INSTITUIÇÕES PARTICIPATIVAS SOB A ÉGIDE DO LULISMO
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="Corpo">A tese do lulismo (Singer, 2012) se baseia no argumento da alteração da composição das bases eleitorais dos ex-presidentes brasileiros Luis Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) e Dilma Rousseff (Dilma), da classe média razoávelmente ilustrada para eleitores com renda média de até dois salários mínimos. No entanto, é mais do que isso: a referida tese propõe que o lulismo atualiza a conciliação entre a melhoria das condições de vida dos mais pobres, sem prejudicar os setores conservadores. “Reformismo fraco” é o termo proposto por Singer. Nossa proposta consiste em analisar as ações do período Lula-Dilma sob esse enfoque teórico. Elemento fundamental do projeto político petista de democracia participativa para o Brasil, as instituições participativas (IPs) proporcionaram mobilização de atores sociopolíticos de sua base mais tradicional de apoio. No entanto, de maneira coerente com os marcos do lulismo, as IPs mantiveram padrões de efetividade política fraca e de carência de legitimidade face às instituições da democracia representativa.</p><p class="Corpo"> </p><p class="Corpo">PARTICIPATORY INSTITUTIONS UNDER LULISMO</p><p class="Corpo">The Lulismo thesis (Singer, 2012) is based on the idea that both Lula and Dilma’s electoral bases moved from the middle class to voters with an median average income of up to two minimum salaries. However, lulismo is more than that: it suggests that Lulismo allows for na improvement of living conditions of the poor without harming conservative sectors. The concept of weak reformism best captures this phenomenon, according to Singer. Our paper proposes an analysis of the Lula-Dilma period’s participatory policies from this theoretical standpoint. A central element of the PT’s participatory democracy project for Brazil, the so-called participatory institutions (PIs), mobilized new progressive sociopolitical actors coming from their traditional support bases. However, PIs remained quite limited in terms of their political effectiveness and lacked legitimacy against representative democratic institutions, which is coherent with lulismo.</p><p class="Corpo">Keywords: Intitucional resilience, Institutional participation, National councils, Health, Women’s rights.</p><p class="Corpo"> </p><p class="Corpo">LES INSTITUTIONS PARTICIPATIVES SOUS L’ÉGIDE DU LULISME</p><p class="Corpo">La thèse du « lulisme » (Singer, 2012) repose sur l’idée que les bases électorales de Lula et de Dilma Rousseff sont passées de la classe moyenne à des électeurs dont le revenu moyen médian est inférieur ou égal à deux salaires minimums. Cependant, le lulisme est plus que cela : en effet, il permet une amélioration des conditions de vie des populations pauvres sans nuire aux secteurs conservateurs. Selon Singer, c’est le concept de réformisme faible qui rend le mieux compte de ce phénomène. Notre article propose une analyse des politiques participatives de la période Lula-Dilma à partir de ce point de vue théorique. Elément fondamental du projet politique de démocratie participative porté par le Parti des travailleurs au Brésil, les institutions participatives (IP) ont mobilisé des acteurs sociopolitiques faisant partie de sa base d’appui traditionnelle. Cependant, en raison des caractéristiques mêmes du lulisme, leur efficacité demeure limitée du point de vue politique et ces IP font état d’un déficit de légitimité par rapport aux institutions de démocratie représentative</p><p class="Corpo">Mots clés: Institutions participatives, Lulisme, Pétisme, Mouvements sociaux, Gouvernement.</p>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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 it