All sins are founded in some form of excess. In this sense, we are all sinners, provided we try and move fast through the road of realizations when we have enough power. Then, one among the few key questions for any society is “who watches who?”.
In the past, intrigues played the role of regulating the political arrangements without any protection to state institutions. The major transformations in the political pacts took place in times of disruption of dynasties, like the transition from the Avis to the Braganças in 1582 or from the Tudors to the Stuarts in 1603.
With the reinvention of the Republic and its triumph among the West modern civilization, the old aristocrats moved fast and created institutional islands to protect privileges and power in the new Gestalt of national states. The alliance between landowners and bourgeois (commerce and finance) was then celebrated. The old richness should stabilize the political order while the new comers should make the selected members of the club wealthier.
This equation worked very well until the first modern world-system crisis of 1914-1945. During the 31 years fight for hegemony, the sovereign industrialized countries could not count entirely on markets to protect their jobs, included the most privileged ones. Although, the preexistence of a technological-industrial elite guaranteed the protection of the local markets for local firms and then supported good jobs for the heirs of the best families.
The “new democratic Republics” that emerged in the immediate post-war accommodated the new transnational US interests within the same political pacts that joined local bourgeois with old aristocrats. The bargain of each sovereign industrialized country with the US transnational corporate interests aimed the entry as a player in the the prosperous US market, either as a final producer or as part of the supply chain of an american company.
The same historical movement was though not observed in the underdeveloped countries during the same period. The ephemeral nature of third world tech-industrial national groups goes until the inexorably deceiving takeover by larger international companies. As such, the local bourgeois has been mainly formed by landowners engaged in the production of commodities to the international markets.
Therefore, in many underdeveloped countries the members of the elites were forced to act jointly to preserve the islands of privilege for their heirs, accepting as a given fate the low rate of creation of qualified jobs in the future.
In some modern developed country the judiciary system has been built as an instance of arbitrage between economical and political contradictory interests, usually favoring diffuse social forces. In contrast, The judiciary system in underdeveloped countries has been built as an instance of jobs for the wealthier. Therefore it has been used mainly to social and political control in favor of a tiny financial and transnational elite.
Keeping history in mind, one understands why the supreme court in Brazil favored the political coup of 12th may 2016. It happened by the same reasons the Supreme Court procrastinated the slavery abolition until the very end of the XIXth century. And also explains why the Brazilian military coup of 1964, which was backed by direct interference of the US inteligence (Condor Operation), was fully blessed by the Brazilian Supreme Court.
The main question that arise to Brazilian observers, besides midia regulation, is who will monitor the Supreme Court? Actually, no instance of the Brazilian Democracy is responsible for limiting potential excesses committed by the judicial system in Brazil. As a result, the juridical system fully responds to the interests of a few big economic and political interest groups, all of them with a previous history of international acceptance by the US. And any change from inside is completely disregarded as it will bring a menace for all the privileged sons of the best families.