Ecologism is a political ideology that emerged in the 1970s. It challenged the neoliberal privileging of economic growth over environmental protection and a narrow conception of the self as autonomous, rational and self-interested. Ecologism’s normative challenge has grown quiet as it became perceived as too inward looking and focused on the self, rather than engaged with issues such as climate change that now preoccupy green political thought. However, in the early 21st century, neoliberalism now dominates western democracies. This turn away from the self and normative opposition to neoliberalism has clearly not furthered the environmental cause, and so there is a need to return to re-politicise the ontological arguments of ecologism. A small number of green political theorists have begun to look towards the Thomistic Aristotelianism of Alasdair MacIntyre and this thesis seeks to add to their number. I argue that MacIntyre’s work concerning the self as dependent rational animal, and arguments for the political and social structures that support this self, can be used to affirm and reengage ecological arguments with politics. MacIntyre’s thought moves ecologism away from its “inward-turn”, concerned with the self’s personal experience of the environment, to a collective politics that looks outwardly to challenge the dominant neoliberal order. In bringing ecologism into conversation with MacIntyre’s philosophy, the original contribution I offer ecological political theory is two-fold. Firstly, the virtues of acknowledged dependence can be used to reflect substantive concern for the environment within political deliberation. Secondly, I develop MacIntyre’s conception of localized deliberative democracy. In order to counter claims that such localization is naïve, I bring MacIntyre’s ideal into conversation with Murray Bookchin’s model of municipal libertarianism and consider two real world examples: Rojava in northern Syria and the ‘Idle no More movement’ in Canada. These examples offer hopeful evidence that decentralised deliberative politics, starting from acknowledging our dependence, can oppose the hegemony of neoliberalism both socially and ecologically.

Disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) is a milestone towards lasting peace, but not the solution for the roots of a conflict. It is considered a highly politicised process because DDR is a cost-increasing provision that not only contributes to the security, but also builds confidence among warring parties. The United Nations has highlighted that without DDR, and specifically demobilisation, civil wars cannot end. Thus, DDR is a crucial aspect of any peace settlement; its greatest challenge is to design a programme and a strategy that convinces both parties that they have guarantees for surrender and disbanding and that their vulnerability and limits will be respected. This study tries to explain why not all agreements include DDR provision during peace negotiation, what determines this, and whether the DDR can explain the resumption of war or the emergence of new types of violence in post-conflict societies. This study contributes to a broader understanding of how DDR provision is determined by specific characteristics of the rebel group, country and conflict; how various components of DDR can have different impacts on the failure of peace and the new type of violence. The findings suggest that including DDR within a peace agreement, especially a reintegration programme, has a significantly positive impact on peace and shows evidence of the importance of military reintegration in the process of peace consolidation.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 40-06, Section: A, page: 3503. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1979.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 35-09, Section: A, page: 6213. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1974.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 36-08, Section: A, page: 5524. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1975.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 37-12, Section: A, page: 7939. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1976.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 38-05, Section: A, page: 3014. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1977.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 39-03, Section: A, page: 1803. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1977.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 39-11, Section: A, page: 6937. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1978.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 33-06, Section: A, page: 2987. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1971.