No description available.

This dissertation examines the theoretical aspects of communication and coexistence among different and sometimes competing national cultures in contemporary liberal-democratic states. As its primary example, the study focuses on the quest for self-determination of Canada's indigenous peoples, but the theoretical significance of the project extends well beyond the bounds of this particular case. With this end in mind, the dissertation advances and defends a set of normative political principles which could, with certain necessary modifications, serve to guide just, equitable, and stable relations among different national cultures in a broad range of cases and contexts. The discussion opens with the development of a model of cross-cultural understanding and accommodation, which in turn is used to demonstrate the manner in which the theory and practice of liberal democracy often serves to legitimate the assertion of the authority of particular national cultures over their relatively smaller and weaker rivals. / In opposition to this more conventional liberal approach, the dissertation proposes a reformulation of the theoretical and institutional bases of liberal conceptions of national sovereignty and self-determination. This alternative approach bypasses any attempt to identify authentic or foundational liberal values which must frame and govern the principle of national self-determination, and which assert their categorical primacy over competing normative ideals and traditions. This approach to self-determination balances, on the one hand, the importance of more localized national ends, ideals, and institutions with a concern, on the other, for universal standards of democratic conduct, responsibility, and governance. What results is not a grand theory of national self-determination, but rather a set of flexible principles which can be attuned to different cultural contexts and circumstances, and which are subject to the democratic consent of the nations or peoples concerned.

People experience autonomy when they perceive their behaviour to be volitional and they feel controlled when their behaviour is driven by external demands or internal pressures. Gaine and La Guardia (2009) developed the Motivations for Relational Activities (MRA) scale to assess the extent to which romantic partners feel autonomous and controlled in a variety of specific relational activities. In a sample of mostly non-married individuals, Gaine and La Guardia (2009) found that the more willing and the less pressured individuals feel to engage in relational activities, the greater their relationship well-being. Study 1 examined whether autonomous and controlled activity motivations have similar implications for relationship well-being for married individuals. Results replicated the results from the non-married sample (Gaine & La Guardia, 2009). Study 2 assessed the relational activity motivation of both partners in married and common-law relationships and examined how one’s own motives relate to one’s own relationship well-being and one’s partner’s relationship well-being. Results suggested that one’s own motivations toward relational activities predict one’s own relationship well-being but not one’s partner’s well-being, with the exception of men’s relationship satisfaction, which was positively predicted by women’s autonomous activity motivation. Study 2 also employed daily diaries to examine the implications of each partner’s activity motivations for partners’ daily relational functioning and well-being. Results showed that when individuals are more willing and less pressured to engage in relational activities, they experience greater daily relationship well-being. Further, when individuals are more willing and less pressured in their relational activities, they are observed by their partner to be more engaged and responsive on a day-to-day basis. Finally, women’s willing engagement of relational activities emerged as a particularly important predictor of their own as well as men’s relational functioning and wellness.

Typescript. / Bibliography: leaves 166-171. / Microfiche. / xiv, 171 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm

The thesis examines existing claims for self-determination in Torres Strait, the mechanics of recognition of the claim, and future possibilities for self-governance in the region.

In this dissertation I examine whether the First Ministers' Coferences (FMCs) and political accords negotiated at these meetings from 1983-1987 assisted in transforming Canadian constitutionalism. During the period 1983-1987, four FMCs were held to consider Aboriginal peoples' place in a new Constitutional order. These meetings renegotiated the relationship between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in Canada by reconsidering some of the assumptions permeating Canadian constitutionalism. The FMCs involved direct dialogues betwen heads of federal government, provincial governments and the four main Aboriginal organisations. Political accords were used in these FMCs to direct the dialogues and to identify when mutually acceptable constitutional associations had been achieved. Tully's reconceptualisation of constitutionalism will be used to evaluate the extent to which Canadian constitutionalism was transformed. He argues that constitutionalism is an activity or process of ongoing dialogues between diverse cultures. He further suggests that three conventions operate to enable these intercultural dialogues to recognise and accommodate cultural diversity. These conventions are mutual recognition, consent and cultural continuity. In order to identify whether constitutionalism was transformed, I consider whether the relationship between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples was altered to further recognise and accommodate cultural diversity. This will be demonstrated by examining whether Tully's three conventions were adopted and advanced during the FMCs between 1983-1987. I conclude that the FMCs and the negotiation around political accords adopted and promoted Tully's three conventions, thereby further recognising and accommodating indigenous Canadians and thus transforming Canadian constitutionalism.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.