Raven Sinclair (2004) locates the social worker at the heart of the colonial project, carrying out violent and assimilative government policy in Canada (p.50). Social work's connections to colonialism have been consciously and some would say “innocently” mutually dependent (Rossiter, 2001; Heron, 2007). Social work responses over time have been criticized for being non-performative (Ahmed, 2004), upholding institutional power (Bunjun, 2014) and ignoring ongoing colonialism (Lawrence & Dua, 2005). This study explores how self-identified white social work managers and directors reflect on and understand their roles in relation to reconciliation policy. It looks at the way discourse interrupts or maintains ruling relations including white supremacy and other colonial continuities (Heron, 2007). “In order to avoid further complicity, in assimilative and colonial practices, non-indigenous helpers must develop a clear understanding of their privilege and of their professions’ complicity in past and present colonial practices embedded in their practice”(Baskin, 2016). Through qualitative interviewing the study used critical whiteness studies and critical discourse analysis with the concept of relational validity in mind (Tuck & Yang, 2018). “What is valid in research is that which resonates with people’s lives and informs their power to make change” (Tuck & Yang, 2018, p.xiii). The findings suggest that participants orientation to reconciliation in the workplace, is controlled and continually reinforced through state discourses (neoliberal, neocolonial, reconciliation). Interestingly, the findings also suggest that participants may be de-contextualizing AOP discourses to neutralize and depoliticize their professional roles in the colonial project, as well as to rationalize their reluctance to take action. This suggests current approaches are not adequate to address colonial continuities in an era of reconciliation. / Thesis / Master of Social Work (MSW)

This dissertation examines how institutions and individuals navigate the histories of racial difference and settler colonialism by focusing on architectural preservationists' explanations of what are referred to as white cities. Through dialogue between architectural history, international relations, and critical heritage studies, I map the making and remaking of the histories of white cities, or what were designed as "European" zones – in opposition to "Indigenous" zones – that brought together modernist architecture, white supremacy, early twentieth-century European settler colonialism, and architectural preservation. My focus on preservationists' narrations of these white cities extends interdisciplinary work charting their historical production from a group of scholars focusing on the relationship of architecture in the production of domination in European colonialism. My work extends this scholarship by shifting to preservationists' narrations of white cities through the question: how do preservationists remake the histories of racial difference and settler colonialism that underpinned the production of white cities? In this dissertation, I argue that preservationists remake the histories of racial difference and settler colonialism that produced white cities by relying on what I refer to as didactic narratives to legitimate preservation interventions. Preservationists use these didactic narratives to reframe white cities as part of national histories, the universalism of the World Heritage List, and the history of the modernist movement in architecture and planning. My argument advances by showing preservationists' appropriations of the didactic narratives in the World Heritage List inscription materials for White City of Tel Aviv (2003), Rabat, Modern Capital and Historic City: A Shared Heritage (2012), and Asmara: A Modernist African City (2017) and through ethnographic fieldwork with local preservationists in Casablanca and Tel Aviv. To frame these analyses, I map the institutional changes within the UNESCO World Heritage Committee that sought greater legitimacy by expanding the typological and geographical scope of the World Heritage List. To do so, the institution enlisted the International Committee for the Documentation and Conservation of Buildings, Sites, and Neighborhoods of the Modern Movement (DOCOMOMO-International) to recraft the criteria to include twentieth-century modernist architecture onto the List. However, DOCOMOMO promoted a particular way of interpreting white cities through the didactic narratives that led to the proliferation of white cities on the World Heritage List. By charting the different ways that preservationists appropriate the didactic narratives in the World Heritage List materials and in the text of semi-structured interviews and from participant observation, I show how the intersecting power structures of white supremacy and settler colonialism that were embedded in the production of white cities are adapted by preservationists in the co-constitution of international institutions, disciplinary knowledge, and individual subject positions. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation considers how the histories of race and colonialism are narrated by architectural preservationists. I do so by focusing on preservationists' narrations of white cities, "European" enclaves designed in opposition to "Indigenous" zones in early 20th century settler colonialism. By focusing on the preservation of what were designed as racialized spaces, I explore how these histories of racial difference and colonialism are mediated by forms of knowledge, institutions, and individuals. Yet it is the focus on preservationists that I detail how preservationists silence, downplay, or mobilize the histories of white cities through three different narrative tropes of national histories, the universalism of the World Heritage List, and modernist movement architecture and design. I show how these narrative tropes justify preservation interventions while making some histories more accessible and others less so. To analyze how preservationists remake the histories of white cities, I map the creation and transformations of the primary international preservation organization, the World Heritage List. These institutional changes led to the addition of white cities in Asmara, Rabat, and Tel Aviv based on preservationists' adaptations of the three narrative tropes. I then show how these same narrative tropes are appropriated by local preservationists to remake the histories of race and colonialism in white cities. By drawing attention to the ways that the histories of race and colonialism are remade through the intersections of individuals, institutions, and forms of knowledge, the project shows how knowledge on the modernist movement is implicated in the constitution of power in the World Heritage List and in consolidating privileged subject positions. Moreover, my analysis opens up questions on the co-constitution of institutions, forms of knowledge, and individual subject positions. Lastly, the analysis demonstrates that individuals have the potential to challenge – rather than to uphold – the constellations of power etched into white cities. I show one instance of architectural preservationists challenging these structures of power in the preservation effort of Les Abattoirs in Casablanca in 2009-2013.

This dissertation is broadly concerned with the relationship between democracy and race in the United States federal government. To analyze this problem, I rely on archival research from the 1967-8 National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (commonly known as the Kerner Commission, after chairperson Governor Otto Kerner) to examine how the discussion and management of hundreds of so-called "race riots" in the summer of 1967 both challenges civil disobedience and embodies structural racism. Employing a content analysis of the final 425-page Kerner Commission government report, I assess the categorization, labeling, and language used to describe and document the hundreds of "race riots" and related state violence through acts of police misconduct that engulfed the country in the summer of 1967. I rely heavily on the report and background research itself, as well as major books related to race riots and presidential commissions, such as Anthony Platt's 1971 The Politics of Riot Commissions and Steven Gillon's 2018 Separate and Unequal. I incorporate theories of exit and the entitlement to rights advanced in literature by scholars like Jennet Kirkpatrick, James C. Scott, and Hannah Arendt. This dissertation is concerned with the relationship between morality and civic participation in democratic politics. I analyze Christopher Kutz's book Complicity: Ethics and Law for a Collective Age to delve into the ramifications of democracy and US citizenship being considered a kind of "collective project" and further contemplate what obligations and implications exist for citizens in US democracy against racial injustice. Since the Kerner Commission coincided with the rise of "law and order" politics in the nation's political vernacular, it represents a unique opportunity to witness an ideological shift toward a Garrison state and neoliberal ethos, both of which undermine the country's espoused democratic values, resting on the grammar of equality and justice for all. The Kerner Commission can provide valuable lessons in studies of political domination that remain pertinent to overcoming oppression and injustice today. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation is broadly concerned with the relationship between democracy and race in the United States federal government. American democracy espouses moral virtues related to freedom and justice for all, and yet structural racism remains pervasive in how the government operates. To analyze this problem, I rely on archival research from the 1967-8 National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (commonly known as the Kerner Commission, after chairperson Governor Otto Kerner) to examine how the discussion and management of hundreds of so-called “race riots” in the summer of 1967 both challenges civil disobedience and embodies structural racism. I rely heavily on the report and background research itself to do a content analysis. I also use major books related to race riots and presidential commissions, such as Anthony Platt’s 1971 The Politics of Riot Commissions and Steven Gillon’s 2018 Separate and Unequal. Given that this dissertation is concerned with how morality shapes civic participation in democratic politics, I analyze Christopher Kutz’s book Complicity: Ethics and Law for a Collective Age. Since the Kerner Commission coincided with the rise of “law and order” politics in the nation’s political vernacular, it represents a unique opportunity to witness an ideological shift toward a Garrison state and neoliberal ethos, both of which undermine the country’s espoused democratic values, resting on the grammar of equality and justice for all. Individual advocates as well as scholars can learn valuable lessons from the Kerner Commission about oppression and injustice in today’s society.

The legislative supremacy of Parliament has dominated the constitutional law of South Africa for a very long time. In the pre-constitutional era, the judiciary had no power to question the deeds of Parliament. Despite the need for the judiciary to be independent from the two other governmental branches to execute its function effectively, it was surely dependent on them. However, the creation of the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) as a separate governmental department by the Constitutional Seventeenth Amendment Act, read together with Superior Court Act, mandated by the requirements of a supreme Constitution (and not Parliament), changed things so that the judiciary is no longer dependent on government for its day-to-day administration. This thesis examines the independence of the OCJ and its role in promoting judicial transformation in the new South Africa. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL. M. (Human Rights Law)

The focus of this discussion is whether there is still the need to enforce the restraint of trade agreements in their pre-Constitutional form. The dawn of the constitutional era has necessitated a re-examination of common law with a view to establishing whether the balance created by the latter (regarding this field) still exists. The Bill of Rights has obviously raised some doubts regarding the equilibrium desired between employer and employee interests. Section 22 of the Constitution is to the effect that everyone must be free to secure employment (as a fundamental right), whereas the common law restraint of trade agreements impose some bars to the operation of the said right. It is common course that the Constitution is more superior to common law, what remains a debateable issue is whether there are any reasonable limits that must be considered to justify the disregard of the Constitution. Serious arguments around the direct and indirect application of the Bill of Rights still persist and failure to resolve them would have the effect of excluding or weakening the application of the Bill to disputes arising in this field. In common law the enforcement of restraint agreements is sine qua non for the greater good of protecting the sanctity of contracts. Contractual obligations must be fulfilled unless it would be unreasonable to enforce same. The question of the onus to prove unreasonableness, which lies with the employee, turns to place an onerous burden on the employee. This coupled with the employee’s weaker bargaining power raises doubts as to whether the employee is in a better position to conclude a restraint of trade agreement. Common law does not consider or accommodate this concern in that its main object is the fulfilment of the agreement. It is believed that the Constitution has ushered in a new approach which focuses mainly on the fairness of the agreement itself. The enforcement of the agreement must pass the constitutional muster built in section 22 in order to ensure that there is equilibrium between the employer (the restrainor) and employee (the restrainee) interests. In the end this discussion explores whether it is justifiable to subject the Right to work (as provided by the Constitution) to the common law restraint which is opposed to the constitutional right. The circumstances under which the exclusion of section 22 is condonable are interrogated within the framework of conflicting case law. / LLM (Labour Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

The focus of this discussion is whether there is still the need to enforce the restraint of trade agreements in their pre-Constitutional form. The dawn of the constitutional era has necessitated a re-examination of common law with a view to establishing whether the balance created by the latter (regarding this field) still exists. The Bill of Rights has obviously raised some doubts regarding the equilibrium desired between employer and employee interests. Section 22 of the Constitution is to the effect that everyone must be free to secure employment (as a fundamental right), whereas the common law restraint of trade agreements impose some bars to the operation of the said right. It is common course that the Constitution is more superior to common law, what remains a debateable issue is whether there are any reasonable limits that must be considered to justify the disregard of the Constitution. Serious arguments around the direct and indirect application of the Bill of Rights still persist and failure to resolve them would have the effect of excluding or weakening the application of the Bill to disputes arising in this field. In common law the enforcement of restraint agreements is sine qua non for the greater good of protecting the sanctity of contracts. Contractual obligations must be fulfilled unless it would be unreasonable to enforce same. The question of the onus to prove unreasonableness, which lies with the employee, turns to place an onerous burden on the employee. This coupled with the employee’s weaker bargaining power raises doubts as to whether the employee is in a better position to conclude a restraint of trade agreement. Common law does not consider or accommodate this concern in that its main object is the fulfilment of the agreement. It is believed that the Constitution has ushered in a new approach which focuses mainly on the fairness of the agreement itself. The enforcement of the agreement must pass the constitutional muster built in section 22 in order to ensure that there is equilibrium between the employer (the restrainor) and employee (the restrainee) interests. In the end this discussion explores whether it is justifiable to subject the Right to work (as provided by the Constitution) to the common law restraint which is opposed to the constitutional right. The circumstances under which the exclusion of section 22 is condonable are interrogated within the framework of conflicting case law. / LLM (Labour Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

History / D. Litt. et Phil. (History)

Approved for public release, distribution is unlimited / Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, the issue of civil-military relations has become critical to the development of the new Eastern European democracies. Both the United States and Germany have a long civil-military relations tradition. A comparison of the United States' and Germany's approaches to civil-military relations will provide clear examples for new democratic states to follow, as they develop their civil-military relations, especially as they consider multi-national NATO units. Following an overview of civil-military theory, this thesis highlights the historical and political developments of civil-military relations within both countries. The thesis further explains the similarities and differences in their developments, as well as the implications for the military profession. The thesis provides a comparison of both approaches to the military profession and to the primary civil-military relations theory, in order to determine if the requirement of democratic civilian control over the military has been met. The thesis summarizes advantages and disadvantages of both American and German approaches. / Lieutenant Colonel (GS), German Army

A predominância do Poder Executivo no contexto atual da separação de poderes, especialmente nos países que adotam o sistema presidencialista de governo, tem, entre suas causas fundamentais, a detenção da titularidade da gestão financeira e orçamentária do Estado pelo Chefe do Poder Executivo. Ademais, além das competências inerentes ao exercício de suas atribuições intrínsecas, o sistema jurídico confere uma série de instrumentos de flexibilidade que permitem ao Executivo, durante a fase de execução orçamentária, deixar de dar cumprimento efetivo ao orçamento público na forma como aprovado pelo Poder Legislativo. A par dos instrumentos de flexibilidade, existem outros mecanismos de que se vale o Chefe do Poder Executivo para alcançar um maior domínio no quadro da gestão financeira, mecanismos estes que, embora abarcados pelo sistema jurídico, são, no mais das vezes, utilizados de forma desvirtuada em relação às suas reais finalidades. Ainda, a despeito da vasta competência constitucional atribuída ao Poder Executivo, verifica-se um quadro de recuo do Poder Legislativo no exercício de suas funções, como ao conferir autorizações antecipadas para a prática de determinadas medidas de gestão, aliado à aquiescência diante dos abusos perpetrados pelo Poder Executivo. Contribui, ainda, de forma decisiva para a predominância do Poder Executivo, algumas práticas inerentes ao chamado presidencialismo de coalizão, que permitem ao Executivo negociar o apoio dos membros do Legislativo a medidas de seu interesse, em troca da liberação de recursos para a consecução de emendas parlamentares, e da nomeação para cargos públicos. Diante do quadro hoje delineado, que aponta para o domínio do Poder Executivo e a supremacia de seus interesses, urge a necessidade de adoção de medidas que visam recompor o equilíbrio entre os Poderes do Estado. Assim, além de expor a problemática existente, por meio da análise histórico-evolutiva das competências orçamentárias, e do papel desempenhado por cada um dos Poderes na sistemática orçamentária atual, abordando, em especial, os instrumentos de flexibilidade conferidos ao Executivo e os instrumentos de controle a cargo do Legislativo, o presente estudo aborda algumas propostas, já em tramitação, visando a alteração da sistemática orçamentária, entre as quais toma relevo a instituição do chamado orçamento impositivo, em substituição ao caráter autorizativo que hoje o reveste. Ainda, o estudo propõe medidas que visam refrear o avanço das competências executivas, utilizando como parâmetro algumas experiências trazidas de outros ordenamentos jurídicos, tendo em vista que as distorções verificadas não constituem uma realidade exclusiva do quadro político nacional. / The supremacy of Executive in the present context of the division of powers, specially in the countries which adopt the presidential government system, has, among its basic causes, the ownership of the attribution of the financial and budgetary administration of the State by the Executive Head. Furthermore, besides the competencies inherent to the term of its intrinsic attributions, the legal system gives a series of flexibility instruments that allows the Executive, during the budget execution phase, not effectively accomplish the public budget as it was approved by the Legislative. Knowing the flexibility instruments, there are others mechanisms used by the Head of the Executive to reach a bigger domain in the financial management scene, these mechanisms that, although embraced by the juridical system, are, mostly used in a distorted way related to its real purpose. Despite of the ample constitutional competency imputed to the Executive, we can find a backward picture of the Legislative performing its functions, as well as to give advanced authorizations to the performance of certain manage practices, allied to the compliance facing the fallacy committed by the Executive. Still, conduce, in a decisive way to the prevalence of the Executive, some inherent practices to the called presidential coalition, which allow the Executive to negotiate the support to Legislative members in actions of its self-interest, in exchange of the release of resources for the attainment of the parliamentary amendments and the public positions designations. Facing the picture contoured today, that points to the ascendancy of the Executive Power and the supremacy of its interests, it is imperative the necessity of the adoption of actions that aim the restore of the balance between the Powers of the State. Thus, besides to expose the existing problematical, by the historicalevolutionary analysis of the budgetary attributions, and the function performed by each of the Powers in the present budgetary systematic, analyzing, specially, the instruments of flexibility given to the Executive and the instruments of control designated to the Legislative, the present study analyzes some proposals, already on course, aiming the change of the budgetary system, among which stands out the institution of the called imposing budget, in replacement to the authoritative nature that today line it. Also, the study propose actions that aim to restrain the progress of the executive competencies, using as a parameter some experiences brought from other juridical systems, taking into account that the distortions found do not constitute a exclusive reality of the national political picture.

[pt] Esta pesquisa tem por objetivo demonstrar que o Apocalipse oferece aos seus leitores uma densa cristologia desde o início do livro e propõe a certeza da realidade transcendente através de um oráculo que evoca e celebra a vinda da supremacia divina a partir da experiência histórica e trans-histórica do próprio Cristo, a fim de proporcionar encorajamento e esperança às comunidades do cristianismo originário que atravessavam seus próprios desafios. / [en] This research aims to demonstrate that the Revelation offers its readers a dense Christology since the beginning of the book and offers the assurance of the transcendent reality through an oracle that evokes and celebrates the coming of the divine supremacy from the historical and trans-historical experience of Christ himself, in order to provide encouragement and hope to communities of Early Christianity who faced their own challenges.