No description available.

En m'intéressant aux discours de deux groupes en opposition, les antipublicitaires et les publicitaires, j'ai tenté de construire une sociologie de leurs visions du monde et de rapprocher ces analyses des concepts d'idéologie et d'utopie. L'approche est qualitative, elle privilégie l'observation non participante auprès de collectifs militants et l'analyse de discours produits lors d'entretiens semi-directifs ou à l'occasion de publications des acteurs concernés. Ce travail sociologique s'organise autour du triptyque soi, l'autre, le monde. La vision de soi, ou encore le discours sur soi, en tant qu'individu et en tant que collectif, déploie les questions d'identification, d'efficacité, de plaisir, de vocation et d'engagement. A travers deux figures vocationnelles, celle du combattant et celle de l'artiste, l'acteur renforce son identité personnelle, dans le sens d'une définition de soi, en légitimant le rôle qu'il se donne au sein de la société. Ainsi, l'autolégitimation prend place dans la construction de la croyance collective et enclenche le processus de légitimation d'une conception du monde, qu'elle soit en accord ou en rupture avec le système existant. Le regard posé sur l'autre renvoie à une définition et une désignation de l'adversaire, mais le discours révèle aussi une certaine instrumentalisation de l'autre, l'autre pensé comme un moyen de se faire entendre et d'acquérir une légitimité aux yeux du public. Enfin, les notions qui se trouvent interrogées dans cette présentation de soi et de l'autre sont dès lors confrontées à un discours plus général, un regard sur le monde et la société. Le discours se fait constructeur d'évidences en affirmant ce qui est et ce qui doit être. La publicité devient ainsi l'élément sur lequel s'amorce une réflexion critique envers le système économique libéral. Idéologie et utopie sont ainsi analysées comme deux dynamiques à la fois opposées et complémentaires, comme si en fin de compte regarder le monde, c'était déjà mettre en œuvre une volonté de le mettre en ordre. / Interesting to me in speech two opposing groups, the activists and advertising professionals, i tried to construct a sociology of their worldviews and bring these analyzes concepts of ideology and utopia. The approach is qualitative, it favors the non-participant observation with community activists and discourse analysis products during semi-structured interviews or on the occasion of publications. This sociological work is organized around the triptych self, the other and the world. Vision itself, or the speech itself, as individuals and as a collective, deploys identification issues, efficiency, pleasure, purpose and commitment. Through vocational two figures, one of the fighter and that of the artist, actor reinforces its identity, in the sense of self-definition, legitimizing the role it gives to society. Thus, the self-legitimation takes place in the construction of collective belief and begins the process of legitimizing a view of the world, whether in agreement or break with the existing system. The gaze of the other refers to a definition and description of the opponent, but the speech also reveals some manipulation of the other, the other thought as a way to be heard and to gain legitimacy the public eye. Finally, the concepts are surveyed in the presentation of self and the other are therefore faced with a more general discourse, a view of the world and society. The speech is evidence of manufacturer stating what is and what should be. Advertising becomes the element that begins a critical towards the liberal economic system. Ideology and utopia are thus analyzed as two dynamic both opposite and complementary, as if ultimately look at the world, it was already implementing a willingness to put in order.

To wield direct influence on the everyday lives of citizens, new political elites have often professed a profound interest in shaping the politics of dwelling. In the 1920s, Vienna’s Social Democrats built 400 communal housing blocks equipped with public gardens, theaters, libraries, kindergartens, and sports facilities, hoping that these facilities would serve as loci for “growing into socialism”. In the 1950s, housing construction in Berlin became a site of the Cold War. East Berlin’s social realist “workers palaces” on Stalinallee were meant to serve as an ideal flourishing ground for the “new socialist men and women”. In contrast, West Berlin's modernist Hansa-Viertel was designed to showcase an ideal dwelling culture and an urban environment that would cultivate individuality. This dissertation examines three historically situated and ideologically distinct responses to the housing question: social democracy in Red Vienna, state socialism in East Berlin, and liberal capitalism in West Berlin. It illuminates how political promises of a radical new beginning were translated into spatial arrangements—the private scale of the apartment and the urban scale of the city—as well as how citizens appropriated the social, political, and economic norms inherent to the new spaces they inhabited. More specifically, the following analyses demonstrate the fact that inherited social, technological, and economic practices have often subverted political visions of a radically different future. This was the case with pedagogy in Red Vienna’s municipal housing, instrumental reason in the form of Taylorism and Fordism in East and West Berlin’s mass housing, and gender relations in Red Vienna’s and East Berlin’s politics of dwelling. At the same time, this dissertation examines counter-spaces that emerged from the dialectics between political promises and actual socio-spatial realities, counter-spaces that both reflect critically on past hegemonic “politics of dwelling” and that foreshadow alternative political imaginations that are still relevant today. Of particular interest are counter-hegemonic practices of dwelling that embody possibilities of emancipation—of experiencing oneself as subject instead of object of social transformation, justice—of emphasizing considerations of equality and recognition, and radical democracy—of questioning power relations and of forming alliances among disadvantaged groups to transform everyday life.

To wield direct influence on the everyday lives of citizens, new political elites have often professed a profound interest in shaping the politics of dwelling. In the 1920s, Vienna’s Social Democrats built 400 communal housing blocks equipped with public gardens, theaters, libraries, kindergartens, and sports facilities, hoping that these facilities would serve as loci for “growing into socialism”. In the 1950s, housing construction in Berlin became a site of the Cold War. East Berlin’s social realist “workers palaces” on Stalinallee were meant to serve as an ideal flourishing ground for the “new socialist men and women”. In contrast, West Berlin's modernist Hansa-Viertel was designed to showcase an ideal dwelling culture and an urban environment that would cultivate individuality. This dissertation examines three historically situated and ideologically distinct responses to the housing question: social democracy in Red Vienna, state socialism in East Berlin, and liberal capitalism in West Berlin. It illuminates how political promises of a radical new beginning were translated into spatial arrangements—the private scale of the apartment and the urban scale of the city—as well as how citizens appropriated the social, political, and economic norms inherent to the new spaces they inhabited. More specifically, the following analyses demonstrate the fact that inherited social, technological, and economic practices have often subverted political visions of a radically different future. This was the case with pedagogy in Red Vienna’s municipal housing, instrumental reason in the form of Taylorism and Fordism in East and West Berlin’s mass housing, and gender relations in Red Vienna’s and East Berlin’s politics of dwelling. At the same time, this dissertation examines counter-spaces that emerged from the dialectics between political promises and actual socio-spatial realities, counter-spaces that both reflect critically on past hegemonic “politics of dwelling” and that foreshadow alternative political imaginations that are still relevant today. Of particular interest are counter-hegemonic practices of dwelling that embody possibilities of emancipation—of experiencing oneself as subject instead of object of social transformation, justice—of emphasizing considerations of equality and recognition, and radical democracy—of questioning power relations and of forming alliances among disadvantaged groups to transform everyday life.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-04T19:56:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 21 / Nenhuma / A década de 90 é marcada pelo desencanto e apatia do magistério gaúcho frente às reformas educacionais promovidas, especialmente, durante os dois mandatos do Presidente Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002), tendo à frente do Ministério da Educação, Paulo Renato de Souza. O foco principal deste trabalho foi investigar as razões que explicam esta indiferença do magistério do Rio Grande do Sul, que tivera na combatividade uma de suas principais marcas. Este desencanto só pode ser compreendido no bojo das políticas educacionais neoliberais, que procuraram cooptar a escola para legitimar a reestruturação do processo produtivo, imposta pelo capitalismo neoliberal globalizado. A função principal da escola passou a ser a qualificação da mão-de-obra, para um mercado cada vez mais exigente e competitivo e, por isso, excludente. As políticas educacionais implementadas neste período foram exigidas pelos Organismos Internacionais, especialmente pelo BM e pela CEPAL e prontamente acatadas pelo governo brasileiro. O movime / In the nineties, specially while President Fernando Henrique Cardoso was governing (1995-2002), and Paulo Renato de Souza was in charge of the Ministry of Education, radical educational reforms occurred, which were taken on, passively, by most of the teachers in Rio Grande do Sul. This paper aims at investigating the reasons that explain the teachers’ indifference in accepting those changes, since they were the ones fighting against them. This dissatisfaction can only be understood in the core of educational neo-liberal policies, which tried to connect the schools to legitimate the reforms of the productive process imposed by globalized neo-liberal capitalism. Therefore, the main function of the school was to qualify manpower for a more and more demanding and competitive market and, this way, eliminatory. Educational policies implemented in that period were demanded by International Organizations, especially by World Bank and CEPAL, and were soon accepted by Brazilian government. The Union Movement, with int