Addressing the topic of whether or not a country can be called a democracy is difficult, especially when said country is indeed a self-proclaimed democracy. The definition of democracy is the cause of more than a little tension in the scholarly world. Robert Dahl (1971), of Yale, defined democracy as being "based on elections that feature effective competition for all positions of government power, held at predictable intervals; the right of individuals and groups to participate in those electoral contests and the existence of basic civil and political liberties that guarantee both contestation and participation." Others insist upon stricter standards that involve written Constitutions, specific procedural laws, and an assortment of other requirements. For our purposes, Dahl's simple definition of a democratic society is best.
             For people today more than ever, the transition to democracy from an authoritarian regime is no unfamiliar process. Indeed, Americans are often referred to as the prototype for a colonial struggle against a repressive, authoritarian regime. Even more current are movements such as the Arab Spring where a flurry of democratic revolution reared its head in the Middle East. Thanks to the explosion of social media, the world's global citizens were able to truly experience the democratic revolutions of Egypt and Libya.
             Like many other countries, Brazil's transition was no easy journey. Brazilians have suffered under a teeter tottering dynamic in which their county sheds its authoritarian roots only to be eventually dragged back into that mire of oppression. In 1964 President Joao Goulart was deposed in a coup that resulted in a military regime seizing control. Similar coups scatter Brazilian political history; many of them intending to end authoritarianism only to result in a General being made president. The Brazilian people are all too used to false promises from politicians and gover...