Political discussion and democratic stability
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21527/2317-5389.2024.23.15516Keywords:
Freedom of speech, Political polarization, Public reason, Democratic stabilityAbstract
This paper addresses the political polarization in Brazil, highlighting the practice of treating adversaries as personal enemies and the disregard for divergent ideas and democratic institutions as indicators of this reality. In light of this scenario, the papers analyses strategies to promote reconciliation and transform the political environment into a less combative space. Considering the absence of a widely shared conception of the common good, it suggests applying the concept of public reason, as developed in Rawlsian theory, as a means to achieve democratic stability and strengthen Brazilian institutions. By examining Brazilian political history, the work highlights the intermittent nature of democracy over the past century, alternating between democratic and authoritarian periods. It justifies the need for rational and dispassionate political debate to achieve democratic stability. The paper proposes the use of public reason, based on Schumpeter's concepts and Rawls' abstract ideas, as an approach to rationalize political discussion in Brazil. In conclusion, it argues that political polarization is not exclusive to recent years but a recurring theme throughout the 20th century. Highlighting the contribution of Schumpeter's and Rawls' concepts, the text emphasizes the possibility of rationalizing Brazilian political discourse through public reason, promoting democratic stability and strengthening democratic institutions without resorting to authoritarian outbursts that are detrimental to the country's development.
References
LEVITSKY, Steven; ZIBLATT, Daniel. How democracies die. New York: Broadway Books, 2018.
NOBRE, Marcos. Imobilismo em movimento: da abertura democrática ao governo Dilma. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2013.
NOBRE, Marcos. A polarização voltou. Revista Piauí, [S. l.], ano 8, n. 98, nov. 2014. Disponível em: https://piaui.folha.uol.com.br/materia/a-polarizacao-voltou/. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2019.
NOBRE, Marcos. O candidato do colapso. Revista Piauí., S. l.], ano 12, n. 145, out. 2018a. Disponível em: https://piaui.folha.uol.com.br/o-candidato-do-colapso/. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2019.
NOBRE, Marcos. A revolta conservadora. Revista Piauí., [S. l.], ano 12, n. 147, dez. 2018b. Disponível em: https://piaui.folha.uol.com.br/materia/a-revolta-conservadora/. Acesso em: 8 jan. 2019.
RAWLS, John. A theory of justice: revised edition. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999a. 539 p.
RAWLS, John. O direito dos povos. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2001a. 259 p.
RAWLS, John. O liberalismo político. 2. ed. São Paulo: Ática, 2000. 430 p.
RAWLS, John. Law of peoples and the idea of public reason revisited. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999b. 207 p.
RAWLS, John. Justice as fairness: a restatement. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001b. 214 p.
RAWLS, John. Uma teoria da justiça. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1997. 708 p.
RAWLS, John. Uma teoria da justiça. 3. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2008. 764 p.
RAWLS, John. The idea of an overlapping consensus. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Oxford, v. 7, n. 1, p. 1-25, 1987. Disponível em: http://tinyurl.com/nbxedpf. Acesso em: 24 dez. 2015.
RAWLS, John; FREEMAN, Samuel (ed.). Collected papers. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999. 656 p.
SHAPIRO, Ian. Os fundamentos morais da política. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2006.
SCHUMPETER, Joseph A. Capitalismo, socialismo e democracia. São Paulo: Unesp, 2016.
WENAR, Leif. John Rawls. In: ZALTA, Edward (org.). Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, Sept. 24, 2012. Disponível em: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/. Acesso em: 21 nov. 2015.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
By publishing in the Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia, authors agree to the following terms:
Articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0), which allows:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format;
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use.
These permissions are irrevocable, provided the following terms are respected:
Attribution — authors must be properly credited, with a link to the license and indication of any modifications made;
No additional restrictions — no legal or technological measures may be applied that restrict the use permitted by the license.
Notices:
The license does not apply to elements in the public domain or covered by legal exceptions.
The license does not grant all rights required for specific uses (e.g., image rights, privacy, or moral rights).
The journal is not responsible for opinions expressed in the articles, which remain the sole responsibility of the authors. The Editor, with the support of the Editorial Committee, reserves the right to suggest or request modifications when necessary.
Only original scientific articles presenting research results of interest, not previously published or simultaneously submitted to another journal with the same purpose, will be accepted.
References to trademarks or specific products are intended solely for identification purposes and do not imply any promotional endorsement by the authors or the journal.
License Agreement: Authors retain copyright over their articles and grant the Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia the right of first publication.
