New Caledonia (1698-1700) was Scotland’s largest independent colonial venture. The scheme’s collapse crippled the country financially and was an important factor in the Anglo-Scottish Union of 1707. This project explores the identity of Scottish settlers who attempted to colonize the Darien region of modern Panama. Colonial identity is assessed by reconstructing the Scottish dialogue about the natural world, the aboriginal population, and the commonwealth. I contend that the ideology of improvement that shaped Scottish perceptions of utility and fertility in the Darien became a powerful moral discourse used to critique the colonists. This paper also chronicles Scottish aspirations to found an empire of trade and civility, uncovering the fundamental problems created by the idealization of the Tule as eager subjects of this new empire. Finally, I argue that Caledonia’s food shortages not only threatened the colonial government’s legitimacy, they also exposed divergent ideals of the commonwealth among the settlers.

This dissertation intervenes in debates in Media Studies, Gender and Sexuality Studies, Canadian Immigration Studies, and Critical Race Studies to explore how shifting news media and political representations of Muslim families reflect the complexities of what it means to be Canadian beyond holding citizenship. In the post-9/11 era, the Muslim family has re-emerged in Canadian English-language news media and Canadian political debates as a site of inherent violence. Drawing on orientalist narratives of the Muslim family, news media and political conversations tend to frame these homes as being headed by patriarchal fathers and oppressed mothers, and children seeking to break from families and traditions, yet always holding the potential to become violent themselves. Even though Canada identifies as a multicultural nation, Muslim families are often presented in media as undeserving of the rights of Canadian citizenship, and even deserving of state violence. While news media play a key role in reproducing orientalist framings of Muslim families, news media can also take the government to task when it comes to the violation of immigrant and racialized Canadians’ rights as citizens. Some news media coverage counter orientalist narratives by producing “positive” representations of Muslim families, however, these “positive” representations frequently frame Muslims who are worthy of the rights of citizenship as adhering to heteronormative family dynamics, productive citizenship, and normative Western gender roles and kinship formations. These “positive” portrayals produce varying representations of Muslim families, but such framings can also labour in the way of reifying Canada’s multicultural ideals and Canada’s idea of itself as “civilized.” Drawing on the news media coverage of the family of Maher Arar, the Khadrs, and the Shafias, I argue that such representations still produce the norms of the settler-colonial Canadian nation, where some racialized bodies, in this case Muslim families, can be granted the rights of Canadian citizenship if they are able to proximate normative Canadian kinship formations. / Dissertation / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / In the wake of 9/11, many Canadian English-language news media have framed Muslim men as violent and Muslim women as oppressed. This dissertation analyzes the shifting Canadian news media portrayals of the Muslim family. Muslim homes in Canada are often portrayed as spaces for the perpetuation of violence that threatens the Canadian nation. Simultaneously, news media also portray some Muslim homes as spaces of purportedly “good” Canadian citizens, if these Muslim families are able to conform to Canadian “values.” I examine how Canadian news media mobilize heteronormativity, middle-class status, productive citizenship, among others, to portray some Muslims as ascribing to Canadian values, and therefore worthy of the rights of citizenship. Drawing on the news media coverage of the cases of Maher Arar and Monia Mazigh, Ahmed and Omar Khadr and Maha Elsamnah, and Mohammed Shafia, Rona Mohammed, and Tooba Yahya, I analyze how Muslims who are viewed as not assimilating to Western ideals of family are deemed as undeserving of the rights of citizenship, and, in addition, may even deserve violence.

This paper explores issues of civility in liberal democracy, and in particular, how civility and civic engagement must be regenerated in order to forward the democratic ideals of equal rights, citizen equality and collective self-government in a meaningful way. Liberal democracy presupposes a level of civility in order to uphold standards of individual liberty and freedom, however as a theory it fails to compel citizens to support levels of mutual respect. An etymological exploration of the term civility introduces the work of puritan theologian Roger Williams, whose early writings on individual liberty as well as the role of civility and civic engagement can inform popular conversations about civility in modern democracy. This leads to an analysis of Rawlsian liberalism, where Rawls seeks to construct a robust civil society by tying individual duty of civility to an idealization of citizenship. Final analysis explores the possibility of a modern civil liberalism, as influenced by Roger Williams. A liberal civil realm must recognize the mutual reliance between individual freedom and a collective common good; this will compel citizens to choose to preserve the freedom of all citizens through civil engagement and dialogue. This ideal shares important intersections with Jürgen Habermas’ theory of deliberative democracy, but Williams’ replaces Habermas’ notion of higher-level intersubjectivity with an appeal to individual freedom of conscience. By doing so, the preservation of individual freedom of conscience requires citizen-commitment to an active and engaged civil sphere, making the ideal of civility richer than that of Habermas’ theory. Replacing the duty of civility with a commitment to the preservation and protection of individual liberty through civil dialogue is the best way to rescue modern liberal democracy from its current state of incivility, which threatens the liberty and freedom of citizens and undermines the collective common good.

L’obligation de coopération a été insérée dans le Code de procédure civile en 2016, tirant ses origines de la procédure civile anglaise. Cette obligation est le point d’ancrage de cette étude, qui a pour objectif non seulement de définir cette nouvelle obligation, mais aussi de démontrer sa complémentarité avec le devoir déontologique de coopérer pour les avocats. L’application concrète de la coopération dans la pratique actuelle de la profession découle de ces deux codes agissant en symbiose. Dans la procédure, la coopération a une place de choix à travers la disposition préliminaire du Code et est qualifiée de principe directeur de la procédure. Elle agit complémentairement avec les notions d’abus de procédure et de bonne foi. L’obligation de coopération s’applique à toutes les étapes du règlement : aux modes privés de prévention et de règlement des conflits, au protocole pré-judiciaire, ainsi que lors de la gestion de l’instance. L’obligation de coopération a également des répercussions importantes en matière de preuve civile. Bien appliquée, elle favorise à la fois la recherche de la vérité par la transmission adéquate des éléments de preuve et l’accessibilité à la justice par la réduction du nombre de procédures. Comme devoir professionnel, la coopération a généralement un impact sur la relation avocat-client et appelle l’avocat à se responsabiliser dans l’accomplissement de ses fonctions. Or, le paysage actuel de la pratique de la profession favorise plutôt l’adversité, notamment parce que la marchandisation et la tarification horaire des services juridiques découragent la coopération entre confrères. Selon nous, il existe néanmoins des solutions concrètes afin de favoriser l’insertion de la coopération dans les différents milieux de pratique. / The obligation of cooperation has enacted in the Code of civil procedure in 2016, inspired by the reform English civil procedure. This obligation is at the heart of this analysis which attempts to define this new obligation and to demonstrate its complementarity with the ethical obligation lawyers has pursuant to the Code of professional Conduct. The practical application of cooperation in lawyer’s modern practice is indeed a mix of those two jurisdictions. In the Code of Civil Procedure, the need for cooperation is described in the preliminary disposition and is expressed as a guiding principle of the procedure at article 20 of the Code. It acts simultaneously with the notions of good faith and abuse of process. The obligation of cooperation is applicable at every step of conflict resolution: to alternative dispute resolution, to pre-judiciary protocol and to case management. The obligation of cooperation also has major repercussions for rules of evidence. When followed properly, it improves not only the research for truth by increasing information exchanges; it also enhances access to justice by reducing the time in court. As a professional obligation, cooperation generally has an impact on lawyer-client relationships and invites the professional to take responsibility for the accomplishment of his functions. However, the professional practice’s landscape does not currently promote cooperation between colleagues, notably because of the commercialisation of legal services and hourly billing. In our opinion though, despite the actual context of legal practice, solutions exist to promote a professional culture based on cooperation.