Suchergebnisse

Cette thèse doctorale interdisciplinaire relève le défi d'examiner l'expérience paradoxale de croissance spirituelle post-traumatique en contexte de violence psychologique au travail. L'acuité de la problématique sociale est telle qu'une majorité des victimes touchées par cette forme de persécution développeront un état de stress post-traumatique par l'effondrement de leurs croyances fondamentales. Or, les témoignages d'expérience de libération et de croissance spirituelle en un contexte culturel religieux différent intriguent : les ressources de la tradition chrétienne pourraient-elles aussi nous éclairer, voire nous aider à mieux vivre ? Ce qui nous amène à poser notre question de recherche ainsi : En dialogue avec l'économisme et la violence au travail, quelle praxis théologique pouvons-nous formuler à partir des expériences individuelles et corrélées de salut à la fois biblique et contemporaine en contexte d'assujettissement traumatique ? Notre démarche herméneutique et corrélative opère une lecture théologique des relations entre les expériences d'injustice, de souffrance et de transformation d'une victime contemporaine et celle d'un personnage biblique pour en saisir le message chrétien. Cette lecture effectuée dans la perspective féministe de la théologie du trauma a mis en lumière la fécondité du théologème de la kénose, soit l'évidement du divin en vue de son incarnation en l'humain, au coeur de l'expérience de vulnérabilité et de salut vécue. Déjà, l'exploration des pôles de la réalité socioculturelle postmoderne de l'économisme puis celui de l'expérience empirique et subjective de la violence au travail révélait certaines convergences avec le pôle de la tradition, soit le récit biblique du livre de Job. À la lumière des interruptions et confrontations des genres discursifs au sein du récit biblique, nous avons corrélé un mouvement kénotique. Comme un itinéraire de sens, ce mouvement se décline en dépouillement, désir d'altérité, appréciation existentielle et foi. Sa recontextualisation, d'abord sur le plan anthropologique en termes d'évidement, de donation et de réception du soi, a enrichi des pratiques spirituelles thérapeutiques dont la remémoration juste, le pardon et la prière d'intercession. Sur le plan théologique, le mouvement kénotique donne à voir un Dieu passible, débordant de considération et en interdépendance avec le créé. Cet exercice de recadrage, dans les préoccupations du pluralisme et de la singularité postmodernes, avance une éthique de la considération par la kénose de l'être en réponse à la violence au travail. En réponse à l'économisme cette fois, la création comme kénose de Dieu, ose politiquement une convivance chrétienne visant l'amour du monde en Dieu et dont le travail sera le vecteur premier d'inclusion.

After years of existing in jurisdictional limbo, the Métis have finally been handed down a Supreme Court declaration affirming that they too, alongside the Inuit and First Nations peoples, fall under the federal government's jurisdiction over "Indians and Lands reserved for the Indians" as outlined under Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. While the April 2016 decision in Daniels v. Canada did remove a significant obstacle for the Métis in the pursuit of rights recognition and meaningful negotiations with the federal government, the decision is worth unpacking. This thesis critically examines the Daniels decision from a Métis and decolonizing lens, and explores the potential outcomes and implications of this decision for the Métis. What this thesis finds that this decision has been achieved by relying on colonial concepts of history, Métis identity, as well as colonial expansionist and assimilationist goals from centuries ago. As for the future of this decision, this thesis finds that it remains largely unsolved, but holds great potential- despite the core of the decision being purely about jurisdiction. ; October 2020

In this essay, I look at the way that Thomas Hobbes offers not only the building blocks for state power and sovereignty (as he is so famous for doing) but also a basis by which to resist those very things. Even as Hobbes constructs a vast and awe inspiring network of sovereign forms of authority, he shows how those forms are produced, in a sense, out of thin air. Hobbes' understanding of language as a series of decisions that are made in ways that render the sovereign's own decision derivative, as well as his understanding of theology as offering us a vision of a human community who must collectively decide on things in the absence of God's ongoing instruction both serve to undermine and expose the emptiness of sovereign pronouncements. In this way, Hobbes can be read as a radical theorist and a theorist of resisting the very encryption that he is at the same time responsible for theorizing and producing. ; En este ensayo, considero la forma en que Thomas Hobbes otorga no solo los materiales con los cuales se ha construido el poder y la soberanía del estado, (por lo cual es afamado) sino también una base para la resistencia ante esas mismas cosas. Incluso cuando Hobbes construye una vasta e impresionante red de formas soberanas de autoridad, muestra cómo esas formas se producen y salen, en cierto sentido, de la nada. La comprensión del lenguaje por parte de Hobbes como una serie de decisiones que se toman de manera que hacen que la decisión del soberano sea derivada, así como su comprensión de la teología como una visión de una comunidad humana que debe decidir colectivamente sobre las cosas en ausencia de la continuidad de las instrucciones dadas por Dios, sirve tanto para socavar como para exponer el vacío de los pronunciamientos soberanos. De esta manera, Hobbes puede leerse como un teórico radical y un teórico que crea las condiciones para resistir la encriptación que él, al mismo tiempo, es responsable de teorizar y producir. ; In this essay, I look at the way that Thomas Hobbes offers not only the building blocks for state power and sovereignty (as he is so famous for doing) but also a basis by which to resist those very things. Even as Hobbes constructs a vast and awe inspiring network of sovereign forms of authority, he shows how those forms are produced, in a sense, out of thin air. Hobbes' understanding of language as a series of decisions that are made in ways that render the sovereign's own decision derivative, as well as his understanding of theology as offering us a vision of a human community who must collectively decide on things in the absence of God's ongoing instruction both serve to undermine and expose the emptiness of sovereign pronouncements. In this way, Hobbes can be read as a radical theorist and a theorist of resisting the very encryption that he is at the same time responsible for theorizing and producing.

This article contributes to ongoing debates on security community-building in international relations (IR) by focusing on the productive role of discursive contestation in this process. It builds on recent work associated with the "practice" turn, discourse theory, and the study of security communities in the Global South to propose a new understanding of how the diversification of security governance impacts security community-building. The article develops an original discourse-based approach that conceptualizes security community-building as a polysemic, omnidirectional, and contested process in which social agents debate the meaning of security and the boundaries of community. It applies this approach to the case of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to show how contestation over the organization's identity as a security community "in the making" takes place along two dimensions. First, different (and potentially incompatible) versions of the community compete for dominance. Second, contestation also unfolds "internally," among social agents who agree on which version ought to prevail. I illustrate this part of the argument through an examination of the debate over ASEAN's identity as a "people-centered" community. The demonstration is supported by the analysis of "texts" enacted in the discursive field where the security community is talked into existence, as well as interviews with practitioners.

The lack of a national comprehensive climate change policy in the United States has prompted cities to take the lead on urban sustainability actions. Extent research has explored various political, socio-economic and institutional factors to explain why some cities pursue sustainability actions and others do not. The role of organized interest groups – particularly business interest groups – is unclear as to whether their involvement correlates with more or less likelihood of sustainability policy adoption. The pluralist nature of the American political system suggests that various organized interests compete to advance their policy positions, and business interest groups have generally been theorized as economically rational profit-maximizers who would presumably oppose environmental regulation. The overall rise in environmental awareness (Yale University and George Mason University, 2017) raises the possibility that business interest groups will support urban sustainability policies, as firm can be profitable while also limiting environmental impacts. This dissertation explores how various types of business interest groups effect the adoption of select urban sustainability policies that regulate the environmental impacts of buildings. My rationale for studying buildings is that urban sustainability is too broad of a concept to get at the nuances of interest group activity occurring in each sector, and distinctive business interest groups participate in urban policy processes depending on what sector is being regulated as many firms only work in one sector (e.g., buildings, transportation, water). Further, urban sustainability research commonly operationalizes business interest groups as one group which assumes a singular profit interest, but not all businesses respond to urban sustainability in the same way. I segment the business interest groups in an attempt to measure the effects of distinctive organized interests within a single industry – the construction industry. I generate sector-specific business ...

This article draws on the work of Nasser Hussain and Keally McBride to think about the way that law is violent. Hussain's work shows that the law's much vaunted distinction between ordinary law and the state of emergency is a false dichotomy, one that stems from Britain's colonial legacy wherein only Britain was said to follow "the rule of law" and other parts of the world (including areas that it therefore got to colonize) were subject to a perpetual state of emergency. Hussain shows how this binary serves to make British rule seem benign and palatable even as it disguises the way that the British state was violent, not only in the colonies but also in the metropole. By looking further at the practices of "ordinary" law, I argue via Hussain and McBride that procedure and codification, nominally the benign and nonviolent practice of creating order and method in the practice of non-emergency law, are themselves thoroughly violent. Hussain shows this through his notion of hyperlegalism whereby places (such as Guantánamo) are said to be lawless but are actually suffused with various forms of ordinary law. McBride shows this through her study of the life work of James Stephen and James Fitzjames Stephen, a father and son who administered much of the legal practices of the British Empire in the mid 19th century and who were both essentially the embodiment of the rule of law in the colonies. In both cases, more for the father than for the son, any attempt to render the rule of law nonviolent met with failure. Codification became the way to formalize and disguise the degree to which the law perpetuates (rather than holds back) the violence and racism of empire. In this way procedure and codification are not just the means for state violence but are themselves a form of violence, a kind of "law of rules," conforming to what Walter Benjamin calls "law preserving violence."

In this commentary, I explore the question of how the way we think about time affects the conclusions that we draw about specific political questions. To demonstrate this, I consider two questions, the relationship between liberalism and neoliberalism and the relationship between neoliberalism and fascism. I look at these issues first from within the normal teleological notions of time that are prevalent and then from a more 'dissociated' form of temporality in keeping with the theorization of Walter Benjamin in his essay "On the Concept of History." My claim is that Benjamin's concept of time is anarchist and that thinking about time, history and politics in this way offers new insights into what may otherwise seem like hopelessly fated predicaments.