A Crise da Democracia Representativa no Brasil

A CRISE DA DEMOCRACIA REPRESENTATIVA NO BRASIL THE CRISIS OF REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY IN BRAZIL Marlon Silvestre Kierecz* RESUMO: O presente artigo tem como objetivo analisar os principais fundamentos da crise da democracia representativa no Brasil. Para tanto, foram analisados os seguintes aspectos da realidade nacional: o conflito existente entre o interesse público e o particular na condução política do Estado, a perda parcial do aspecto abstrato da lei e o desconhecimento, indeterminação e descrédito do Direito. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Democracia Representativa. Crise. Interesse Público. Interesse Particular. Direito. Cidadania. ABSTRACT: This article aims to analyze the main foundations of representative democracy crisis in Brazil. To this end, the following aspects of the national reality were analyzed: the conflict between the public and particular interest in the state's political leadership, the partial loss of the abstract aspect of the written law and the ignorance, uncertainty and distrust of law. KEYWORDS: Representative Democracy. Crisis. Public interest. Particular interest. Law. Citizenship. SUMÁRIO: Introdução. 1 Concepção Antiga de Cidadania e Democracia. 2 O Sistema Representativo e a Democracia Contemporânea. 3 Conflito entre Interesse Público e Interesse Particular. 4 Perda da Generalidade da Lei. 5 Complexidade, Indeterminação e Descrédito do Direito. 6 A Questão da Formação para a Cidadania. Considerações Finais. Referências.* Mestre em Ciência Jurídica pela Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Santa Catarina. Especialista em Direito Tributário pela Universidade do Sul de Santa Catarina. Professor do Instituto Federal do Paraná, campus Palmas.

Download Full-text

The liberty of the moderns: Market freedom and democracy within the EU

Global Constitutionalism ◽

10.1017/s2045381711000086 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 141-172 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

RICHARD BELLAMY

Keyword(s):

Public Interest ◽

Civil Liberties ◽

Representative Democracy ◽

The Political ◽

Political Liberty ◽

Free Markets ◽

The Public ◽

Private Interests ◽

Logical Entailment ◽

The Eu

AbstractTaking its cue from Benjamin Constant’s famous comparison of the liberty of the ancients with that of the moderns, this article examines the compatibility of democracy with free markets within the EU. Constant argued that commerce had replaced the political liberty of the ancients with the civil liberties of the moderns. Nevertheless, he contended a degree of political liberty remained necessary to guarantee these civil liberties. The difficulty was whether the political system could operate in the interest of all if modern citizens had ceased to identify with the public interest in the manner of the ancients and preferred to pursue their private interests. Constant believed representative democracy offered a form of political liberty that was compatible with modern liberty. It involved a less demanding view of civic virtue to ancient liberty and a different conception of the public interest as promoting rather than in conflict with private interests. However, for it to operate as Constant expected required certain social and cultural conditions that emerged in European nation states but are not themselves the products of commerce and may even be undermined by it: namely, a national identity; a social contract; and political parties. The EU involves a further deepening of modern commercial liberty beyond the nation state. This article explores three main issues raised by this development. First, have any of the three elements that facilitated the operation of representative democracy within the member states evolved at the EU level? Second, if not, is it possible to create an effective form of representative democracy on a post-national basis as the logical entailment of the liberties of the moderns? Third, if neither of these is possible, can we simply detach modern liberty from political liberty and see social rights as attributes of free movement, and efficient and equitable economic regulations as the products of technocratic governance? All three questions are answered in the negative.

Download Full-text