PERSPECTIVE Democratic Expeditions How to counter the far right: lessons from Brazil Talita Tanscheit and Léonie de Jonge Over the past few decades, the far right has been advancing across the globe, both electorally and through increased street-level mobilisation(Mudde 2019). While much attention has been paid to the causes and consequences of this rise, much less is known about how to counter it effectively. This policy brief outlines key stra tegic responses to the far right and draws lessons from Brazil, a country in which far right forces rapidly rose to power but subsequently were pushed back. The Brazil ian case highlights how coordinated, multi-actor efforts can curb far right momentum and help safeguard democratic institutions. Responding to the far right: who, what, when, and where? When looking at ways of countering the far right, it is useful to distinguish between four key dimensions: actors, strategies, timing, and context – in other words, who does what, when, and where? Actors The academic literature has identified a range of actors involved in responding to the far right. These include state institutions, such as law enforcement and the judiciary(Ramalingam 2014); parliamentary actors, including mainstream political parties and elected officials(Heinze 2022); and extra-parliamentary actors, such as civil socie ty organisations and media institutions(de Jonge 2019). Strategies These actors have a variety of strategies at their disposal. From a theoretical perspective, three broad approach es can be identified: demarcation, confrontation, and accommodation(de Jonge 2021a). → Demarcation(or Abgrenzung in German) involves iso lating the far right by treating it as a political pariah (Minkenberg 2013). This may include enforcing a socalled cordon sanitaire, a refusal by mainstream parties or media outlets to cooperate or give a platform to far right actors. Crucially, demarcation means iso lating rather than ignoring the far right. How to counter the far-right: lessons from Brazil 1

→ Confrontation is a more active form of opposition. Political and institutional actors may adopt delegitimising or stigmatising stances, openly denouncing far right narratives and distancing themselves from their policies. Similarly, journalists might work to ex pose contradictions, extremist affiliations, or the harmful consequences of far right agendas. → Accommodation, by contrast, involves the partial or full adoption of far right positions. The logic of»if you can’t beat them, join them« hopes to reclaim voters by co-opting far right rhetoric or policies(Bale et al. 2010). This may include mimicking policy posi tions, forming coalitions or amplifying similar narratives. Media outlets may also reproduce far right frames, thereby normalising their discourse and, in some cases,»removing the stigma of extremism« (Ellinas 2018). Timing The effectiveness of such strategies often depends on when they are applied. For example, demarcation is par ticularly effective before the far right has gained substantial influence. The case of Belgium offers useful in sights here(de Jonge 2021b). In Flanders(the Dutch-speaking north), far right parties have secured a strong foothold, whereas in Wallonia(the French-speak ing south), they remain marginal. This difference may be explained partly by the consistent enforcement of a cordon sanitaire in Wallonia by both political and media actors, which has systematically excluded far right voices from mainstream platforms. When such measures are applied early and comprehensively, they can prevent the far right from gaining the visibility it needs to grow. When this is not achieved, however, even small breaches can have outsized effects(Art 2011; Heinze 2018). Context Finally, context matters. There is no universal formula for countering the far right; what works for one actor in one setting may fail elsewhere. A strategy that is effec tive at the local level may backfire nationally, or vice versa. Similarly, while a combination of demarcation and accommodation may help centre-right parties to regain far right voters in the short term(Van Spanje and De Graaf 2018), it may at the same time harm cen tre-left parties or erode broader democratic norms in the long term. Moreover, recent research suggests that adopting far right positions rarely achieves its intended goal; instead, it often merely legitimises far right narra tives and expands their influence(Krause et al. 2023). With this analytical lens in place, we now turn to the case of Brazil, a particularly relevant context given its recent experience under a government aligned with far right politics. As a large, diverse democracy with robust but contested institutions, Brazil provides a valuable case through which to test and refine insights drawn largely from European research on responses to the far right. The case of Brazil Jair Bolsonaro, a former military officer with a long but marginal career in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies, was ini tially viewed as a political outsider with limited chances of national success. He ran with an unconventional coali tion of two minor right-wing parties, the Social Liberal Party(PSL) and the Brazilian Workers’ Renewal Party (PRTB). Despite spending most of his career on the polit ical fringes, Bolsonaro rose to prominence in the years leading up to the 2018 election as the most visible figure in Brazil’s emerging far right(Rocha 2021). His election marked a rupture in Brazil’s post-democratisation political landscape. For over two decades, power had alternated between the centre-left Workers’ Party (PT) and the centre-right Brazilian Social Democracy Party(PSDB). Bolsonaro’s victory not only disrupted this pattern, it replaced the traditional centre-right with a newly ascendant far right(Santos and Tanscheit 2019). Although his success surprised many, his campaign and presidency remained consistent with the views he had long espoused, based on moral conservatism, a hardline approach to crime and open praise for Brazil’s past military dictatorship. After breaking with the PSL during his presidency, Bol sonaro joined the Liberal Party(PL) in late 2021. The PL quickly became the largest party in Brazil’s National Congress, reflecting both Bolsonaro’s personal influence and the far right’s growing institutional consolidation. Because the far right now held executive power and enjoyed parliamentary support, passive containment or non-engagement were no longer viable. Responses from democratic actors had to be timely, coordinated, and assertive. At different moments, different groups were mo bilised to defend institutions and push back against authoritarian drift. Brazil’s experience under Bolsonaro can be understood in terms of three key turning points that shaped both the rise and the pushback against far right governance: the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2022 elections, and the 8 Janu ary 2023 attacks on Brasília. (i) The COVID-19 pandemic: from crisis to coalition The first major test came with the COVID-19 pandemic. Bolsonaro became one of the most prominent global leaders associated with pandemic denialism. He discour How to counter the far-right: lessons from Brazil 2

aged mask use, promoted mass gatherings, endorsed unproven treatments and spread misinformation. The human toll was catastrophic: Brazil recorded over 700,000 COVID-related deaths, second only to the Unit ed States. In response, the National Congress – particu larly the Senate – established a Parliamentary Commis sion of Inquiry(CPI) to investigate the federal govern ment’s handling of the crisis and played a prominent role in this response. The CPI brought together actors from across the political spectrum and played a pivotal role in documenting nearly two years of federal misconduct. This legislative initiative evolved into a broader multi-actor coalition, marked by strong alignment with extra-parliamentary forces, such as initiatives launched by civil society organisations and major media outlets, including the Consortium of Press Vehicles initiative, which independently monitored pandemic data and promoted an early pro-vaccination campaign. It also re shaped the political landscape in advance of the 2022 elections, providing a platform for public scrutiny and opposition mobilisation. The pandemic thus became a moment of collective learning, forcing institutions, society and the media to confront the realities of far right governance. It laid the groundwork for cross-sector alli ances and more coherent counterstrategies that would become crucial in later crises. (ii) The 2022 presidential election: contesting power and protecting institutions The second turning point came during the 2022 presi dential elections. Bolsonaro took advantage of his in cumbency to expand his electoral appeal, introducing targeted social programmes and discretionary budget mechanisms, such as the»secret budget«, to secure legislative and voter support(Tanscheit and Barbosa 2023). His campaign was anchored by the influential »Beef, Bible, and Bullets« coalition, which consistently commanded around 30 per cent of the electorate. Alongside this mobilisation, Bolsonaro escalated attacks on the Supreme Federal Court(STF) and other institutions, repeatedly alleging electoral fraud and judicial bias. These unfounded claims were intended to delegitimise his opponent, Luiz Inácio Lula da Sil va, and to suggest that electoral defeat would not be accepted. During this period, political leaders and parties played a central role in forming a broad pro-democracy coalition that transcended traditional ideological divides. Simultaneously, the judiciary – particularly the Superior Electoral Court(TSE) and the STF – acted decisively to safeguard the integrity of the electoral process, countering disinformation and ensuring institutional stability. The coordinated efforts by partisan and judicial actors, supported by civil society and the media, were essential in defending democratic norms and upholding electoral legitimacy against an incumbent president who was actively undermining them. (iii) The 8 January 2023 attacks on Brasília: a breaking point The most acute crisis occurred on 8 January 2023, just days after Lula’s inauguration. Whipped up by months of disinformation and anti-democratic rhetoric, thousands of Bolsonaro supporters stormed and vandalised the Congress, the Supreme Court and the Presidential Palace, mirroring the 6 January 2021 insurrection in the United States. Bolsonaro’s refusal to concede defeat, his abrupt departure from Brazil days before the end of his term, and his absence from the formal handover of power(symbolised by his refusal to pass on the presidential sash) was intended to signal to his supporters that the election had been»stolen«. In the immediate aftermath, however, the executive branch acted with remarkable speed to restore order, reestablish control over the federal capital, and ensure institutional continuity. The judiciary, particularly the STF and the Feder al Police, then assumed a more prominent role, leading investigations and prosecutions and securing the convictions of those involved in the attacks. Following Bol sonaro’s conviction, renewed attempts within Congress to grant amnesty to him and his allies sparked massive social mobilisation; civil society organisations exerted decisive pressure that ultimately forced legislators to backtrack and uphold due legal process. Together, these actions demonstrated a dual approach to democratic defence, both reactive and proactive. So what works and what doesn’t? Lessons from Brazil Though initially fragmented, Brazil’s democratic forces coalesced around processes of demarcation and confrontation, especially when accommodation proved politically costly. Parliamentary actors(especially political parties and legislative coalitions) led the response dur ing the pandemic and 2022 elections, playing a central role in building anti-authoritarian alliances. Over time, extra-parliamentary actors, including civil society, media and judicial institutions, increasingly complemented and reinforced these efforts. In the aftermath of the 2022 election and the 8 January attacks, these nonstate actors assumed a more prominent role, reflecting a shift in the locus of democratic self-defence from formal politics to broader societal mobilisation. Brazil’s experience demonstrates that effective responses to the far right require coordination across institutional boundaries, strategic timing, and a willingness to confront authoritarian tendencies head-on. It also sug gests that proactive measures, rooted in democratic education, coalition-building and institutional reform, are essential to prevent democratic backsliding. Taken together, these three moments – pandemic denialism, electoral delegitimisation and the 8 January in How to counter the far-right: lessons from Brazil 3

surrection – triggered a gradual but meaningful process of political learning in Brazil. They catalysed coopera tion among institutional and extra-institutional actors, including political parties, courts, civil society, and the media. Over time, these actors moved on from frag mented and reactive responses to a more coordinated and proactive defence of democratic institutions. The Brazilian case shows that countering far right authoritarianism, especially once it has assumed power, requires more than principled opposition. It demands adap tive, cross-sectoral coalitions that can respond to evolving threats while maintaining democratic legitimacy. Nevertheless, Brazil’s far right remains a powerful and organised political force, capable of influencing public debate and policy agendas. This enduring presence un derscores the need for continued vigilance and sustained democratic engagement. Countering the far right is a societal responsibility that requires coordinated action across multiple democratic actors. It calls for a long-term, multifaceted commit ment, one that combines principled political leadership, strong institutional safeguards, active civil society engagement and creative cultural strategies. Only through such comprehensive, top-down and bottom-up resistance can liberal democracies withstand the far right’s persistent threat and preserve democratic norms in the years ahead.  Bibliography Art, David . 2011. Inside the Radical Right: The Development of Anti-Immigrant Parties in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press. Bale, Tim, Christoffer Green-Pedersen, André A Krouwel, Kurt Richard Luther and Nick Sitter . 2010.»If You Can’t Beat Them, Join Them? Explaining Social Democratic Responses to the Challenge from the Pop ulist Radical Right in Western Europe.« Political Studies 58 (3): 410–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2009.00783.x. de Jonge, Léonie . 2019.»The Populist Radical Right and the Media in the Benelux: Friend or Foe?« The International Journal of Press/­ Politics 24 (2), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161218821098. de Jonge, Léonie . 2021a. The Success and Failure of Right-Wing Populist Parties in the Benelux Countries. Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781003049258. de Jonge, Léonie . 2021b.»The Curious Case of Belgium: Why Is There No Right-Wing Populism in Wallonia?« Government and Opposition 56 (4): 598–614. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2020.8. Heinze, Anna-Sophie . 2018.»Strategies of Mainstream Parties to wards Their Right-Wing Populist Challengers: Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland in Comparison.« West European Politics 41 (2): 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2017.1389440. Heinze, Anna-Sophie . 2022.»Dealing with the Populist Radical Right in Parliament: Mainstream Party Responses toward the Alternative for Germany.« European Political Science Review 14 (3): 333–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773922000108. Krause, Werner, Denis Cohen, and Tarik Abou-Chadi . 2023. »Does Accommodation Work? Mainstream Party Strategies and the Success of Radical Right Parties.« Political Science Research and Methods 11(1): 172–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2022.8. Minkenberg, Michael . 2013.»From Pariah to Policy-Maker? The Radi cal Right in Europe, West and East: Between Margin and Mainstream.« Journal of Contemporary European Studies 21(1): 5–24. https://doi.org /10.1080/14782804.2013.766473. Mudde, Cas . 2019. The Far Right Today. Polity. Ramalingam, Vindhya . 2014. On the Front Line: A Guide to Countering Far right Extremism. Institute for Strategic Dialogue. https://­ www.tandis.odihr.pl/bitstream/20.500.12389/21928/1/08096.pdf. Rocha, Camila . 2021. Menos Marx, mais Mises: O liberalismo e a nova direita no Brasil. São Paulo: Todavia. Santos, Fabiano, and Talita Tanscheit . 2019.»Quando velhos atores saem de cena. A ascensão da nova direita política no Brasil.« Colombia Internacional 99: 151–86. https://doi.org/10.7440/colombi aint99.2019.06. Tanscheit, Talita, and Pedro Barbosa . 2023.»A Battle of Two Presi dents: Lula Vs. Bolsonaro in the Brazilian Elections of 2022.« Revista de Ciencia Política 43(2): 167–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/s0718090x2023005000111. Van Spanje, Joost, and Nan Dirk De Graaf . 2018.»How Established Parties Reduce Other Parties’ Electoral Support: The Strategy of Par roting the Pariah.« West European Politics 41(1): 1–27. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01402382.2017.1332328. How to counter the far-right: lessons from Brazil 4

About the author Talita Sao Thiago Tanscheit is Professor in the Department of Social Sciences at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro(PUCRio) and Associate Researcher at the Laboratory for the Study of the Far Right(Ultra-Lab). She is Chair of the Steering Committee of the Standing Group on Latin American Politics of the European Consor tium for Political Research(ECPR). Her main area of research is com parative politics, especially on issues related to political parties and democracies in Latin America. talitastt@puc-rio.br Léonie de Jonge is Professor of Research on Far-Right Extremism at the Institute for Research on Far-Right Extremism(IRex) at the University of Tübingen, where she holds the chair in political science that focuses on far-right political actors and ideologies. She studied political science and international relations in the United States and the United Kingdom and received her PhD from the University of Cambridge in 2019. Her doctoral dissertation examined the success and failure of populist radical right parties in the Benelux countries. Following her PhD, she worked as Assistant Professor of European Politics and Society at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands until 2024, where she was also a research fellow at the Documenta tion Centre for Dutch Political Parties. Her current research examines the rise and normalization of the far right, as well as societal and political responses to it. leonie.de-jonge@uni-tuebingen.de About Democratic Expeditions This essay is based on the paper presented by the author at the workshop Contesting the Far Right, Safeguarding Democracy: Comparative Insights from Europe and Latin America. Convened by Daphne Halikiopoulou(University of York, UK) and Carlos Meléndez(CEU Democracy Institute, Budapest), the workshop took place at the CEU Democracy Institute in Budapest on 22 and 23 September 2025. It was the second edition of Democratic Expeditions, a series of openly sourced, carefully crafted international research workshops that shed light on underexplored issues of democratic crises and democratizing struggles. The ini tiative is a joint venture of the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung’s Regional Office on Democracy of the Future in Vienna, the CEU Democra cy Institute, and the CEU Department of Political Science. Imprint Published by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung e.V. Godesberger Allee 149 53175 Bonn, Germany info@fes.de Issuing Department FES Regional Office for International Cooperation Democracy of the Future Reichsratsstr. 13/5 A-1010 Vienna Contact Filip Milačić filip.milacic@fes.de Design pertext| www.pertext.de The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung(FES) or of the organization for which the author works. Commercial use of media published by the FES is not permitted without the written consent of the FES. Publications by the FES may not be used for electioneering purposes. November 2025 © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung e. V. Further publications of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung can be found here: ↗ www.fes.de/publikationen FES Regional Office for International Cooperation How to counter the far-right: lessons from Brazil 5