Maquiavel versus Rousseau: as divisões sociais e seu papel em uma república bem-ordenada
Carregando...
Data
2015
Autores
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Resumo
The conflictual relations between social groups constitute an important topic for political
philosophy, and the different ways in which they are interpreted depend on a broader view of the
appropriate conditions for a well-ordered state. Machiavelli, for example, by reflecting on the case of
Ancient Rome, sought to refute those who condemned the tumultuous conflicts between the nobles and
the plebs of the city as if they had only caused harm to the Republic. For this author, these tumults were among the main causes of Roman freedom, since the difference in the “humours” of the great and the
people led to clashes that gave birth to laws favorable to freedom. Rousseau, for his part, described the
existence of “private associations” within civil society as something potentially harmful to the harmony
of the Republic, because each of them had a self-interest that was able to override the common good
in public deliberations and jeopardize the prevalence of the general will. For Rousseau, the occurrence
of long debates and tumults in the popular assemblies could also be a sign of internal divisions capable
of causing the ruin of the state. In the face of these two ways of conceiving the political role of social
conflicts, the goal of this article is to make a comparative analysis of Machiavelli’s and Rousseau’s ideas.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Maquiavel, Rousseau, República, Conflitos políticos, Machiavelli, Republic, Social conflicts
Citação
MOSCATELI, Renato. Maquiavel versus Rousseau: as divisões sociais e seu papel em uma república bem-ordenada. Trans/form/ação, Marília, v. 38, ed. esp., p. 121-138, 2015.