Matching Items (18)
Description
Amidst studies attempting to fix the U.S., China, and their relationship into preconceived frameworks of international relations, presupposed definitions, and models of reality, this dissertation adopts an identity centric approach to understanding the nature of U.S.-China relations and, more generally, international politics. This approach involves utilizing an interpretive method to understanding, analyzing the narratives of self and other expressed by political actors and how their identities--expressed through narratives--interact with one another and thus how they influence or reflect social behavior. Striving for greater understanding and a more intellectually honest approach to the study of international politics, this study seeks not theory building or generalizability in a traditional "scientific" sense. Rather, informed by thinkers from Karl Popper through those more recent, this dissertation develops and outlines an in-depth, contextual approach to understanding, applying this approach to analyzing the nature of U.S.-China relations. Ultimately, this study argues that U.S. and Chinese identities and how their identities interact influence the nature of U.S.-China relations, whether the relationship tends towards cooperation or conflict, and that in order to glimpse this nature researchers must delve into the details of their subjects of study. Attempting to do so, this study analyzes U.S.-China relations surrounding the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, relations regarding the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute between China and Japan as it pertains to U.S. relations with China, and relations regarding encounters between the U.S. and China in cyber space (paying special note to attempts to define this "space" itself).
ContributorsKoehler, Clifford Eugene (Author) / Simon, Sheldon (Thesis advisor) / Doty, Roxanne (Committee member) / Ashley, Richard (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Since 9/11 a wide range of violent practices including indefinite detention, torture, and targeted killing have been employed by the United States and the "international community" against "international terrorism." Modern laws of war are portrayed as the bright line that distinguishes the "international community" from "unlawful combatants." The threat posed by unlawful combatants has been portrayed as so exceptionally grave that the international community is justified in the transgression of those very laws of war that constitute the distinction between "us" and "them." In consequence the efficacy of modern laws of war to provide humanitarian protections has been cast into doubt and many characterize humanitarian laws of war as obsolete. Existing work on the politics of exception and the exclusion of Guantánamo Bay detainees from US federal law does not frame the problem of the exception in terms of international law. Though many consider the prerequisites for politics of exception absent in the international system, I argue that a dispersed notion of sovereignty and constructivist approaches to law resolve obstacles to considering the exception at the level of the state system. I explore system level exceptional politics through a critical reading of modern laws of war. Rejecting essentialist historical narratives, I first conduct a genealogical study of laws of war from ancient Greece through the Middle Ages. I then conduct a critical reading of three texts from the War on Terrorism; Barack Obama's 2009 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, John Brennan's "The Ethics and Efficacy of the President's Counterterrorism Strategy," and Medea Benjamin's interruption of John Brennan. I argue that modern narratives of war law venerate codification and textually privilege a "mystical" figure of modern law. This figure empowers a universalized "international community" as law's privileged agent. Violence employed by this archetypal community, even when outside the law, is rendered ethically pure and historically necessary. In consequence modern humanitarian law as a bright line always permits excluded archetypal identities and vast powers of violence are mobilized by the "international community" against discrete individual human bodies who are identified with this excluded archetype, or who simply find themselves in the way.
ContributorsHickman, Peter L (Author) / Doty, Roxanne (Thesis advisor) / Ashley, Richard (Committee member) / Thomas, George (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The goal of this exploratory study is to learn how undocumented immigrants remain resilient by adopting new strategies to survive and thrive despite confronting challenges as they legally justify their presence in the United States. This study will focus on three research questions: first, what are the demographic factors that describe undocumented immigrant family resiliency in the United States? Second, how are social service providers; perceptions of the challenges faced by their clients modified by the services they provide? Third, how do resiliency factors identified by their social service providers allow undocumented immigrants to overcome the challenges of criminalization in the United States? The theoretical framework for this study was based on two approaches: first, a symbolic interaction approach which was specifically inspired by Benedict Anderson's classic Imagined Communities (1983, 2006). The second approach is Ecological Risk and Resiliency. This study used mixed methods of research: interviews and descriptive analysis. The qualitative data was drawn from ten social service providers from a faith-based agency, and from a narrative analysis of participants enrolled in an ESL program (English as a Second Language). The subjects for the quantitative design were drawn from a group of undocumented first-generation Hispanic immigrants who received social services during the year 2009 from the same faith-based agency. In summary, this exploration discovered that immigrants show great ability for imaginatively developing strategies in order to survive and thrive under their difficult circumstances. Furthermore, undocumented immigrant survival does not completely depend upon food and shelter and even money, but also on a sense of well being. Noted was that women undocumented immigrants show greater resiliency than their male counterparts. Also discovered was that social services do make a difference in the lives of undocumented immigrants but not all social service providers are fully trained and prepared to assist them beyond normal standards. In conclusion, the Hispanic undocumented immigrant displays remarkable resiliency despite tremendous obstacles and personal difficulties and this resiliency could only improve by social service providers' improved understanding of their needs and personal resources.
ContributorsAlatorre, Francisco Jesus (Author) / Johnson, John (Thesis advisor) / Zatz, Marjorie (Committee member) / Ashford, Jose (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
The state of exception in Rwanda did not spontaneously occur in Rwanda, it was initially developed by German and Belgian colonizers, adopted by two successive Hutu regimes, and nurtured and fed for 35 years of Rwandan independence until its final realization in the 1994 genocide. Political theory regarding the development of the "space devoid of law" and necropolitics provide a framework with which to analyze the long pattern of state action that created a milieu in which genocide was an acceptable choice of action for a sovereign at risk of losing power. The study of little-known political theories such as Agamben's and Mbembe's is useful because it provides a lens through which we can analyze current state action throughout the world. As is true in many genocidal regimes, the Rwandan genocide did not just occur as a "descent into hell." Rather, state action over the course of decades in which the subjects of the state (People) were systematically converted into mere flesh beings (people), devoid of political or social value, creates the setting in which it is feasible to seek to eliminate those beings. A question to be posed to political actors and observers around the world today is at what point in the process of one nation's creation of the state of exception and adoption of necropolitics does the world have a right, and a duty, to intervene? Thus far, it has always occurred too late for the "people" in that sovereign to realize their political and social potential to be "People."
ContributorsSinema, Kyrsten (Author) / Johnson, John (Thesis advisor) / Quan, Helen (Committee member) / Gomez, Alan (Committee member) / Doty, Roxanne (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
Above all else, this project is about parentage in the modern American legal system and culture. Advanced reproductive technologies require our courts to reconsider the long-standing presumption that a child has only one female mother and one male father. We now have children of choice, rather than chance. Assisted Reproductive Technology and its widespread availability and use and changed the landscape of parentage maybe forever. And the children of such efforts remain largely unprotected by our current legal system that favors reproduction by chance within a recognized marriage or at the least, a traditional two-parent paradigm. However, assisted reproduction calls into question the current legal framework for determinations of parentage based in marriage and/or biology. Based on a long and convoluted history, our current legal system conflates marriage and parentage. Moreover, in many circumstances the law restricts both the number and gender of the parties to a marriage or possible parents. One of the more compelling historical and still salient justifications for doing so is to accord the "Best Interest of the Child" standard which purports to underpin all such determinations. Unfortunately, that standard cannot best be met when weighed in a balance against a constitutionally protected exclusive right to parent vested in an adult either by a determination of a genetic link to the child or marriage to another parent. Children of choice, who result from the affirmative and purposive engagement in assisted reproduction, should be entitled to the same protections as children of chance born to a man and woman who are married. Once we look beyond marriage and biology as determiners of parentage, a better way for our legal system to serve the best interests of children, and their parents, is to identify and protect those adult relationships that are parental in nature and that benefit the child irrespective of a marriage between parents or genetic links to the child. Fortunately, the tools to accomplish this paradigm shift already are in existence. The expansion of our commonly used definitions and broader view of our current statutes will allow the legal system to better protect both children of choice and children of chance by making better parentage determinations. To that end, this project also takes on the ambitious task of praxis; of applying the theories to the law as it stands and demonstrating how the new paradigm might look as it is implemented with all of its far-reaching tentacles.
ContributorsRoss, Jane (Author) / Johnson, John (Thesis advisor) / Hepburn, John (Committee member) / Stinson, Judith (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
This project is to help Guatemalan youth immigrants by providing them with the information necessary to access support in the United States, and obtainin legal status in the United States. In order to produce a brochure with this information, it was necessary to research the political, economic, and social history of Guatemala in order to determine what struggles citizens are facing, and specifically what experiences youth in the country have prior to their journey to the United States. This research is culminated into a paper that discusses the history, the causes of emigration from Guatemala, and the status of youth immigrants before they leave Guatemala and once they arrive in the United States.
ContributorsMckay, Rachel Marie (Author) / Magaña, Lisa (Thesis director) / Elias, Olivia (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / College of Letters and Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
Mass media has played a central role in the construction of "illegal" immigration as a crisis, despite demographic trends suggesting otherwise, resulting in public concern and extreme policies. Additional coverage by local news has brought the issue closer to home, leading state legislatures to action. This project analyzes trends in a 10 year period in local news articles and state-level legislation about undocumented immigration in Arizona and Alabama. The representation of immigration as a threat has consequences for the lives of immigrants and what it means to be an American.
ContributorsGultz, Chrisanne Marie (Author) / Menjivar, Cecilia (Thesis director) / Doty, Roxanne (Committee member) / Diaz McConnell, Eileen (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
Community gardens have wide-reaching potential for addressing public health issues. However, of the thousands of gardens located in the United States, many lack rigorous planning and encounter crippling obstacles, like disinterest from community members, soon after implementation. This study created a processual typology to summarize steps in the implementation process for existing gardens described within peer-reviewed, academic journals and offers recommendations for more sustainably planning future garden projects up to ten years in advance. A systematic review was conducted to identify descriptions of community gardens in peer-reviewed, academic literature. A general logic model was used as a basic structure and themes for each step (inputs, activities, outputs, short/long term outcomes, impacts, and methods of evaluation) were summarized from the included studies to construct a processual typology for evaluating community garden implementation in the United States. This typology was then used to assess a case study of a garden in Des Moines, Iowa, which generated the author's interest in conducting this research after assisting with that space through an AmeriCorps community health program. Results showed that existing gardens shared common attributes and could be categorized according to one of two speeds of implementation ("regular" or "accelerated") and according to one of three types of organizational structure ("grassroots," "externally-organized," or "externally-managed"). The typology was assessed for limitations from having been based on a systematic review of only peer-reviewed, academic articles and, referring to its themes, was used to construct a logic model for a hypothetical community garden project. The processual typology developed in this study is limited in its power to summarize all existing community gardens but offers a first step toward informing the creation of logic models for future projects in order to improve sustainability and attain more funding.
ContributorsOlivas, Elijah Taylor (Author) / Magaña, Lisa (Thesis director) / MartÃÂnez, AirÃÂn (Committee member) / School of Human Evolution and Social Change (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants, and undocumented immigrants have been a prominent part of American culture and have been woven into the history of the United States. Both group's presence in the United States has elicited rhetoric from U.S citizens and U.S public officials. One may infer that the narrative of Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants overlaps the narrative of undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Both Muslim refugees and immigrants as well as unauthorized immigrants, are criminalized in the United States, or are associated to crime by default of their faith and or their legal status. The association that Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants, and undocumented immigrants have with crime, based on their rhetoric, has elicited a policy from the United States government as well. The United States government has responded to a presumed threat that both groups pose to U.S. citizens and the nation by means of aggressive legislation, both local and federal. In this research paper, past and present discourse on Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants and undocumented immigrants was analyzed to determine each of the group's narrative; the mainstream media, newspapers and photographic images, was also considered to determine the narrative of both groups. Based on the discourse on Muslim refugees and Muslim immigrants and on undocumented immigrants, the media portrayal of both groups, and on the change of public policy one may assert that the narratives of both groups overlaps; as both Muslim refugees and immigrants and unauthorized immigrants are seen as a possible threat to the American people.
ContributorsGalvan, Brigitte Magdalena (Author) / Doty, Roxanne (Thesis director) / Magaña, Lisa (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
On November 8th, 2016, pollsters, news correspondents, and millions of American voters watched in disbelief as the news came in; Donald J. Trump had been elected as the 45th President of the United States. Donald Trump, How Did This Happen?: An Analysis of Rhetorical Strategies Utilized in the 2016 Presidential Campaign of Donald Trump is a rhetorical analysis of the strategies implemented in Donald Trump's 2016 Presidential campaign. It challenges the idea that the Donald Trump win was "unprecedented" and rather that when looking at the white, working-class in the the United States, their attraction to Trump should have been expected. White, blue-collar Americans trust the government at historically low rates. That, coupled with economic insecurity and a culture of fear that is heavily steeped in racial undertones, allowed the Trump campaign to successfully use fear as a mechanism to encourage Trump supporters to vote.
ContributorsHoffer, Aubrey Linn (Author) / Doty, Roxanne (Thesis director) / Lennon, Tara (Committee member) / Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-12