A Rawlsian Interpretation of the Constitution: An Agonistic Approach of Brazilian Democracy

Abstract

In John Rawls’ view, the overlapping consensus consists of formulating an instance of mutual tolerance that makes democracies possible. Understanding that for a democracy to work it is necessary for political agents to respect the rights of their opponents, even if they disagree with their beliefs, a notion that dialogues with Chantal Mouffe’s idea of agonistic democracy. Agonistic democracy, combining Rawls’ ideas with those of Bobbio and Mouffe, depends on respect for the overlapping consensus, for the very existence of democracy. It is pertinent to use the theoretical reflections of these authors to understand their absorptions by the Federal Constitution of 1988, especially the Rawlsian notions. Moreover, it is also possible to perceive the weakening of the notions of the principles of justice and of overlapping consensus as successive crises – political, health, economic – put the Constitution itself in check. Thus, the purpose of this work is to displace the theory of John Rawls to understand their dialogues with the Constitution of 1988, in the face of the hypothesis that the Brazilian democratic fragility, followed by the election of an authoritarian nationalist in 2018, erodes these very notions from the inside. Thus, through the dialogue between the theoretical basis and the proposed object, it will be possible to contribute to the state of the art by extending the Rawlsian concepts to the interpretation of a peripheral object, and ultimately allowing to perceive the essentiality of the concepts of Rawls for the existence of a healthy and stable liberal democracy.