Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks – practices and ideologies

The study aims to identify in the literature some characteristics that compose and influence the decisions of public policies. We can infer that ideologies: personal, social and party influence in the votes of parliament’s representatives. To this end, we conducted a bibliographic survey where we found some characteristics, which does not exclude others that can be contemplated in other studies. Thus, it was observed that personal, social and political issues can generate changes in the behavior – directly or indirectly – of the representatives elected by society, leading to changes in the voting process, now meeting agendas: personal, social and/or partisan. The work was divided into an introduction of the seminal literature where it deals with representatives pre-selected by all, but not responding to anyone. In the second part, we present the paths taken for the development of work. The theoretical literature is shown in the third part and the considerations we leave in the fourth part of the text.

Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br or (better) choose different options.
Studies on party unity present several answers to this phenomenon (heterogeneity). In addition to some comparative studies evaluating the impact of different political systems (Carey, 2007(Carey, , 2009Depauw and Martin, 2009;Kam, 2009;Sieberer, 2006), cited by Ceron (2015), where a series of articles analyze party unity in a single country. These works shed light on the elements that affect the willingness to party divisions. They draw attention to the heterogeneity of political preferences, the degree of partisanship, the impact of contrasting electoral rules or modes of party organization, the differences between government and opposition, the margin of the ruling coalition and the size of the party. In general, scholars identified two main paths to party unity: cohesion (homogeneity of political preferences) and discipline (sanctions provided). Both elements are crucial and are taken into account to explain the electoral behavior of the representatives (Bowler et al., 1999;Hazan, 2003) referenced in (CERON, 2015).
Regarding the first path (cohesion), the relationship between party affiliation and divergent political preferences has been investigated in recent studies. In another case study related to party affiliation in the Italian Left Democrats (DS), Giannetti and Laver (2009) cited by Ceron (2015), highlight how divergent generational preferences alter the degree of party unity and explain the variation in the electoral behavior of deputies. Ceron (2015), presenting Spirling and Quinn (2010), demonstrating that factional preferences can be linking within the party presenting a polarization as electoral behavior.
On the other hand, Ceron (2015), highlight that, when discipline is not effective, intraparty heterogeneity gives rise to heterogeneous electoral behavior, exerting a decline in the party agenda. On the contrary, when leadership can rely on effective resources of discipline, it will be able to impose, and the behavior of members will show homogeneity and adherence to the party agenda. Thus, polarization no longer has significant effects on party unity Thus, the left, excels in the egalitarianism of free trade, rationalism, secularism, criticism of ethical-religious limitations, the lack of absolute opinions of good and evil, the lack of appreciation to oligarchy, the conservation of the environment and the demands of workers, who must overlap the need for economic growth, antifascism and identity with the lower classes of society.
The right -according to Bobbio (1994) cited by Messenberg (2017), works with other ideals that include: individualism, the hegemony of private property and free enterprise, intuition, the precedence of the sacred, the recognition of order and tradition, nobility and heroism, inflexibility to ethnic, cultural and sexual difference, militarism and national security, economic growth at the loss of environmental conservation and the demands of workers , anti-communism and identities with the upper classes of society (MESSENBERG, 2017).
Thus, in the political field, the worldviews [2] of the left and right compose and extend Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br "metapolitical field of daily social relations and cultural struggle" (Pierucci, 1990, p. 11) cited by (MESSENBERG, 2017). Being, allusion models from which individuals understand and relate to the world, constituting significance to their experience and clarifying the "order of things".
According to Messenberg (2017), currently the mass media and digital networks establish unique environments for the constitution of frameworks [3], Bajoit (2006, p. 235) clarifies that each individual is continually in (re)constitution, assuming identity commitments: "he has a certain idea of what he is and what he wanted to be and what he believes he should do for it". In this sense, we must enter into social relations, participating in exchanges, exchanges and social connections. Therefore, each subject constructs logics of action with others, imbued with obtaining his personal identity. This process contributes to the construction of the social actor, being committed to the logics of action established by him in the relationship with the other.s. In order for the individual to resolve his conflicts of his life, in order to minimize or solve them, "he strives to reduce or increase the value he attributes to certain traits of his desired identities, attributed and compromised, in order to better reconcile them" (BAJOIT, 2006, p. 235). This process is called relational management of you.
The relational management of one's is also the work through which the individual "conceives" the logics of action. Commitment is the translation of compromised identity into logics of action over others. Taking into account the "idea" he has of what he is and wants to be, and the possibilities that open to him or close his ties  Source: Bajoit (2006) Considering the above table, it is infers that social actors organize different exchange logics to realize their personal identities, with different purposes and strategies. Therefore, each Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br criterion produces types of exchange logics that will promote the strengthening or not of the relationship between the actors.
Corroborating the interpretation of the picture, Bajoit (2006, p. 241) summarizes: We can also verify that each of these four logics can be coated in an amplified and latent way. Cooperation can be active or passive, conflict can be opened or disguised, the contradiction can be a direct confrontation or an escape, and competition can be offensive or reduce to a simple opportunism. The more the logics are latent, the better they combine with each other and coexist; the more they are amplified, the more they are mutually excluded.
Another way for individuals to relate and make their commitments to others is based on the logics of solidarity. According to Bajoit (2006, p. 242), "individuals who choose the logic(s) of exchange often (but not always) tend to recognize each other in action, and to build bonds of solidarity with each other." Recognition for the construction of relationships between individuals often involves the issue of commitment, because in order to realize their identity commitments, they need one another and thus sympathize.
The logics of solidarity are divided into two, where one is based on reciprocity and the other on Greekity, according to the table below: Source: Bajoit (2006) The author (idem) develops his theory by arguing that, in the logic of reciprocity, solidarity is a relationship based on "gift -against gift", because there is always "something" that is In affective solidarity, exchange is much more subjective, and individuals make their relationships of commitment in an expressive way; and receive it in return for the realization of their personal identity. When exchanges are material or instrumental, individuals perform contractual solidarity, which obeys an objective and much less subjective relationship.
According to Bajoit (2006), in the logic of aggregation, the relations of exchange and realization of commitments are more connected to the dynamics of groups, and, in groups, individuals can have something that is missing from all separately, but that when they then together, they have it.
In this understanding, things can also be divided into two aspects: one focused on things of subjective character and quality (religion, cause, social movement, struggle, courage to undertake, etc.). and those whose things are objective (strength, security, anonymity, etc.). When the things that are in return, in relation, are of subjective quality, we have the expressive logic, whose interest is in the need to develop them through groups, merging the personal identity with that of others, which together provide qualities that would not be if they were alone, generating the so-called fusional solidarity. On the other hand, when a personal identity becomes strength and security in addition to those of others, creating a strong group, it is called serial solidarity. In the meantime, these four logics of solidarity express the need to articulate with others in the realization of their personal identities, which, alone, would not be able to take effect. Bajoit (2006, p. 243-244) stresses that social groups (family, church, working groups, trade unions, etc.) "they are all the more solid the more they can articulate all the logics: their members are then connected to each other by all ties at the same time." It is worth mentioning that the logics of solidarity start from the focus on the realization of individual Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br commitments and personal identities, being independent of collective identities. However, Bajoit (2006, p. 244) points out that: Of course, one of the indispensable conditions for the formation of solidarity is the socialization of individuals: that they occupy the same position in the relationship, who participate in the same collective identity. However, it is not a necessary condition: solidarity can be formed among individuals who do not occupy the same social positions (this is the case of altruistics, for example), as may also not form between individuals who occupy the same social position (different subject and exchange logics are adopted). Therefore, solidarity is not only anything more than identity, but also anything different. More generally, it depends on a complex set of conditions.
According to the citation above, the complex set of conditions necessary for solidarity to occur is what Bajoit calls collective action, formed by conditions that stimulate the social mobilization of the individuals involved and others who take collective action.
These conditions are classified as three components of collective action: the formation of organized solidarity; the composition of an opponent or enemy; and the elucidation of the objectives of the action. According to Bajoit (2006, p. 248), the presence of individuals engaged in any of these components is not enough for collective action to be fertilized. This, yes, allows the establishment of solidarity, however, the lasting social mobilization, aiming at achieving the desired results will depend directly on an organization made up of leaders, resources and traditions: Quality leadership: united, consistent, persevering, independent, competent, visible, combative, organized, charismatic; Resources for mobilization: money, relationships, information, weapons (real or symbolic); Traditions of struggles inscribed in a common history, with successes and failures to which the group can refer to guide their struggle today.
It is perceived that leadership is an extremely important factor for the effectiveness of collective action, whatever its objective or purpose. In this sense, understanding the leaders in solidarity economic enterprises is significant for understanding which logics of solidarity and exchanges individuals establish in self-management groups, as well as whether there are Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br leaders who mobilize collective action of these groups in favor of the objectives they establish as structuring their personal identities.
The collective actor, by mobilizing, transforms the conditions of his existence, participating in the (re)construction of his own conditions. Therefore, social mobilization has its own dynamic, triggering certain processes:  Bajoit (2006, p. 250-251) Explaining the table above, it is perceived that social actors begin their logics of exchange, solidarity and even collective action based on processes that go, from the beginning, moving to deeper processes generated by the conflicts that arise with the engagement of the actors, and the actor explains why to establish the relationship with the group. With this, its relationship with collective action becomes stronger and the level of commitment and responsibility that the other members demand of this actor is increasing, resulting in processes of evaluation of the actions performed within the group, analyzing their performance.
According to Messenberg (2007) Bernabel (2015) works on the influences that can trigger political polarization. The concept of polarization and understood when members of a given party vote in one way and those of another party vote differently, these two parties can be described as polarized. There may be several causes to explain polarization. Bernabel (2015) snapping authors McCarty, Poole and Rosenthal (2006), where they argue that income, immigration and campaign finance can generate polarization. It also adds that the form (proportional or majority vote) as a legislator is elected can also have an effect on polarization. Parliamentarians elected by the majority rule tend to behave more extremely than those elected by the proportional rule, who vote more with their party. Paiva (2016), presents the analysis of public policies as a process that involves negotiations, conflicts and disputes of the public policy agenda, not ruling out the power to influence the decisions of the legislative power. Bajoit (2006)  Norberto Bobbio is one of the main advocates of understanding left and right thinking.
They draw attention to the heterogeneity of political preferences, the degree of partisanship, the impact of contrasting electoral rules or modes of party organization, the differences between government and opposition, the margin of the ruling coalition and the size of the party. In general, scholars identified two main paths to party unity: cohesion (homogeneity of political preferences) and discipline (sanctions provided).
In addition to the media and party ideologies, the sociocultural, economic and ideological dimension of doing and thinking politics can be represented by the profile of parliamentarians.
Individuals are continually in (re)constitution, assuming identity commitments: "you have a certain idea of what you are and what you want to be and what you believe you should do for it". In this sense, we must enter into social relations, participating in exchanges, exchanges and social connections.
The influences that can trigger political polarization. The concept of polarization and understood when members of a given party vote in one way and those of another party vote differently, these two parties can be described as polarized.
Doing and Thinking: How the Legislator thinks -practices and ideologies www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br We understand that this study does not include all the diversities that produce, divergences in the decisions of the votes of parliamentarians, requiring, for another moment, empirical samples, of the relationships and behavior of those indicated by society. Therefore, there is a gap for other studies or studies that investigate scans with data and quantitatively demonstrates true preferences or ideologies. BIBLIOGRAPHY