A corrente dos novos desenvolvimentistas precursores no Brasil a partir da década de 2000: uma análise sobre sua eficácia na economia brasileira à luz do velho desenvolvimentismo

Abstract

The historical development of developmentalism presented a strong state, inducing development, leaving marks in the formation of society and establishing social transformations. The growing interest in the topic of developmentalism after the depletion of the neoliberal, leads us to reflect on the efficiency of this new thinking for Brazil. Therefore, the main objective of this work is to criticize, through the economic trajectory of Brazil, the thesis of the "new developmentalism" defended mainly by Bresser Pereira considering the current of the new precursor developmentalists as the focus of the research. In order to do so, a brief historical and theoretical exploration of the developmental process in Brazil was carried out. It was also related to the important contributions of CEPAL to the idea of underdevelopment. An analysis was also made of the definitions of the theorizing of new developmentalism and its different currents. Aiming for greater aggrandizement for the debate, the economic trajectory was observed from the first term of the Lula government until the first term of the Dilma government, trying to expose the results of the Brazilian economy before the adoption of policies guided by one of the currents of the new developmentalism, the called social developmentalist, and also the vision of Bresser Pereira regarding these policies employed. In this way, the new theory has as its main objective the practice of macroeconomic policies, not giving due importance to the issues of underdevelopment, which involve international insertion, center-periphery theme, and especially the implementation of policies for an active and competitive industry, problems that are considered unsurpassed in the country. Moreover, the new theory presents positions of a rooted liberalism although its authors point out to be critical to neoliberalism. It is necessary to resume an agenda of real developmental thinking that reinforces the importance of industry for national economic development and long-term structural changes.