O ativismo jurídico com estratégia da razão neoliberal no Brasil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O objetivo deste artigo é apresentar um quadro conceitual genérico da recepção da razão neoliberal global no Brasil, tal como a postulam Wendy Brown, Dardot e Laval, por meio de uma de suas estratégias decisivas, o ativismo jurídico. Esse ativismo, presente em todo o período do governo do Partido dos Trabalhadores, por não estar ancorado nos pressupostos necessários ao seu sucesso, a saber, instituições políticas e jurídicas sólidas e uma cultura democrática razoavelmente estabelecida, conduziu o país como estratégia decisiva, ao populismo autoritário de direita, mantendo e reforçando a velha estrutura de dominação oligárquica local e antimoderna, em sintonia com a ultramoderna oligarquia global, e também neofeudal, como a define Streeck, ao pretender promover uma reforma moral da política. Abstract The objective of this article is to present a generic conceptual framework for the reception of global neoliberal reason in Brazil, as postulated by Wendy Brown, Dardot e Laval, through one of its strategies, legal activism. This activism, present throughout the entire period of the Workers' Party government, for not anchored in the assumptions necessary for its success, namely, solid political and legal institutions and a reasonably established democratic culture, led the country to right-wing authoritarian populism, maintaining and reinforcing the old structure of local and anti-modern oligarchic domination, in tune with the ultramodern global oligarchy, as well as neofeudal, as Streeck defines it, in seeking to promote a moral reform of politics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".