Military dictatorships arise as military rulers devise tactics to stay in power managing to suppress opposition. Most military rulers take power from civilian governments that have failed to win the favor of the people. Military governments, which initially act as caretaker governments become unpopular with time as the support of the people, wither. The people, therefore, start opposing the governments.
Since leaders installed through military coups are not accountable to the people, they come up with ways to suppress these oppositions. Nigeria and Brazil are examples of nations that have suffered for a long period the catastrophic effects of military dictatorships. This paper aims at discussing the effects that military dictatorship has on the political cultures of nations by examining how the effects tend to be similar or different in the two nations.
Brazil fell into the hands of the military in 1964 when the military came in to restore order, as there were tensions in the country. The military referred this takeover to as a revolution, but opponents referred to it as a coup. Whichever term suits best, the fact remains that the military remained in power for twenty years. The military came in after President Joao Goulart imposed restrictions on the multinationals and instead encouraged a nationalist policy.
Alves (1985) argues, “This led to the rapid organization of the working class, which threatened the upper class…it was impossible for a capitalist system to support the demands made by the groups” (89). It is at this point of tension in the nation that the military came in to stabilize the situation. On the other hand, Nigeria did not exist under a civilian government for long after independence in 1960. Mass corruption in the government was disillusionment to people. The evident series of mass protests threatened the stability of the young nation, which forced the military to intervene. There have been several attempts to restore democracy in Nigeria since then with no success until in 2007 when the first democratically elected president Umaru Musa Yar’Adua assumed office.
In both countries, there have been similar both positive and negative effects of military dictatorship (Schneider 1971, 104). For instance, on a positive note, the military governments in the initial years of coming to power in both countries were successful in implementing the economic policies they had. This for a while won the favor of the people who had grand hopes in the military governments.
For instance, it is recorded that the Nigerian currency, Naira, fell to the lowest level against the dollar during the tenure of the democratically elected president Yar’Adua while it gained a lot in relation to the American dollar during the reign of the Military president Sani Abacha (Toyin 1999, 99). In Brazil, the economy did not suffer negatively after the political instability. There is a time when the economy experienced a growth during the early 1970s. This made the military regimes enjoy the support of the people for a period.
Organized oppositions groups posed a threat to the military dictators. As a result, the governments responded by brutally suppressing the opposition. In both countries, political opponents experienced a brutal assassination, torture or exiling cases as a way of getting them out of the way of the military governments (Bacchus 1990, 12). There were tensions as people with mass protests and civil disobedience counteracted these treatments. In most cases, lives were lost when the dictatorial governments tried to silence the angry protesters.
According to Laitin (1986), torture was an invariable routine part during interrogations (49). International civil societies such as Amnesty international noted with concern that the governments of Nigeria, as well as the military government of Brazil, authorized the use of torture and other cruel and inhuman activities. This resulted to massive infringement of human rights, as the people were not in a position to talk anything about the leadership or review any aspects of the government (Alves 1985, 36).
Military dictatorship in both Nigeria and Brazil resulted to political instabilities as different groups took up armed resistance as a way to try to liberate themselves (Toyin 1999). In Nigeria, the oil rich Niger delta has been a center for most war crimes in the history of Nigeria. Rebel groups have been engaging ruling authorities in battles that eventually lead to the deaths of innocent civilians who are mostly women and children. Following the excessive spread of the use of firearms, the two nations experience high crime rates even after civilian governments replaced the military governments.
There is also a variation based on the effects of long-term military dictatorship for the countries. Nigeria had extreme divisions even after the takeover of the civilian government, as there are rebels in existence mostly in the Niger Delta (Toyin 1999, 65). Brazil, on the other hand, re-established a democratic government that united all the people from different regions. As a result, it is more politically stable compared to Nigeria (Alves 1985, 23).
Initially, the people viewed military governments as saviors who ended up turning against them as time goes by. The initial promises and the policies owned by these governments aimed at protecting the interests of the common person. Because of the desire of the privileges that come along with positions of power and the desire to continue suckling at the power tit, most military leaders end up exhausting the patience of the people (Alves 1985). Nigeria and Brazil experienced both similar and differing effects of military dictatorship in their political cultures some of which are experienced even now long after the people took back the leadership of the nations.
References
Alves, Maria H. 1985. State and Opposition in Military Brazil. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bacchus, Winfred A.1990. Mission in Mufti: Brazil’s Military Regimes, 1964-1985. New York: Greenwood Press.
Laitin, David D. 1986. Hegemony and culture: politics and religious change among the Yoruba. Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Schneider, Ronald M. 1971.The Political System of Brazil: Emergence of a “Modernizing” Authoritarian Regime, 1964- 1970. New York: Columbia University Press.
Toyin, Falola M 1999. The History of Nigeria, New York: Greenwood Press