The problem of this thesis is to determine the relationship of political promises made by the elected candidates for governor with their achievements in relation to these political promises. From such an evaluation, it is hoped to determine the value of different types of political promises, and thus be more able to judge properly candidates seeking the office of governor.

abstract: The current landscape of political speech is ripe for deep philosophical analysis yet has not been thoroughly investigated through the lens of speech-act theory. In this space, I believe I contribute something novel to the area, namely a notion of campaign promises that differs from standard promises that enables a new way of interpreting this kind of speech. Over the course of this paper, it is argued that Campaign Promises (CP) are non-trivially and philosophically distinct from the notion of Standard Promises (SP). There are many philosophical distinctions to draw, including moral, political and logical, but my focus is largely in philosophy of language. I engage the work of Searle, Austin and Wittgenstein among others to investigate what I take to be the following important differences from CP and SP: First, that CP and SP differ in the “best interest” condition, of the condition that a promise must be in the best interest of the promisee in order for that promise to obtain, which in turn, produces the effect of threatening those who do not want the promise to come about. Secondly, that CP serve to reinforce world views in a way that is non-trivially different from SP. To do this, I employ Wittgensteinian language game theory to bridge the gap between traditional Searlian speech act theory to more modern McGowan-style oppressive language models. Through this process I develop and defend this alternative way of understanding and evaluating CP and political speech. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Philosophy 2019

Foreign policy is the nexus between domestic and international political systems. Studies in Canada have so far produced mixed findings related to the role of political parties in foreign policy. Drawing from campaign promise, issue ownership and foreign policy decision-making literature, this dissertation investigates whether there is a foreign policy domain consistently dominated by a particular political party in the Canadian context. Part I uses data from the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP) combined with manually coded foreign policy promises to determine the content and scope of foreign policy-related election promises in Canada. Part II follows the well-established pledge approach to measure promise fulfilment of foreign policy promises of Canadian governing parties following elections. This dissertation not only seeks to determine whether parties matter in the context of foreign policy, but also whether one party consistently “owns” the foreign policy domain or specific foreign policy issues. Findings from this research will fill an existing gap in the literature related to policy-specific promise fulfillment in Canada and will bridge existing theoretical assumptions related to political party behaviour and foreign policy decision-making. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)

No description available.