http://hdl.handle.net/1974/785 2013-06-19T17:44:45Z 2013-06-19T17:44:45Z Schulz, KARLA http://hdl.handle.net/1974/8049 2013-05-29T20:38:07Z 2013-05-29T04:00:00Z

Title: Limiting Liberalism (Multi)cultural Epistemologies, (Multi)cultural Subjects Authors: Schulz, KARLA Abstract: The central argument of this text is that the liberal subject is constitutively rather than coincidentally or contingently exclusionary. From this initial premise, I explore the conceptual and practical inadequacies of liberal articulations of multicultural justice, many of which I argue can be traced back to this exclusionary subject. When making this critique, I frame my analysis around the scholarship of Canadian philosopher Will Kymlicka, whose articulation of a distinctly liberal defense of the value of cultural belonging has shaped much of mainstream theoretical debate on multiculturalism both within Canada and elsewhere. Although Kymlicka’s work has faced a multitude of critiques from within and without liberal theory, he is widely recognized as the most prominent liberal defender of multiculturalism, and his work has been particularly influential within related discussions of national unity, multicultural accommodation, and national identity in Canada. I have chosen, then, to focus my critique of liberal multiculturalism on Kymlicka specifically for two reasons. Firstly, due to his prominence within the field and, secondly – and more importantly – because of the instrumental relationship between subject and culture which Kymlicka defends throughout his work. Despite this critical focus, what is primarily at stake in such a project is a rearticulation rather than a rejection of multiculturalism. While my arguments are based fundamentally on a critical interrogation, and ultimately a rejection, of liberal articulations of multicultural justice, within my project I also offer an alternative model of multiculturalism conceived as a vital form of epistemic cooperation. Such an alternative defense of multiculturalism is rooted in a commitment to the value of everyday experience, a more dialectically formed and culturally embedded sense of self, and finally, a critical and substantive awareness of context, both contemporary and historical. In making this positive case for a more radical form of multiculturalism expressed through intercultural dialogue/negotiation and a widening of the public sphere, I challenge dominant understandings of the value of multiculturalism defended within liberal theory and the mainstream of Canadian Political Science (CPS). Description: Thesis (Ph.D, Political Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-05-29 14:51:51.628

2013-05-29T04:00:00Z Koning, Edward http://hdl.handle.net/1974/7922 2013-04-28T05:33:03Z 2013-04-25T04:00:00Z

Title: Selective Solidarity: The Politics of Immigrants' Social Rights in Western Welfare States Authors: Koning, Edward Abstract: Recent research has cast doubt on the suggestion that immigration weakens the societal foundation of a redistributive welfare state: there is little evidence of a negative relationship between immigration-induced diversity and public support for social programs. This research has largely overlooked, however, that unease about immigration is likely to have a more selective effect on solidarity. In some countries, the public has become less willing to share benefits with newcomers, and policy-makers have acted upon that sentiment, implementing limits and restrictions on immigrants’ welfare access. By combining quantitative data analysis of fourteen countries and a qualitative comparison of the Netherlands, Canada, and Sweden, this research explores when and how such expressions of selective solidarity are most likely to occur. The main findings are threefold. First, there is no evidence that actual patterns of immigrant welfare dependence are an important driver of selective solidarity or immigrant-excluding welfare reforms. Second, more important is how those patterns are politically translated. In the Netherlands, high levels of immigrant welfare dependence are commonly described as a sign that immigrants are lazy welfare cheats. In Canada and Sweden, the discourse is less accusatory and divisive, and attempts at welfare exclusion are consequently rarer. Country characteristics, in particular the political strength of anti-immigrant parties, the nature of national identity, and the structure of the welfare state, explain why the political translation differs between countries. Third, the primary constraint on immigrant-excluding welfare reforms tends not to be public opposition but legal prohibitions on differential treatment embedded in national legislation and international treaties. Sometimes politicians are forced to amend or withdraw from existing legislation before they can pass exclusionary reforms; in other cases the reforms are simply not possible. In sum, in some welfare states access to benefits has changed from an individual social right to a privilege for those lucky enough to be born in the country or to have lived long enough on its territory and acquired the necessary documentation. But this development is not unavoidable. Where forces of cohesion are stronger than forces of division, welfare states will likely address immigrant welfare dependence by more sanguine means than disentitlement. Description: Thesis (Ph.D, Political Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-04-24 14:12:18.2

2013-04-25T04:00:00Z TOLLEY, ERIN http://hdl.handle.net/1974/7912 2013-04-24T20:36:57Z 2013-04-24T04:00:00Z

Title: How Race Affects the Media's Coverage of Candidates in Canadian Politics Authors: TOLLEY, ERIN Abstract: This study examines how race affects the media’s coverage of candidates in Canadian politics. Situated in the literature on political communication, gendered mediation and race studies, it proposes a new theory of racial mediation, which posits that politics are covered in ways that reflect the assumption of whiteness as standard. Although candidate self-presentation does influence media portrayals, this alone does not account for differences in the framing of candidates’ policy interests, viability and socio-demographic characteristics. The project argues that candidate race has a significant but subtle impact on media portrayals. Articles from the print media coverage of the 2008 Canadian election are analyzed using a hand-coded content analysis, which is replicated through an innovative automated approach. The study finds that visible minority candidates’ coverage is more negative and less prominent than that of their White counterparts. It is less likely to focus on key electoral issues and much more likely to emphasize socio-demographic background. Visible minority candidates are held to a higher standard and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, they are portrayed as less viable and credible than their competitors. Gender can amplify these effects, with raced and gendered discourses characterizing the coverage of visible minority women. The media study is complemented by 40 elite interviews that probe candidates’ communication strategies, issue emphasis and self-presentation, as well as reporters’ negotiation of these elements in their construction of news stories. While there are visible minority candidates who emphasize elements of their ethnocultural heritage, my findings suggest that few rely only on racialized strategies, nor are White candidates immune from racialized appeals. Nonetheless, journalists struggle to adequately portray nuance and candidates’ multi-dimensionality. They employ familiar narratives and tropes, and generally only seize on racialized framing when it applies to visible minority candidates. Although the study does not provide a direct test of media effects on vote choice, it draws on existing literature to argue that because media coverage influences the ways that voters evaluate issues and develop schema for understanding the world around them, the portrayal of visible minority candidates has the potential to alter electoral opportunities and outcomes. As a result, racialized coverage and race continue to matter in Canadian politics. Description: Thesis (Ph.D, Political Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-04-22 15:21:07.585

2013-04-24T04:00:00Z Gaucher, MEGAN http://hdl.handle.net/1974/7845 2013-03-07T15:53:52Z 2013-03-07T05:00:00Z

Title: Keeping it in the Family: The (Re-) Production of Conjugal Citizens Through Canadian Immigration Policy and Practice Authors: Gaucher, MEGAN Abstract: This is an examination of how conjugality acts as an access point for Canadian citizenship. The conjugal family unit — married or common-law — continues to be privileged in Canadian law and policy; this is especially evident in immigration policy and practice. Family class immigration continues to be a steady source of immigrants for Canada, spousal/partner sponsorship being the primary type of family reunification. In order to control access, a strict understanding of conjugality is used to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate families. When it comes to family class immigration, it is not simply a case of individuals sponsoring individuals; it is about the state producing and maintaining the ideal family unit through the provision of citizenship. My analysis proceeds in two main parts. First, I engage with mainstream Canadian citizenship theory — focusing specifically on the work of Will Kymlicka and Rita Dhamoon — and analyze its focus on the individual citizen. Moreover, I examine how the state’s asymmetrical treatment of conjugality has created two versions of the conjugal family — the inside family (families within Canadian borders) and the outside family (families outside Canadian borders). Second, I explore the state’s reliance on conjugal relationships in their assessment of potential immigrants and refugees in three areas of immigration policy — the assessment of sexual minority refugee claimants, the assessment of common-law couples seeking sponsorship, and the government’s current crackdown on marriage fraud. Combined, these examples speak to the Canadian state’s vested interest in privileging the conjugal family unit; furthermore, they highlight how the inconsistent and often ambiguous treatment of conjugality undermines its effectiveness as the primary mode of identification in family class immigration. In summary, this dissertation integrates families into a body of scholarship that has ignored the role that one’s personal relationships plays in the provision of state access. Description: Thesis (Ph.D, Political Studies) -- Queen's University, 2013-03-06 20:33:38.518

2013-03-07T05:00:00Z