Fifty years ago, the word autonomy ceased to be merely a historical murmur, a scattered aspiration among economic, political, and intellectual elites and, though with little concrete meaning, among the neglected island people whose daily struggle was one of survival. Fifty years ago, autonomist aspirations acquired constitutional form, and the path toward self-government began. The achievement of regional autonomy did not emerge by chance, nor from a sudden act of generosity by the central government. It was born from a rare convergence of the democratic opening brought by April 25, the social and political pressure within the Azores, and the recognition that governing islands from the administrative and mental distance of Lisbon meant perpetuating a historical misunderstanding.
For decades, insularity was treated more as a useful inevitability than as a specific condition requiring its own responses. The centralism of the Estado Novo viewed the islands through a lens of bureaucratic paternalism, rarely acknowledging the economic, social, and cultural uniqueness of the archipelago.
The constitutional autonomy established in 1976 profoundly transformed that relationship. For the first time, the Azorean people gained effective instruments of democratic self-government, representing far more than a mere administrative change. It created the possibility of making decisions closer to the people, with a deeper understanding of the concrete realities of the islands, their vulnerabilities, and their potential.
The results are visible. Autonomy made it possible to modernize infrastructure, expand access to education and healthcare, improve transportation, create social support mechanisms, and establish a distinct political presence within both the national and European contexts. It also helped consolidate an Azorean identity that is open, plural, and fully integrated within the Republic, dispelling old fears that confused autonomy with separatism.
Yet autonomy cannot live solely on the achievements of the past. Weariness, disillusionment, and the persistence of structural problems have distanced many people from the autonomic project, while some political actors have ceased to examine themselves critically.
Five decades later, it is legitimate to ask whether autonomy has been able to respond to the profound transformations of our time. In many instances, the autonomous system has reproduced some of the very shortcomings of the centralism it sought to overcome: excessive politicization of institutions, structural economic dependence, concentration of decision-making, the growth of political patronage networks, and difficulty in fostering a more demanding and sustained form of civic participation.
Autonomy brought decision-making capacity, yet excessive dependence on external forces remains, alongside productive weaknesses, social inequalities, poverty, and a troubling demographic aging process intensified by the emigration of qualified young people. On some islands, the silent risk of human depopulation can already be felt.
The coming years will require more than the symbolic celebration of autonomy. The Azores will need to seek a new balance between economic development and environmental preservation; between tourism and sustainability; between modernization and social cohesion; between openness to the world and the defense of their cultural singularity.
Perhaps the greatest challenge is this: preventing autonomy from becoming merely an administrative structure accustomed to managing dependencies. For autonomy, in its deepest sense, is not simply the governance of routines for the perpetuation of power. It is the collective capacity to imagine the future.
Aníbal C. Pires is a poet, writer, political, and cultural activist who resides on the island of São Miguel, Azores. The picture is also by him. He has a forthcoming book by Bruma Publications/Letras Lavadas titled Islands of Dream and Longing