The Political and Economic Climate that led to Utilitarian Genocide of Brazil’s Indigenous

Population from 1964-1985

Karah Hughes

Dr. Zaryab Iqbal

PLSC 450H
Introduction:

Brazil’s land was once inhabited solely by indigenous populations before Europeans like

Pedro Alvarez Cabral invaded the continent. The continent was conquered, many of the

indigenous were killed or colonized, and the land was desecrated. But not every tribe was

eliminated, and quite a few lived in a tense cohabitation with the European colonizers. In Brazil,

the dense Amazon protected many tribes from frequent (and at times, any) contact by the

established government, allowing them to live in relative peace and freedom from European

influence, and from the early genocides associated with that influence.

The already strained peace was disrupted further by industrialization in the mid-twentieth

century. Brazil was a developing country struggling to catch up to the economic standings of the

other world powers like the United States and (at the time) the USSR. They relied heavily on

imported oil to manufacture their domestically made goods and struggled to keep up in the

international marketplace. The economic struggle was met with a coup d’etat in 1964, where the

newly instated authoritarian government sought to make Brazil comparable to the rest of the

developed world, through any means necessary. The government modernized into a militaristic

bureaucracy that constitutionally allowed media censorship and disenfranchisement that

separated the public from the government. In order to fully modernize the economy and the

government, Brazil sought to eradicate what was left of the indigenous population, leading to the

predictable cultural and utilitarian genocide detailed in the Figueiredo Report.

Historical Context:

In the year 1500, Portuguese explorer Pedro Alvarez Cabral landed in present-day Bahia,

along the northeast coast of Brazil. The centuries that followed were marked by the colonization
of the land; the Portuguese flocked to the new continent to make their fortune on the untouched

resources abundant in the new world. The settlers exploited the land for its lumber, rubber, fertile

soil, exotic plants and animals, and gold and other precious metals. The population of western

settlers grew, and in 1889 they finally sought independence from the control of the Portuguese

government.

The First Republic of the United States of Brazil was founded in 1889 as the result of a

military coup against the monarchy that had previously ruled. Marshal Deodoro da Fonseca led

the coup and was subsequently named the first president of Brazil; he granted autonomy to the

states of Brazil and decentralized the highly centralized monarchy. Power in the government was

passed between the oligarchies of two states, São Paulo and Minas Gerais, and consequently still

prevented the government of Brazil from modernizing. The First Republic crumbled in 1930

with another military coup, after the oligarchy of Minas Gerais militarized in retaliation to São

Paulo’s President Washinton Luís’ refusal to endorse a candidate from Minas Gerais, as was

custom.

As the First Republic crumbled, the Second Republic rose with the hopes of uniting

Brazil after the divergence between Minas Gerais and São Paulo through increased focus on

nationalism. This government started strong under President Getúlio Vargas, who brought

authoritarian ideals to gain and keep control over the states. He modernized the economy

significantly by focusing on industrialization and establishing and protecting workers' rights. His

regime ended with the end of World War Two when President Vargas resigned and the country

began to democratize once again. The Second Republic saw 3 other presidencies, including

another regime under Vargas' rule, but ended in 1964 under the rule of President João Goulart. In

the years leading up to 1964, Brazil was plagued by high inflation rates and growing national
debt, causing social unrest among the citizens and frustration among the military at Goulart's

inability to curb the economic plummet.

Brazil's history of authoritarian regimes and militaristic ideals continued into the 1960s

with the Coup D'etat of 1964 and the government that was formed thereafter. The pattern of

political upheaval, the undercurrent of nationalism, and the prominence of military violence as a

solution to political disagreements provide the necessary preconditions for the genocide that

occurred between 1964 and 1985.

The Political Climate:

The strides towards modernization started in 1964, with a series of violent uprisings

aimed at reforming the administration of João Goulart. These attacks against the administration

followed by the creation of a new conservative, authoritarian government were inspired by the

National Security Doctrine (Napolitano). The ideologies found in the National Security Doctrine

grant the power of national security to the military forces of a country, in which the military is

responsible for the economy, the prevention of political polarization, national stability, and the

prevention of communism. These conservative ideals were extremist ideologies based on the

actions of the United States during the Cold War, and as such were tied to a very modern, very

successful nation. Much like other legitimate governments, the new government established after

the Coup D'etat of 1964 was founded on a constitution and legislative acts.

Brazil's new constitution in 1964 established a bureaucracy that was legally intertwined

with the military. The military, led by nationalist and far-right extremist Castelo Branco, operated

on the aforementioned ideologies in place by the National Security Doctrine to centralize the

government and separate it from the public by censoring the media and replacing the direct
elections with indirect ones. These measures, legalized through the issuance of 17 Institutional

Acts, increased the powers of the executive branch and the president and consolidated the

powers of the government overall into those positions.

Paradoxically, many government actions were hidden due to the high level of

documentation in the bureaucracy thanks to the high level of censorship the regime exercised.

The government was able to document every significant detail of the various actions, and could

retrospectively censor and meticulously decide what should remain or be removed from the

history of the regime. The Figueiredo Report, a prime example of this phenomenon, was a report

with more than 7,000 pages sent to the President of the Ministry of the Interior from Jader

Correia Figueiredo that was lost for roughly 40 years. Criminalizing details about the atrocities

the military dictatorship was committing against the indigenous peoples were included in the

chapters of the report, all of which disappeared without a trace shortly after it was finished, until

2013.

The goal of the Figueiredo Report was to investigate the Serviço de Proteção aos Índios

(Indigenous Protection Service or SPI) a department of the Ministry of the Interior, one of the

two departments Brazil has seen in recent years that deals with Indigenous peoples' relations.

Contrary to the name of SPI, the service was not concerned with the protection of the indigenous

peoples, but rather with their assimilation into society. This department was started in the First

Republic and lasted until the Figueiredo Report was released in 1967 when it was abolished and

replaced with the Fundação Nacional do Índio (National Foundation of the Indigenous or

FUNAI). FUNAI's purpose, unlike SPI's, is to protect the rights of the indigenous people and

their land. The department is still in commission and has faced few but significant scandals. Both

departments were charged with the responsibility of documenting indigenous affairs and
overseeing the land on which they reside. Both departments were highly efficient and indicated

that the structure of the government was highly organized and modern.

Economic Climate:

Brazil's economy over the last 150 years is abundant with periods of extreme economic

expansion and extreme recession, with the expansions found at the beginning of each regime

change and the recession occurring at the end of a regime's rule. The military dictatorship in

1964 planned on fixing this economic wavering by modernizing the economy, once and for all.

The military dictatorship momentarily succeeded in industrializing the economy. In the years

leading up to the Oil Shock of 1973, Brazil’s GDP was growing at roughly 10% a year

(Napolitano). Brazil's economic growth during this time stemmed directly from agricultural and

industrial growth. But for this growth to happen, the Amazon had to become economically

viable. Tracts of land were deforested for farming, trees were used for timber and rubber, and the

land was mined for the rich gold deposits. In fact, the majority of farmland in Brazil is found on

land that was formerly a part of the Amazon, and most resources used in manufacturing came

from the trees of the Amazon (Browder).

Economically, the Amazon was a miracle and single-handedly facilitated the rapid

expansion Brazil saw between 1968 and 1973. The growth was capitalistic, and the “milagro

económico” (economic miracle) (Davis) resulted in extreme wealth inequality, leaving the poor,

including most of the indigenous peoples, in the trenches of poverty. This left the indigenous

peoples living on reserves heavily dependent on the welfare given by the SPI, despite the

prosperity those a part of Brazil's capitalist society were enjoying.

 But the miracle was short-lived; Brazil was hit hard when the international economy

stagnated. The industries Brazil was in the process of building its economy upon were dependent

on imported oil to run factories and machinery. The Oil Shock of 1973 caused problems with the

importing of oil itself as well as the stagnation of the world economy. Thus, despite the abundant

resources contained in the rainforest, when the Oil Shock occurred, Brazil's economy dipped

significantly and never recovered during the military's rule, as it was unable to turn those raw

materials into exportable goods. In addition, the goods Brazil could export were not as widely

consumed as foreign countries tried to fix their domestic markets before returning to the

international market. But while the economy was prospering, the Amazon, home to the majority

of the remaining indigenous tribes, was being destroyed at an alarming rate.

The Genocide:

Genocides against indigenous peoples have occurred ever since European colonizers set

foot on the continents of North and South America. The genocide of Brazil's indigenous peoples

can be traced back to the very first time Pedro Alvares Cabral and his crewmen killed an

indigenous person. That roughly 500-year period between Cabral's landing and the present day is

a broad and intricate expanse, worth studying in-depth through different lenses, but the interest

of this paper is the genocide that specifically occurred during the military regime that followed

the fall of the Second Republic.

The genocide was both cultural and utilitarian in nature, to achieve the ideal of a modern

nation. The end goal was to rid Brazil, and most importantly the Amazon, of all indigenous

people in any way that was fit. Brazil wanted a modern population, not plagued by primitive
peoples, and a modern economy that was dependent on the resources of the Amazon, protected

by the primitive peoples. Thus, the indigenous people whom the SPI thought could be reformed

were reformed and those that could not be reformed were killed.

Part of the genocide was centered around assimilating the indigenous peoples into society

to make them economically viable for the state of Brazil. Killing an entire population was not

popular, but preserving life and killing a culture was acceptable to many in the dictatorship.

Children and young adults were sent to reformatory schools, where the SPI taught lessons that

"ignored the interest of indigenous societies in order to fit them into capitalist patterns."

(Sant’Anna) In a case study of just one school, the Fazenda Guarani, it was found that children

were drawn from at least 23 different (Oliveira). This education was a punishment for being born

into a certain culture, and the practices often were not humane; it was a way of ending the way of

life without ending the life itself.

But life was killed, through negligence and through intentional actions. Ultimately, the

dictatorship believed the Amazon and its resources belonged to the government and that the

indigenous peoples that were inhabiting it were in the way of true economic prosperity, so they

were killed. Methods of killing varied by who was doing the killing and which tribe was being

eradicated, but all ways were inhumane. Some were killed at gunpoint or by machete, others by

strategically planned biological attacks, and some were spared their lives but forced off their land

by settlers (Chuquel). Regardless of how the indigenous peoples were killed, they were targeted

for inhabiting an area rich in resources and for practicing cultures that were not acceptable in the

eyes of the dictatorship

The Figueiredo Report:

The Figueiredo Report was a lengthy report written during Attorney General Jader

Correia Figueiredo's investigation into the treatment of the indigenous tribes by the SPI, to

investigate the “serious irregularities” (Relatorio Figueiredo, Vol. 1) found in the Serviço de

Proteção aos Índios' own reports. The investigation was performed over a three-year period

before it was released in 1967 and suspiciously lost very shortly thereafter.

In the report, Figueiredo detailed with extreme precision the goals and financing of the

investigation, as well as the data and testimonies collected from the indigenous peoples he

interviewed. He found that the SPI was guilty of the murder of indigenous peoples on small and

large scales, the prostitution of women, slavery, as well as numerous other crimes against human

rights. Figueiredo came to the conclusion that "the indigenous people… became victims of true

criminals, who imposed a regime of slavery and denied the basic living conditions necessary for

the dignity of humans" (Figueiredo, Vol. 2).

Figueiredo's findings were posted in newspapers and broadcasted over the radio briefly

before the government censored it all. To cover the report, the dictatorship abolished the SPI and

instituted FUNAI, and the report disappeared. In retaliation, the summer after the report was

released, the dictatorship released another Institutional Act that further entrenched the power in

the executive branch of the government, further censoring the media and making elections more

indirect to preserve the power of the military.

Conclusion:

Personal future studies of the genocide against Brazil's indigenous will explore the

influence of various international influences as well as the domestic social response. This period

of genocide in Brazil conveniently found itself nestled in the midst of the Cold War, where much

of the world was preoccupied with the competition between the United States and the Soviet

Union. Additionally, many of the members of Brazil's military at this time still remembered

fighting in World War II alongside the Allied Forces. These two relationships to prominent wars

may have had a strong influence on how and why Brazil's genocide occurred and why there was

no international intervention. Additionally, the two wars most likely had an effect on what

Brazil's leadership viewed as a powerful modern country, and thus influenced the type of country

the dictatorship attempted to become.

The domestic social influences and response to the genocide is also a critical aspect to

study in the future. The genocide was mostly hidden from the general public, yet the report was

still temporarily available to the public. Thus, it is impossible to assume that no member of the

public knew a genocide, or at least mass killing, of indigenous peoples was occurring. Diving

into what, if any, social resistance was pursued while the genocide was occurring would unearth

key insights into the public sentiments of the indigenous peoples, especially when broken down

by key demographic categories. In addition to the potential public response to the genocide while

it was occurring, a study of the social movements that were inspired after the military regime

ended would be equally as important, with close attention paid to the role of media in spreading

or preventing the spread of information.

Brazil's political turnover between the First Republic and the fall of the military
dictatorship in 1985 followed a very precise pattern that aligned with the economic prosperity of

the given time. Not only could the Coup D'Etat of 1964 be predicted to some extent, but also the

genocide that occurred within the regime. The necessary conditions of recent political upheaval,

longstanding, widespread nationalism, and the quest to modernize the government and the

country's economy all indicated a higher risk of a genocide occurring. The military dictatorship's

choices of industrializing the economy as well as forming a bureaucratic government based on

the National Security Doctrine were the final manifestations of the necessary conditions that

resulted in the predictable genocide. But, although it was predictable, that does not mean it was a

preventable government. The patterns were evident, but sufficient conditions for genocide have

not been recognized yet.

Ultimately, capitalist and far-right ideals popular in Brazil’s military regime founded a

nationalistic government focused on joining other modern nations at the cost of human lives. By

means of military force and bureaucratic procedures, the regime systematically killed and

tortured thousands of indigenous peoples for economic prosperity. At a time when political

leaders were trying to bring Brazil to greatness and modernity, they resorted to brutish and cruel

killings.
Bibliography:

Barreto de Araujo, Rayane. “O Relatório Figueiredo E as Violações Dos Direitos Indígenas

nas Páginas do Jornal do Brasil (1965-1968)” Core, 27 Dec. 2018,
https://core.ac.uk/display/303962667.

Browder, John O., and Brian J. Godfrey. “Frontier Urbanization in the Brazilian Amazon:
A Theoretical Framework for Urban Transition.” Yearbook. Conference of Latin
Americanist Geographers, vol. 16, University of Texas Press, 1990, pp. 56–66,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25765723.

Chuquel, Luane Flores. “Introductory Aspects on Human Rights Violations Suffered by

Indigenous Peoples during the Period of Brazilian Civil-Military Dictatorship.” Annals of
Bioethics & Clinical Applications, vol. 4, no. 1, 22 Mar. 2021,
https://doi.org/10.23880/abca-16000168.

Davis, Shelton Harold. Vítimas Do Milagre: O Desenvolvimento E OS Índios Do Brasil.

Zahar, 1978.

Figueiredo Correia, Jader. Relatório Figueiredo. 3 Nov. 1967,

https://www.ufmg.br/brasildoc/temas/5-ditadura-militar-e-populacoes-indigenas/5-1-minist
erio-do-interior-relatorio-figueiredo/.

Napolitano, Marcos. “The Brazilian Military Regime, 1964–1985.” Oxford Research

Encyclopedia of Latin American History, Oxford University Press, 26 Apr. 2018,
https://oxfordre.com/latinamericanhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199366439.001.000
1/acrefore-9780199366439-e-413.

Oliveira, Aline Nóbrega de. “Civilização Ou Barbárie? : A Política Estatal De Extermínio

Indígena No Relatório Figueiredo (1967-1968).” Core, 8 July 2019,
https://core.ac.uk/reader/270085065#related-papers.

Sant’Anna, André Luis, et al. “Ditadura Militar E PRÁTICAS Disciplinares No Controle

De Índios: Perspectivas PSICOSSOCIAIS No Relatório Figueiredo.” Psicologia &
Sociedade, vol. 30, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-0310/2018v30188045.