Thèse (M.A.)--Université Laval, 2006. / Bibliogr.: f. 105-110. Publié aussi en version électronique dans la Collection Mémoires et thèses électroniques.

This thesis considers Michael Ignatieff’s theory regarding ethnic conflict and applies Afghanistan as a case study. Ignatieff correlates the outbreak of ethnic violence to the breakdown of state government which creates societal anarchy and war. Ignatieff argues that ethnic relations can improve through the creation of democratic institutions. Afghanistan represents a model empirical case study to explore the central tenets of the Ignatieff thesis. Ignatieff’s argument is critically analyzed by assessing the viability of transplanting democratic institutions into Afghanistan. According to democratic theory a successful democracy requires a strong economy, a vibrant civil society, an advantageous institutional history and a positive security and geopolitical environment. Based on these five key variables it is reasonable to conclude that Afghanistan is not predisposed to pluralistic governance. Such analysis highlights the limitations of Ignatieff’s thesis as his theory is only relevant to those post-conflict societies that possess the requisite preconditions for democracy. / February 2007

This thesis considers Michael Ignatieff’s theory regarding ethnic conflict and applies Afghanistan as a case study. Ignatieff correlates the outbreak of ethnic violence to the breakdown of state government which creates societal anarchy and war. Ignatieff argues that ethnic relations can improve through the creation of democratic institutions. Afghanistan represents a model empirical case study to explore the central tenets of the Ignatieff thesis. Ignatieff’s argument is critically analyzed by assessing the viability of transplanting democratic institutions into Afghanistan. According to democratic theory a successful democracy requires a strong economy, a vibrant civil society, an advantageous institutional history and a positive security and geopolitical environment. Based on these five key variables it is reasonable to conclude that Afghanistan is not predisposed to pluralistic governance. Such analysis highlights the limitations of Ignatieff’s thesis as his theory is only relevant to those post-conflict societies that possess the requisite preconditions for democracy.

This thesis considers Michael Ignatieff’s theory regarding ethnic conflict and applies Afghanistan as a case study. Ignatieff correlates the outbreak of ethnic violence to the breakdown of state government which creates societal anarchy and war. Ignatieff argues that ethnic relations can improve through the creation of democratic institutions. Afghanistan represents a model empirical case study to explore the central tenets of the Ignatieff thesis. Ignatieff’s argument is critically analyzed by assessing the viability of transplanting democratic institutions into Afghanistan. According to democratic theory a successful democracy requires a strong economy, a vibrant civil society, an advantageous institutional history and a positive security and geopolitical environment. Based on these five key variables it is reasonable to conclude that Afghanistan is not predisposed to pluralistic governance. Such analysis highlights the limitations of Ignatieff’s thesis as his theory is only relevant to those post-conflict societies that possess the requisite preconditions for democracy.

No description available.

The emergence of Human Rights NGOs continue to influence the practice of human rights domestically and internationally. In connection with this development, as scrutinizers of human rights and human rights violations, the Human Rights NGOs must in turn be scrutinized. Guided by a theoretical framework consisted of theories of justification by Rainer Forst, Martha Nussbaum and Michael Ignatieff, a critical analysis of how Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reveal the state of human rights in the respective annual report of 2017 is carried out. The aim is to scrutinize how the Human Rights NGOs interpretation, prioritization and justification of human rights affect the validity of human rights. The validity of human rights in turn, argues the thesis, presupposes that we must assess whether these strategies are reasonable. The thesis finds that human rights are understood as universal claims for the respect and protection of the underpinning values of human rights: dignity, freedom and equality. Human rights, interpreted in this sense, must have an abiding effect and protect human rights, but also to hold human rights violations accountable through means of justice. Accordingly, justice has a double meaning for the purpose of human rights in the sense that it firstly set out conditions for when human rights are protected and secondly, make this task possible. / I ljuset av framväxten av icke-statliga människorättsorganisationer och deras betydande inflytande på de mänskliga rättigheterna, syftar denna uppsats till att studera deras förståelse och tolkning av dessa rättigheter. Med hjälp av ett teoretiskt ramverk bestående av teorier om rättfärdigande av mänskliga rättigheter av Rainer Forst, Martha Nussbaum och Michael Ignatieff, genomförs en kritisk analys av hur Amnesty International och Human Rights Watch årliga rapporter om de mänskliga rättigheternas status ser ut. Syftet med denna analys är att kritisk granska hur organisationernas tolkning, prioritering och rättfärdigande av mänskliga rättigheter påverkar rättigheternas validitet. Validiteten i sin tur, förutsätter att en kritisk analys av dessa strategier förhåller sig till huruvida dessa är förnuftiga och godtagbara. Uppsatsen kommer fram till att mänskliga rättigheter förstås som universella anspråk vars syfte är att respektera och skydda de underliggande normerna av mänsklig värdighet, frihet och jämlikhet. Mänskliga rättigheter måste således ha en varaktig effekt för att skydda människor, men även för att kunna ställa brott mot mänskliga rättigheter inför rättvisa. Följaktligen har rättvisa mer än ett syfte, nämligen att först staka ut de förutsättningar som krävs för att respektera och skydda mänskliga rättigheter, och för det andra att göra detta möjligt.

Le mémoire s'intéresse à l'État et à la pensée idéaliste au Canada, de même qu'à la relation qu'entretiennent ces deux concepts. Plus précisément, il cherche à rendre compte de la structure institutionnelle de l'État canadien et du développement de la pensée idéaliste au Canada, ainsi qu'à s'interroger sur la possibilité que l'Etat canadien se définisse lui-même, par le biais de ses représentants, au moyen de concepts idéalistes. Pour résoudre cette problématique, l'étude de cas est la stratégie de recherche retenue. Celle-ci tentera de mettre en évidence l'influence de l'idéalisme de Michael Ignatieff et de John Ralston Saul dans le discours de Beverley McLachlin, Juge en chef de la Cour suprême, et dans celui d'Adrienne Clarkson lorsqu'elle était Gouverneure générale du Canada.