ABSTRACT
The crisis of 2007–2008 unleashed discussions over the role and weight of empirical issues, methodology and rhetoric as its causes. In this chapter, we unfold an argument that begins with a brief presentation of some important methodological and rhetorical points, which we consider relevant to understanding the crisis of 2007–2008, with its epicenter in the US. Afterwards, we unveil the effects of that international crisis on the Brazilian economy and its economic policies, detailing the steep change of course that the Brazilian Federal Government chose, after its re-election, at the end of 2014. To this end, the article presents four items, in addition to this introduction and some brief concluding remarks. First, we provide a more detailed discussion of methodological issues (Dow, 2008; Lawson, 2009; Grune-Yanoff, 2009). Second, we discuss the essential role of rhetoric in mainstream economics and its use in different proposals to explain persuasively the reasons and consequences of the financial crisis and to prepare—of course, painfully, in general, since the majority of people (even economists, policy-makers, and businessmen/women) seem to believe that ‘more pain, more gain’—for another ‘normal’ epoch in the economy and economics (Blyth, 2013). Third, we present the recent case of the Brazilian economy, in which its Federal Government initially (2008–2009) reacted to the crisis through a creative and non-mainstream stance—profusely using public credit through its huge public banks (two commercial and one investment bank), albeit quite schizophrenically, together with a very conservative Central Bank (Guttman, 2009)—but later surrendered to austerity policies, triggering one of the worst economic crises in Brazil since the Great Depression of 1929 (and also bringing about an impeachment, less than 16 months after the re-election of Dilma Rousseff as President of Brazil). Fourth, we describe and analyze some metaphorical mappings and scenarios in authoritative discourses on crisis and austerity, with illustrative examples from the recent Brazilian case, underscoring both the crisis and the rhetoric linked to it (2014–2017).
