Thesis (M.A.) in Communication--University of Maine, 2002. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 126-137).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 114-118). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 114-118).

Through a combination of stringent and deceptive corporate control of sources, as well as an academic blind spot on certain low-brow subcultures, there has been a lack of serious study of the various regional professional wrestling traditions that crossed the United States until the end of the 1980s. An in-depth examination of a wide range of books, newsletters, and interviews shows a rich history with a deep economic, social, and creative diversity that has been largely ignored as the industry has moved towards monopolization under Vincent Kennedy McMahon. The various regions are divided into three groups: those that closed on their own, those that fell in competition with McMahon, and those that survived into the era of national corporate pro wrestling. This organization challenges the narrative that regional pro wrestling came to an end solely due to the business power of McMahon. The first group looks at Northern California, Southern California, Georgia, and North Texas. The second group examines the independent wrestling companies Mid-South Wrestling and the American Wrestling Association, and their attempts to compete with McMahon on a national level. The group also explores how the intense local fan bases in Portland and Memphis buoyed the local pro wrestling promotions for a time from outside competition from McMahon. The third group contains Jim Crockett Productions and the World Wide Wrestling Federation. These two organizations eventually became the two major corporate wrestling entities World Championship Wrestling and the World Wrestling Federation, respectively. A glossary of terms is included.

Since the latter half of the twentieth century patterns of economic flows and the deployment of systems of production have encouraged greater political and social integration between nation states. This phenomenon, called globalisation, has reinvigorated debate about the nation state as a mode of organisation, and created the conditions for an ongoing natural experiment concerning state adjustment. This experiment, while on a global scale, has led to different responses from national governments, as each grappled with how best to accommodate both domestic and international interests. One neglected aspect of analysis in these processes is the role played by national bureaucracy in state adjustment as a means to move with globalising pressures or to resist their impact. This thesis presents a qualitative analysis of the interaction of one globalising process, foreign direct investment (FDI), and the workings of the nation state, as a means of assessing the way in which the national government has used regulatory processes and its bureaucracy to control FDI. An extended historical case study is used to examine changes in policy, regulation and the organisation of the national bureaucracy concerned with FDI in Australia. The period examined is from 1968 to 2004 enabling comparisons to be made across the experience of seven successive national governments (those led by prime ministers Gorton, McMahon, Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating and Howard) in the way they managed the domestic and international circumstances that impacted on FDI. This thesis makes a contribution to the literature on the interaction of globalising processes, the nation state and the role played by national public bureaucracies where national and transnational interests intersect. In particular, this thesis identifies the national bureaucracy as a key agent for government in enabling and domesticating the processes of globalisation. This finding demonstrates that national bureaucracy is significant as both a facilitator and the inhibitor of processes of globalisation, and therefore is a key factor in understanding the issues of state adjustment in studies of globalisation.

China and India claimed two territories along their borders on the Himalayas: Aksai Chin in the west and the North-East Frontier Agency in the east. The border dispute escalated and, on October 20, 1962, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) opened fire on the two fronts and advanced into the disputed territories. One month later, on November 21, China declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew behind its disputed line of control. In response, the Indian government arrested over 2,000 Chinese living in India and interned them in Deoli, Rajasthan. When the Chinese were released between 1964 and 1966, they found their properties sold off by the Indian government. Many left India and immigrated to Canada. I interviewed four Indian-born Chinese who were interned and who now live in the Greater Toronto Area. I recorded their accounts of life in Deoli Detention Camp in Rajasthan.

China and India claimed two territories along their borders on the Himalayas: Aksai Chin in the west and the North-East Frontier Agency in the east. The border dispute escalated and, on October 20, 1962, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) opened fire on the two fronts and advanced into the disputed territories. One month later, on November 21, China declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew behind its disputed line of control. In response, the Indian government arrested over 2,000 Chinese living in India and interned them in Deoli, Rajasthan. When the Chinese were released between 1964 and 1966, they found their properties sold off by the Indian government. Many left India and immigrated to Canada. I interviewed four Indian-born Chinese who were interned and who now live in the Greater Toronto Area. I recorded their accounts of life in Deoli Detention Camp in Rajasthan.