The Bolsonaro government turned denialism into a structural axis of its political action. By denying scientific evidence, relativizing historical consensus, and downplaying environmental threats, it not only governed under a logic of disinformation but also consolidated a method that remains alive in Brazilian politics. Even after the change in the Executive, the traces of that project are still evident in the National Congress, influencing agendas and hindering social and environmental progress.
Denialism, in this context, is not a simple disagreement with facts, but a deliberate attempt to redefine what truth is and who has the authority to state it. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this translated into attacks on vaccines, promotion of ineffective treatments, and disregard for the recommendations of international organizations. In the environmental sphere, denial of the climate crisis and the dismantling of oversight bodies opened the way for predatory activities in strategic biomes.
This agenda was not limited to the executive branch. It was supported by a cohesive parliamentary base made up of sectors of the rural caucus, representatives of mining interests, and part of the evangelical caucus. Together, they advanced projects that loosened environmental licensing, encouraged the exploitation of Indigenous lands, and weakened the legal protection of sensitive areas. The result was the institutionalization of denialism, transforming speeches into regulations, budget cuts, and regressive public policies.
The change of government did not immediately reverse this logic. In the Legislature, the balance of power continues to favor agendas that weaken the environment. Urgent proposals to address the climate emergency face organized resistance, while narratives inherited from Bolsonarism continue to shape the debate. Systematic doubt about environmental data, for example, is still used as justification for loosening regulations and prioritizing short-term economic interests.
The persistence of this logic rests on two main pillars: the mobilization of emotions such as fear and resentment against groups identified as “enemies” — environmentalists, Indigenous peoples, scientists, the Judiciary through the figure of Supreme Court justices, and journalists — and the convergence of interests with economic sectors that benefit from the erosion of environmental protections. Added to this is the digital communication model of Bolsonarism, still active, which fuels disinformation and pressures parliamentarians through highly polarized social media.
It is not only a matter of assessing the environmental, social, and health damage caused by Bolsonarism but of understanding that the struggle over the meaning of truth and the legitimacy of speech is ongoing. Denialism is not an episodic phenomenon: it has been incorporated as a political and discursive practice, with the capacity to reproduce and transform itself. Its persistence in the National Congress demonstrates that it is not enough to defeat a government to dismantle an authoritarian political grammar.
Confronting this legacy requires coordinated action on three fronts. At the institutional level, it is necessary to rebuild and strengthen environmental and scientific bodies, ensuring technical autonomy and adequate budgets. At the legislative level, it is essential to build majorities capable of stopping setbacks and approving laws that consolidate rights and environmental protections as untouchable. At the cultural and communication level, it is urgent to contest the public narrative, combat disinformation, and rebuild social trust in science and democratic institutions.
Denialism, as a power strategy, erodes the democratic system’s ability to respond to crises. By weakening institutions and generating public distrust, it creates fertile ground for new authoritarian attacks. Breaking with this legacy requires more than isolated measures: it is necessary to rebuild institutional structures, forge legislative majorities committed to socio-environmental protection, and dispute the public narrative to restore trust in science and democracy.
Without this coordinated effort, Brazil will remain trapped in a political project that, even outside the Planalto Palace, continues to shape decisions and block urgent advances for the country’s future.
Machine translation, proofread by Ricardo Aceves.
Autor
Profª. de Ciencia Política de la PUC-Rio y del Programa de Posgrado en C. Sociales, de la UFRRJ. Doctora en C. Sociales (PUC-Rio). Miembro de la Red de Politólogas #NoSinMujeres.
Lawyer and Master of Social Sciences from the Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ).
