abstract: Rhetorical theorist Kenneth Burke has asserted the significance of paying equal, if not more attention to, propagandist rhetoric, arguing that "there are other ways of burning books on the pyre-and the favorite method of the hasty reviewer is to deprive himself and his readers by inattention." Despite Burke's exhortation, attention to white supremacist discourse has been relatively meager. Historians Clive Webb and Charles Eagles have called for further research on white supremacy arguing that attention to white supremacist discourse is important both to fully understand and appreciate pro-civil rights rhetoric in context and to develop a more complex understanding of white supremacist rhetoric. This thesis provides a close examination of the literature and rhetoric of two white supremacist organizations: the Citizens' Council, an organization that sprang up in response to the 1954 landmark decision of Brown v. Board of Education and Stromfront.org, a global online forum community that hosts space for supporters of white supremacy. Memory scholars Barbie Zelizer, John Bodnar, and Stephen Brown note the usability of memory to shape social, political, and cultural aspects of society and the potential implications of such shaping. Drawing from this scholarship, the analysis of these texts focuses specifically on the rhetorical shaping of memory as a vehicle to promote white supremacy. Through an analysis of the Citizens' Council's use of historical events, national figures and cultural stereotypes, Chapter 1 explicates the organization's attempt to form a memorial narrative that worked to promote political goals, create a sense of solidarity through resistance, and indoctrinate the youth in the ideology of white supremacy. Chapter 2 examines the rhetorical use of memory on Stormfront and explains how the website capitalizes upon the wide reaching global impact of World War II to construct a memorial narrative that can be accessed by a global audience of white supremacists. Ultimately, this thesis offers a focused review of the rhetorical signatures of two white supremacist groups with the aim of combating contemporary instantiations of racist discourse. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.A. English 2013

Magister Legum - LLM / The 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa is the supreme law of the Republic and in enjoying this status it is prescribing the composition of the three different arms of government as well as each branch’s status within the new constitutional dispensation. Prior to this era of constitutional supremacy South Africa was subject to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, an era where the courts could only challenge legislation on procedural grounds, but had no general power to declare legislation unconstitutional. The Constitution further provides for a separation of powers between these arms of government, and it has vested the judicial authority in the courts and conferred strong judicial review powers upon the Constitutional Court. The head of executive has recently argued that “the powers conferred on the courts cannot be regarded as superior to the powers resulting from a mandate given by the people in a popular vote”. The preceding quote is one of many statements and claims that forms part of a national debate on the nature and scope of the Constitutional Court’s powers in South Africa. The Constitutional Court has in recent years handed down judgments that were not favourable to the legislative and executive arms of the South African government. These judgments are evident in the existing and on-going tension between, the three arms of government.

In this thesis I examine the reproduction of nationalism and white supremacy within Confederate monument removal (CMR) storytelling, and the ways collective identity and emotions are implicated within these reproductions. Using reader generated CMR narratives published in a Southern newspaper, the Augusta Chronicle, I conduct narrative analysis in order to identify key story elements, moral arguments, and cultural codes present in the public CMR debate. Findings indicate that two sharply contested narratives emerge during this debate, one calling for the protection of Confederate monuments and one calling for the removal of Confederate monuments. Further, though these contested stories produce opposing moral value judgements of Confederate monuments, they rely on similar cultural and emotion codes, frames, and rhetorical moves which reproduce nationalism and white supremacy. Through reifying national mythologies, constructing individuals as citizens, rhetorically isolating racism and slavery, and reproducing racialized capitalism, CMR narratives on both sides of the debate become sites where nationalism and white supremacy are perpetuated. These findings indicate that there is an important relationship between collective memory and cultural meaning-making processes related to identity and emotions. Further, findings also suggest that collective memory narratives, particularly contested or oppositional narratives, are important sites facilitating continuity in hegemonic systems. Because of their key role in perpetuating nationalism and white supremacy, it is possible that collective memory narratives may also be spaces where the interruption of hegemonic systems can also be facilitated.

Thesis advisor: Heather Cox Richardson / Throughout the nineteenth century, southern Democrats had one continual objective: to preserve racial hierarchy in their home region. Direct efforts in the 1870s, though, failed to eliminate the threat that Republicans might renew Reconstruction. So, in the 1880s, white southerners in Congress developed an array of softer, less direct approaches. Their goal was to foster reconciliation with white northerners, undercutting support for Reconstruction and securing white supremacy for the South. With one issue more than any other, they succeeded: expansion of the U.S. Navy. Recognizing that global developments and the decrepit state of the U.S. Navy were increasing concern about national defense, Congressman Hilary Abner Herbert (D-AL) positioned himself to become a champion of naval expansion. A former enslaver with no maritime experience, the Confederate colonel leveraged an appointment as chair of the House Committee on Naval Affairs in 1885. Over the next eight years, Herbert established bipartisan and cross-sectional support for naval legislation in the House and spearheaded the most drastic peacetime military buildup Americans had ever seen. The interests of this “Father of the New Navy,” though, were chiefly sectional. For Herbert, militarization was a means to advancing reconciliation and securing white supremacy for the South. He stated this purpose clearly both in private and public. In 1890, he put it into practice. When Republicans introduced legislation to address voting rights in the South, Herbert wielded his reputation for bipartisanship and reconciliation against it, threatening violence and an end to economic unity. On the national level, Herbert’s use of naval expansion to further reconciliation escalated militarization and paved the way for an overseas U.S. empire. In the South, the Alabamian’s efforts helped open the door for a new system of legalized white supremacy that he celebrated as “a final solution of the negro question.” / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2021. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: History.

The political climate in America continues to become more polarized each year. The "left" and "right" political parties are locked in near-constant struggle and it is often the people whom they are meant to serve that suffer the harshest effects of this struggle. This mainstream political posturing and hostile behavior has allowed for the continued presence, and some say resurgence, of racially motivated right-wing nationalist groups. Groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Nations and racist Skinheads have seen periods of strength and decline throughout American history. In the late 20th and early 21st Centuries they have begun to adapt their message to find acceptance in groups outside their own and plant the seeds of racial and ethnic bias and supremacy in minds not yet stricken with the illnesses of hate and bigotry. This research examines the ideological framing of far-right White Supremacist groups in the United States. Discussion of political, nationalist and economic ideologies and the ways these ideologies are framed and presented to wider audiences are described. Using content analysis, more than 50 editorials, articles and other writings from six of the most circulated newsletters produced by American based White Supremacist groups were examined. Thematic analysis and line-by-line coding allowed for the development of various codes related to nationalism, immigration, traditional supremacy and perceived political failure, as well as many others. Findings suggest that many White Supremacist groups and individuals are shifting away from the biological or genetic supremacist beliefs of a previous era. Instead adopting a racially motivated nationalist identity and positioning themselves as being engaged in a struggle for "white civil rights." While still vehemently racist and racially/ethnically biased they seem to have taken up this new position in order to thinly veil their racism behind a guise of nationalist pride and altruism. This is especially troubling when one considers that many hate crimes are committed by individuals with no formal affiliation to organized hate groups. These individuals are often racially radicalized in a slow process that starts with mainstream political beliefs and slowly progresses to more radical beliefs as they struggle to understand the world in which they live.

Internal strife has plagued the South American country of Colombia for well over forty years. In an effort to combat the different subversive elements within its borders, the Government of Colombia developed an interagency counterinsurgency strategy that takes a whole-of-government approach. This approach takes many governmental functions and institutions and places them under one counterinsurgency "umbrella". The cornerstone of this interagency model is strong civil-military cooperation. What this research project seeks to accomplish is to first apply the Concordance Theory of Civil-Military Relations to Colombia's unique civil-military relationship. Secondly, this research project seeks to understand how the Colombian interagency counterinsurgency model has balanced the country's security and socio-political development and sustainability. Specifically, this research project attempts to answer the question of how this interagency model of counterinsurgency influences socio-political and security sustainability since the implementation of Plan Colombia. The methodology for this research project will include a combination of primary source reviews, comparative case study examination and simple trend analysis of significant security and socio-political variables. This methodological approach will best describe the unique political, military and social dynamics taking place within Colombia. This analysis of Colombia's interagency counterinsurgency strategy is relevant not only to Colombia but to many other countries facing similar challenges in Latin America and around the world. The applicability of this model to other insurgency scenarios will also be briefly examined. / by Harvey A. Schoonover. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2010. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2010. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

It is not generally known that a pro-Nazi organization, the German-American Bund, held sway among certain segments of American society during the 1920s and 1930s. The organization achieved its greatest successes after the self-proclaimed "American Fuehrer," Fritz Julius Kuhn, took up the reigns of leadership in 1936. Under Kuhn's leadership, the Bund saw a dramatic increase in its membership rolls; it is estimated that over 25,000 dues-paying members belonged to this first-ever National Socialist organization created outside the environs of Nazi Germany. This thesis explores reasons why this blatantly pro-Nazi organization thrived in the bastion of democracy. While most historians attribute other reasons for the Bund's success, this thesis argues that it was the outstanding organizational skills of Kuhn that kept the movement alive in the years prior to World War II. / by Eliot A. Kopp. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2010. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2010. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

A supremacia da Constituição exige que a Suprema Corte tenha a última palavra sobre o sentido da Constituição? As Supremas Cortes norte-americana e brasileira afirmam que sim, respaldadas pelo conhecimento convencional. O objetivo principal da tese é demonstrar que esta assertiva é simplesmente equivocada. Será reconstruída a história da expansão do papel político do Judiciário, no âmbito da interpretação constitucional, com vistas a elucidar os seus verdadeiros pressupostos. A evolução do constitucionalismo brasileiro será analisada à luz de tais critérios, para que se possa perceber que só há no Brasil algo parecido com uma supremacia judicial após 1988. Após o exame das críticas institucionais e democráticas, será explorado o potencial da doutrina dos diálogos constitucionais para explicar a realidade das interações entre os Poderes Legislativo e Judiciário na interpretação constitucional, e para prover um suporte normativo que logre reconciliar o fenômeno da judicialização da política com a democracia no Brasil. / The supremacy clause requires that the Supreme Court shall have the last word on constitutional matters? The brazilian and north-american Supreme Courts confirms, endorsed by the traditional wisdom. The thesis aims proving that such statement is mistaken. The history of the global expansion of the judicial power, in refer to the constitutional intepretation, will be reconstructed, in order to clarify its real presuppositions. The brazilian constitutional evolution will be analyzed to prove that before 1988 there was no judicial supremacy in Brazil. After the analysis of the institutional and the democratic criticisms, the potencial of the constitutional dialogues doctrine will be explored to explain the interactions between the legislative and the judicial branches in constitutional interpretation, and its ability to provide a normative basis to reconcile the judicialization of politics with democracy in Brazil.

A supremacia da Constituição exige que a Suprema Corte tenha a última palavra sobre o sentido da Constituição? As Supremas Cortes norte-americana e brasileira afirmam que sim, respaldadas pelo conhecimento convencional. O objetivo principal da tese é demonstrar que esta assertiva é simplesmente equivocada. Será reconstruída a história da expansão do papel político do Judiciário, no âmbito da interpretação constitucional, com vistas a elucidar os seus verdadeiros pressupostos. A evolução do constitucionalismo brasileiro será analisada à luz de tais critérios, para que se possa perceber que só há no Brasil algo parecido com uma supremacia judicial após 1988. Após o exame das críticas institucionais e democráticas, será explorado o potencial da doutrina dos diálogos constitucionais para explicar a realidade das interações entre os Poderes Legislativo e Judiciário na interpretação constitucional, e para prover um suporte normativo que logre reconciliar o fenômeno da judicialização da política com a democracia no Brasil. / The supremacy clause requires that the Supreme Court shall have the last word on constitutional matters? The brazilian and north-american Supreme Courts confirms, endorsed by the traditional wisdom. The thesis aims proving that such statement is mistaken. The history of the global expansion of the judicial power, in refer to the constitutional intepretation, will be reconstructed, in order to clarify its real presuppositions. The brazilian constitutional evolution will be analyzed to prove that before 1988 there was no judicial supremacy in Brazil. After the analysis of the institutional and the democratic criticisms, the potencial of the constitutional dialogues doctrine will be explored to explain the interactions between the legislative and the judicial branches in constitutional interpretation, and its ability to provide a normative basis to reconcile the judicialization of politics with democracy in Brazil.

How did EU and US legislation go from initially appearing to be the same, if not mirroring each other, to differing significantly in their execution of competition legislation goals? Why did the US take a more authoritative tone in enforcing interstate competition legislation? And if the EU is so inclined to mimic US policies 50 years ago, why didn’t their competition enforcement take the same form today? I hypothesize that the US and EU’s legislative history with regulating governmental supremacy is part of the clue to answering for these differences.