Efeitos do sentido de "intervenção militar" no Brasil: análise do discurso em textos da Folha de São Paulo e G1. SÃO PAULO E DO G1

Abstract

This dissertation, based on the theoretical assumptions of Discourse Analysis, aimed to discuss the processes of erasure, re-elaboration or maintenance of subject positions in speeches about “military intervention” in Brazil, based on journalistic texts by Folha de São Paulo and G1 news portal. Along the way, we sought to analyze the socio-historical inscription of the production and reception of these speeches, investigate the ideological constructions that can be perceived, identify how the meanings of “military intervention” are transformed or reaffirmed in the corpus in question and discuss the relevance of media in the production of the meanings of “military intervention” in Brazil in the 21st century. It started from the conception of discourse as a historical and social construction through which ideology materializes, this being the proper way of constituting the individual into a subject through language. Based mainly on Pêcheux (1995; 1997a; 2008) and Orlandi (2010; 2012; 2014; 2017), the current statements about “military intervention” were taken here as a discursive event and, through the examination of the relationship between discursive meaning and memory, we sought to understand the meaning effects of “military intervention” that they have produced. Benetti (2010) was used in this dissertation to refer to journalism as a discursive event. The discussions on the historical and political conjuncture that mark the constitutive production conditions of the analyzed speeches were mainly based on Tatagiba (2018; 2019), Safatle (2010), Singer (2001; 2013), Fico (2014; 2020; 2020a) and Mendonça (2018). The main corpus was composed of five journalistic texts referring to the years 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020. The analyzes carried out in the qualitative approach showed that, in the corpus in question, the current sayings on “military intervention” mobilize so many speeches that come in defense, as well as discourses of rejection of such a model. They both mobilize negative meanings related to the dictatorship, as they build their functioning by silencing those meanings, updating the discursive memory regarding the imaginary of order, salvation and progress linked to the Armed Forces. The analyzes also indicate that the expansion and strengthening of conservative groups of right and extreme right mark the conditions of production in which the discursive statement “military intervention” emerges at the same time.