Ruptura: A crise da democracia liberal

by Manuel Castells, Joana Angélica d'Avila Melo (Translator)

Uma análise contundente dos tempos sombrios que vivemos, por um dos mais respeitados pensadores da atualidade

"Sopram ventos malignos no planeta azul", sentencia o sociólogo Manuel Castells, enquanto o mundo é assolado por um turbilhão de múltiplas crises. A crise econômica que se prolonga em precariedade de trabalho e desigualdade social; o terrorismo fanático que impossibilita a convivência e alimenta o medo; a permanente ameaça de guerras atrozes como forma de lidar com conflitos; as inúmeras violações aos direitos humanos e à vida.

Existe, porém, uma crise ainda mais profunda: a ruptura da relação entre governantes e governados, refletida no sentimento geral de que as instituições políticas "não nos representam". Para o autor, trata-se do gradual colapso da democracia liberal.

Nesse livro claro, instigante e bem-documentado, Castells analisa as causas e consequências desse rompimento, à luz dos mais recentes acontecimentos políticos mundiais: a vitória de Trump nos Estados Unidos; o resultado do Brexit no Reino Unido; a desconfiguração partidária na França na votação que elegeu Macron presidente; e a ideia de "democracia real" (em oposição à moribunda democracia liberal), nascida dos movimentos originários das redes sociais na Espanha, que levou ao fim do tradicional bipartidarismo no país.

Mas aonde nos levará essa ruptura? Qual a nova ordem que substituirá a que morre? Se o futuro é incerto, Castells nos faz refletir e enxergar com clareza o panorama atual, em uma publicação crucial para o momento que vivemos.

Genres: Nonfiction, History

127 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 26, 2018

About the author

Manuel Castells is Professor of Communication and the Wallis Annenberg Chair in Communication Technology and Society at the Annenberg School for Communication, University of Southern California, as well as Professor Emeritus of Sociology and Planning at the University of California, Berkeley, Research Professor at the Open University of Catalonia, and Marvin and Joanne Grossman Distinguished Visiting Professor of Technology and Society at MIT. He is the author of, among other books, the three-volume work The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture.

Reviews

[Víctor · Rating 3 out of 5]

Prou bo i recomanable. Reflexiona al voltant de la crisi de legitimitat de la Democràcia liberal. La creixent ruptura entre governants i governats. Així, el sorgiment de l'extrema dreta arreu del món seria una mena de revolució neojacksoniana global amb les particularitats específiques de cada país. Els perdedors de la globalització, les antigues classes obreres ineducades, es refugien en allò que entenen i on s'identifiquen: la nació, la religió, etc. La legitimitat dels moviments anti-globalistes no és positiva, sinó que només ataca la del model actual, desvirtuant-lo i deslegitimant-lo.

[Igor · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ruptura: A Crise da Democracia Liberal, escrito por Manuel Castells e trazido ao Brasil pela Zahar é, tal qual Como as Democracias Morrem (Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt) e O Povo contra a Democracia (Yascha Mounk), mais um dos livros que tentam explicar o processo mundial de recessão democrática observado nos últimos anos.

A tese defendida pelo autor, de maneira bastante resumida, diz que a crise democrática é uma consequência da crise de legitimidade, causada por uma população que não se enxerga representada na classe política. Nas palavras do autor: “A identidade política dos cidadãos, construída a partir do Estado, vai sendo substituída por identidades culturais diversas, portadoras de sentido para além da política.” A crise da legitimidade, por sua vez, pode ser vista como uma consequência dos diversos resultados (ainda que positivos) da globalização.

Para ilustrar seu argumento, o autor cita como exemplo a União Europeia, que obteve relativo sucesso em seu um plano de unificação econômica, mas não conseguiu os mesmos avanços no que diz respeito à unificação política. Uma das consequências dessa falta de identidade europeia é o distanciamento entre o cidadão comum e o político, agravando a crise de legitimidade. Nas palavras do autor: “A subordinação da soberania nacional à legislação e às decisões da Comissão Europeia nunca foi submetida a debate e muito menos a votação. Na medida em que os grandes partidos, assim como a maioria da classe política, eram todos europeístas, as eleições nacionais não serviram para esse debate, e as eleições europeias, com escassa participação popular, estavam encaminhadas para a composição de um Parlamento Europeu sem atribuições reais durante muito tempo. […] Ou seja, o já considerável distanciamento entre os cidadãos e seus governos nacionais aumentou por causa da distância ainda maior em relação à deliberação europeia e se tornou intransponível em relação à governança cotidiana de uma Comissão Europeia tecnocrática, apoiada em um funcionalismo privilegiado, geralmente desprezado por grande parte dos cidadãos. […] Mas o que deslegitimou a ação das instituições europeias foi um sistema construído de cima para baixo, e não mediante uma delegação de poder sob controle democrático.”

Além de questões políticas, os avanços tecnológicos (que são simultaneamente tanto causas quanto consequências da globalização) também contribuíram para a crise que vivemos hoje. As novas maneiras de se comunicar, por exemplo, incentivam discussões políticas mais agressivas. Nas palavras do autor: “A luta pelo poder nas sociedades democráticas atuais passa pela política midiática, pela política do escândalo e pela autonomia comunicativa dos cidadãos.” Não à toa a sensação de corrupção endêmica cresceu em diversos países do mundo.

Em um determinado momento do livro, mais exatamente no quarto capítulo, entretanto, o autor desiste de dissertar sobre a crise da democracia e decide escrever sobre os principais acontecimentos políticos espanhóis da última década. A fuga ao tema já seria prejudicial por si só, mas é agravada pelo forte viés político que o autor não se preocupa em esconder. A parcialidade não é um problema em si, mas os fatos são exibidos de maneira tão maniqueísta que fica difícil não se questionar quais trechos do livro são frutos de pesquisas técnicas e quais são frutos de paixões ideológicas.

O ápice da propaganda partidária ocorre quando o autor relata seu encontro com Pedro Sánchez, atualmente primeiro-ministro da Espanha, mas que vivia um momento ruim na época. Para um leitor de fora, a sensação é de que o autor abriu mão da parte técnica e decidiu escrever uma jornada de redenção de um herói lutando contra o mal. Em suas palavras: “Por um desses acasos da vida, fui testemunha de sua reflexão e de sua decisão final. Pedro Sánchez quis se afastar da Espanha por alguns dias para se reencontrar. […] Eu, que tenho uma debilidade romântica pelas causas perdidas, como bem sabem meus amigos, animei-o a não se render. Porque, se o fizesse, seria o fim do PSOE […] Ficou claro para mim que ele tinha força suficiente para resistir e que, sobretudo, havia percebido que não seria possível a política progressista na qual acreditava sem que enfrentasse os poderes fáticos e aqueles que os representavam no partido. […] Quando o acompanhei ao aeroporto, havia determinação em seu rosto, esperança em seu olhar. […] Era a mais improvável das aventuras. Sánchez tinha contra si quase todo o aparelho do partido, o grupo parlamentar, o governo de Rajoy […], todos os ex-presidentes socialistas, os poderes europeus, as elites financeiras e a totalidade dos meios de comunicação.”

Mesmo sendo a pior parte do livro, o quarto capítulo ainda é interessante, pelo menos para o leitor brasileiro. É inevitável traçar paralelos entre os acontecimentos políticos da Espanha e os do Brasil. O 15-M e o 17 de julho de 2013 são fenômenos quase idênticos, assim como o sentimento de corrupção generalizada e o surgimento de partidos políticos que nasceram com a proposta de representar melhor os cidadãos, como o Ciudadanos e Podemos lá, e o PSL e Novo aqui.

Mesmo com seus problemas, o livro é uma boa leitura para quem deseja tentar compreender melhor o processo de recessão democrática mundial. Torna-se ainda melhor sabendo, de antemão, das limitações impostas pela falta de um distanciamento histórico e do forte enviesamento político, que podem inviabilizar algumas das opiniões do autor.

[Hugo · Rating 4 out of 5]

En capítulo 4, “España: movimientos sociales, fin del bipartidismo y crisis del Estado”, “Una democracia cansada”, se podría cambiar España por Chile y franquismo por pinochetismo, y el resultado sería similar.
La crisis de la democracia liberal, entendida como desconexión entre el representante y los representados, es el resultado de los procesos de globalización económica y comunicacional, migraciones, pérdida de identidad social, crisis económicas, con sus correspondientes planes de austeridad, corrupción, abusos, crisis de legitimad de las instituciones, bipartidismo, poder anquilosado en el establishment político y económico, etc.

[Madara]

Not sure I like the constant narration of what events took place. I would have liked a little more analysis. Also, covering the same events across books makes for boredom.

[Felipe Costa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Uma ótima análise do sociólogo espanhol Manuel Castells dos movimentos de ruptura nas mais importantes repúblicas moderndas. Diria que se trata de uma sequência lógica do “sociedade em rede”.

[Nils · Rating 4 out of 5]

A discussion of the political ructions in Spain over the post-2010 period in the opening and closing chapters, framed around a long core chapter that provides a fundamental analysis of how the financial crisis of neoliberal capitalism that began in 2008 produced the political crisis of democracy that has unrolled across the North Atlantic core over the last years.

Castells is concerned with “the rupture of the relationship between those who govern and the governed” which he says is fundamentally about “the lack of trust in institutions” (3) which in turn has led to “a gradual collapse of a political model of representation” (4) which finally has left us “without legitimate tools to solve our major issues collectively.” (5) This formulation of the crisis of democracy aims to explain what politicians like Trump, Le Pen, and Macron have in common with movements such as Spain’s Podemos, Greece’s Syriza, and the Italian Five Star movement — all of which he sees as symptomatic of the arrival of a “post-liberal order”. [Many would reject this sort of lumping — and it’s also unclear what the post-liberal order is, as opposed to what it is merely not.] “My intention is not to blend and confuse all of the various movements and individuals into one misleading amalgam.... This rebellion therefore needs to be analyzed in all its diversity.” (37)

“The strength and stability of institutions depends on their inherent validity in people’s minds.” (10)

“Politics is professionalizing, and politicians are becoming a social group that defends its common interests above those of the people it purports to represent.” (10) Castells is essentially sympathetic to the radical critique of the passing liberal technocratic order, not least because he regards that old order not merely as corrupt and self-serving, but as having pursued that self-interest by selling out social social democracy.

Elections have become merely a way to “take the pulse” of the people, and to jazz them up with hopes for renewal, after which the politicians go back to the trough. But at some point, “the recurrent letting down of those hopes begins to erode legitimacy, until resignation given way to indignation when things become unbearable.... At times of economic, social, institutional and moral crisis, people refuse to tolerate what they once accepted simply because there ways no other choice.” (11)

“What strikes me is that ever fewer people believe in this form of it, liberal democracy, while the great majority continue to defend the democratic ideal.” (12)

- [x] His causal account of how the “confluence of factors” that landed us in our current predicament is a bravado set piece of condensed argumentation: “The globalization of the economy and communication has eroded and deconstructed national economies, and limited the capacity of the nation-state to respond.... Meanwhile, professionals with better education and broader possibilities are connecting with one another across the planet to form new kinds of [“globalist”] social classes.... The resulting social inequality between the value-makers and the devalued is the most significant disparity in recent history [leading to] fragmentation within every society and between every country....” Meanwhile, politicians have recast the state from being a national-welfare oriented institution to “a new form of state: the network-state” which conceives the state as merely a node “in a supranational network in which sovereignty is partly surrendered in exchange for participation in the management of globalization.” (14) This has led to a “dissociation” between the (institutional manifestation of the) state and the (cultural reality of the) nation it supposedly supports and defends. This tension creates an “identity crisis” for the nation-state. “While the triumphant elites of globalization proclaim themselves citizens of the world, broad social sectors hunker down into their cultural spaces, which feel familiar and where their value is dependent on their community, rather than just their bank balance... The elites’ scorn at people’s fear of stepping outside of the local without guarantees of protection becomes a source of humiliation. This is where the seeds of xenophobia and intolerance are sown.” (15)
- [x] Then he does a structural analysis: “At the root of this crisis of legitimacy of the the financial crisis.” [Like Russian dolls, he sees the ultimate doll as being economic.] “In reality it was a crisis of a form of capitalism, global financial capitalism, a model based on the interdependence of world markets.” (15) What the crisis revealed was that the neoliberal state’s commitment to imposing consequences in the name of not stoking moral hazard was very partial indeed: when the crisis hit, “systemically important” institutions were bailed out, while individuals were stripped naked and sent out into the cold in the form of austerity politics. In Europe, Castells’s focus, this led to a profound distrust of the driving force behind this austerity politics, namely the EU, and behind it, Germany. All this left “traditional left-wing voters feeling betrayed, increasing the sense of distrust between established parties.” (17) “Corruption is a systemic trait of contemporary politics.” (18) In the end, “traditional ideologies, whether the egalitarian ideas of the left, or those that serve the values of the conventional right, have lost their way.“ (19)
- [x] Finally, he mobilizes an argument about the media: “The post-truth world, which the traditional media end up participating in, transforms uncertainty into the only reliable truth... The main effect of this politico-digital cacophony is to cast doubt on anything that we cannot personally verify.” (21)
- [x] “Distrust in parties and institutions that were founded on the basis of the values and interests of another era leads people to search for new political actors to believe in.” (35) It makes people want to “go back” to the national state, to the cultural community, to race, to the patriarchal family unit, to God. (36)
- [x] “The new legitimacy functions through opposition and is constructed around a discourse that proposes an overall rejection of the status quo. It promises salvation through a rupture with the deep-rooted institutional order.” (36)
- [x] The essential dynamic unfolds at the nexus of two great, contradictory tendencies, namely the formation of worldwide networks, on the one hand, and the continued existence of “the vast majority of humans who lack the institutional capacity for agency over the programmers that govern these networks.” (84) The logic of network penetrates these cultural communities but cannot dissolve them, and thus people in this communities take refuge in identities that cannot be reduced to dominant rationales.
- [x] The modern nation-state finds itself caught at this nexus, facing “an internal tension between acting as a node within the global networks... and in representing its citizens who refuse to give up on their historical, geographical and cultural roots.” (85) ‪What is the root cause of the current crisis of democracy? It is that, when at the point of financial & economic crisis in 2008, the state was forced to choose between protecting its citizens and protecting the system & its position in the network, it choose to protect the latter‬. This called into question the representativeness and thus the legitimacy of the institutions of the state.

Castells’s account of the causes of Islamic terrorism: 1. “The marginalization and discrimination experienced by the nearly 20m Muslims in the European Union.”(29) 2. “The global jihad movement symbolized initially by Al-Qaddafi and subsequently by Islamic State or Boko Haram in Africa.” 3. The “search for meaning” — he cites the work of Farhang Khosrokhavar on how jihadis attest to “a systematic narrative describing the emptiness of life in West’s rotten ))consumerist societies, the paucity of human relationships and the daily struggle to survive in a state of nihilism, and for nothing.” (29-30) Sacrificing one’s mortal self to Allah provides meaning. “Perhaps this is the implicit objective of jihadist revolt: to expose the stark reality of liberal democracy’s discrimination and political hypocrisy.” (30)

The central set piece of the book is a long middle chapter that addresses the anti-incumbent revolt in America (Trump), Britain (Brexit), France (Macron), and generally against the European Union — all of which is used to provide a broader context for his assessment of the political situation in Spain over the last decade.

Trumpism
- [x] His analysis of Trump is fairly conventional: the white working class that felt like strangers in their own land turned out en masse against Hillary for what they perceived as her technocratic condescension about their plight. Castells claims that the cultural motive is not about racism, but rather about people “who feel threatened by their country’s rapid economic, technological, ethnic and cultural change.” This may be true, but it seems to dodge the question: why to they feel “threatened” by this change, instead of, say, exhilarated? In what sense have they been “left behind” more than say, the black working class (who had zero sympathies for Trump)? “Trump’s election was not so much a response to the financial crisis itself, as the social inequality exacerbated by policies intended to manage it.” (48) The situation cannot be described as a profound crisis of living standard that could have led to such a broad and radical mobilization as the one that swept Trump to power.... The explanation appears to point more to the cultural crisis of alienated populations, which began with the social disintegration of working class communities affected by industrial restructuring.” (49) [I think a more pointed story is that there are a variety of communities who have been so affected. Trump was very effective at using racial dogwhistles to politically mobilize one set of these alienated sorts, and also to cast scorn on the efforts of Democrats to protect other categories of people suffering from precariousness. Hillary had virtually no story about she wanted to change the direction of the country.]
- [x] Castells also validates Walter Russel Mead’s view that Trump is about the revitalization of the “Jacksonian” tradition in America, but much more than Mead acknowledges the toxicity of that tradition to anyone other than freeholding white men: “This new-Jacksonism was based on... a savage critique of the cosmopolitan nature and intellectual tolerance of the influential academic, financial, and media sectors of large urban population centers.” (50) “Suddenly, white men found themselves in a situation where no one was talking about their identity... their alpha identity was now being overtaken and negated. This sense of exclusion from predominant cultural expressions and protected categories with seemingly special rights gave rise to a need for those who were left behind by identity politics it stand up: white men [and the women who love them].” (50) “The identity-driven nationalist movement that surrounds Trump is by no means racist or Neo-Nazi in nature. It has deep roots in the sense of personal humiliation and social marginalization felt by a broad sector of society, a marginalization that began as labor displacement through the restructuring of the economy and which was drawn out, with terrible consequences, into the national opioid epidemic.... The cultural alienation and social marginalization of poorer sectors of society simultaneously led people to disconnect through drug use, and to reconnect with Trump as their providential savior.” (51)

Brexit
- [x] Castells is sympathetic (maybe more than he should be) to the discontents that motivate Trumpism, but hopes that the anti-self-dealing-incumbent feelings can be turned more in the direction of Podemos and Syriza (he ignores the total betrayal that Syriza engaged in) than toward the more ethno-centric nationalisms. The political winners will be those who manage to create a narrative that can best capture both the sources of alienation and the aspirations of the alienated.
- [x] “People categorize and assess the information that they receive based on their pre-existing convictions, rooted in the emotions they feel: electoral deliberation is secondary.” (59)
- [x] Brexiteers were all about asserting national sovereignty. “European immigration became a cipher for the invasion of people’s daily lives by globalization in all its forms.... Opposition to immigration and the EU [expressed] a profound class and cultural divide that defines British society. The local objected to the global using the only tool at hand: the border.” (61) “Resistance to being dependent on global movements and cosmopolitan culture is what real forms the foundations of Brexit society.... It is a reaction that tends to compensate for the dominance of market forces over people’s lives by defending their social entitlements.” (63) The EU came to symbolize “the denationalization of the state.” Brexit was thus less a class vote, Castells claims, than “a note by those who, to use the parlance of the campaign, felt leftist behind and marginalized by the increasing pace of technological, economic and institutional change.” (63) [Is the difference between a class vote and a vote by those left behind a distinction without a difference given that those ‘left behind’ are almost all from a particular class?]
- [x] “Two key threads came together in the Brexit vote: opposition to the perceived threat of immigration and the loss of national sovereignty alongside the crisis of legitimacy of the main parties and politics more widely; and a rejection of the austerity politics imposed by the Conservatives and effectively accepted by Labour.” (65) “It was a protest against the homogeneity of the political and economic establishment.” (65-66)

Macronisme
- [x] Fundamental antipathy to globalization, which “translated into nationalism and anti-EU feeling.” (69) Although France appeared to get a reprieve with the election of Macron (better than Melanchon or Le Pen) “this was at the expense of the collapse of the political system that had defined France for five decades.... Rather than a triumph for Macron’s project, the election result was in fact a mass rejection of traditional French politics.” (71)
- [x] Castells sees what’s happening in France as marronage — not direct rebellion as a flight from the system. What the old elite fears is “many sectors of society deserting a democracy that does not represent them, raising the prospect of a tentative search for new forms of representation.” (73) [Castells can barely contain his glee.]
- [x] “Macron is almost the archetypal model of what the financial and technocratic elites are searching for as a response to the political crisis in Europe.” (73) By this Castells means he is young, has passed through all the elite rites of passage (enarque, investment banker), is a beautiful speaker, and is committed to achieving the old goals albeit through new means. “Macron may be too young to realize this, but the voice of the streets cannot simply be drowned out with riot police and PR campaigns. When institutions close ranks to the voiceless, their only means of self-expression is to find new public spaces, made up of social networks and symbolic barricades.” (74)
On the European Union
- [x] “It began as a doubly defensive project: against the internal demons that had led to two world wars, and against the Soviet threat... In reality, at least for those who started it, it was always a political project, which utilized the economy in order to create an irreversible new continental dynamic that would transcend borders and overcome nationalism.... The European Union project has been consolidated far beyond even the most optimistic projections of its visionary founders.” (75-76-77)
- [x] Castells rightly notes that the most fateful decision of the EU was to expand eastward, and that this was motivated by different things for different proponents: “Germany’s intention was to recreate its traditional sphere of influence, while the UK correctly calculated that the more countries that jointed the EU, the less chance it would have of effective co-governance as a single entity.” (76)
- [x] Three main flaws with the European Union’s architecture: no common European identity; elite and technocratic and imposed without much democratic consultation; lastly, it was always a bit covert about its ultimately political rather than economic objective.
- [x] “For citizens of many European countries, globalization and European integration have come to mean the same thing.” (80)
- [x] “European countries found themselves with a dilemma: whether to defend the Euro, subjecting themselves to the austerity policies divized by Germany, or to leave the common currency and face the collapse of their financial system and the massive devaluation of their savings.” (81)
- [x] The crisis was effectively written into the common currency’s design of currency union without fiscal union. “This technical defect could only be overcome through the centralization of policies at the European level, which favored both systemic integration and Germany’s hegemony over this process.” Systemic integration under German hegemony was of course by definition anti-democratic, and also led to “the domination of financial interests of social priorities in the policies of European institiutons. The result was a deepening crisis of legitimacy of those institutions, reflected in polls in almost every country.” (82)
- [x] The second great crisis was the migration crisis which had two faces: one was the intra-EU migration crisis, and the other was the refugee crisis from Africa and the Middle East.

[Anderson Paz · Rating 5 out of 5]

O sociólogo espanhol, Castells, analisa a crise da democracia liberal que tem fragmentado e dividido o debate público. Essa crise surge da ruptura ou distanciamento entre governantes e governados.
No primeiro capítulo, o autor discorre sobre a crise de legitimidade política. Primeiramente, destaca que há uma crescente desconfiança da classe política e uma consequente crise de legitimidade. Essa ruptura tem suas raízes no ressentimento ocasionado pela fragmentação política, o sentimento de exclusão, a divisão social causada pelas políticas de identidade, a corrupção, e o uso do Estado para autobenefício.
O sociólogo diz que a política é emocional e constrói seus vínculos pelas imagens dos políticos e de suas ideias. Porém, essas imagens têm sido alvos de ataques e reduzidas à reprovação moral irracional que, por sua vez, destrói o substrato institucional.
No segundo capítulo, o autor diz que o terrorismo se alimenta do medo e do vazio dessa crise da democracia liberal e do individualismo da sociedade de mercado. Por sua vez, a sociedade aceita ser mais vigiada e passa a negar o valor da liberdade em favor da proteção do Estado.
No terceiro capítulo, o escritor apresenta casos recentes de "rebelião das massas", isto é, a eleição de políticos outsiders. Essa rebelião, em geral, visa a um retorno ou a uma redução a: o Estado, a nação, o mercado, os valores conservadores, etc.
a) Trump: o ressentimento de setores "brancos" (classe baixa, meio rural, etc) da sociedade americana e a ira contra as políticas identitárias elegeram Trump.
b) Brexit: desejo de "retomada" do país e de sua soberania e abandono e marginalização das classes baixas ajudaram na escolha pelo Brexit.
c) Macronismo: crise dos partidos tradicionais franceses possibilitaram a subida de Macron.
Causas gerais:
a) desunião europeia: a integração econômica não representou integração política. Falta de identidade europeia. Crise financeira e migratória e intervenção nas políticas nacionais criaram ressentimento entre aqueles que se sentiram prejudicados.
b) descolamento entre a rede global e o eu: enquanto o mundo se conecta em redes globais, as pessoas formam suas identidades em instituições locais. Rede global e identidade se opõem.
No quarto capítulo, o autor destaca a crise da democracia espanhola: partidocracia, corrupção, desemprego que levaram a protestos (15-M, 15/05/2011) e ao surgimento de novas lideranças políticas. A social democracia ao voltar a suas origens retoma sua força.
Por fim, Castells entende que apesar dessa crise nos mostrar a nossa existência precária, faltam-nos instrumentos confiáveis para sair dessa escuridão.

[Carla · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a collection of essays on the crisis of legitimacy facing liberal democracies across the world, although his focus is on Europe and the US. Castells outlines the impact of the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent bailout of the banks on the political legitimacy of governing structures that then continued the neo-liberal project of abandoning the welfare state. If you have followed the news over the past decade, Castells story is not necessarily new but he does a good job of marshaling up the interesting details and drawing the comparisons across nations. Also, Castells' special focus on Spain and Podemos and a new sort of democratic activism.

Castells' sort of glad-handing with the young political leadership is a little too ... and his refusal to use paragraphs is awful ... three rather than four ... but it's a good, smart book about one of the most important phenomena of the day.

[Miguel Blanco Herreros · Rating 3 out of 5]

2,5*

Nada nuevo para quien haya vivido en España en la última década larga. Entiendo que Castells no pretendía escribir un tomo erudito y académico, sino un simple ensayo-manifiesto en donde plasmar ciertas conclusiones a las que ha ido llegando a medida que analizaba la evolución socio-política del mundo en los últimos tiempos. Pero, no sé, esperaba más de uno de los investigadores más citados e influyentes del mundo.

Me han chirriado demasiadas -a mi juicio- valoraciones personales y subjetivas a lo largo de las páginas, así como algunas referencias históricas que me han hecho levantar la ceja, en especial cuando citaba alguna cosa más atrás del siglo XX. Lo salvo porque, en general, el libro es didáctico y el último capítulo -quizás el único donde vemos en exclusiva su pensamiento- es muy interesante. Pero seguro que tiene obras mucho mejores.

[Ronaldo Lima · Rating 3 out of 5]

Um livro muito interessante para se analisar a deterioração da democracia na Europa, com os movimentos xenofóbicos, descrença na UE, diminuição da influência dos partidos, novas formas de se fazer uma comunicação política e radicalização das ações. Em muitos momentos o livro parece mais uma reportagem sobre diferentes eventos em diferentes países da Europa do que uma análise sobre a democracia. Mas, ainda assim Ruptura é um livro que merece ser lido por quem deseja entender um pouco mais das movimentações antidemocráticas naquele continente.

[Juan Fuentes · Rating 4 out of 5]

El autor no se casa con nadie, expone y explica lo hechos, reparte estopa a todo el mundo (corrupción del PP y PSOE, problemas de Ciudadanos y Podemos) y te pone los pelos de punta, porque el futuro no pinta nada bien. Me gusta la independencia de pensamiento y la solidez intelectual del autor.

[ALEXANDRE RAMOS · Rating 5 out of 5]

Imprescindível para entender o momento político no mundo ocidental.

[Julia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Que livro! Ensaio perfeito pra quem gosta de ciência política sem jargão complicado. Espero que o primeiro de muitos de Manuel Castells

[Robert Silva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Muito bom!!! Vai me ser muito útil.

[José Luis · Rating 4 out of 5]

É o segundo livro do Castells que leio. Elucidativo antes de mais nada, mostra a íntima relação entre redes sociais e a insatisfação crescente com políticos, politiqueiros e seus partidos. O dinamismo se acelerou na era das nações conectadas, exigindo mudanças e acomodações mais frequentes. Livro curto e muito intenso.

[Luisa Marsiglio · Rating 2 out of 5]

Perspectiva colonialista e generalizante acerca dos movimentos sociais europeus que surgiram depois da crise do mercado imobiliário norte-americano em 2008. Menciona algumas premissas e diretrizes da organização social europeia no século XXI, tenta generalizar para o resto do mundo mas obviamente falha porque fala de um lugar muito limitado sem reconhecer. Serve basicamente como um breve ensaio sobre a política espanhola contemporânea com várias pitadas de egocentrismo. E ainda tem um último capítulo que oferece A SOLUÇÃO para a crise da democracia liberal (só isso). Até seria um bom livro se não pretendesse abarcar tanto quanto pretende. É aquele ditado, queria ter a autoestima de qualquer homem hétero branco.