← New Books Network
New Books Network
Luiz Guilherme Burlamaqui, "The Making of Global FIFA: Cold War Politics and the Rise of João Havelange to the FIFA Presidency, 1950-1974" (De Gruyter, 2023)
01:14:45
Loading summary
Transcript72 lines
- [00:00]
A
It's football season and you can now get almost anything you need for game day delivered with Uber Eats. What do we mean by almost?
- [00:07]
B
Well, you can't get a running back.
- [00:09]
A
Delivered, but you can get baby back ribs delivered. A strong defense?
- [00:12]
B
No. A strong deodorant?
- [00:14]
A
Yes. A six pack of abs? Nope. Six pack of beer?
- [00:18]
B
Yes.
- [00:19]
A
Get almost almost anything for game day delivered with Uber Eats official on demand food delivery partner of the NFL. Order now. Alcohol 21+, and in select cities. Product availability varies by region. See app for details.
- [00:30]
C
Hello, everybody. This is Marshall Po. I'm the founder and editor of the New Books Network. And if you're listening to this, you know that the NBN is the largest academic podcast network in the world. We reach a worldwide audience of 2 million people. You may have a podcast or you may be thinking about starting a podcast. As you probably know, there are challenges basically of two kinds. One is technical. There are things you have to know in order to get your podcast produced and distributed. And the second is, and this is the biggest problem, you need to get an audience. Building an audience in podcasting is the hardest thing to do today. With this in mind, we at the NBM have started a service called NBN Productions. What we do is help you create a podcast, produce your podcast, distribute your podcast, and we host your podcast. Most importantly, what we do is we distribute your podcast to the NBN audience. We've done this many times with many academic podcasts and we would like to help you. If you would be interested in talking to us about how we can help you with your podcast, please contact us. Just go to the front page of the New Books Network and you will see a link to NBN Productions. Click that, fill out the form, and we can talk. Welcome to the New Books Network.
- [01:37]
B
Hello and welcome to New Books and Sports, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Keith Rathbun and I'm coming to you from Macquarie University in sunny, sunny Sydney, Australia. And I am speaking today with Luis. Pardon me, my Portuguese is not so good. With Luis Guillerme Berlamachi. Am I doing that?
- [01:58]
A
Okay, that's perfect. Okay, thank you.
- [02:01]
B
I'm sure that's very generous. Luis is a fantastic historian. He has a PhD in history and he's an assistant professor in history in Brazil. And he's published a book, first in Portuguese and now translated into English. The Making of a Global Cold War, Politics and the Rise of Xiao Havalanga and to the FIFA presidency, 1950 to 1974. Thank you so much, Luis for joining me. You're welcome.
- [02:34]
A
Thank you so much, Keith, for the invitation. It's a pleasure for me to be here today, talk about my book. Yeah, I'm really happy to be here today. Thank you so much.
- [02:45]
B
No, no, I'm really, I. It's always a it for me. I feel like it's a blessing to get to read all the books because it's a. It's a good reason to. To keep up with the field. Luis, this book was. I thought it was fantastic. And I tell people that somewhat regularly I'm like, I loved your book for this reason, I love your book for that reason. But it's not often I can tell someone I loved your book because you made me totally change my mind about something I thought I knew. And so I'm really excited to get to talk about this book. So Luis, can you tell us a little bit about this project? How you developed it, what it's about, what. Why is it important to you?
- [03:22]
A
Okay, so I'm going to start a little bit early back to, I don't know, 2013, 14. That's a long time now. So that, that time I started my master program and when I started my master, I was trying to figure out like a project what to do what really I know like from a long time that I want to research about sport and football special in particular, but I didn't know what kind of subject. So I kind of looked into Brazilian literature about sports and football and there's a lot of research when you look the Brazilian literature, there's a lot of research about fandoms, there's a lot of research about fans, supporters, players, but not so much when you talk about.
- [04:15]
B
Those.
- [04:15]
A
Who control the games that in Portuguese we call like the top. It's a. They even had a specific word for that. It's called the cartoles, which means like the top hats, the political elites within football. So actually I start from there in 2012, 2013. And I did my master thesis about. About the football presidents in Rio de Janeiro in two clubs, Flamengo, Inflaminesi. And I interview a lot of president, the so called. The so called football presidents. And that's pretty much where I started to do research about, about. About the presence. And one of the. One of the presidents that I interviewed, like I said was a long time ago, told me that I should interview Avalanche, Joan Village, which was later the subject of my dissertation. And he told me, and at the time I was why I'm not so interested in research about Tifa. I'm really interested in research about local politics and the connection between, like, the. The presence of Rio de Janeiro and local politics in the 80s and the 90s. That was the topic of my master thesis. But he insisted and he gave me like the number of Avalanche. And then I decided, okay, why not? And then I met with Avelange. It was very interesting experience. I come to his office, a lot of very, very interesting office, because I remember, well, going there, the wall, like, the wall. The walls were full of diplomas, prizes, medals. And I interviewed him and it was very interesting to see how he had, like this very. How can I say that? He had this very narrative where he's really consolidated about himself, about his role in FIFA, about his role as a football president. So. And I started. Realized that he was saying what he said to me, to everyone, and kind of like blew my attention. Like, why this person. So strong idea about himself. And maybe I should go look deeper into that. And then I come with this idea to make a PhD dissertation about him. But I also didn't want to do a sort of biography because that was not what I want to do. So I decided I'm going to look into a specific moment of his life, which is this moment that he talks so much about, which is election in FIFA. And I'm going to see if the story that he claims in different places. I mean, is this for real? Is this solid? So this is pretty much how I started to research about that at the time, remember? Well, I wasn't so sure that I want to do a PhD in history, because I really wanted to. I mean, this was a long time ago. I wasn't so sure that I want to do a PhD in history at the time. I want to do a PhD in anthropology. But the way things are in Brazil is really complicated to. I mean, it's not so complicated, but it's gonna. But it's. Yeah, and it's complicated if you want to follow a career to do like a Master in history and then a PhD in another subject. So, yeah, so. So I decided to do this PhD in history and research about sort of continuing what I'd done before in. In my master program, still, like focusing on political elites, but this time the specific situation. Right. So that's how I decided. That's how I come up with this object. Also. There's also a little bit of contest into that, because if you go back 10, 15 years, Brazil was hosting the Olympic Games, Brazil was also hosting the World Cup. So I was also like, there was a lot of momentum for research in sports as well. And Avalanche was a very important figure in secure in Brazil to help host the Olympic Games in 2016. So he was still 12, 13, 14 years ago. He was still like a person that was important in media. So all of this come together and I decided to start doing this prime.
- [09:02]
B
Yeah. And it's in some ways like an extremely ambitious project because I think most people who know anything about FIFA or think they know anything about FIFA, know about Havelonga because he's like the, one of the principal, if not the most important figure of the 20th, the second half of the 20th century in FIFA. That the whole story is like, that we all think we know is that Halalanga in 74 is this total earthquake moment in which FIFA goes from being traditional to being modern. It shifts from European to Third World. It goes. And so in some ways your project takes on that idea. And I want to really applaud you, Luis too, because like you say, your work's not about, it's not a narrow biography. But also in terms of sport history, it takes on a lot of theories from outside of sport history. So globalization, theories of development, theories of, of even this kind of like more meta. Theoretical is the idea of a turning point. Even the good theoretical states, you know, starting point.
- [10:09]
A
Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's also a very good way to put. For me, it's not a turning point, but it's pretty much like a starting point.
- [10:16]
B
Yeah.
- [10:17]
A
I will look at the election and think about what's going on with FIFA in this time. Right. So it kind of flips. Yeah. Kind of flip the, the coin.
- [10:29]
B
So how can you just. I mean, I know in. We'll talk a little bit more about the production book here in a second. So just kind of thinking at that 30,000 foot view, how does your, how does your account shift that traditional narrative? How are, how do we all get it wrong? How did I get it wrong? I would say too, I, I so.
- [10:52]
A
I think so I think Avalanche, just like I said, was so that's not only I. It's also very interesting because after I wrote my dissertation, actually I wrote an article in Portuguese about what, what it's like to interview. That was a long, long time ago. So I wrote a very short article about how, how it's like to interview Avalanche and some Brazilian researchers. I'm not sure if you're familiar with them. Sergio Giglio and Lijia Magalanch, they also interview him. And I remember everyone kind of have this feeling, I'm going to interview Avalanche. So nice it's going to be so exclusive. And then I wrote in this specific article, he's pretty much saying the same thing to everyone. So he said. And he was giving a lot of interviews to a lot of people. And it was also very interesting because from a researcher's perspective, you get access to this person who, I mean, superpower, like president of FIFA, that you feel like so privileged to be speaking with. But actually he was doing this with so many researchers, so many journalists, so many. He published so much about himself. I mean, it's really incredible, like, how he was able to tell this story, like the story of, like, he. The person, like, who wants to change, who changed FIFA in the 70s and make it global, like, to so different people in so different in a lot of ways. And he does that, like very. I mean, that's his superpower. And he was really brilliant in a way that he presented himself as the center of this narrative. And I think that's partially true because he was certainly a very important person in FIFA. But it's also very interesting if you look with nuance how some things are completely erased. I'm just going to give you one example. Once Stanley Royce died, I'm trying to remember when, but I think was 8,880s, and FIFA published an obituary about him. And Royce was one of the person who was responsible to create the FIFA development programs. They didn't mention that in his obituary. So things are going to be like, erasing, like little by little. It's very interesting to see that process. I even mentioned the beginning of my book. There was an interview that Avalanche gave to the Brazilian press just three or four years after taking over FIFA. So he says something that I'm not going to change much. Things are pretty much settled. I only have to do very simple things. So he goes from this to 1994 World cup, which is a big moment for FIFA, because the first World cup here in the United States. It's almost like there's also a book about this, if I'm not mistaken. It's called the 90 Years of FIFA as well. So it's also official publication. And now Avalanche is in the center, presenting himself as a central person who changed FIFA completely. And if you look at this, that was also the moment when the first books and the first papers, academic papers about the history of FIFA, were also coming out as well. So they're all also part of this contest, like. Of this, like seeing 99, 4 World cup, which is, I'm a hundred percent sure, was in another dimension compared to the World cups before. So they're all so much absorbed about this that they tried to look 1974 and say, okay, here is a moment where everything changed because they're also writing history from that present, that 1994 present as well. But there's so much between 74 and 1994, like 20 years. So there's sort of this. Get really influenced by this historical moment of the 1980s to write about the 70s, but I think it's a very different story, personally.
- [15:26]
B
Yeah, your book does, and let's jump into it in a second. But I know beforehand we just talked a little bit about the issue of the production of the book too. So I know we wanted to talk to you about that. But yeah, your book does such a great job of showing this kind of longer history of globalization of FIFA that's not centered around Halalanga. And really in that introductory chapter you show how Havalanga is the arch narrator of his own story. Like he, he's constantly kind of burnishing his own reputation and even involved. You could come without, without, without being putting too fine upon it. It's, it's not anti hagiographic. You're not tearing him down, but you are just pointing out hit the role that the big outsized role he plays and in writing his own histories.
- [16:17]
A
Yeah, it's very impressive. And also Barbara Keys, who wrote the foreword of my book. Yeah, she told me. I'm not sure if this is on the forward, but I, I'm not sure. But she told me that she's writing. I'm not sure if she's finished. I didn't have the chance to check. But last time we talked she said she was writing a bio biography about Kissinger. And she also told me that like the strongest side of Kissinger is also his ability to tell his own story as this master of diplomacy, which has a lot of parallels with Avalanche as well. So I don't think this is particular about him. I feel like it's just the way. But he was very clever on this and he was really a master of like telling his story about FIFA.
- [17:16]
B
This is a terrible segue. But as I mentioned, we talked earlier about the production of this book and as you mentioned, this originally came out in Portuguese and now this is out for the first time in English. And can you tell us a little bit about that process for people who are keen to know how that works?
- [17:39]
A
It's also very interesting to, to know because, I mean, just like I said, like was 15 years ago, never cross. Today I have a completely different View. I also feel like, even though time hasn't passed so much, but like 15 years ago, never would pass in my mind to do like my PhD in Europe or United States. I really want to do my PhD in Brazil for a lot of reasons. First, because I think Brazilian universities are excel excellent and also because I never thought of like living outside of Brazil. So my goal was to stay there. And I had a family there. And so I never want to leave Brazil. Today I have a different mindset. But so I wrote my PhD dissertation Portuguese, which is pretty much how we do things in Brazil even nowadays. I think now this is changing a little bit. So if you want to write in English, you can. I'm not sure if all universities accept English PhD dissertations. Some of them do. I think the university that I did accepts that. But for me it was very hard because I finished my PhD dissertation. I want to publish in English because the jury recommended me to publish, publish in English and Portuguese as a book. So I really want to try to do that. But it's also very complicated. Some press here in the US they request that the books never been published before in another language. They want to have like the firsthand publication. So for me, it was a little bit hard trying to find like the first six months I didn't know what to do so much. But then eventually Philip got in contact with me. He knew that I had this dissertation because we have some friends in common now we are also friends. But before that we didn't had any contact. And he invited me to publish the book in his collection. So it made a lot easier because with this I was able to secure funding to publish, to. To translate, to pay somebody to translate the. The book to English. So that was also very good. And there was make like they. They helped me a lot in this process of like translating some adjustments for. For an English version as well. My book in Portuguese is a little bit bigger than in English. It has one first part about FIFA as a political entity that doesn't. That doesn't appear in the English version. So it's a whole first chapter that I had in Portuguese that I don't have in English. I'm thinking of publishing this is an article now, but thanks. It was very, very good that Philip and at the time was when I got in contact with him, Philip and Amanda Schumlund as well. They were like the editors of this collection. They gave me a lot of support to do this. There's also a lot of bureaucracy because when you have the funding, it's Also very tricky. I want to comment on this because from the Brazilian perspective, if I want to publish the book in English, I need to have it in Portuguese. So for the Brazilian to secure the funding and for the European and United States presses, they want a lot of them. They want the original one. It's very tricky like those like academic. You know, it's very complicated because the like one hand the Brazilian universe want you to publish in English. They sometimes they even give you fund for that which was my case. But the rules are completely different from the rules from Europe and United States. So. But thanks like thanks to Philip and Armando and to the greater that was. I was able to have this much more smooth. Yeah. In some ways I think the English version of my book is much more. It's much more condensed than Portuguese version because I think Portuguese version you show you. But I don't think anybody's gonna see that.
- [22:13]
B
But we'll be the only people that see.
- [22:16]
A
But yeah, it's like it's life, you know, it's big.
- [22:20]
B
Your.
- [22:21]
A
Your book.
- [22:21]
B
I wouldn't say like I would I. Well one. The translation is. Is. Is fantastic. And I wouldn't say it's. It's not. It's not short to me but it's. It's perfect length for the. For your argument. It fits nicely. And for people who don't know, Luis is talking about Philippe Vonard and Amanda Schumann who are affiliated with the. The rarest as I. As I call it. But it's the International Sporti. It's a. It's a European organization that. That really in the past decade that they've been meeting has. Has connected scholars from around the world. And Philippe and Amanda and everyone over there at the. At the rare Reese, they're. They're fantastic. And they're still holding annual conferences as far as I can. I can tell. So if you're a scholar of sport history, they're worth. They're worth looking up and getting to know because their conferences are great and they're usually in Europe, which is not a bad place to go sometimes if you can get a little funding.
- [23:32]
A
Yeah yeah. And also they publish how Kumar book which is great. And they also publish now this book. This one I don't know but I also feel like it's probably great about Hungary as a superpower. So they published Haukumar book about Salazar's Portugal. I know that I read this also. There's also book. It's also very interesting because this book was also published first in Portuguese and now it's also in English. So their first two books were originally published in Portuguese and they're doing a very good job. Like in this, with this collection, there are three great books they publish so far.
- [24:16]
B
And as you say, Luis, it's really hard to find American presses that will publish a book in translation that has already been published somewhere else. And that's really a shame because there's a lot of great work that comes out overseas that's just not accessible even to people who are pretty. Like, I'm pretty good at languages, French and German and. But there's a huge number of researchers like yourself who write in Portuguese and it's not Spanish or Chinese and we don't have enough institutions that bring this together.
- [24:53]
A
Yeah, that's. Yeah. And just like I said, was also very funny because when I. When I was looking for funding in Brazil, they're like the same Breers. They need the book in Portuguese so they can give them the money. So it's also very interesting. Like, either sides are not communicating so well. But thankfully I was able to do that and to publish this in English. And I'm really happy of this. It's not easy. Like I would say most of the books and the dissertations that are published in Portuguese, they're probably going to stay like, local. And I was able to do that to publish in English with. I feel like a lot of people are reading the book. I got a lot of reviews. So, yeah, I'm actually really happy with this.
- [25:42]
B
Let's talk more about your book then, Louise. It has it for people who haven't read it yet. Then as I say, I. I encourage people to go out and pick up a copy. Um, there. There are five chapters, um, and they kind of walk chronologically through the. The. The Babelonga's rise until. Until 1974. So you're not doing. Detailing his career, which I think a lot of the books, because he's had such an important role in the legacy. A lot of books focus on that. On that half. Right. Once he's in. Since, you know, once he's in charge and your. Your work is actually kind of showing how. How he gets to that point and, and you. You take on that. That this was a beautiful metaphor in the book, this kind of assumption that people had in the 60s, that there was a. In 70s, that there was a battle between English stiffness and Brazilian fluidity. You know, there's like this contrast. And so your first chapter deals a lot more actually with a person you've already mentioned, Stanley Rus. So I'm wondering if you can tell us a little bit about FIFA in the 60s and Stanley Rus. Like what. What's going on in that moment kind of before Havalanga.
- [26:58]
A
Yeah, it's also very. So I'm not sure. So I wrote my book before Alan Thomas writes. The biographer of Stanley Ross, I think would publish almost like. I think he published one or two years later than I, of course, English versions later, but I wasn't able to change much. So that one of the reasons that I don't cope quote this biography. Because when I wrote that, a lot of people like say, why don't you quote this? But they only look to the publication date of the book in English. But I publish just like it's also important we will know that because I publish first in Portuguese. But the traditional views of Stanley Ross as to pretty much this idea that he was almost like a conservative that did the. Doesn't want to change anything in FIFA. But when you look at the documents and the sources, what do you see about him even? I mean, he was a conservative in some ways, but he wants to change a lot. Like in terms of when you look at this figure, even the 1920s, 1930s in the football association, he was much more a connector with FIFA and with the Football association and international football then a lot of his peers. So he has this idea that football was a very important way of keeping England as a leader international after World War II. So he was pretty much responsible of doing the whole connection with the English and the former colonists. And he was a very important and prominent person after World War II in Football Association. So the question for me was also very interesting because when the Football association decides to return to FIFA after World War II, I never understood really well why he wasn't appointed immediately to become FIFA president. So there's this almost this gap where Arthur Drury was present for I think five years and he was only appointed after. So I think Arthur Drury was appointed in. I'm just going to check the dates because I wrote this book. I mean it doesn't sound like that, but I wrote a long time ago. So I'm just going to double check the dates. So he was appointed to FIFA 1955, right? Yeah. So 1955 and then, yeah, so he was appointed FIFA in 1955 and he becomes like six years ahead of FIFA. So I never understood why this person who wasn't exactly as important internationally as Stanley Rose, because Stanley Ross was very big after World War II. He had a lot of connections, a lot of connections like In Southeast Asia. He had a lot of connections in Africa as well. He had a lot of connections in Australia, United States. And why did he pick this person, Durie and not him? And understood a little bit later, because one of the reasons was, I think I wrote about this, is because he was a person, Stanley Ross. He was some sort of employee of the Football Association. He was the secretary of the Football Association. He was making money as administrator. Right. And Drew was much more like a figure, like a noble figure that wasn't making money, was dedicating himself to. To the Football Association. So he was a chairman of the Football association. Then he wasn't making money. She was doing this because he was almost like volunteer to work for the Football Association. It's also very interesting to see that until the 60s there was this clause in the institutes of FIFA that if you want to apply to become president of FIFA, you don't. You are not allowed to work for football, for national federation. So Stanley Ross was not able to. So he was not the first choice. Even though he was the man that had all the connections, he was not the first immediately picked in 1955. So it took him six years, six years as almost like a shadow of this person, drury, to become FIFA FIFA President 1961 and at this time it was also very interesting to see a lot of forces that you're going to also see in 1974 as well. They're already there. So I'm trying to remember as well. But he runs his election against Andreyevic and what is the name of the other person? 63 I think Toman Thoman maybe.
- [32:23]
B
Yeah.
- [32:25]
A
So it's also. It's also very clear that Andre Y has all, not all of them, but a lot of. A lot of the new countries that are new members of FIFA after the World War II, because he was also me. He was member of the medical committee, was also a member of technical committee and he was from Yugoslavia. And he was pretty much doing this role of trying to unify some of the Eastern countries, some of the African countries and some of the Asian countries. And you have. On the other side you have Toman, who is a Swiss man, was trying to unify more of Central Europe and some of the countries in more traditional countries in Germany and a lot of the countries in Central Europe. But you have Ross, who is pretty much now the secretary of the Football Association. He has all the four football association of NBA. So he has Scotland, England, North Ireland and Ireland. All, all of them are with him. And a lot of those new countries that especially in Southeast Asia. So also if you go to look the colonization maps, it happens first in Asia and then in Africa. So 61 we didn't have a lot of African countries that were. There were members of FIFA. Most of the affiliations happens in 1964. But even though Ross has a lot of dialogues, has a lot of connections with those countries in Africa as well. So he was like the perfect man, I would say, to do almost like a facilitator between these new countries that are going to be members of FIFA and more traditional ones, they're still European. And he's going to be like this figure who's going to try to control that process and to change some things in FIFA. So he was almost elected as this figure that want to change something but want to control the process. I would put those words. So it was not like the conservative that doesn't want to change anything. That's pretty much like Toman. I would say pretty much traditional. Traditional perspective. They want to keep the powers in the hand of the Europeans. So we had this figure which is Toman, not Russ. And we have the Andre Yic, which is I would say much more. I'm not going to say radical, but much more pro change in the way also FIFA is structured. Right. Not a conservative person who wants to keep the status quo as it is.
- [35:27]
B
This chapter does a really good job of I think of showing that. And you mentioned earlier of course, that Rus was involved in the organization of the technical development committees, which as we all know, is a means for moving money from FIFA down to countries that are to use the terms at the time, developing and needed additional financial support to. To. To kind of set up soccer football in those countries. And I would point out too that for. For listeners, another thing that this chapter does really well is it. It also addresses some of the challenges that were coming from outside of FIFA, from the Dandong movement, the organization of. Of the. The g. This is kind of an alternative game. So FIFA and the IOC were facing challenges from other. Other organizations. I don't want to go into that too much or we won't get to talk about any of the rest of the book because it's. It's a really rich account. But this is kind of the moment in which. So it takes on. So Louise, you're very much taking on the idea of like this stage 60s where nothing is happening and you're going. Actually a lot is happening. And it's this moment that we see like at the. At the. The this moment we see avalanga kind of coming in and meeting that moment. And so in some ways, your. Your second chapter, it. It does the. For me, it was a nice little parallel because your second chapter shows, in fact, you know, that how far from being like a revolutionary, from the. From the very moment, actually how long is also in some ways very conservative.
- [37:10]
A
Yeah. I just want to mention one thing also, because one tricky things of dealing with sports history and I think of being like a story in general. You don't work with the archives that you want. You work with the source that you had available. Right. And then you had to be really good in terms of like reading the nuance, like using sources as much as you can, you know. So for example, for me, free form requires are very good, but it's also very hard to find a lot of meaningful documents. You have to be really. Because it's pretty much like official communication. Right. You don't see them like a lot of times, you don't see a very, you know, explicit narratives. So we have to work really well with the nuance, with the footnote. Everything that you can find, that you can add to your comment, to your narrative, you have to use it. So that's also why I use a lot of sources that I find in the ioc, because even though it's a different organization, I feel like was the same historical moment that FIFA was also going through and the sources in the IOC that are much more clear about this. Right. So that's one of the reasons that I also use a lot of IOC sources in that chapter as well. But about Avalanche. Yeah. So it's also very interesting because Avalanche was also very conservative. There's a saying here in Latin America, I'm not sure if you heard. If there's government, I support it. Have you ever heard this?
- [39:00]
B
No. No. But how do I say that in Portuguese?
- [39:03]
A
We. We actually don't even say in Portuguese. We say in Spanish because. Yeah, it's also very. I don't know why even Portuguese we. We say in Spanish. So I go, vierno si soye favor. Something like that. If there's a government, any favor. So that's pretty much the position that he owns always had in his life. Right. So he always want to be in the side that's winning. Maybe I was. So there's this political position in Latin America. It's very traditional in Latin America, but I think you can see this across the world, which is something that we call like the center. But it's not like. It's not like a geological center, like moderation is pretty much like the center that goes on the side that whoever is winning. So if the right is winning, there are more right wings. If the left is winning, so there are a little bit more left wings. So that's pretty much his position, right? So he was. There's government, I'm prove it. And he was always on the side of the people who were in, in the government. Which is also very interesting to see because this political tradition in Brazil and Latin America in general almost like was very useful for him. But in the time that he was FIFA president, because every time he was in the side of the people who were in power and if they're in the power, I don't care, I don't care if they. He usually says something. I don't care if they are. I'm quoting. I don't care if they are left, yellow, back, white. They are the presidents, they I'm going to respect them. I'm going to be. And I'm going to work for him. Which is this pretty much the political discourse of this group that has influenced role in Brazil for I would say last 200 years, but certainly in the past 50 years, which we call in Portuguese we call centro, which means like the big center. They're convictally in the side of the people who are in power. And he's sort of this part of this group. But if you're going to look in deep and you're going to try to understand this political group, you're going to see their right wing groups, right, they're pretty much right wingers. The way they think about politics, the way they think about government. They're pretty much a conservative traditional group that doesn't want to change and pretty much don't criticize anything. So he was able to go to the Nazi Olympics 1936 and say a lot of good things about. It's very good organization. I went to oper, I went to you know, talk good things about this and also good things about 1980 Olympics in Moscow. So it's this kind of political view that you don't pretty much. You don't criticize anything, you just are.
- [42:11]
B
There in some ways he was very much. Although he presented himself later as more of a champion for some of some political change. One thing you could see across his career is that actually he did hew in some ways closely the idea that sports and politics are at least not natural bedfellows.
- [42:35]
A
Yeah, a lot of times. And it's also very interesting to see because I would say that his dream was to become like the head of the ioc. I think he manifest that in a couple of Brazilian interviews in the 60s and the 50s. I think he ultimately political goal was to become head of the ioc. But I also feel like he realized that in the ioc he never had a chance because it was pretty much more. Much more European dominant institution than FIFA. So it was in the moment and also hard to see when exactly that happened. I think it was probably 1966. He has this click and decided to go to present his name to become FIFA president. I would almost certainly say that happened between 1966 and 1968. The moment when he had this click that he wants to become FIFA. Not he wants to, but he could became FIFA president if he campaigned for that. That probably happened somewhere between 1966 and 1968.
- [43:47]
B
Well, he's 1966. For me, 1966, like, forget 1974. 1966 was the year because. And in chapter three, I think you. You bring this out really well. But like, so what happens with. By now, middle of the 1960s, Havelong is already working in Brazilian football. He's come up through Flumiensa and now he's, you know, he's. He's. He's a. He's a. I'd say he's a mocker or a muckety mark that you used a Portuguese term earlier. He's a. He's a. He's an important. He's an important figure within. Within Brazilian football. And then something happens in 1966 that. That creates a lot of criticism for him and he has to. He has to like, make a really big gamble, I would say. So what's going on between 66 and 70, that really kind of sets the stage for him to use Brazil as a launching pad to get to FIFA.
- [44:44]
A
Yeah. It's also very interesting to see because until recently, I hope this has changed. I don't think so, but hopefully it has. But in Brazil, we had this idea that we never lose the World Cup. Sometimes we don't win it, you know, like, sometimes we don't win it. Maybe that changed after 2014, I don't know. But that was pretty much the discourse until like 2014, that then Brazil, like the World cup belongs to Brazil. I'm not. And sometimes we're just not able to win it. And then we have to. You must find an explanation. You must find like a. Like a villain, I would say, and a reason and why. Why we haven't word. Won the World Cup. So Brazil won the World Cup 958, 962 but didn't win 960C. So who is the villain? Since we have the best players. That was the narrative in the press. We had to find a villain. So the press was pretty much divided between two villains. One of them was the administration of Brazilian Football association. The other one were the referees that did a very poor job in the World Cup. So Avalanche was pretty much in the center of this debate. And again, actually I would say that he lost this one inside Brazil because he was pretty much the center like the face of the defeat in 1966 defeat. But he was trying in Brazil to push to sort of like. No, I wasn't the main responsible for this defeat. The main responsible of this defeat was the bad refereeing for from FIFA and he was trying to push this. That was a very hope. It's also very interesting because this. Even if you look to Brazilian games, there is one specific game, Brazil and Portugal, that some players deserve to be sent off. Probably especially if he looks with the eyes from today. Right. If you look to the highlights of this game, it's a very violent game. But I'm not so sure about how is this, you know, just a regular game in the 60s that was probably more valid.
- [47:08]
B
Yeah, it was different with the studs.
- [47:13]
A
If you look with the eyes of today, it's a very violent game. Like, it's a very. A lot of f. Like Helen, this game I saw there was chase in the field but. But nothing happens in the Brazilian game. But a lot of things happens in the rugby games and also in the Argentinian game as well. So they're trying to. He was trying to create this narrative that not only Brazil was robbed, but pretty much South America was robbed in 66 World cup in a way that he was not perceived to the Brazilian past as the villain of the defeat of Brazil in 66. But he wasn't so successful in terms of internal narrative. But that was also very. I think was a very starting point for him to be able to unify and to establish political ties with the other local federations, with the South American federations. Because if you look at the history of the South American football, there's a lot of rivalries between Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, a lot of disputes. A lot of Argentina didn't play the 1950 World cup because they were. They didn't have relationship with the Brazilian Federal Association. So if you look at the story of the Brazilian and Argentina Footballs association, there's a lot of moments there were. They were never allies. Most of the times they were not friendlies. Also, the relationship, the Brazilian relationship with the rest of South America has also been really complicated because there's a very big country, it's the only country that speaks Portuguese. There's a lot of. I would say, I'm trying to find a good word, but there's a lot of suspiciousness in either side, either from the Brazil's perspective, but also on the Spanish country's perspective. So the relationship was never good. So this defeat, 1966 defeat, was also a key moment in terms of where they start to perceive that they have some shared interest. And after this, they start to get much more political united than before. So. And there's a lot of documents that shows that either on the press, also diplomatic documents as well, that show that after 1966, they start to come more together in terms of presenting a political project to FIFA. It's also very interesting to see because a lot of us, I'm saying us, like the sports historians, we don't think that what happens in the field has an impact into political terms. But this is a very good example on how sometimes it has. It was pretty much the fact that all the South American clubs lost that starts to create this sense of solidarity after the defeat, after 1966 defeat. And that was the moment when they start to work for his candidacy.
- [50:33]
B
He needed support domestically as well. In this chapter, for me, like, one of the things it does really well is show how tenuous that was at first. Like, he reaches out to business leaders. Is the government going to support him? And it wasn't always so clear. People are like, well, yeah, we can support you, maybe. Like, we can be on your side maybe. But you blew it. Like, you blew it in 1966. Like, so he was way. In my mind, I'm reading this and I'm going, this is a really big wager that he's gonna. He's got. He puts together this thing that you. You called and they called the Mexico plan. And it's like, if Brazil does not win the World cup in Mexico, like, he's sunk. There's no way he's gonna.
- [51:16]
A
Exactly.
- [51:16]
B
Wedding. He's betting everything on Brazil being able to win the World cup, which to me is like, the biggest bet. You're like, no, because I. I mean, you know, for me, I'm like, no one deserves to win the World Cup. You just kind of do because it's so unsexy.
- [51:30]
A
Exactly. Of course. But at this time, he was also very. So he was trying everything to win the World cup again. And as you probably know it's going to be the third time that Brazil is going to win the World cup, which has a huge impact because the first country to win the World cup three times was able to take the Julie Hime trophy to home. Right after that. They changed the trophy. So that was a big thing back then. That's why I'm not gonna say that. I'm gonna say this just because I feel like this is more like a fan than historian. I feel like the 97 World cup is probably like the biggest World cup because you have like Brazil, Italy, Germany, they're all fighting for the chance to win the third trophy. That was, that's why also why was so big. And the first time the World cup was showing televisions in colors for most of the plays. That also has to do with the myth. Not the myth, but the fact that Palais is so big because was the first time, I wouldn't say the world, but a lot of almost the entire world is seeing the World cup live and play is doing those incredible things that you can see in video, right? Very. The very big moment also because of that. So he was also, again, he was betting a lot on this. And he was. I mean, for him was a very strong bet because he pretty much had no option. Otherwise you're going to probably be sacked from his football association, Brazil Football association position. He's going to be replaced if he doesn't win. And it's also one thing that doesn't appear in his narrative, but because when you tell the narrative from the present, right, just always like, I was destined to be greatness. I was destined to be FIFA president. But when you look like, from the things that happen, like, you know, football has a lot of, you know, a lot of things can happen in the football field. You don't know. You don't know who's going to win. You don't know who's going to lose. And. But then he has this speech. I was destined to become FIFA president. I was, you know, and to create this FIFA that I created. But there was a lot of things that could have been done wrong. And that's, that's, that's also one of the things that I try to. To do in my book to show that, like history in the process and not history from the present, but how this happens. Like, because when you have results, like 1994, I mean, the World Cups in the U.S. he won. But what about 1968? Brazil was like a mess. We had the military government. It pretty much isn't even if you're like, a supporter of the regime. When you have, like, dictatorship, you're never Safe. You're never 100% safe. Even if you have, like, friends, even if you have connections, you're never safe. I mean, I don't think people realize that. And he himself, even though I just said that he was, There's a government, I'm in favor. But he was also a figure that was pretty much identified with some of the political opposition of the regime because it was friends of a lot of people from the previous government as well. So they never, the military government, ever trust 100% into his. In his political figure. So, yeah.
- [55:03]
B
As you show in chapter four, he was maybe, you know, among the most predominant figures for making a case for Brazil as a model of development, independent or different from other models. And this is the other thing that I really loved and to talk about that kind of contra teleological history, was that you not only tell the story about what's going on in Brazil, you tell the story about what's going on in FIFA, but you also tell the story about what's going on globally. And like, the political crises of FIFA, the decolonization, the Cold War, all kind of intersect with his rise at a very particular moment. And if it had been a couple years later or a couple years earlier, it wouldn't have been possible. But because it happens, like, right at this kind of very particular moment, he's able to take advantage. And so I wonder if you could talk a little bit about, because this chapter, chapter four for me, was one of the coolest because it kind of deals with the. The intricacies of FIFA agencies and agents and their fight against agents, but also, you know, of what corruption might mean. And then at the same time, like, they're bringing everyone, everyone possible to Brasilia.
- [56:19]
A
You know, I mean, personally, I think it's the chapter that I prefer, in my opinion, the captures, the chapters that I like the most is chapter one and this one. Yeah, I feel like it's the.
- [56:36]
B
It encapsulates the whole argument of the book in some ways in one chapter.
- [56:40]
A
Yeah, yeah, I agree with you. So, yeah, it's also very interesting to see that when you think about contra teleological narratives, it's also, when we see also, we know what happened to China, we know what happened to Brazil, we know who's a superpower now. We know that China is a superpower, but we didn't know. We didn't have this idea in 1973. Right. We didn't know how, because there Is a lot of. There's a lot of speculation that Brazil, if Brazil keeps. Keeps growing from, I don't know, 10% a year that was growing the 70s, Brazil might be like the next Japan, next China, wherever. So there's a lot of optimism. There was a lot of expectations, There was a lot of desire, political desire as well, that Brazil become a bigger and bigger party in the Cold War. That never happened. But again, 972, 973 people didn't know. That's never going to happen. Now we know never happened. It's also very interesting because also another moment where everyone feel like the Brazil was going to be able to become a central player in the global stage, which is the moment that I started doing my research and also didn't happen as people expected, even though it's a very different historical moment. But there's a lot of comparisons. We were hosting the World cup, we're hosting the Olympics. We expect Brazil to boom. What happened? Like, we had the biggest economical crisis that have ever happened in Brazilian history, and biggest. And now we're still dealing with that. So it's also interesting parallel of the moment I was writing the book and what was happening in 1972, 1973. So the goal of Avalanche was pretty much to try to present Brazil as this. Almost like this new model of society, like very open, democratic, even though it was a dictatorship. Democratic in a way that was pretty much open to everyone. And it's also funny because I still feel there's a lot of people outside of Brazil that still has this image that Brazil is a very democratic. When I'm saying democratic, I'm not talking about politics. I'm pretty much talking about the idea that everyone is welcome to Brazil if.
- [59:09]
B
You want to go to civic society. And racial democracy.
- [59:13]
A
Is the idea of racial democracy. I didn't want to use this. Yeah, I mean, the myth of racial democracy that everyone, if you go to Brazil, you're going to be, you know, accepted, you're going to be welcome, you're going to be. It's a still very strong picture that people internationally have about Brazil. I have some friends here in the us they're always saying that, no, Brazil is a great country. You have no, like, no such problems as racism or all of this. But we do actually have. But also, if you look into the perspective in the 70s again, you have the Brazilian national team there, you have a lot of white players, they have a lot of black players that you have a lot of different kinds of players playing together. This Incredible. Football is a great way of advertising your country, right? And to make people believe that, okay, now we have very democratic society where everyone has a chance, no matter if you look. For example, if you look to the United States, you have the segregation laws like six years before. If you look to South Africa, at the same time, you have apartheid and Brazil has these players, all these national teams coming together. That was not happening to other national teams at this time. Maybe in Peru, Uruguay a little bit, but most of them, Brazil was pretty much exception because you have so. So different players, so different backgrounds. And for Avalanche was a perfect way of advertising his role at the Football Association. This team almost like. Almost like saying, you know, are you. Are you guys seeing this team? This team over there? I sort of made this. And I'm not only made a team, I also made this. Come to Brazil. I'm going to show you. And that was pretty much what he's trying to do. So he invited a lot of delegates from FIFA 1971-1973 to come to Brazil to visit Brazil. He even host, even create this event. It's called the Mini World Cup. So there was this idea of creating this. They were called the past independencia to celebrate 1972, 150 years of Brazil. Independence was also a big thing for the military government and at the time. So he created this. This tournament where. Where he has this idea of bringing to Brazil the best national teams all over the world, but which is also fascinated. They never, they never came. A lot of them never came. The Europeans, they never came because they soon realized that was political tool for. For Avalanche. But he was able to get together all the South American. So all the 10 countries in South America Federation, they came to Brazil. They play, was also able to come. It's also very interesting story that I feel like deserve to be better told is the only time, as far as I know, the only time they have a national, African, national continental African team where they get the players, the best players in Africa. They made like a team and they. They come to play for Brazil. I think it's the only time, as far as I know, where they have this sort of. Of team to play like in an official tournament. He does the same thing with the Caribbean, Caribbean, Caribbean team as well. And Mexico, I think also comes Yugoslavia, Portugal, France. All of them come to Brazil to play this tournament. It was an opportunity for them and to. To Avalanche, to other FIFA delegates to show what Avalanche has done in Brazil. So he shows like the big stadium, the big cities. Also it's also very interesting, the place where he took those persons. So he always wanted to take them to Brasilia, which is pretty much like the symbol of modern Brazil. It's a very futuristic city. But he also took them to big constructions like dams, roads. That was pretty much a symbol of developing and modernization that Brazil has been through the past five, six years.
- [63:50]
B
So that this was a, for me, a fantastic chapter to kind of showcase how he, how he, with the support of the. These Brazilian businesses and the government could. Could make a case for himself. But also Brazil as a, as a, as a. As a steward for FIFA, but also as a model, a model that. For development that borrowed from capitalist and communist lexicons, but wasn't the, wasn't one or the other. It was kind of neither, nor.
- [64:22]
A
Yeah, I would say. I would say it's pretty much a capitalist model, but we felt. So there was a lot of criticism in Brazilian society about United States especially like the way they do with racial relations at that time. So it was pretty much. So we get, we got the best from the west models from the United States without racism, I would say. So that's the official discourse. I'm not, I'm saying that I agree with this, but that's pretty much the official discourse. Like I would get the best from the west without the racism that we can see in the United States. So, yeah, so that's pretty much what they're trying to say. Here is a different society for like people in Africa that are not very happy whether things are going on in the United States. We're also showing how you can become from being a colony that's being exploited to a modern and developed country, which, I mean, if you look to the United States, you're not going to see a model for that because it's a different story that you have in Africa. We have a much more similar story to present and to show to you and to demonstrate how we are similar to you. It's also very interesting because I would say that China pretty much occupied this place that Brazil was trying to. To be at absorb. Right.
- [65:49]
B
He was, he was able to.
- [65:50]
A
Yes, China was able to, you know, to present himself as neither Soviet model or neither American model.
- [65:59]
B
Both for some, Brazil in many of the countries of South America and China took on that voluntarily and, and not in some ways took on that. That mantle of Third Worldism, you know, like, oh, actually, you know, we can lead some of this in the interest of time. I. We need, we need to move on a little bit. There's one Chapter left, which we're not going to. I'll leave that to the. To the readers. But this is the key chapter in some ways, not the crux chapter. It's not really. Here's where you just show chapter five the world that we had lost FIFA. Crisis in the making of a new international order. You take on a really naughty problem that people who work on IOC or FIFA deal with, which is that they vote for these leaders, they vote for decisions, but the votes are secret.
- [66:51]
A
Yes, I sort of try to try to see whoever vote for Avalanche and whoever had not. I try. I mean, I don't know how much I could do that. I also feel. It's also very interesting because, just like I said, I feel like the best chapter was chapter four. When I get to chapter five, which in Portuguese is chapter six, I was pretty much tired and, you know, I just feel like I didn't have a lot of energy to wrote this, but ultimately I feel like I. I did. Yeah, yeah. Tried to answer this question, who vote Private lunch and who did it?
- [67:25]
B
And I was pretty convinced. And I think you also leave some measure of uncertainty, too, for things where you weren't sure, like, did Portugal vote for Avalanga or not? Or did you ever thought yes? You never know, say no, and obviously there's a conclusion. Actually, Louise, I wrote questions in the conclusion, like, hey, how much did Jalanga's work set the stage for Brazilian efforts in the 2000s? But you've already talked about these ones, actually, so I think maybe it's time for the question I usually ask people at the end, which is, we've read this fantastic book that you wrote. Is there something we can look forward to in the future? What are you working on now that you might want to tell people about?
- [68:13]
A
No, actually, it's a very good question. So I'm working. I work into this book. It's an added collection about the football presidents, which is pretty much the work that I started with, just like I said at the beginning. So I published this special issue, Soccer Society. It's called the Football Presence, which is. I was really happy to see different places, different parts of the world, about how the club presence can have a very important position in politics in different societies. So it's coming up as a book now as this added collection of soccer society. So that's pretty much where I'm working now. I finished this. My goal just. I told you before we started, my idea was to go to Illinois for a period, but never happened. So right now I'm not doing Any archival research I want to do, I'm probably gonna do in maybe one or two years. I wanna. I have this also this idea of rights, like a political history of FIFA. Not like, not only Avalanche, but the whole history of FIFA, like, introduction, maybe that this is something I want to do at some point, but now I'm pretty much just taking care of. Of, like, my family, like, now my priorities, my. Like, my family and. And take care of my family. And after maybe in two years, I'm probably gonna go into another bigger project. That's pretty much what I'm doing now, taking care of my family.
- [70:03]
B
I think that's a good. That's a good process. We don't always have to be doing everything.
- [70:08]
A
Yeah. You know, I did this book. I think it was also very interesting, the football president once. So I really recommend, if you're interested in learning about, like, presidents, the soccer presidents. There was a very good webinar that we hosted, and there was a very good special issue about myself. I published recently an article about the first woman to be president of the three. First woman to be present in Brazilian clubs is also going to come up in soccer society as well. And one thing that I also want to do maybe in the next two years, before I started this big project, is to publish in English the part of the book that was cute, which is pretty much a discussion about what is FIFA? I never. Yeah, what is FIFA? How can we framework FIFA? And how can we think about FIFA as historical and political entity? I want to see if I can publish that.
- [71:08]
B
I think that was good. And that's really important work because too many histories of FIFA are kind of sui generis, internal kind of work. They just think of FIFA as a kind of organization, little history, rather than as a political history that's connected to these broader forces. That's necessary. Oh, thank you. Thank you so much. If you've been listening, we've been speaking with Luis Guillerme Berlamachi, who is the author of Making a Global FIFA Cold War Politics and the Rise of Xiaohavalanga to the FIFA presidency, 1950 to 1974. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much, Luis, for joining us.
- [71:52]
A
No, you're welcome, man. Really appreciate it. It was very good conversation. There's a. Yeah, there's a very good conversation. Really enjoy.
- [71:57]
B
Yeah, yeah, I. And I thank you again for the opportunity to read the book. This one was just absolutely fascinating and indefinitely worth it for listeners. Go pick up our copy. All right. You all have been listening to new books in sports a channel on the New Books Network that. I'm Keith Rathbone, coming to you from Macquarie University. Thank you for listening.
- [72:19]
A
Thank you so much.