Unicamp reacts to Marina's guru's statement.

247 – Professors at Unicamp reacted to recent statements by Eduardo Giannetti, current economic advisor to presidential candidate Marina Silva (PSB), regarding the institution.

According to him, Unicamp is a "typical product of the military regime." He was referring to the training of economists at the State University of Campinas, who tend to advocate for state regulation of the economy.

He further argued that tuition should be paid for at public universities for students who can afford it, such as "those who completed high school at private schools." 

The statements provoked a reaction from professors at Unicamp, who came to the institution's defense. Read the text below:

Eduardo Giannetti and the intolerance of a liberal

At an event organized last Monday by the consulting firm Empiricus (which has become known for its militant pessimism and predictions about the “end of Brazil”), the economic spokesperson for the PSB candidacy stated: “Unicamp is a typical product of the military regime.” Professor Eduardo Giannetti is a sophisticated intellectual, philosopher, and economist, admittedly a liberal – who, in principle, defends and respects the plurality of viewpoints. In this episode, he was closer to people far less refined, such as the blogger Rodrigo Constantino.

According to a report by Rede Brasil Atual, when questioned about the background of government economists, his words were: "The military regime is to blame for this (...) a group that religiously closes itself off around a way of thinking disconnected from the world."

Going further, he pulled out of his hat an alleged seminar "in 1978" in which Celso Furtado was supposedly discredited in Campinas, with his ideas considered "of interest to the 'bourgeoisie,' while the concern of those present at the meeting was 'the class struggle, imperialism.'" As the icing on the cake, he allegedly stated that "Bolshevism does not appear in democratic countries."

Unless the reporter is mistaken, we regret the tone and terms used. But above all, we cannot understand the reasoning of the expert in economic ideas. The disqualification that seeks to obstruct the debate is based on a lack of knowledge of the institution that is being criticized in such a superficial way.

Celso Furtado was the starting point for the original reflections of the institute's founders, he holds an honorary doctorate from this institution, and it seems unlikely that his ideas have ever been challenged here with this level of argument. Not even from this angle. Incidentally, speaking of "Bolshevism" and resorting to this supposed episode raises the question of who is actually stuck in past decades.

Unicamp was one of the centers that brought together critical Brazilian thought during the military period. Like other economists now in the liberal camp – such as Edmar Bacha and Pedro Malan, for example – its professors rigorously discussed the meaning of the dictatorship's economic choices and denounced their exclusionary nature. Contrary to the notion of "closure," what marked the institution during that period of limited openness to dissent was always the pursuit of public debate, the explanation of Brazilian reality and its real problems. And this continued throughout the following decades, in various other areas.

If the content of these explanations displeases those who did not participate in that debate today, that is another problem. We disagree with Giannetti and the discourse of the "state that doesn't fit within the GDP," the privatization of public banks, and the reduction of social spending. But we would never link his ideas to a lack of intelligence or religious motivations. On the contrary, the economic and financial interests underpinning such positions are clear.

Furthermore, the political plurality of economists at Unicamp disallows any generalization or direct association. The institute produced the President of the Republic, but also figures who served in other governments before 2003. The current president of BNDES and the Minister of the Civil House are professors at the institution, but José Serra and Paulo Renato Costa Souza also played a significant role in its history.

From a theoretical standpoint, the Economics course, known for introducing Marx and Keynes to its students, also obviously studies Hayek, Friedman, and their more recent disciples. The existence of a theoretical framework that organizes the course does not imply a blockage or disregard for other approaches.

In fact, most conventional economics schools are doing this, an attitude that has been heavily questioned lately. If being "connected" means this kind of stance, we appreciate it but reject the advice.

Ultimately, the caricature often made of Unicamp economists reveals a desire to reign supreme in a debate where there is only one alternative: economic liberalism. And that all who think differently are disqualified. The "new politics," in the specific case of economic policy, has as its main ingredient an old acquaintance: the Minimal State.

Luiz Gonzaga Belluzzo
Ricardo de Medeiros Carneiro
André Biancarelli
Pedro Rossi