Informal groups of interest and the political process
The role of informal interest groups appears, in the political structure, as a representation in the decision making process, through the presentation of propositions or requests that can be addressed in the political discussion.
Societal participation in the discussion of political guidelines has grown in recent years, as a reflection of democratic maturity and of the emergence of informal groups with the aim of defending their interests. The role of these groups in the political structure appears as a representation in the decision-making process, through the presentation of propositions or requests that may be addressed in the political discussion.
Currently, the difficulty of consensus in Brazil may be a consequence of the diversity of interests. The more complex the Society, the greater the appearance of specific and simultaneous interests, that can be conflicting with each other (Burdeau apud Castilho Esparcia, 2013, page 22). In this sense, we can highlight the enormous number of groups that weekly take part in meetings and public hearings in the National Congress, with the aim of marking their positions in relation to a certain theme.
Such complexity can be tied to a greater qualification of the groups and, consequently, to a greater ability to articulate their needs. The emergence of a group is the “awareness of a common interest by a particular sector of the community.”
In Brazil, we can highlight the groups formed by the movements “Vem pra Rua” (or “Come to the Street”, in a free translation) and the “Muda Brasil” (“Change, Brazil”), against the corruption in the country and against a group of politicians considered corrupt, with the objective of mobilizing the population in the defense of values such as Democracy, Ethics in politics and an efficient State. It as a reaction to the country’s corrupt political class. The emergence of groups as a reaction to a group that harms the common interests is widespread; which can also happen as a reaction to a social happening.
Thus, we can affirm that what makes a group possible is the common interest of its members, either as a “psychic reaffirmation of interaction between its members, either as external identification with other social groups.”
The need for more transparent relations between informal groups and the government, based on ethical conducts, is a point of no return. The tendency in Brazil is the strengthening of these groups, and, consequently, reviewing the activity of government relations to suit the current political and social context.