O gênero “projeto de lei” sobre temas sociais sensíveis: argumentação e dialogismo na "onda conservadora”

Abstract

This thesis discusses the institutional political discourse of the “conservative wave” in Brazil, analyzing the “Bill” (PL) genre on sensitive social issues. The work addresses how the world is undergoing a transformation where conservative discourses intensify, often with dehumanizing traits, and how these discourses legitimate themselves within Brazilian democracy. The research analyzes the enunciative and argumentative dimension of the institutional corpus, focusing on “ways of saying” and articulating pragmatic-enunciative theories such as Point of View (POV) theory, polyphonic theory of enunciation, speech act theory, and informal and dialogic argumentation. The research corpus consists of six specific Bills: (i) “PL do Programa Escola Sem Partido;” (ii) “PL do Criacionismo;” (iii) “PL do Dia do Orgulho Heterossexual;” (iv) “PL das técnicas subliminares nas escolas;” (v) “PL do Herói da Pátria;” (vi) “PL do Ministro da Defesa Aventureiro. ” The analysis demonstrates that a conservative system mobilizes fallacies and attacks dialogical alterities. Throughout the first part, the text also traces a path through the social representations of political discourse and a brief history of Discourse Analysis in Brazil, from the military dictatorship to re-democratization, showing how it propelled a pragmatic Discourse Analysis in the country, especially at UFMG, aligned with the “plurality of ideas” of the 1988 Federal Constitution. It further discusses the relationship between the “conservative wave” and hate speech, and ethics, morality, and values in political discourse. Throughout the second part, the text highlighted the Integrated Discourse Analysis (ADI) methodology. The text explored enunciative activity, introducing new concepts about “to speak 1” and “not-to-speak 2” to uncover the management of conservative Points of View (POV). In addition, the thesis discussed argumentation, examining how Bills use fallacies and also described the methodology and categories of analysis, including a range of modalities. Finally, it concluded that conservative rhetoric, by cloaking itself in democratic legitimacy while dehumanizing the “other” and resorting to fallacies, only reveals a systemic articulation of “personal” attacks. In this sense, this thesis reveals that, by proclaiming themselves "democratic conservatives," the proponents of such Bills not only instrumentalize “tradition” to validate discourses of dehumanization and hate but also expose the fragility of an argumentation that, instead of dialoguing, resorts to fallacies to silence alterity and undermine the very foundations of plurality and respect in Brazilian democracy.