A call to Arms? The Uruguayan and Brazilian Communists Confront the Cuban Revolution (1959-1979)

• Grant number: 25/09611-0
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
• Start date: September 01, 2025
• End date: August 31, 2028
• Field of knowledge: Humanities - Political Science
• Principal Investigator: André Kaysel Velasco e Cruz
• Grantee: Igor Mattos Marquezine
• Host Institution: Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas (IFCH). Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Campinas , SP, Brazil

Abstract

This study proposes a comparative analysis of the political thought of Brazilian and Uruguayan communists between 1959 and 1979. In light of the armed struggle's success in the Cuban Revolution (1959) and the island's subsequent transition to socialism, the Communist Parties of Uruguay and Brazil reassessed their revolutionary tactics and strategies for their respective national contexts. Though both organizations were part of the International Communist Movement and grounded in the Marxist theoretical-conceptual framework, their responses diverged: the Uruguayans established a military apparatus, while the Brazilians definitively rejected armed struggle. Investigating these differences constitutes the primary objective of this research.The study undertakes a systematic comparison of the political thought of the two parties, drawing on primary sources such as party documents, newspapers, periodicals, internal bulletins, and texts by their key leaders. The comparative analysis aims not only to elucidate the unique aspects of each case but also to shed light on the shared history of the Latin American left and to stimulate reflections on the contemporary issue of resistance to authoritarian regimes.The hypothesis guiding this work is that the differences in the political thought of the Uruguayan and Brazilian Communist Parties emerged as responses to the dual imperative of maintaining alignment with the International Communist Movement while adapting their actions to national contexts. Methodologically, the research is anchored in the history of political thought and comparative history, with an emphasis on document analysis. Sources will undergo external criticism (examining material characteristics and authenticity) and internal criticism (interpreting content, with attention to the interplay between text and context).