Fundamentalism revisited

His main interests and professional publications focus on problems in sociological theory, cultural aspects of global change, and various sociocultural movements.     

The Canada Council as a public body

Abstract. This paper examines the problems encountered by the Canada Council in defining its status, and particularly its relationships with government and with its clientele, during its first twenty-one years. It deals primarily with the Council's experience in the support of the humanities and social sciences. The Council was created as a public body, in some respects resembling a government agency, but in others more like a private foundation. In its dealings with the academic community, the Council's public status made it more susceptible to criticism by scholars, especially after 1965 when growing revenues gave it a near-monopoly in support of research and scholarship. Failure to develop adequate links with that community in its first eight years led to persistent demands from scholars for a new organization, and increased the Council's vulnerability to a changing government view of its role. Although the introduction of annual appropriations in 1966 necessitated a new working relationship with the government, this was accomplished initially with no loss of the Council's autonomy. From the late sixties on, however, the Council experienced growing difficulty in maintaining an arm's-length relationship with the government in the face of persistent efforts to subsume its policies and priorities within a unified framework of government objectives. The paper argues that, in the support of scholarship and the arts, the public interest is better served by the original concept on which the Canada Council was based, namely as a public but non-governmental organization. Sommaire. L'auteur de cet article étudie les problèmes qu'a rencontré le Conseil des Arts en voulant définir son statut, et plus particulièrement ses rapports avec le gouvernement et avec sa clientèle, pendant ses vingt-et-une années d'existence. II porte une attention particulière à l'expérience du Conseil du point de vue de l'aide apportée aux humanités et aux sciences sociales. A sa création, le Conseil était une institution publique qui, d'un certain point de vue, ressemblait à un organisme gouvernemental mais qui, aussi à d'autres égards se rapprochait davantage d'une fondation privée. Dans ses rapports avec la communauté universitaire, le statut public du Conseil se prêtait à la critique des universitaires, particulièrement après 1965, lorsque l'augmentation de ses revenue Iui donna le quasi-monopole des bourses et des subventions. Le Conseil n'ayant pas réussi àétablir des relations satisfaisantes avec cette communauté durant les huit premieres années, les universitaires réclamèrent avec beaucoup de persistence un nouvel organisme, ce qui ne fit qu'accroître la vulnérabilité du Conseil à une nouvelle perception de son rôle de la part du gouvernement. Bien que l'introduction, en 1966, d'appropriations annuelles ait nécessité de nouvelles relations de travail avec le gouvernement, ceci s'est fait initialement sans que le Conseil ne perde son autonomie. Toutefois, à partir de la fin des années 60, le Conseil éprouva de plus en plus de difficultés à garder ses distances par rapport au le gouvernement, alors que celui-ci s'efforçait, avec beaucoup de persistance, de canaliser ses politiques et ses priorités dans un cadre unifié d'objectifs gouvernementaux. L'auteur soutient qu'en ce qui concerne le support à l'enseignement et à la recherche, l'intérêt du public est mieux servi par le concept original sur lequel le Conseil des Arts était fondé, c'est-à-dire celui d'un organisme public mais non-gouvernemental.     

Europeanisation Before and After Accession: Conditionality,Legacies and Compliance

This introductory essay reviews the literature on historical legacies in the post-communist area and relates it to the study of enlargement and Europeanisation. The authors develop a framework for the special section, specify various ways in which historical legacies can be conceived of affecting conditionality and compliance, give an overview of the contributions and summarise the findings.     

Commonwealthmen and Republicans: Dr. H.V. Evatt, the Monarchy and India

H.V. Evatt's foreign policy has attracted considerable historical attention, but his response as Australian External Affairs Minister to Commonwealth constitutional issues remains neglected. Evatt sought to retain India in the Commonwealth in 1948–49, but he insisted that India ought to recognise the king's prerogatives in its constitutional arrangements. He had developed his defence of the monarchy and its place in the empire in his writings of the inter-war years, and sought to apply these ideas in his Commonwealth diplomacy of the late 1940s. Evatt's failure to have these ideas accepted resulted from his attempt to impose an ideal of the relationship between the monarchy and the Commonwealth, derived from his understanding of the evolution of constitutional relations between the United Kingdom and the old dominions, to the very different context of Asian postwar decolonisation.