Esta tese aborda o tema do impacto político e intelectual da Guerra do Vietnã nos Estados Unidos a partir da história da fundação e dos primeiros anos de existência do periódico Foreign Policy (1970-1977). A intervenção no Vietnã desencadeou uma intensa contestação na sociedade norte-americana em relação às doutrinas e práticas de Guerra Fria que, até então, eram amplamente aceitas. A crise foi tão profunda que as principais organizações de política externa, o sistema político, os consagrados membros do establishment e as bases ideacionais e intelectuais que sustentavam as práticas intervencionistas se tornaram todos alvos de profundos questionamentos e, muitas vezes, violentos ataques. A história da Foreign Policy reconstrói este processo a partir de um ponto de vista privilegiado, uma vez que foi esta crise que motivou a fundação de um novo periódico com a intenção de revisar a política externa norte-americana e reformular os paradigmas analíticos em relações internacionais. Além disso, diversos membros da Foreign Policy participaram de decisões da intervenção no Vietnã, quando ainda eram mais jovens, e assumiram ao longo da década de 1970 posição de destaque na elaboração de uma política externa menos intervencionista e militarista (o que desencadeia na participação deles no governo Carter) ou na constituição de novos paradigmas intelectuais em política internacional que transcendiam o tema da Guerra Fria, abordando a crescente interdependência e as novas questões sociais globais. Esta tese retoma desde a Guerra do Vietnã até as propostas de governo do presidente Carter e os novos paradigmas analíticos em relações internacionais a partir da trajetória de membros da Foreign Policy (Samuel Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Holbrooke, James C. Thomson, Joseph Nye, entre outros). A história deste periódico ajuda a compreender melhor uma conjuntura política decisiva nos Estados Unidos em que foram concebidos os germes da polarização política, da crise do establishment e de uma preocupação política com as consequências domésticas de uma economia cada vez mais interdependente e globalizada. / This dissertation focuses on the political and intellectual impact of the Vietnam War in the United States, based on the founding and first years of the existence of Foreign Policy Magazine (1970-1977). Intervention in Vietnam set off an intense dispute in American society regarding the Cold War doctrines and practices, which had been widely accepted until then. The crisis was so deep that the major foreign policy organizations, the political system, respected members of the establishment, and the ideological and intellectual bases that had sustained the interventionist practices all became targets of profound questioning and, frequently violent attacks. The history of Foreign Policy reconstructs this process based on a privileged vantage point, since it was this crisis that motivated the rise of a new periodical with the intention of reviewing American foreign policy and reformulating the analytical paradigms regarding international relations. Moreover, various members of Foreign Policy had taken part in the decisions to intervene in Vietnam, when they were younger, and during the 1970s assumed a position of importance in developing a less interventionist and militaristic foreign policy (which led to their participation in the Carter government), or in the creation of new intellectual paradigms in international politics that transcend the theme of the Cold War, focusing on increasing interdependence and the new global social issues. This dissertation reexamines the period from the Vietnam War to the Carter president proposals and the new analytical paradigms with respect to international relations based on the trajectory of the Foreign Policy associates (Samuel Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Holbrooke, James C. Thomson, Joseph Nye, and others). The history of this journal helps to better understand one decisive political juncture of the United States, wherein were conceived the seeds of political polarization, the crisis of the establishment, and of a political concern with the domestic consequences of an increasingly interdependent and globalized economy.

Submitted by Cássia Santos (cassia.bcufg@gmail.com) on 2017-05-26T11:31:16Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Fabrício Freitas Barbosa Rezende Melo - 2017.pdf: 2359637 bytes, checksum: b94f5b8e239d384e78cf961722f4883a (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2017-05-26T14:47:37Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Fabrício Freitas Barbosa Rezende Melo - 2017.pdf: 2359637 bytes, checksum: b94f5b8e239d384e78cf961722f4883a (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-26T14:47:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Fabrício Freitas Barbosa Rezende Melo - 2017.pdf: 2359637 bytes, checksum: b94f5b8e239d384e78cf961722f4883a (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-04-13 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / The main purpose of this research is to analyze and to comprehend the meaning of the concept of national-developmentalism in the work and thought of Hélio Jaguaribe in the 1950 decade. More specifically, one intends to understand the notion of national-developmentalism as an ideology created in the book O Nacionalismo na Atualidade Brasileira published in 1958 by the Superior Institute of Brazilian Studies (ISEB in Portuguese). The ISEB, heir of the tradition of Brazilian Institute of Economics, Sociology and Politics (IBESP in Portuguese) and the Itatiaia Group, was created in 1955 and was part of the Brazilian public intellectuality in the 1950 decade. The organism, which reunited thinkers of diverse branches of the science, was created to think the Brazil and contribute to the State bureaucracy instituted since the first administration of Getúlio Vargas (1930-1945). The national-developmentalism of Hélio Jaguaribe comprehend the project of nationalist development which permeated the Latin-American public intellectuality. In order to analyze and comprehend the meaning of the national-developmentalist ideology of Hélio Jaguaribe in its work and thought, this research will use the theoretical-methodological reference of the linguistic contextualismo of Quentin Skinner. This methodology as a branch of the history of political thought intends to elucidate the meaning of a concept by the linguistic context of the work and thought of the studied author. Meaning, therefore, does not comprehend the terminology of the word or its conceptual definition and historiography, but also the author intention motivated by the linguistic contextualismo of the book. The linguistic context comprehend the analyses of the social-political, economical, cultural and intellectual context along with the intellectual and professional trajectory of the author, in order to establish the intention behind the concept and by that, the meaning of the concept, in this case, the meaning of national-developmentalism to Hélio Jaguaribe in its book of 1958. / O objetivo principal desta pesquisa é a análise e compreensão do significado do conceito de nacional-desenvolvimentismo na obra e pensamento de Hélio Jaguaribe na década de 1950. Em um sentido mais específico, busca-se entender a noção de nacional-desenvolvimentismo enquanto ideologia formulada na obra O Nacionalismo na Atualidade Brasileira de 1958, trabalho publicado pelo Instituto Superior de Estudos Brasileiros (ISEB). O ISEB, herdeiro da tradição do Instituto Brasileiro de Economia, Sociologia e Política (IBESP) e do Grupo de Itatiaia, foi criado em 1955 e fazia parte da intelectualidade pública brasileira da década de 1950. O órgão, que reunia pensadores de diversos ramos do saber, foi criado com o intuito de pensar o Brasil e contribuir para a burocracia estatal instituída desde o primeiro governo de Getúlio Vargas (1930-1945). O nacional-desenvolvimentismo de Hélio Jaguaribe compreende um projeto de desenvolvimento nacionalista dentre as inúmeras elaborações do ISEB, inserido em um debate desenvolvimentista que permeava toda a intelectualidade pública latino-americana. Para se analisar e compreender o significado da ideologia nacional-desenvolvimentista de Hélio Jaguaribe em sua obra e pensamento, este trabalho se utilizará do referencial teórico-metodológico do contextualismo linguístico de Quentin Skinner. Tal metodologia enquanto vertente da história do pensamento político busca elucidar o significado de um conceito a partir do contexto linguístico da obra e do pensamento dos autores estudos. Significado, portanto, não compreende somente a terminologia da palavra ou sua definição conceitual e historiográfica, mas também a intenção autoral motivada pelo contexto linguístico da confecção de sua obra. O contexto linguístico compreende a análise do contexto sócio-político, econômico, cultural e intelectual aliados à trajetória intelectual e profissional do autor, buscando estabelecer-se a intenção por trás do conceito e por meio disto, o significado de um conceito, neste caso, o significado de nacional-desenvolvimentismo para Hélio Jaguaribe em sua obra de 1958.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-01-29T13:28:48Z No. of bitstreams: 1 brunomacielpereira.pdf: 1099223 bytes, checksum: 81c47fec5c813bf6ee155d004094c1b6 (MD5) / Rejected by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br), reason: Adicionar instituição on 2016-02-01T15:45:51Z (GMT) / Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-02-01T16:13:53Z No. of bitstreams: 1 brunomacielpereira.pdf: 1099223 bytes, checksum: 81c47fec5c813bf6ee155d004094c1b6 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-02-01T20:11:10Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 brunomacielpereira.pdf: 1099223 bytes, checksum: 81c47fec5c813bf6ee155d004094c1b6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-02-01T20:11:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 brunomacielpereira.pdf: 1099223 bytes, checksum: 81c47fec5c813bf6ee155d004094c1b6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-11-11 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / O objetivo deste estudo é compreender o conceito de Razão de Estado de Fernando Alvía de Castro (1572-1642?) a partir da análise de sua obra: Verdadera Razon de Estado (1616). Enfatiza o modo como o tratadista logroñes orienta a conduta dos governantes, realçando as permissividades e interdições de sua Teoria da Razão de Estado. Ancorado no método de Quentin Skinner– conforme o historiador inglês o apresenta em Fundações do Fundamento Político Moderno –, busca remontar as origens do conceito Razão de Estado, bem como compreender as relações da obra de Alvía de Castro com a intelectualidade de seu tempo. Complementarmente analisa o modo em que Alvía de Castro interpreta as obras de Aristóteles, Cícero, Sêneca e Tácito e a importância desses autores para formulação de sua Teoria da Razão de Estado. / The objective of this study is to understand Fernando de Castro's (1572-1642?) concept of Reason of State, from the analysis of his work: Verdadera Razon de Estado (1616). The study emphasizes how the Logroñes treatisewriter guides the conduct of rulers, highlighting the permissiveness and restrictions of his Theory of the Reason of State. Anchored in the method of Quentin Skinner – as the English historian presents in the Foundations of Modern Political Thought – this is an attemptto trace the origins of the Reason of State concept, as well as to understand the relationship of the work of Alvía de Castro with the intellectuals of his time. In a complementary manner, the study analyzes the way in which Alvía de Castro interprets the works of Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, and Tacitus, and the importance of these authors in formulating his Theory of the Reason of State.

protein chemistry, unnatural amino acids, chemical biology, proteomicsThe foundation of political societies is a central theme in Rousseau's work. This is no surprise coming from a man who was born into a people who had their own celebrated founder and foundations, and immersed himself in the writings of classical republicans and the quasi-mythical histories of ancient city-states where the heroic lawgiver played an important and legitimate role in political foundations. However, Rousseau's propositional political writings (those written for Geneva, Corsica, and Poland) have been accused of being unsystematic and running the spectrum from conservative and prudent to radical and utopian. It is this seeming incongruence which is the subject of this thesis. In particular, it is argued that this confusion is born out the failure to recognize a systematic distinction between "founding" and "re-founding" political societies in both the history of political thought, and Rousseau's own work (a distinction in Rousseau which has rarely been noted, let alone treated to a study of its own). By recognizing this distinction one can identify two Rousseaus; the conservative and prudent thinker who is wary of making changes to established political systems and constitutional foundations (the re-founder), and the radical democrat fighting for equality, and claiming that no state is legitimate without popular sovereignty (the founder). In demonstrating this distinction, this thesis examines the ancient concept of the lawgiver, the growth and expansion of the idea leading up to the eighteenth century, Rousseau's own philosophic writings on the topic, and the differing political proposals he wrote for Geneva, Corsica, and Poland. The thesis argues that although there is a clear separation between these two types of political proposals, they remain systematically Rousseauvian.

This dissertation re-examines a set of long-standing problems that arise from Aristotle’s defense of kingship in the Politics. Scholars have argued for over a century that Aristotle’s endorsement of sole rule by an individual of outstanding excellence is incompatible with his theory of distributive justice and his very conception of a political community. Previous attempts to resolve this apparent contradiction have failed to ease the deeper tensions between the idea of the polis as a community of free and equal citizens sharing in ruling and being ruled and the vision of absolute kingship in which one man rules over others who are merely ruled. I argue that the so-called “paradox of monarchy” emerges from misconceptions and insufficiently nuanced interpretations of kingship itself and of the more fundamental concepts of community, rule, authority, and citizenship. Properly understood, Aristotelian kingship is not a form of government that concentrates power in the hands of a single individual, but an arrangement in which free citizens willingly invest that individual with a position of supreme authority without themselves ceasing to share in rule. Rather than a muddled appendage tacked on to the Politics out of deference to Macedon or an uncritical adoption of Platonic utopianism, Aristotle’s defense of kingship is a piece of ideal theory that serves in part to undermine the pretensions of actual or would-be monarchs, whether warrior- or philosopher-kings. / text

La thèse est le résultat d’une recherche menée en sciences du langage : lexicologie, sémantique lexicale et analyse du discours. Elle s’appuie sur les sources primaires du droit de l’Union, les sources doctrinales de la Doctrine Sociale de l’Eglise et des corpus de textes doctrinaux (juridiques allemands), ainsi que sur une relecture de sources philosophiques : aristotélisme, thomisme, kantisme et romantisme allemand. Il est généralement avancé par la doctrine juridique européenne (en France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991), que le principe de subsidiarité, règle de droit positif européen (traité de Maastricht - 1993) défini à l’article 3B (5TUE), aurait initialement été théorisé par la Doctrine sociale de l’Eglise au 20e siècle (Pie XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). La règle « directive » (CORNU, Vocabulaire juridique, 2015) aurait toutefois été délestée de sa charge philosophique et théologique problématique pour s’apparenter à une règle de procédure. Sur le plan linguistique, la forme française subsidiarité serait un emprunt francisé du néologisme allemand Subsidiarität.Nombreux auteurs soulignent le caractère ambigu, polysémique ou gigogne d’une notion « plus politique que juridique » (DU GRANRUT, 1997, BARROCHE, 2012). Cet « élément juridique communautaire » (Rapport parlementaire DE LA MALENE, 1996-1997), introduit par J. Delors et A. Spinelli dans les années 1980, aurait eu pour vocation de désamorcer les conflits relatifs à la caractérisation constitutionnelle de l’Union Européenne. Il permettrait également d’organiser de manière souple la réalisation des objectifs politiques communautaires définis par les Traités européens dans le domaine des « compétences partagées » (TUE). La thèse s’attache à montrer les incohérences des hypothèses linguistiques relatives au rattachement de cette notion et de sa forme linguistique (subsidiarité, substantivation de subsidiaire (secours, renfort d’un élément inférieur à une chose supérieure, initialement en contexte militaire latin)), ainsi qu’à son rattachement à des sources philosophiques et théologiques en particuliers thomistes et personnalistes.Une recherche sur l’étymon latin et de l’occurrence allemande (Subsidiarität), tend à montrer que la forme subsidiarité désigne initialement le droit romain (subsidiäres Recht), occurrence régulière de la doctrine juridique allemande, tout au long du 19e siècle. La thèse présente donc les résultats d’un repérage et de la collecte d’un corpus d’occurrences de subsidäre(r) Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität, dans les œuvres de la science allemande du droit, en particulier chez les membres de l’Ecole historique du droit (F. K. VON SAVIGNY) et chez les premiers formalistes (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) et penseurs allemands de l’Etat de droit (Robert VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL). Le travail discute cette occurrence comme une formule discursive, c'est-à-dire un mot d’ordre politique allemand, qui se diffuse dans la science juridique et dans les œuvres de l’école historique d’économie, tout au long du 19e siècle. Initialement, il est un mot d’ordre historiciste, avancé par Savigny dans la Querelle de la codification qui traverse les Etats allemands de l’Ancien Empire Romain Germanique, à partir du Congrès de Vienne (1814). L’occurrence (adjectivale et adverbiale) se diffuse par la suite et devient un motif de l’Etat de droit social (en particulier à partir de R. VON MOHL, 1829), se substantive, devient un principe juridique (relations les ordres juridiques régionaux et fédéraux), puis pénètre la terminologie économique (Etat subsidiaire, devoir subsidiaire de l’Etat dans l’assistance aux pauvres). Son motif conditionne le vote des premières lois dites « sociales » sous Otto von Bismarck. / The PhD is the result of a research carried out in the sciences of language: lexicology, lexical semantics and discourse analysis. It is based on the primary sources of European Union law, the doctrinal sources of the Church's Social Doctrine and the corpus of German legal doctrinal texts, as well as a rereading of philosophical sources: Aristotelianism, Thomism, Kantism and romanticism.It is generally argued by European legal doctrine (in France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991) that the principle of subsidiarity, a rule of positive European law (Maastricht Treaty - 1993) defined in Article 3B), would initially have been theorized by the Social Doctrine of the Church in the 20th century (Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). The "directive" rule (CORNU, Legal Vocabulary, 2015), however, would have been relieved of its problematic philosophical and theological position in order to resemble a procedural rule. On the linguistic level, the French form subsidiarity would be a francized loan of the German neologism Subsidiarität.The PhD focuses on the inconsistencies of the linguistic hypotheses related to the connection of this notion and its linguistic form (subsidiarity, substantivation of the adjective subsidiary (relief, reinforcement of an element lower than a superior thing, initially in a Latin military context), as well as its attachment to philosophical and theological sources, in particular Thomists and personalists.A search for the Latin etymon and the German occurrence (Subsidiarität) tends to show that the subsidiarity form originally designates the Roman law (subsidiäres Recht), a regular occurrence of German legal doctrine throughout the 19th century. The PhD therefore presents the results of a retrieval and collection of a corpus of occurrences of subsidäre (Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität) in the works of the German legal science, especially among the members of the Historical School of Law (FK VON SAVIGNY) and the first formalists (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) and German thinkers of the Rule of Law VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL).The work discusses this occurrence as a discursive formula, that is to say a German political slogan, which is diffused in the legal science and in the works of the historical school of economics, throughout the 19th century. Initially, it is a historicist slogan, advanced by Savigny in the Quarrel of the codification which crosses the German states of the Old Germanic Roman Empire, starting from the Congress of Vienna (1814). The occurrence (adjectival and adverbial) is subsequently disseminated and becomes a motive of the social law state (especially from R. VON MOHL, 1829), becomes substantive, becomes a legal principle (relations legal orders Regional and federal), then penetrates the economic terminology (Subsidiary State, subsidiary duty of the State in assisting the poor). His motive conditioned the vote of the first laws called "social" under Otto von Bismarck.The PhD attempts to demonstrate that the pontifical occurrence of 1931 is a late borrowing from these different theoretical and doctrinal sources and not a Catholic neologism.

Les récentes révolutions du « Printemps des pays arabes » attestent de la vivacité de l’idéal démocratique. Or ce régime est caractéristique d’une manière philosophique de penser le droit et les institutions. En effet, il se conforme mieux que nul autre à l’essence de l’Homme. Alors, malgré le succès des méthodes quantitatives en sciences humaines et l’autonomie désormais incontestée de la science du politique, nos temps contemporains seraient les héritiers d’une vision métaphysique plutôt que scientifique de la matière politique. Pourtant, la thèse explore l’histoire de la première « science des institutions » qui naît et se développe dans les Temps Modernes. Courant méconnu au cœur de l’histoire des institutions, ses tenants sont pourtant des figures incontournables et emblématiques de la pensée politique moderne, qu’il s’agisse de Machiavel, Hobbes, Montesquieu ou encore Hume. La thèse dévoile alors l’ambitieux projet de ces penseurs : proposer des institutions adaptées à la variété des mœurs, des histoires et des sociétés qu’ils étudient. Le choix du régime politique se doit d’être à la fois respectueux de l’humain et adapté à la variété des populations existantes. Dès lors l’universel et le particulier se rejoignent pour servir la première « science » de la Modernité. La thèse serpente les siècles et le continent européen. Au bout de son périple, une rencontre surprenante : celle de philosophes fascinés par les découvertes de ces premiers scientifiques du politique. De cette rencontre devait naître un nouveau régime politique, différent de son homologue athénien : la Démocratie moderne / The recent revolutions of the « Arab Spring » attest of the vivacity of the democratic ideal. Yet, this regime is characterised by a philosophical questioning on law and on institutions. In fact, it fits better than any other regime the essence of mankind. So despite the success of quantitative methods and the now undisputed autonomy of political sciences, modern times inherited a metaphysical point of view rather than a scientific way to address political questioning. However, the thesis explores the history of the first “science of institutions” that was born and developed in Modernity. Unknown current in the history of institutions, its proponents are paradoxically emblematic figures of modern political thinking, such as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Montesquieu or even Hume. The thesis unveils their ambitious project: to propose institutions adapted to the variety of the customs, behaviours, histories of the societies they study. The choice of the political regime should be respectful of human nature and at the same time adapted to the variety of the existing people. Therefore, the universal and the specific merge in order to serve the first real science of the modern era. The thesis research progresses through Europe from the XVIth to the XVIIIth centuries. At the end of its journey: a surprising encounter: the meeting of philosophers fascinated by the discoveries of these first political scientists. This encounter bore a new type of political regime, different from its Athenian counterpart: modern Democracy