Zugl.: Berlin, Humboldt-Universiẗat, Diss., 2007. / Bibliogr. S. 810-824.

Habil.--Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät--Universität Kiel. / Bibliogr. p. 176-198.

Zugl.: Berlin, Humboldt-Univ., Diss., 2007 / Bibliogr. S. 810 - 824

Orientador: Álvaro Gabriel Bianchi Mendez / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-18T00:00:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernandes_RenatoCesarFerreira_M.pdf: 673775 bytes, checksum: b785e6b7a18d62e8ce62577a65aa683a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 / Resumo: Esta dissertação teve como objetivo debater a crítica de Antonio Gramsci a Robert Michels. A análise foi desenvolvida sobre a crítica a três conceitos-processos de Michels: da lei férrea da oligarquia nos partidos políticos, da elite carismática e do conceito de elite política. Para esta pesquisa, foi preciso recuperar as formulações de Michels à luz do seu tempo, refletindo sobre as transformações no pensamento do autor na história política do início do século: da sua crítica à socialdemocracia até o seu apoio ao fascismo. Já em Gramsci, a reconstrução teórica se deu a partir dos Cadernos do Cárcere, principal obra em que o autor desenvolve a crítica a Michels. Esta crítica nunca foi sistematizada e, por isso, foi preciso passar por uma reconstrução dos principais conceitos do comunista italiano buscando clarificar as diferenças. Tanto Michels quanto Gramsci formularam suas ciências políticas sobre a divisão entre dirigente e dirigidos. Mas a construção teórica desta divisão, nestes autores, é oposta. A partir desta divergência foi possível demonstrar que a crítica de Gramsci revela as limitações do texto de Michels. Neste sentido, chegamos à formulação de que o conceito gramsciano de transformismo apareceu como uma superação teórica da oligarquização presente na teoria de Michels / Abstract: This dissertation aimed to discuss Antonio Gramsci's critique to Robert Michels. The analysis was undertaken on the critique to three concept-processes of Michels's: the iron law of oligarchy in political parties, the charismatic elite and the concept of political elite. For this research, it was necessary to recover Michel's formulations in the light of his time, reflecting about the changes in the author's thought in the political history of the beginning of the century: from his critique on the social democracy to his support for the fascism. However, according to Gramsci, the theoretical reconstruction was made from the Prison Notebooks, the main work in which the author develops a critique to Michels. This critique was never systematized and, therefore, it had to undergo a reconstruction of the main concepts of the Italian Communist seeking to clarify the differences. Both Michels and Gramsci formulated their political sciences concerning the division between leader and led. But the theoretical construction of this division, according to these authors, is opposite. From this divergence was possible to demonstrate that Gramsci's critique reveals the limitations of Michels's text. In this sense, we come to a conclusion that the Gramscian concept of transformism emerged as a theoretical overrun oligarchization in Michels's theory / Mestrado / Ciencia Politica / Mestre em Ciência Política

The purpose of this study is to examine why the media has a more negative attitude towards lobbyism in 2014 compared to earlier years since the 1970s in Sweden. This study examines first if a change of attitude has occurred between the given years and whether the attitude is more positive, negative or neutral towards lobbyism in recent years compared to earlier years and lastly if the media are comparing different contexts in which lobbying takes place. The method of this study is based on quantitative content analysis, and on Kanol’s ideas that by implementing theories from different disciplines one can develop theories on comparative lobbying in order to increase and improve our knowledge on the phenomenon of lobbyism as the contemporary research on the subject are scars and underdeveloped. The material in this study are news articles that have been collected between 1970 to 2000 and every second year from 2000 up until 2014. This study also provides a comprehensive picture of the Swedish context in which lobbying takes place by gathering information from multiple sources and earlier studies as this information has as of yet not been gathered in a single study up until now. The conclusion is that there has been a change of attitude towards lobbyism in Sweden, however, the dominant attitude is not a negative but rather a more skeptical/cynical one which has increased since 1992. The term lobbying is controversial because it’s being mentioned in various topics that could be considered negative by the reader as the decision making whether the news article is negative or positive is subjective. Because the media has increased its negative news reporting overall and that the unconscious mind of the reader is also attracted to negative news reporting, the term lobbying can be considered “negative” overall as it is constantly being mentioned in negative contexts even when the article is not about lobbying. A reasonable explanation why the media has a more negative / skeptical attitude to lobbyism is because of previous scandals related to lobbying either in Sweden or outside the country's border, but also because the media can’t hold the elected officials responsible for their actions as transparency and accountability is absent. Because of the increased reporting in Sweden on lobbying from all over the world, the subject will most likely become more relevant on the Swedish political agenda.