This thesis examines the unstable nature and dynamic impact of contemporary nationalism on the arduous process of reconstituting a modern multinational state. The basic research question concerns the relationship between nationalism and multinational democracy, or more specifically how nationalist forces may facilitate or impede the intricate process of political transition, democratic transformation and stabilization of the newly formed Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state. The findings indicate that nationalism and exclusive ethno-nationalist politics create serious inter-group security challenges and significantly hinder the process democratization, state-building and political transformation. The main obstacle to a coherent political system is based on the fact that nationalism causes an unconstrained reconfiguration of political space. This is apparent in BiH where exclusive nationalist politics continue to dominate the domestic and inter-national political agenda, thus limiting the capacity for political reforms, security and stability. As nationalism is a grave security threat to multinational states, there is a pressing need to manage nationalism with confidence building mechanisms that strengthen the state’s capacity to ensure enduring security and stability. / May 2006

How do religious and political elites in Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands see the modern state? This thesis addresses this question. The thesis shows that these two countries do not fit with the ideal structure of the modern state provided here. This is despite the state building efforts of Australia as the two countries largest aid donor. It shows that there are a number of ways that the state can be seen by elites. Amongst both groups of elites can the state can be seen by some as something for the security and betterment of the population. It can be seen as a structure to oppose by some religious groups. Other religious leaders see the state as a partner for the development of both countries. Political elites can see keeping the state weak as being beneficial to finance its operations. Some leaders see the state as an item of capture. It finds that though religious leaders have generally good intentions for the state, they are limited in their authority and influence. The thesis also finds that though political elites are much more important than religious elites in shaping the state, their role is limited by and tied to the people. It finds that the two societies are extremely fragmented and competitive with many differing interests. This leads to the state being seen as an item of competition. This competition does not create the conditions that the state as a structure depends on to reach its ideal form. It concludes that for the state to succeed in both countries there needs to be a shift in attitude towards it.

This thesis examines the unstable nature and dynamic impact of contemporary nationalism on the arduous process of reconstituting a modern multinational state. The basic research question concerns the relationship between nationalism and multinational democracy, or more specifically how nationalist forces may facilitate or impede the intricate process of political transition, democratic transformation and stabilization of the newly formed Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state. The findings indicate that nationalism and exclusive ethno-nationalist politics create serious inter-group security challenges and significantly hinder the process democratization, state-building and political transformation. The main obstacle to a coherent political system is based on the fact that nationalism causes an unconstrained reconfiguration of political space. This is apparent in BiH where exclusive nationalist politics continue to dominate the domestic and inter-national political agenda, thus limiting the capacity for political reforms, security and stability. As nationalism is a grave security threat to multinational states, there is a pressing need to manage nationalism with confidence building mechanisms that strengthen the state’s capacity to ensure enduring security and stability.

This thesis examines the unstable nature and dynamic impact of contemporary nationalism on the arduous process of reconstituting a modern multinational state. The basic research question concerns the relationship between nationalism and multinational democracy, or more specifically how nationalist forces may facilitate or impede the intricate process of political transition, democratic transformation and stabilization of the newly formed Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state. The findings indicate that nationalism and exclusive ethno-nationalist politics create serious inter-group security challenges and significantly hinder the process democratization, state-building and political transformation. The main obstacle to a coherent political system is based on the fact that nationalism causes an unconstrained reconfiguration of political space. This is apparent in BiH where exclusive nationalist politics continue to dominate the domestic and inter-national political agenda, thus limiting the capacity for political reforms, security and stability. As nationalism is a grave security threat to multinational states, there is a pressing need to manage nationalism with confidence building mechanisms that strengthen the state’s capacity to ensure enduring security and stability.

This dissertation argues that there is an agreed upon commonsense view of violence, but beyond this view, definitions for kinds of violence are essentially contested and non-neutrally, politically ideological, given that the political itself is an essentially contested concept defined in relation to ideologies that oppose one another. The first chapter outlines definitions for a commonsense view of violence produced by Greene and Brennan. This chapter argues that there are incontestable instances of violence that are almost universally agreed upon, such as when an adult intentionally smashes a child’s head against a table, purposefully causing harm. It is also claimed that, because political, ideological distinctions between kinds of violence arise from the creation of moral equivalences to the commonsense view of violence, political ideology is the source of disagreement. The second chapter argues that the concept of violence and of the political are essentially contested concepts. Gallie’s criteria for what counts as an essentially contested concept are utilized in order to argue that violence is an essentially contested concept at the level of the political, though not at the level of the commonsense view of violence. In fact, the paradigmatic cases that the commonsense view of violence pertains to serve as the core cases that are then interpreted as kinds of violence at the ideological level. To define violence as altogether wrong, or to define kinds of violence as acceptable and others as wrong is itself a politically ideological move to make, such as when liberalism defines its own uses of violence as justified and legitimate, and its enemy’s violence as unjustifiable and illegitimate. The World Health Organization and Bufacchi’s definitions for violence are presented, as are the definition for terroristic violence defined by Nagel. Erlenbusch’s critique of a liberal view, such as that of Nagel and the World Health Organization, is addressed as a reflection on the fact that, beyond the commonsense view of violence, violence is an essentially contested concept for which an ideologically, politically non-neutral definition is unlikely. The third chapter outlines numerous definitions produced by various philosophers, historians, and theorists, such as Machiavelli, Arendt, Hobbes, Kant, Treitschke, Weber, Bakunin, Sorel, Žižek, and Benjamin. The definitions produced by each demonstrates that person’s political ideological assumptions. Their definitions demonstrate an ongoing disagreement, in the sense of Rancière’s formulation for what counts as a disagreement in that each theorist defines kinds of violence under the yoke of their own political ideology. They all might agree that a single act is violent, under the commonsense view of violence, but they disagree concerning what kind of violence it is. So, though they may point to the same events and actions as examples of violence, what they mean fundamentally differs, and this means that they disagree. Their disagreement arises due to their respective political ideologies. This disagreement shows that there is no neutral justification for the neutrality of a state, particularly if a neutral state must defend itself. The state is instead defined in historically contextual terms of how the state relates to kinds of violence, and the distinctions between kinds of violence are not themselves politically, ideologically neutral. So, the concept of violence, beyond the commonsense view, is an essentially contested concept for which a non-neutral definition is unlikely. Beyond the commonsense view, political ideology is inextricably bound up within distinctions between kinds of violence. The fourth chapter then examines arguments on the question of whether nonviolence counts as a kind of violence. If distinctions between kinds of violence are essentially contested and non-neutrally defined, and nonviolence is defined as distinct from violence, then it follows that nonviolence is an essentially contested concept for which no non-neutral definition is possible, at least beyond a commonsense view of nonviolence. A commonsense view of nonviolence is defined as the assumption that nonviolence is not violent in the way that the commonsense view defines violence. That is, nonviolence occurs when there is no action or event that most people would define as a violent one. Definitions for nonviolence, civil disobedience, nonviolent political actions, and nonviolent direct actions are then outlined. These definitions aim at showing that the doctrine of nonviolence does not merely refer to nonviolent acts, but to a strategy that is a means to defeating violence. Given that what counts as the nonviolence that defeats violence is ideologically a matter of disagreement, nonviolence, in this sense, can count as a kind of violence. The fifth chapter concludes, raising questions concerning how violence can be valued, the degree to which a state cannot neutrally justify its neutrality, and the degree to which, beyond the commonsense view of violence, there ever could be agreement concerning what counts as kinds of violence. 1 In this dissertation, I draw on a number of ideas/passages that appeared earlier in my paper “The Efficacy of Scapegoating and Revolutionary Violence," in Philosophy, Culture, and Traditions: A Journal of the World Union of Catholic Philosophical Societies, ed. William Sweet, 10(2014), 203-219. I am grateful to the editors of the journal for permission to draw on this material here.

1 Abstract: Modern states and genocides: the fate of Turkish Armenians and European Jews This thesis focuses on the relationship of the modern state and genocide and examines how the formation of the modern state influences the development of crime of genocide. It also deals with the similarities and differences between the Armenian genocide and the genocide of the Jews. The work has set two goals. Comparison of both genocides, finding their intersection in relation to the modern state. Furthermore, the approach of the international community to the recognition of the Armenian genocide, which is still an important international theme, and the reasons why it is so. The first part discusses the development of international criminal law, the development of the term genocide and the way of settling the crime of genocide in the legal system. The next chapter focuses on the Armenian genocide. It describes in detail the causes, course and means that have been used to resolve the Armenian issue, including how international society has subsequently dealt with this situation. The following part deals with the basic aspects of the Holocaust in order to explain its course and the reasons for its origin. The Armenian genocide has more space in this part of the work than the Holocaust, as the Holocaust is used here for...

Nas últimas décadas surgiram diversas doutrinas sobre possíveis evoluções do constitucionalismo, impulsionadas pelos processos de globalização, regionalização e transnacionalização. Partindo da ideia de crise do Estado moderno e crise da soberania, doutrinadores nacionais e estrangeiros desenvolvem teorias sobre um constitucionalismo sem Estado e sem Constituição, múltiplos constitucionalismos convivendo sem relação hierárquica entre eles. Assim, a partir da análise dos conceitos clássicos e das principais doutrinas sobre as diferentes formas de aproximação entre o direito constitucional e o direito internacional, procura-se avaliar o impacto real da globalização no Estado moderno, em especial para a soberania nacional e o direito constitucional. Busca-se demonstrar que ainda há lugar para a soberania. / In recent decades, various doctrines about possible developments of constitutionalism emerged, driven by the process of globalization, regionalization and transnationalization. Starting from the idea of the modern State crisis and sovereignty crisis, domestic and foreign scholars develop theories over a constitutionalism without a state or constitution, multiple constitutionalism coexisting with no hierarchical relationship between them. Thus, from the analysis of classical concepts and the main doctrines about the different ways of approaching the constitutional law and international law, seeks to assess the real impact of globalization in the modern State, especially for national sovereignty and constitutional law. It is quite evident that there is still room for sovereignty.

Andrew Michael Ramsay‟s Essay de Politique (1719) and the revised second edition, the Essay philosophique sur le gouvernement civil (1721) claimed to promulgate the political principles of the Archbishop Fénelon author of Télémaque (1699). The assumed relationship between Fénelon and Ramsay augmented by Ramsay‟s Vie de Fénelon (1723) meant that subsequent biographers of both men have believed the Essay to be a faithful depiction of the prelate‟s political ideas. However this work, aided by the Vie de Fénelon was used by Ramsay to promote the Jacobite cause of James Stuart (the 'Pretender'). The Essay was used by Ramsay to set out a theoretical system of government that would prevent an 'excess of liberty' in the people and thereby prevent the possibility of Revolution against a king. Ramsay's second edition augmented this idea with a more focused attack on the contract theorists and apologists for the 1689 Revolution. Ramsay deliberately manipulated the political legacy of Fénelon and focused on a corrupted view of Fénelon's early (children's) educational works in his promotion of Jacobitism. In doing so, he disregarded the important later reform plans for the French state under the potential reign of (an adult) Duke of Burgundy which were later influential in Regency France. Moreover, Ramsay manipulated the name and reputation of Fénelon to disguise the real influence of his Essay, Fénelon's nemesis Bossuet. The reliance of the Essay upon the seventeenth century absolutist theory of Bossuet at a time when eighteenth century Britain and Regency France had rejected absolutism in favour of reform led to its failure. The aim of the Thesis is therefore to examine the extent of Ramsay's Jacobitism, his impact on the political legacy of Fénelon in his attempt to create a work of Jacobite propaganda, and the true influences on the Essay de Politique.

O presente trabalho debruça-se sobre os quatro volumes da obra The Modern World System, de Immanuel Wallerstein, visando a compreender o pensamento desse autor acerca do Estado moderno como instituição, de longa duração, essencial ao funcionamento da economia-mundo capitalista europeia, surgida no longo séc. XVI e que perdura até hoje. Para tanto, percorreu-se o seguinte itinerário: (1) no capítulo primeiro, a obra de Wallerstein foi contextualizada, expondo-se as suas influências teóricas e as premissas fundamentais da análise dos sistemas-mundo, crítica metodológica por ele feita em oposição ao método tradicional das ciências sociais; (2) no capítulo segundo, apresentaram-se o contexto social e econômico no qual surgiu e se consolidou o Estado moderno, tais como a desagregação do sistema feudal; as causas da formação de uma economia-mundo capitalista europeia no longo séc. XVI; as características da divisão única do trabalho e da estrutura centro-periferia; a dimensão espacial da economia-mundo no séc. XVI; as opiniões complementares de Fernand Braudel e Giovanni Arrighi acerca do surgimento do capitalismo como sistema mundial; e a raison d\'être do capitalismo histórico ou sistema-mundo moderno; (3) no capítulo terceiro, foram analisados as estruturas e mecanismos de funcionamento do Estado moderno na primeira fase do seu desenvolvimento histórico, nos séculos XV-XVIII, evidenciando as vinculações íntimas entre o objetivo da acumulação capitalista que dirigiu a vida econômica europeia a partir dessa época, e a conformação peculiar que o Estado moderno assumiu, especialmente no que tange à dependência estatal da acumulação capitalista para a manutenção do poder soberano; a existência de um sistema interestatal que estabiliza a relação entre os aparatos estatais em prol da meta da acumulação; o relacionamento da classe capitalista com o Estado; e a diferenciação geográfica essencial entre os aparatos estatais, que se organizavam em uma hierarquia de poder diretamente relacionada à estrutura centro-periferia; (4) no capítulo quarto, tratou-se dos acontecimentos posteriores à Revolução Francesa e dos seus impactos cultural-ideológicos no sistema-mundo moderno, que promoveram a mudança da feição do Estado; o surgimento das ideologias políticas e dos movimentos antissistêmicos; a formação do Estado liberal, do Estado do bem-estar social e dos Estados socialistas; e os episódios derradeiros de crise e desarticulação do Estado e do capitalismo como realidades de longa duração; (5) no capítulo quinto, foi realizada uma síntese teórica das teses de Wallerstein acerca do Estado, demonstrando os desafios que os aparatos estatais enfrentam diante da tendência de democratização do mundo, com especial atenção ao atual momento de crise sistêmica e os possíveis desdobramentos para o séc. XXI. / The present work deals with the four volumes of Immanuel Wallerstein\'s The Modern World System, in order to understand the author\'s thinking about the modern state as a long-term institution essential to the functioning of the European capitalist world-economy, created in long sixteenth century and lasting until today. For this, the following itinerary was pursued: (1) in the first chapter, Wallerstein\'s work was contextualized, exposing its theoretical influences and the fundamental premises of the world-systems analysis, a methodological critique he made in opposition to the traditional method of social sciences; (2) the second chapter presented the social and economic context in which the modern state has emerged and consolidated itself, such as the breakdown of the feudal system; the causes of the formation of a European capitalist world-economy in the long sixteenth century; the characteristics of the single division of labor and the center-periphery structure; the spatial dimension of the world-economy in the sixteenth century; the complementary views of Fernand Braudel and Giovanni Arrighi on the emergence of capitalism as a world system; and the raison d\'être of the historical capitalism or the modern world-system; (3) the third chapter analyzed the structures and mechanisms of modern state functioning in the first phase of its historical development in the fifteenth-eighteenth centuries, highlighting the intimate connections between the objective of capitalist accumulation, which directed European economic life from this time on, and the peculiar conformation that the modern state has assumed, especially as regards the state\'s dependence on capitalist accumulation for the maintenance of sovereign power; the existence of an interstate system that stabilizes the relationship between state machineries in favor of the goal of accumulation; the relationship of the capitalist class with the state; and the essential geographical differentiation between the state machineries, which were organized in a hierarchy of power directly related to the center-periphery structure; (4) the fourth chapter dealt with events subsequent to the French Revolution and its cultural-ideological impacts on the modern world system, which promoted a change in the state\'s character; the emergence of political ideologies and antisystemic movements; the formation of the liberal state, the welfare state and socialist states; and the final episodes of crisis and disarticulation of the state and of capitalism as long-lasting realities; (5) in the fifth chapter, a theoretical synthesis of Wallerstein\'s theses on the state was carried out, demonstrating the challenges that state machineries face about the trend towards democratization of the world, with special attention to the actual moment of systemic crisis and the possible unfolding for the twenty-first century.

The thesis investigates the basis of possible sources of shifts in the classical conceptualizations of political legitimacy of nation state as a result of the impositions of globalization. To this end, it first suggested that we should have a theory of globalization. Globalization in the fields of economy, politics, society, culture and identity along with fragmentation provides crucial changes in the roles and functions of the state, which result in fundamental transformation in the distinctive features of nation state, such as autonomy, capacity, unity, territoriality, sovereignty and identity. The depreciation in the classical roles and functions of nation state is observed in its decreasing capacity to cope with emerging global threats, such as environmental pollution, unequal development and international crimes. Economic globalization deprives nation state of its autonomy in determining its own economic policies. And identity/culture assertions of the locality disintegrate the unity and identity of nation state. Decreasing autonomy, capacity and unity lead to further depreciation in other two fundamental features of nation state, which are territoriality and sovereignty. These developments force nation state to find out new ways of legitimizing its position under the global context. In classical conceptions, political legitimacy of nation state had been constructed within the framework of the premises of its autonomy, sovereignty, territoriality, unity, identity and capacity. However, those fundamental characteristics of nation state seem to be depreciating under the global context. Actually, this depreciation will result in a new conceptualization of political legitimacy under globalization. Therefore, in this re-conceptualization of political legitimacy, individual, local and global impositions emerge as major sources. Nation state, which is eager to resituate itself in a legitimate basis in the twenty first century, should take into account emerging individual, local and global concerns.