Brazil keeps getting worse

Suppose someone says "Each of Brazil's republican constitutions was worse than the last." Is there some consistent set of political views where this makes sense?

Short answer: yes—if you judge constitutions almost entirely by how much they expand and centralize the state (not by how democratic they are), the claim can be coherent.

Here’s a consistent lens: a hard classical-liberal/minarchist constitutionalism that prizes (1) a small central government, (2) strong state/provincial autonomy, (3) few “positive” social rights and entitlements in constitutional text, (4) light judicialization of politics, and (5) fiscal flexibility (few earmarks/mandates). On that yardstick:

• 1891 — Most congenial: very federal, limited central taxing/spending, sparse social commitments.
• 1934 — Worse: adds corporatist labor architecture and social rights; more central direction.
• 1937 — Worse still: hyper-centralized, executive-dominant, corporatist planning.
• 1946 — Still worse (on this narrow metric): restores elections, yes, but locks in Vargas-era labor/corporatist machinery and more social guarantees; central state remains larger than 1891 and the constitutional text supports it.
• 1967/69 — Worse again: entrenches executive rule, national-security exceptionalism, and state-led development; centralization deepens.
• 1988 — Worst: very long, highly programmatic; broad social rights, fiscal earmarks, union and social-policy entrenchment; strong judicial review that pulls policy into courts; heavy federal responsibilities.

Under this philosophy, the line from 1891 → 1988 is a steady march toward a more expansive, centralized, and judicialized state, so “each was worse than the last” tracks.

Important caveat: if you value liberal-democratic freedoms and participation more than small-state minimalism, the pattern breaks (notably 1946 is plainly “better” than 1937, and 1988 better than 1967/69 on rights and elections). But the question was whether some coherent view fits, and the strict small-state/minarchist one does. If you want, I can sketch how other ideologies (monarchist-traditionalist, Catholic corporatist, socialist, developmentalist) would rank the same sequence—and where monotonic decline fails for them.