Nesse artigo vamos analisar a questão do medo, e o uso político do medo, comparando dois casos dessa utilização da estratégia do medo no discurso político da mídia televisiva, os quais foram efetuados em dois momentos diferentes, nas campanhas eleitorais das eleições presidenciais de 2002 e 2014. Além disso, busca-se relacionar o discurso do medo na mídia, às condições de incertezas, a busca do prazer, o consumo e o individualismo instauradas na pós-modernidade. A partir de uma análise crítica das condições sociais, pretende-se investigar como o medo, potencializado pela mídia, é capaz de produzir um efeito de alienação capaz de criar um discurso que acaba se repetindo mecanicamente, reproduzindo ações e ampliando conceitos artificiais introduzidos socialmente, produzindo, mesmo, a proliferação de preconceitos, discursos fáceis e estereotipados.
Uncertainty, insecurity and vulnerability have become commonplace in contemporary societies. This article aims an interdisciplinary reflection on the social and political construction of fear in liquid modernity. Zygmunt Bauman, Leonidas Donskis, Martha Nussbaum, Hannah Arendt, Ulrich Beck, Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Bernard Henri-Levy and Umberto Eco are some of the authors that we will put into dialogue to better understand the multiple narratives of fear in an era deeply marked by destruction social certainties, the worsening of social inequalities, the logic of predatory capitalism, the resurgence of nationalisms of exclusion, as well as ethnic-cultural particularisms, which move from xenophobic and racist discourses and, finally, new risks, such as ecological degradation and the pandemic COVID19, which currently plagues contemporary societies and domesticates social behaviors.
This article aims to offer some notes related to the question of the insecurity and fear in urban life. Constitutive condition of many, if not all, contemporary societies, fear and insecurity in urban space, or, in public space, are here analized from two thinkers. The sociologist Zygmunt Bauman is present insofar as he considers the fear a constitutive aspect on two life dimensions : on the fragility and the human contingence towards nature, and on the society itself, constituted by rules and norms. The philosopher Giorgio Agamben is here emphasized on two oportunities. The first, when showing the impossibility of experiences made by human on the current societies context. The second when noting contemporary societies as following the concentration camp paradigm. Starting with these two authors, is found the necessity of rescue the public experience, resignify the economy and revalue the political economy.
Carl Schmitt is still astonishingly present in the legal discourse. Yet instead of indulging in the study of his explicit 'lesson' and its possible impact on contemporary legal problems, it might be worthwhile to survey the primary cause of his greatest fear. Following this perspective, the article analyses Schmitt's concept of the nomos, distinguishing it from the traditional normativist approach on the one hand and confronting it with a more recent understanding of law in terms of the network conception on the other. Thus Schmitt's view of the developing legal system in the twentieth century proves to be relevant to our current efforts to grasp newly emerging legal phenomena in the twenty- -first century.
The article aims to identify as the main passions that run through the Hobbesian theoretical corpus. To this end, the exhibition will begin by analyzing the mechanism of the passions founded by the author. Next, it will be highlighted how unbridled passions make peaceful coexistence between individuals unfeasible, establishing a scenario in which conflicts are inevitable. Two passions will be analyzed in more detail: vainglory and fear. After emphasizing that the Hobbesian man tends naturally to his own benefit, to competition and to domination, representing a threat to the other, it will be pointed out how the State asserts itself as the necessary that aims to discipline like passions. This part of the argument will analyze as desirable passions for the maintenance of civil life, with emphasis on hope, the desire for comfort and delight, the desire for knowledge and the arts, as well as for fear and vainglory itself.
In: Lusotopie: enjeux contemporains dans les espaces lusophones ; publication annuelle internationale de recherches politiques en science de l'homme, de la société et de l'environnement sur les lieux, pays et communautés d'histoire et de langue officielle ou nationale portugais et luso-créoles ; revue reconnue par le CRNS, S. 299-328
This paper examines the reading of Hans Jonas about the impact of new technologies on human and extra-humanlife. He highlights, in particular, that new technologies have assumed an excessive power to the man, who bringsboth good and disastrous consequences, which may even lead to the extinction of the present and future life. He confirms that this significant increase in technical knowledge. Unfortunately, that was not proportional to the increase of human wisdom. So, our intention is to present, according to the understanding of Hans Jonas, the proposed review of the prevailing ethical levels along the western philosophical tradition; elucidating the main features of modern technology; presenting the shortcomings of traditional ethics before emerging problems in the contemporary world; circumscribing how ethical principle of responsibility emerges and showing how extent scientific progress demands ethical prudence. Therefore, we support the idea that the ethics of Hans Jonas goes beyond the anthropocentric relationship, promoting bio-cosmocentric ethics that includes the extra-human, considering the development of ethical awareness and the responsibility of man to the present and future of life on the planet.
Humanity has always been tormented with the end of existence. On some occasions, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, this affliction is pronounced. To what extent can fear of death alter individuals' political perceptions and beliefs? It is in this context of uncertainties and fears that we investigate how Brazilian society has been evaluating its leaders, especially concerning the policy of social distancing. The COVID-19 pandemic changed the axes of political polarization. On the one hand, governors, mayors, and legislators are concerned about the risks of a collapse of the health system. On the other, President Jair Bolsonaro focused primarily on the negative economic consequences of the pandemic. Through an opinion poll, we identified that "fear of death" diminished the ideological polarization that has existed in Brazil since Jair Bolsonaro's election. Contrary to what many expected, voters who identified themselves as right-wing and center-right - supposedly, the core of Bolsonaro's voters – refused to follow the president's recommendation of relaxing social distancing policies and considered his performance inappropriate during the pandemic. We also show that different income levels did not influence this change in behavior. ; La humanidad siempre se ha afligido por el fin de la existencia. En algunas ocasiones, como en la pandemia actual del nuevo coronavirus, esa aflicción se hace más presente. ¿Hasta qué punto puede el miedo a la muerte alterar las percepciones y creencias de los individuos? Es en este contexto de incertidumbres y temores que decidimos investigar cómo la sociedad brasileña ha evaluado a sus líderes, especialmente con relación a la política de aislamiento social. La pandemia de COVID-19 cambió los ejes de polarización política. Por un lado, gobernadores, alcaldes y legisladores preocupados por los riesgos de estrangular el sistema de salud a causa de la pandemia. Por otro, el presidente Jair Bolsonaro centrado principalmente en las consecuencias económicas negativas de la política de aislamiento social. A través de una encuesta de opinión, identificamos que el "miedo a la muerte" disminuyó la polarización ideológica que ha existido en Brasil desde la elección de Jair Bolsonaro a la presidencia de la República. Al contrario de lo que muchos esperaban, los electores que se identificaron como de derecha y centroderecha, supuestamente los principales votantes de Bolsonaro, rechazaron cumplir con la recomendación y juzgaron mal el desempeño de su líder. También mostramos que este cambio en el comportamiento no fue influenciado por diferentes niveles de ingresos. ; Desde sempre a humanidade se aflige com o fim da existência. Em algumas ocasiões, como a atual pandemia do novo coronavírus, percebemos sua presença mais de perto. Até que ponto o medo da morte pode alterar percepções e crenças dos indivíduos? É nesse contexto de incertezas e medos que decidimos investigar de que modo a sociedade brasileira vem avaliando seus governantes, sobretudo em relação à política de isolamento social. A pandemia da COVID-19 alterou os eixos da polarização política. De um lado, governadores, prefeitos e legisladores preocupados com os riscos de estrangulamento do sistema de saúde causado pela pandemia. De outro, o presidente Jair Bolsonaro, focado primordialmente nas consequências econômicas negativas da política de isolamento social. Por meio de uma pesquisa de opinião, identificamos que o "medo da morte" diminuiu a polarização ideológica existente no Brasil desde a eleição de Jair Bolsonaro à presidência da República. Ao contrário do que muitos esperavam, os eleitores que se auto-identificaram como de direita e centro-direita – supostamente, o núcleo de eleitores de Bolsonaro – rejeitaram seguir a recomendação e avaliam mal a performance de seu líder. Também mostramos que essa mudança de comportamento não foi influenciada pelos diferentes níveis de renda.
"Focuses on role of slave resistance, e.g., revolts, flight, messianic movements, land invasions, etc., and on efforts of urban ex-slaves and mixed bloods in the abolitionist process. The authorities and the press played down such activities for fear of panicking the white population, but by the 1880s there was clear evidence of a growing loss of social control and a spreading fear of a breakdown in public order"--Handbook of Latin American Studies, v. 58
The 21st century was accompanied by fear, first of all of the terrorist threat, then of losing one's job, of losing one's traditional family values, and also of the weakness of the state. We live in societies of fear, a feeling that serves to win elections in the United Kingdom, the United States or Colombia, and is an excuse for some governments to backtrack on the recognition of human rights and their guarantees.If the unifying factor of the peoples is trust, fear causes the opposite effect, division, insecurity, suspicion, and many take advantage of these weaknesses in their electoral speeches and when they come to power they govern by sowing fear. Now the West lives in a democracy of fear. ; El siglo XXI vino acompañado del miedo, primero a la amenaza terrorista; luego, a perder el trabajo, a perder los valores tradicionales de la familia, y también, miedo a la debilidad del Estado. Vivimos en sociedades del miedo, sensación que sirve para ganar elecciones en Reino Unido, Estados Unidos o Colombia, y es excusa de algunos gobiernos para retroceder en el reconocimiento de los derechos humanos y sus garantías.Si el factor aglutinante de los pueblos es la confianza, el miedo provoca el efecto contrario, división, inseguridad, sospecha, y muchos aprovechan estas debilidades en sus discursos electorales y cuando llegan al poder gobiernan sembrando el temor. Ahora Occidente vive la democracia del miedo. ; O século XXI veio acompanhado do medo, primeiro da ameaça terrorista; depois, de perder o trabalho, perder os valores tradicionais da família e, também, medo da debilidade do Estado. Vivemos em sociedades do medo, sensação que serve para ganhar eleições no Reino Unido, nos Estados Unidos ou na Colômbia, e é a desculpa de alguns governos para retroceder no conhecimento dos direitos humanos e suas garantias.Se o fator aglutinante dos povos é a confiança, o medo provoca o efeito contrário, divisão, insegurança, suspeita, e muitos se aproveitam dessas debilidades em seus discursos eleitorais e, quando chegam ao poder, governam disseminando o temor. Agora o Ocidente vive a democracia do medo.
Este trabalho tem como objetivo central analisar comparativamente as diferentes tendências de ação geradas pelo medo nas obras de Sérgio Buarque de Holanda (Raízes do Brasil) e Octávio Paz (O labirinto da Solidão). O medo opera de formas distintas nos contextos descritos, associado e articulado a outras emoções, resulta em características próprias a cada um dos povos: o brasileiro e o mexicano.