About the Journal

Aim and Scope

We live in a time in which the old has died and the new has not yet been able to be born, suffocated by the entrails and coagulated blood of old — yet always resurrectable, like zombies — structures of power and subjectivation. These structures persistently and violently prevent the emergence of the new, of a coming community, of a life grounded in potentiality and the common. Thus, (Des)troços: Journal of Radical Thought, e-ISSN 2763-518X, is an electronic journal in the field of Law that seeks to brush the legal, philosophical, and political tradition against the grain, bringing to light subterranean or marginal currents of thought in order to promote a radical and non-disciplinary critique of the discourses that have shaped and continue to shape the construction of Law and the State in the West. These discourses, grounded in authoritarian conceptions of the political, conceal structures and dispositifs of domination — such as gender, class, race, and sexuality — which ultimately normalize the state of exception and legitimize the violence of juridical-political power.

The journal primarily accepts original and unpublished contributions in the fields of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, with special emphasis on Law (Philosophy of Law) and Philosophy (Political Philosophy).

Technical Information

• Periodicity: Biannual

• Publishing Model: Continuous publication* Accepted texts are published individually, once the evaluation and revision stages have been completed, without waiting for the composition of a complete issue.

• Year of foundation: 2020

• Qualis (2021–2024): B2

• Target audience: Researchers, professors, students, social movement activists, and artists

• Open access: Free, immediate, and unrestricted access, in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI)

• Article Processing Charges (APC): No submission or processing fees

• Average processing time: 2 weeks (initial review) | 4 months (peer review) | 6 months (publication)

• Editorial commitment (maximum timeframe): 6 months (editorial decision) | 12 months (publication)

• Rejection rate: 39% (24% at initial review; 15% after peer review)

• Digital preservation (LOCKSS): Rede Cariniana and PKP Preservation Network

• Interoperability: OAI-PMH 2.0 Protocol (available here)

• License: Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 (since Jul/2023); CC BY-NC 4.0 (previous issues)

• Funding: FAPEMIG – Call 08/2023 (Nov/2023–Jul/2026)

• Institutional Sponsor: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)

 

Peer Review Process

Initial Assessment

Submissions received will undergo an initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief, who will evaluate their thematic relevance and their connection to the journal's existing publications. Subsequently, the submissions will be forwarded to the Section Editors for a detailed review to ensure compliance with the journal's standards, which include the author's credentials, originality, and unpublished status. The latter criterion will be verified using anti-plagiarism software (Check for Plagiarism).

Should a submission be declined during the initial review, the authors will be informed via email. They will then have the opportunity to address the issues identified and resubmit their work for consideration in a subsequent issue.

Submissions in the forms of reviews, interviews, translations, or artistic experiments that pass the preliminary assessment will be directly forwarded for editing and publication. Articles and essays that are approved at this stage will undergo peer review, employing the double-blind method, as detailed below.

 

Double-blind peer review

After the initial evaluation, the manuscript will be submitted to the peer review process, following the double-blind model to guarantee the anonymity of the reviewers and authors, thereby avoiding personal influences in the evaluations. The reviewers will analyze the manuscript using the evaluation form and provide opinions of rejection, acceptance, or acceptance with reservations for the assessed contributions. The possible outcomes are as follows:

  1. If both opinions are accepted without reservations, the manuscript will proceed to the editing and publication process.
  2. If both opinions are accepted, but one or both reviewers indicate reservations, the raised issues will be communicated to the authors, allowing them to make the necessary corrections. If the corrections are made, the manuscript will proceed to the editing and publication process. However, if the authors do not make the suggested corrections, they will be informed of the reasons for rejection and given the option to resubmit the contribution in a subsequent volume after addressing the indicated problems.
  3. In the case of a discrepancy in opinions (one indicating acceptance, with or without reservations, and the other indicating rejection), a third reviewer will be assigned to evaluate the article. If the third reviewer decides on acceptance with or without reservations, the procedures mentioned above will be followed. However, if the third reviewer recommends rejection, the authors will be informed of the reasons and given the option to resubmit the contribution in a subsequent volume after addressing the indicated problems.


The editorial committee commits to providing an editorial decision to the authors within six months and publishing the manuscript within one year.