A la fin du 18ème siècle, les Etats-Unis inaugurent les révolutions fondatrices ou refondatrices, directement inspirée des Lumières et ayant dialoguées par-delà l’Atlantique. La période révolutionnaire a vue une élite politique nouvelle aux prises avec la nécessité de bâtir un «ordre nouveau», c'est-à-dire de créer un gouvernement et de définir le rapport au monde de ce nouvel Etat. Cette quête a amené les acteurs politiques de la révolution à chercher un modèle politique différent de celui, dominant, des monarchies absolues. L’idée de république s’impose dès la déclaration d’indépendance. En effet, les Lumières avaient redécouvert le républicanisme qui pouvait incarner l’espoir d’un ordre politique réformé. Cependant, les républiques classiques et les exemples contemporains confirment l’idée alors partagée par tous qu’une république ne peut être qu’une petite entité politique au sein de laquelle vit une population restreinte d’hommes libres et où les différences sociales sont relativement faibles. Non seulement cette petite taille des républiques était-elle un phénomène empirique mais elle semblait être une loi d’airain. Depuis la reformulation du dilemme républicain par Machiavel, l’idée qu’une république ne puisse pas être libre et étendue faisait consensus. Cette première république moderne, fille des Lumières pacifistes, a pourtant mené une expansion quasi-continentale. Comment cette petite république à la périphérie du monde pouvait-elle réconcilier sa volonté de rompre avec les tentations hégémoniques et son désir de puissance ? Comment pouvait-elle s’étendre tout en préservant sa liberté républicaine ? Nous avons formulé l’hypothèse que la réponse à ces questions se trouve dans une redéfinition des principes et des méthodes de leur politique étrangère. Afin de minimiser les risques de corruption de la république, les acteurs de la révolution ont cherché à mettre en place une politique étrangère républicaine fondée sur les idées des Lumières. Cette hypothèse nous a mené à articuler notre travail autour de trois axes de recherche : le premier portant sur la théorie politique internationale, le second sur le débat idéologique autour de la politique étrangère et le troisième sur les institutions de prise de décision et de mise en œuvre de cette politique étrangère. Ces trois axes sont reliés par les idées qui forment la structure intellectuelle des débats entre les acteurs ainsi que les déterminants de la création institutionnelle. C’est là le cœur de notre thèse. En faisant appel à la méthodologie originale développée par Pierre Rosanvallon, qu’il décrit comme une histoire conceptuelle du politique, nous avons tout d’abord procédé à une étude du cadre intellectuel de la révolution américaine en mettant en lumière les évolutions des concepts-clefs de la philosophie des relations internationales par une analyse de la contribution de Montesquieu à la théorie politique internationale. La thèse porte ensuite sur les débats révolutionnaires, la tension entre les idéologies des Lumières telles qu’illustrées par la pensée de Montesquieu et le désir d’expansion territoriale ou de grandeur des acteurs de la révolution. Nous avons choisi de consacrer notre étude aux élites, non pas que nous ne considérions pas l’histoire sociale digne d’intérêt mais nous avons postulé que dans cette phase de bouleversement politique, ce sont les élites politiques qui ont joué le rôle déterminant. Enfin, la troisième partie de la thèse consiste en une étude du cadre constitutionnel, législatif et institutionnel de la politique étrangère républicaine issue de l’interaction entre la structure intellectuelle des Lumières et son interprétation par les acteurs. Ainsi, notre analyse des idées, des acteurs et des institutions de la république américaine nous a permis de contribuer d’une part à la théorie des relations internationales en mettant en lumière les évolutions des concepts-clefs de la politique internationale au cours du 18ème siècle et d’autre part à l’histoire des idées politiques en étendant son champ aux questions internationales. Cela nous a permis également de mettre en lumière le lien étroit entre la structure idéelle, les intérêts et les stratégies des acteurs et la création des institutions politiques.

The object of my investigation is Svenska Arbetsgivareföreningen (SAF) (The Swedish Employer’s Association) and the concrete questions I wish to raise are: (i) How did SAF articulate their ideal of liberty during the period 1902-1948? (ii) How did they combine this ideal with the demands of an ascetic work ethic among the workers? My ambition with this investigation has been to spread some light on how SAF, one of the market’s most important actors in Sweden during the twentieth century, has combined an alleged strong belief in personal freedom with the demands of adjustment to specific virtues and how the proclaimed freedom has, in fact, been subject to a number of conditions. It would be fair to say that the survival of a market economy depends on a broad foundation of workers that in practice are not allowed to make use of the freedom that they are proclaimed to have in theory. The workers must not only be convinced to go to work but also to work efficiently. If this were not the case, then capitalism, built on competition, would collapse. This is congruent with the conclusions made in my investigation. SAF’s proclamations of freedom were indeed a freedom for the believers; for those who could take advantage of the competition. But for those who did not believe in the system or who did not feel that they could find themselves justice in it, SAF demanded a high moral standard. As a consequence of this we are confronted with the following paradox: Freedom for the rich, morality to the poor.

The Parliamentary election in Russia held in December, 2011 caused vote fraud scandal and resulted in a wide-scale protest movement which spread all over the country. The Western media repeatedly compared political situation in Russia to ‘Arab spring’. Russian media, in their turn, got divided in two opposite camps regarding their reporting on the issue. This study examines news coverage of the political conflict in two Russian media outlets and interprets the findings within the framework of propaganda. The analysis incorporates two main levels: institutional and textual. In-depth interviews with the journalists were conducted in order to establish what internal and external factors, such as censorship or state control, shaped news reporting and promoted ideological bias. The comparative analysis of news coverage involved two media outlets Russia Today and Radio Liberty, which adhere to different ideological perspectives. The results show that both media represented contrasting versions of the situation and used information selectively in order to pursue certain goals. Nevertheless, the analysis allows to conclude that Russia Today explicitly supported the views of the Russian authorities and oppressed undesirable facts and opinions. Its news policy also evokes an idea of cold war, as it repeatedly appeals to the image of external enemy – the USA. Radio Liberty, in contrast, provided various opportunities to the discontent part of the Russian society to speak out, which can be considered as an attempt to represent the other side of the story, as it was excluded from the news agenda of the state owned media. However, news policy of Radio Liberty also implied certain propagandistic objectives. The study confirms the assumption that propaganda arguably exists within any political doctrine, but can take explicit and implicit forms which are difficult to detect without thorough scrutiny of overall news reportage of certain media. Further research should look at the role of social media in a series of political scandals and protest movement awakening in Russia, as many media experts link the political situation with emergence of new means of communication. It could also compare news representation of the current political conflict in several Russian domestic independent media to detect distinctions and similarities and try to evaluate what kind of an ideology they communicated to the audience.

This study examines individual-level citizen participation in the notice and comment component of federal agency rulemaking. It focuses on characteristics of individual participants ascertained through a survey mailed to 400 actual commenters. Survey data is used to evaluate the representativeness of these participants to the general public. Also, the compatible of citizen participation in rulemaking with the democratic ideals of liberty, equality, and fairness is evaluated, along with potential consequences of proposed reforms.

Toleration is a core liberal ideal, but it is not an ideal without limits. To tolerate the intolerant would be to violate the principles and purposes underlying liberal societies. This important exception to the liberal ideal of toleration is dangerous, however, in that we may make it too exclusionary in practice. That is, we may mistakenly apply it to peaceful, beneficial members of our communities as well as to the truly intolerant. In particular, some contemporary liberals see religion either as inherently intolerant and dangerous or as violating standards of public discourse that they feel are necessary to uphold liberalism's core ideals, including toleration. This work argues that we risk violating the liberal ideal of toleration in a hasty over-generalization about religious belief. Through an examination of the arguments of Roger Williams and John Locke, this work argues that religious belief can be compatible with toleration, and that the practice and popular value of liberal toleration has at least in part a religious origin. These authors, and believers like them, defended toleration, partially as a result of their own experiences of intolerance, but also because they saw toleration as a theological necessity. Thus, this work shows that we have misunderstood the relationship between religion and toleration. While some forms of religious belief may incite intolerance and violence, others provide a firm foundation for toleration. We must show care in distinguishing the two to avoid violating the fundamental liberal ideal of toleration. Moreover, it is important that we do so to foster civil comity and cooperation, as well as to sustain the other benefits that religious groups provide to liberal, democratic societies.

Abstract The eighteenth century is doubtlessly an astonishing chapter in human history. Following America¡¦s independence that brought the first new democratic country to the world, the French Revolution further aroused tremendous political effects all over Europe, shocked the foundation of feudalism, and announced the advent of democratic era. Confronted with all these historical impacts, Tocqueville has achieved profound understanding and retrospection on the inevitable prevalence of democracy. The concept of liberty plays a very important role in Tocqueville¡¦s theory. As the wave of democracy crashed outmoded institution of feudalism, it also caused people to grow assimilated, or even philistine. In light of this, Tocqueville proposed that, in order to preclude domination and slavery, people should more actively grasp their liberty and develop the habitude and spirit of participating public affairs. Therefore, township and jury system in American tradition, as well as individual activities of organizing secondary civil groups through gilds, are highly regarded by Tocqueville with democratic connotation. From this viewpoint, Tocqueville¡¦s great expectation on liberty is essentially different from ¡§human¡¦s liberty from interference¡¨ of contractarian liberalism but is in harmony with the conventional idea of people¡¦s ¡§agency¡¨ in republicanism. This connotation of liberty, however, doesn¡¦t imply clashes without limit but suggests reasonable and restrained political participation within the schema of stable political institution. Thus, the concept echoes the conventional appreciation upon institution in roman republicanism. The researcher regards the integration of the aforementioned two aspects as ¡§liberty of institutional republicanism¡¨. This research intends to embody the republicanism value in Tocqueville¡¦s theory with an expectation to broaden the definition of his thought.

The thesis puts more emphasis on Scientific methodology,discuss Philosopher of Science--Paul Feyerabend's thinking. It discusses if science is a rational statement or not and has some reflections on how we think of Scientific methodology. In this reserch we can make a conclusion that Paul Feyerabend think Science doesn't have a so-called position.What we called "Science" today also follow a normal methodology.He suggest that we should get rid of the normal methodology and support the scientists do their reserch freely by using suitalbe methodology so human beings can devolop more knowledge probability

Identities should be established independent of limitations by organization or application. We consider mobile and/or remote users and applications. Essential parts are centralized or distributed identity management systems. / Workshop "Netz- und Service-Infrastrukturen" Wünschenswert ist die Gültigkeit von Identitäten über Organisations- bzw. Applikationsgrenzen hinweg. Dabei werden mobile/entfernte Nutzer und Anwendungen betrachtet. Kernstück bilden zentrale oder verteilte Identitätsverwaltungen.

Project (M.F.A.) - Simon Fraser University, 2004. / Theses (School for Contemporary Arts) / Simon Fraser University. Also issued in digital format and available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2001. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 243-246).