Democracia e eficiência: a difícil relação entre política e economia no debate contemporâneo

Democracy and efficiency: hard relations between politics and economy. Many economists see politics as an irrational activity. They also think state action usually generates market inefficiencies and democratic institutions, such as elections, often work as obstacles to sound economic measures. Showing that vision has been embedded into the main currents of economic thought since the last century, we also argue those ideas are exported to great part of contemporary political science, including the area of public policies. Examining the literature, we show that rational choice political scientists, as the economists, claim governability and effective decisions will be guaranteed mainly through concentrated arenas or through insulated arrangements able to protect policy makers from political interference. In other words, governability depends on the reduction of the political arenas. On the contrary, we reject this technocratic solution of splitting politics from economy. With the support of classical pluralist thinkers, we stand another conception, arguing politics is the privileged social space for building interests and values in an institutionalized way. The difficulties to surpass current international crises since 2008 reveal this is a crucial problem: reducing politics would prevent societies from improving institutional solutions which are the only ones able to give space to emerging conflicts and, then, reach eventual consensus around them.

The UN peacebuilding process: an analysis of its shortcomings in Timor-Leste

This paper brings a comprehensive analysis of the peacebuilding process conducted by the UN in Timor-Leste. Drawing on fieldwork, interviews, and secondary sources, the paper brings light to the main fragilities of this process. Firstly, the paper briefly outlines the scholarly debate around UN peacebuilding process. Then, the paper brings an overview of the UN missions deployed to Timor-Leste. Finally, the paper identifies the major limitations of such engagement. By highlighting the main flaws of this peacebuilding process, the paper opens the space for (re)thinking alternative ways of building peace in post-conflict scenarios.

DUNS SCOTUS, ESCOTISTAS E O DEBATE EM TORNO À EXTENSÃO PREDICATIVA IN QUID DA NOÇÃO DE ENTE NO SÉCULO XIV

O objetivo de meu texto consiste em reconstruir um aspecto da recepção da compreensão de Duns Scotus sobre a noção de ente em dois autores pertencentes à geração que imediatamente o sucedeu: no franciscano Guilherme de Alnwick e em seu confrade Francisco de Meyronnes. O problema que surge nessa primeira recepção de Scotus pode ser assim resumido: uma vez que tenhamos aceitado que a noção de ente é simultaneamente unívoca, primeira, a mais geral e a mais simples das noções, como podemos evitar a ameaça de se ter de conceder que a ciência de tal noção – que a metafísica, noutras palavras – não seja capaz de se distinguir claramente de uma investigação que não lida necessariamente com realidades extramentais? Ou, pondo a questão em outros termos: não nos vemos depois de Scotus condenados a ter de escolher entre uma noção de ente como uma noção real ou como uma noção perfeitamente geral? Veremos que, tratando da mesma questão, Alnwick e Meyronnes seguem diferentes caminhos, cada um deles com seus custos e méritos.