Hegemony and Abolitionist Strategy in the Field of Discursivity of Criminal Knowledge in Brazil

Abstract

There is a dispute for hegemony in the field of discursivity of criminal knowledge, fought between the discourses of criminal efficiency, criminal minimalism and criminal abolitionism, particularly in the Brazilian context. This dispute conditions the policies in both criminal and public security matters. Criminal abolitionism finds itself in a position of absolute disadvantage in this clash, appearing as a counter-hegemonic discourse. This article aims to understand which discursive strategies can be mobilized to empower abolitionist discourse, putting it in a position to dispute hegemony, influencing more effectively institutional changes and public policies aimed at resolving problematic situations outside the logic of punishment. The methodology employed is bibliographic analysis, using genealogy, deconstruction and discourse analysis as tools, along the lines of the discourse theory of the Essex school. The reinterpretation of the Gramscian concept of hegemony promoted by Laclau and Mouffe enables discursive strategies to reposition abolitionism in the hegemonic dispute. We propose the fraying of the meaning of criminal abolitionism to the point of allowing its conversion into an empty signifier, articulated around the repudiation of cruelty as a nodal point. We conclude that, with this, it becomes possible to build a relationship of representation with several discourses dispersed in the discursive field of criminal knowledge, allowing criminal abolitionism to agglutinate, around itself, in a chain of equivalence, a greater number of particular identities. This will enable it to compete for hegemony, allowing it greater ethical reach and participation in the important task of guiding public policies and institutional changes in the criminal, prison and public security fields.