Quem decide o futuro? A disputa simbólica dos três poderes no caso das emendas parlamentares sob a lente da análise dialógica do discurso

Abstract

Who has the legitimacy to have the final say regarding the future of the State? Is it the Supreme Federal Court? The President of the Republic? The National Congress? Is it the Academy?

In short, among so many possible agents, there is a clear institutional dispute over the benefit of the monopoly of the right to determine the future of the State and the transposition of the final outcome to substantive issues concerning fundamental rights and Brazilian political institutions. This is the trophy sought by agents in the political field, according to a Brazilian perspective that was identified during the proposed research, and who dispute among themselves the ultimate legitimacy to define what the future of the country should be. This master's research outlines the agents, tools, and positions that surround the aforementioned political field, as well as identifying the forms of symbolic domination exercised discursively among them. Thus, in addition to merely describing the field, the aim is to create a diagram of its institutional dynamics and propose an interpretative key to its intentions that are expressed through language, making use of dialogical discourse analysis. By uniting Bakhtin and Bourdieu, each with their own field of study, an interdisciplinary approach is proposed to address the questions posed, with the objective of ultimately identifying how agents in the legal field behave discursively in pursuit of the monopoly on the right to dictate the future of the State.