Suchergebnisse

Dilma Rousseff's government inherited clearly defined foreign policy strategies from her political party predecessor: a revisionary approach to international institutions, an active stance in multilateral forums as a representative of southern countries, and an orientation towards the South American dimension. The autonomist group remains holding key posts in the Foreign Ministry, and the developmentalist tendencies have been reinforced. However, this article argues that despite the continuities, the Brazilian behaviour has experienced changes and a visible reduction of its international activism. These changes have been affected by the international and the domestic economic scenarios and by the new foreign policymakers' dynamic. Adapted from the source document.

This article aims to analyze how the distrust of a significant portion of Brazilians both in their democratic institutions and in relation to democracy itself, influenced or the election of President Jair Bolsonaro. For this, we conducted a bibliographic research, using institutionalist and, especially, culturalist theories. Thus, we perceive as possible explanatory factors, on the one hand, the recent Brazilian democracy that preserves traces of the dictatorial past in its political culture. On the other hand, as distortions between the functioning of democratic institutions, in a context of incentive to "delegative democracies", which "guides" part of the citizens to identify themselves with charismatic leaders who present themselves as outsiders within this discredited political system. In the scenario in which the media played a central role in electoral disputes.

O artigo busca retomar a discussão sobre o caráter de classe do Estado capitalista, fazendo dialogar três contribuições que, em geral, são raramente aproximadas: a compreensão de Bourdieu sobre o funcionamento do campo político, a ideia da "ossatura material do Estado", presente no último Poulantzas, e a discussão do Offe inicial sobre a seletividade das instituições. O problema é compreender como a universalização do acesso à esfera pública política, com a concessão de direitos formais iguais a todos, convive com a permanência da dominação de classe (embora esse conceito seja entendido de forma diversa pelos três autores). De maneira inversa, o problema pode ser formulado como sendo a necessidade de demonstrar a permanência da dominação em situações nas quais as classes dominadas parecem obter vitórias e mesmo instrumentalizar o Estado em seu favor.

This paper addresses the State capacities organized to promote bilateral international cooperation between Brazil and South Africa, and between Brazil and China, concerning international trade and human's rights, using comparative method and transversal analyses. Aiming to examine the impacts of political institutions on State capacities, China and South Africa were chosen due to the fact that they compound, with Brazil, different dyads of international cooperation (Leeds, 1999): China, an autocracy, and South Africa, a democracy. The paper's main objective is to point differences and similarities in the States capacities of these countries, depending on variations in their political institutions. The three countries present different types of State capacities (Cingolani, 2013): in China, there is a contrast between high administrative and low legal, relational and political State capacities. South Africa and Brazil present a more complex network of actors and institutions, revealing a bigger development of the legal, relational and political State capacities.

ABSTRACT Introduction: This article propose to connect two research agendas on political behavior: studies on political tolerance and research on partisanship. Search, by connecting these two agendas, to assess the extent to which parties have become targets of political intolerance and thereby to assess the intensity of negative attitudes towards this central institution of democracy. Studies on partisanship conflicts in Brazil have focused on the antagonism opposing petismo and antipetismo. However, the 2018 elections have shown that Brazilians also adopt other forms of antipartisanship. Changes in patterns of political and electoral behavior in recent years can only be properly understood if we consider variation over time in the intensity and scope of antipartisan sentiment. We propose a typology where antipartisanship may be moderate or radical and may have a narrower or broader target. This theme is significant not only for interpreting Brazil's current political context, but also for deepening understanding of theoretical and analytical questions. Our understanding is that these different types of antipartisanship are distinct phenomena with different effects. Materials and Methods: The data we use to construct the proposed typology and analyze the range and intensity of antipartisanship are derived from an unprecedented Latin America Public Opinion Project initiative to measure political tolerance in Brazil, in its 2017 edition. Our methodology combine variables of disaffection and political intolerance to construct different voter profiles, based on respondent's attitudes towards unpopular groups, including political parties. After constructing the typology, we propose regression models to estimate the effects of each type on several attitudes, like support to democracy and institutional trust. Results: Our findings show a relationship between the most extreme types of antipartisanship and attitudes towards democracy. Compared with non-antipartisan voters, intolerant antipartisan are less supportive of democracy and democratic institutions and less favorable to freedom of expression and the granting of political rights to minorities. The intensity of antipartisanship matters more than its scope, since the models show that, there is little difference in the degree of commitment to democracy and democratic principles between the two types of intolerant antipartisans, regardless of the scope of the target of their disapproval. This means that attitudes toward democracy, democratic institutions, and democratic principles depend less on the scope antipartisanship, than on political intolerance towards these groups. Discussion: The data and results presented here indicate that antipartisanship is not a one-dimensional phenomenon. The individual is not merely antipartisan or non-antipartisan. We show that antipartisanship contains at least two dimensions: its scope and intensity. Previous studies have already shown the existence of different expressions of antipartisanship, but this diversity has not yet been systematically explored using a well-defined typology. Our work points to this research agenda.KEYWORDS: antipartisanship; political tolerance; political attitudes; political parties; democracy.