RESUMO Indagando se inovações democráticas podem, ao aumentar a participação da sociedade, ampliar a qualidade da democracia, o artigo toma uma das dimensões desta, a responsividade, como objeto de investigação. Propondo um modelo analítico deste conceito em três níveis (impacto nas políticas públicas, congruência temática e multidimensionalidade da participação), o artigo busca examinar se as Conferências Nacionais de Políticas Públicas aumentaram (ou não) a responsividade do Poder Legislativo brasileiro. Para isto, analisa-se a recepção das demandas das Conferências Nacionais pelo Poder Legislativo brasileiro entre 2003 e 2010, testando, por meio de análises descritivas e modelos de regressão logística, cada uma das três dimensões do conceito proposto.

ABSTRACT Using the dimension of responsiveness as its object of investigation, the following article aims to determine whether democratic innovations can enhance the quality of democracy by increasing society’s participation. By proposing an analytical model for the concept across three levels (impact on public policies, thematic congruence, and the multi-dimensional nature of participation), the article seeks to examine whether National Public Policy Conferences increased responsiveness in the Brazilian Legislature. To do so, it analyzes the reception in the Brazilian Legislature of the demands made in the National Conferences from 2003 to 2010, using descriptive analyses and logistic regression models to evaluate each of the three dimensions of the concept proposed.

RESUMEN El artículo, en su valoración de si las innovaciones democráticas pueden ampliar la calidad de la democracia al aumentar la participación de la sociedad, toma una de las dimensiones democráticas, la capacidad responsiva, como objeto de investigación. Proponiendo un modelo analítico de este concepto en tres niveles (impacto en las políticas públicas, congruencia temática y multidimensionalidad de la participación), se busca examinar si las Conferencias Nacionales de Políticas Públicas aumentaron (o no) las acciones responsivas del poder legislativo brasileño. Para ello, se analiza la recepción de las demandas de las Conferencias Nacionales por parte del poder legislativo brasileño entre 2003 y 2010, y se examina, por medio de estudios descriptivos y modelos de regresión logística, cada una de las tres dimensiones del concepto propuesto.

RÉSUMÉ En se penchant sur la question de savoir si les innovations démocratiques, en augmentant la participation de la société, permettent d’améliorer la qualité de la démocratie, cet article prend comme objet spécifique d’étude l’une des dimensions de celle-ci, à savoir la réceptivité. À partir de la proposition d’un modèle analytique de ce concept à trois niveaux (impact sur les politiques publiques, congruence thématique et multi-dimensionnalité de la participation), cet article cherche à savoir si les Conférences nationales de politiques publiques ont augmenté (ou non) la réceptivité du Pouvoir législatif brésilien. Pour ce faire a été analysée la réception des demandes des Conférences nationales par le Pouvoir législatif brésilien entre 2003 et 2010, et testée, au moyen d’analyses descriptives et de modèles de régression logistique, chacune des trois dimensions du concept proposé.

The relationship between representative democracy and participatory and deliberative experiences is not trivial. Those who endorse the discourse of a crisis in political representation sometimes defend participatory and deliberative modalities of democracy as a way of denying the legitimacy of the Legislative Branch, questioning the latter's real capacity to express the people's sovereign will. Still, the emergence of new democratic spaces, as well as new actors involved in the management of the public good, can be seen as a way of strengthening political representation, and not as a sign of weakening in its institutions. The current article defends this argument, seeking to demonstrate that the Brazilian national conferences on public policy have actually provided impetus to the National Congress, thereby strengthening representative democracy in Brazil through a participatory and deliberative practice.

This article's working hypothesis is that contemporary reflection on democracy should not be limited to the false dichotomy between representation on the one hand and participation and decision-making on the other. Within the scope of dialectically analyzing democracy, the article contends that numerous possibilities remain to be explored, even from the normative point of view, given the reluctance of democratic theory to draw on empirical reality to test its premises, expand its concepts, revalidate its meanings, and broaden its horizons. The article thus proposes to introduce in broad strokes "pragmatic democracy", a normative concept serving as an analytical tool to approach the contingency and complexity of contemporary democracy and its institutions.

Dans cet article, on part de la prémisse que la réflexion contemporaine sur la démocratie ne doit pas buter sur la fausse dichotomie entre d'un côté, représentation, et de l'autre, participation et délibération. En souhaitant penser dialectiquement ce qu'est la démocratie, on suggère qu'il y a beaucoup de possibilités encore inexploitées dans une optique de norme, face à la réticence de la théorie démocratique à se servir de l'apport de la réalité empirique afin d'évaluer ses prémisses, d'élargir ses concepts et horizons et de revalider ses significations. Ainsi, on propose l'introduction des grandes lignes de la "démocratie pragmatique", un concept normatif qui peut servir d'outil dans l'analyse de la contingence et de la complexité qui marquent la démocratie contemporaine et ses institutions.

O objetivo deste artigo consiste em examinar o conceito marxiano de verdadeira democracia, tal como desenvolvido, sobretudo, na Crítica da filosofia do direito de Hegel, de modo a indicar a maneira pela qual ele se apresenta como o "enigma resolvido" das formas modernas de organização política. Nesse sentido, argumento que esse enigma aponta para a contradição entre o Estado e a sociedade civil, que, para Marx, constitui a principal característica da modernidade política. Em conseqüência, argumento também que como solução do enigma que revela, a "verdadeira democracia" implica na superação daquela contradição, a qual apenas pode se dar mediante a criação de um novo lugar para a política: a comunidade real fundada em uma livre associação de homens igualmente livres.

This article aims at analyzing the concept of Marx on true democracy as developed especially in the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, in order to indicate how he poses himself as the "resolved enigma" for modern ways of political organization. In doing so, the article argues that such enigma points towards the contradiction between state and civil society, which for Marx constitutes the main characteristic of political modernity. It consequently also argues that a solution revealed to the enigma of the "true democracy" implies in overcoming contradiction, what can only happen through the instauration of a new place for politics: the real community founded on free association of equally free men.

L’objectif de cet article est d’examiner le concept de la véritable démocratie selon Marx, tel qu’il a surtout été développé dans la Critique de la philosophie du droit de Hegel, de façon à indiquer la façon par laquelle il se présente comme l’"énigme résolue" des formes modernes de ’organisation politique. Ainsi, je défends que cette énigme indique la contradiction existante entre l’État et la société civile, qui, pour Marx, a été la principale caractéristique de la modernité politique. En conséquence, je défends également que la "véritable démocratie", en tant que solution de l’énigme qu’elle révèle, implique le surpassement de cette contradiction, qui ne peut exister que par la création d’un nouvel emplacement pour la politique: la communauté réelle fondée sur une libre association d’hommes également libres.

Pode-se identificar duas importantes diferenças de perspectiva entre o pragmatismo de Charles S. Peirce, William James e John Dewey e o neopragmatismo de Richard Rorty. Em primeiro lugar, a filosofia pragmatista pode ser compreendida como realista, ao passo que o neopragmatismo rortyano é eminentemente anti-realista. Em segundo lugar, Rorty minimiza a importância do conceito pragmatista de experiência ao conferir primazia teórica ao conceito de linguagem. Em face dessas duas diferenças fundamentais, o artigo discute se é possível falar em continuidade entre os elementos que caracterizam o pragmatismo em sua origem e o neopragmatismo rortyano.

There are two relevant differences between the pragmatism of Charles S. Peirce, William James and John Dewey and Richard Rorty's neopragmatism. Firstly, pragmatism is philosophically connected to realism while Rorty's neopragmatism is deeply anti-realistic. Secondly, Rorty undermines the role experience plays on pragmatism by attaching an overwhelming theoretical value to the concept of language. Given these two main differences of approach, this paper questions the supposed continuity between the features that define original pragmatism and Rorty's neopragmatism.

The aim of this article is to focus on Marx’s political theory as announced in his Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, from 1843. To reclaim young Marx means first and foremost to recover the essence of his political thought, which formed the ontological and epistemological basis for his subsequent work. My argument in this sense is that to recover the true statute of the political as announced by Marx in his 1843 manuscript allows laying the foundations for a new way of conducting political theory, particularly normative political theory.

Dans cet article, on cherche à considérer la théorie politique de Marx telle qu'il l'annonçait dans sa Critique de la Théorie de l'État de Hegel, de 1843. Revisiter le jeune Marx veut dire avant tout reconstituer l'essence de sa pensée politique, celle qui sera le fondement ontologique et épistémologique de ses travaux futurs. On défend ici l'idée que, si l'on retrouvait le vrai statut politique annoncé par Marx dans son Manuscrit de 1843, on pourrait jeter les bases d'une nouvelle manière de faire de la théorie politique et, particulièrement, une nouvelle manière de faire de la théorie politique normative.

Entre os principais assuntos que vêm marcando presença na agenda da teoria política contemporânea nos últimos anos, estão os temas da deliberação, da comunidade e da comunicação. O que os "novos" debates sobre a democracia deliberativa, o comunitarismo e a teoria da comunicação não deixam claro, contudo, consiste no fato de que a "novidade" que apresentam já se encontrava anunciada na teoria pragmatista desenvolvida no começo do século XX, especialmente nos escritos de John Dewey. Com efeito, nos primeiros anos desse século, Dewey elaborou uma consistente teoria política normativa, cujo principal foco centrava-se na questão da democracia. Isso não teria nenhuma relevância especial caso a teoria democrática avançada por Dewey não abarcasse efetivamente uma concepção normativa de democracia participativa ou deliberativa nos mesmos moldes discutidos pelas mais recentes tendências e autores da teoria democrática contemporânea. A partir da leitura de Dewey e de alguns de seus comentadores, é possível identificar um conceito de democracia "radical", "procedimental" e "deliberativa" que apresenta fortes ressonâncias, por exemplo, com os temas de comunidade, participação, comunicação, espaço público e educação. Diante disso, o objetivo deste artigo consiste em recuperar o pensamento de John Dewey, demonstrando o seu vanguardismo frente à teoria política contemporânea e indicando a relevância de sua contribuição para o atual debate da teoria da democracia.

Among the main issues that have been making their presence felt in contemporary political theory of recent years are the themes of deliberation, community and communication. However, what the "new" debates on deliberative democracy, communitarianism and communication theory do not make clear is the fact that the "novelty" that they represent had already been enunciated in early twentieth century pragmatist theory, and in John Dewey's writings in particular. In essence, during the first few years of this century Dewey elaborated a consistent normative political theory whose principal focus was the issue of democracy. This would be of no particular relevance if Dewey's democratic theory did not actually develop a normative conception of participatory or deliberative democracy that is very similar to that of recent tendencies and exponents of contemporary democratic theory. Through reading Dewey and some of his commentators, we can identify concepts of "radical", "procedural" and "deliberative" democracy that resonate strongly with themes of community, participation, communication, public space and education. Thus, the goal of this article is to revisit Dewey's thought, showing his vanguard relation to contemporary political theory and pointing to the relevance of his contribution for current debates within democratic theory.

Parmi les principaux thèmes mis en relief par la théorie politique contemporaine ces dernières années, figurent les thèmes de la délibération, de la communauté et de la communication. Ce que les «nouveaux» débats sur la démocracie, le communautarisme et la théorie de la communication n'éclaircissent pas est le fait que la «nouveauté» qu'ils abordent existait déjà dans la théorie pragmatique développée au début du XXième siècle, surtout dans les textes de John Dewey. En effet, dans les premières années de ce siècle, Dewey élabora une consistante théorie politique normative centrée sur la question de la démocracie. Cela n'aurait aucune importance si la théorie démocratique présentée par Dewey ne portait justement pas sur une conception de démocracie participative ou délibérative selon les modèles des débats menés par les tendances les plus récentes et par les auteurs de la théorie démocratique contemporaine. A partir de la lecture de Dewey et de certains de ses commentateurs, il est possible d'identifier un concept de démocracie «radicale», «procédurière» et «délibérative» qui ont de fortes résonnances, par exemple, avec les thèmes de la communauté, de la participation, de la communication, de l'espace public et de l'éducation. De ce fait, l'objectif de cet article consiste à réhabiliter la pensée de John Dewey en revelant son esprit d'avant-garde face à la théorie politique contemporaine et en soulignant l'importance de sa contribution au débat actuel de la théorie de la démocracie.

O artigo analisa o conceito de poder em Michel Foucault em sua fase genealógica, buscando identificar um conteúdo específico e inominado, que não se confunde com as conhecidas categorias do poder disciplinar e do biopoder. O argumento central consiste na possibilidade de se identificar um conceito foucaultiano de poder cujo conteúdo, ao afastá-lo da idéia de repressão e de lei, o torna produtivo, positivo e, especialmente, emancipatório.

The article analyses Foucault's concept of power in its genealogical phase. It seeks to identify a specific and unnamed content, which differentiates itself from and by the well known categories of disciplinary power and biopower. Its main argument relies on the possibility of identifying a foucauldian concept of power whose substance, once avoiding the ideas of repression and law, turns out to be productive, positive and, particularly, emancipatory.

The article analyzes Marx's critique of the theme of human rights, based on his writings concerning the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. Marx and Robespierre are confronted within the context of this analysis. After demonstrating the identity between the two concepts of freedom expounded by Robespierre and Marx and between the concept of resistance to oppression in Robespierre and that of political emancipation in Marx, the article concludes by contending the impossibility and inadequacy of recourse to Marx in the contemporary defense of human rights and their universalization.

Dans cet article, on analyse la critique émise par Marx aux Droits de l'Homme, à partir de ses textes sur la Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen de 1789. Cette analyse établit une confrontation entre Robespierre et Marx. Après avoir montré l'existence d'une identité de vue entre les conceptions de liberté chez Robespierre et chez Marx, ainsi qu'une identité de vue entre la conception de résistance à l'oppression chez Robespierre et d'émancipation politique chez Marx, on conclut sur l'argument de l'impossibilité et de l'inadéquation de recourir à Marx pour la défense contemporaine des Droits de l'Homme et de leur universalisation.