This dissertation considers how district-level demographic factors favorable to women congressional candidates facilitate substantive representation of women's interests. I contribute to the existing research by linking the literature on women candidate emergence and electoral success with that on descriptive and substantive representation. Beyond simply asking whether and how women in Congress represent women's interests, I argue that the demographic characteristics of districts in which women are more likely to run and win public office also put women representing those districts in Congress in better position to cultivate feminist homestyles and substantively represent women's interests through legislative behavior. I examine whether women representatives in women-friendly districts are more likely than men representing similar districts, or women in less women-friendly districts, to sponsor legislation in women's issue areas, sponsors women's issue earmarks, and defect from party in women's issue roll-call votes. Overall, I find general support for my theory that district-level factors contribute to observed gender differences in legislative behavior in women's issue areas.

Can institutions successfully reduce ethnic conflict? Institutions such as autonomy and federalism are often advocated as a means to prevent ethnic conflict, however empirical evidence is largely mixed with regards to their effectiveness. In a similar manner, political parties have begun to receive more scholarly attention in determining their relationship with ethnic conflict, but their evidence is also mixed. In this research I examine autonomy, federalism, and the banning of political parties within ongoing ethnic group self-determination movements. While I do not find evidence for a relationship between autonomy and conflict, I do find that federalism increases the likelihood of ethnic conflict. Additionally, the banning of ethnic political parties indicates a strong increase the likelihood of ethnic conflict, while the banning of regional political parties significantly reduces the likelihood of ethnic conflict.

This dissertation examines the behavior of post-civil war governments and explores how the aftermath of civil war not only influences state behavior but how the previous conflict becomes institutionalized through a state's governance decisions. While post-civil war states will each have different governance needs as they endure the post-conflict environment, this dissertation contends that the governance decisions a state chooses are key to understanding, and potentially predicting, future government behavior. Further, it is important to recognize the role that the previous civil war plays towards shaping a state's governance decisions and the opportunities available.

Within interstate militarized disputes, states use different kinds of influence strategies, like bullying, reciprocating, and trial-and-error. My dissertation examines state influence strategies within border disputes. This context serves as a hard test which could testify if state behaviors in world politics are mainly driven by the salience of contested issues. Or other factors, like leader militarized backgrounds (e.g., participating in rebellions or military service), may also at work. On the other hand, focusing on state influence strategies could be a promising direction to investigate the dynamics of border disputes, like border crisis outcomes. My dissertation contains three chapters. The first chapter explores the rationales behind state choices of influence strategies in border crises by focusing on leaders and their militarized experiences. The second chapter focuses on the influence strategy's short-term effect by examining how do hey influence border crisis outcomes? The third chapter examines the influence strategy's long-term impact by investigating how do they affect the durability of border claims? My dissertation has some important findings. First, leader militarized backgrounds influence state choices of influence strategies. Second, bullying strategies create escalations, which make border crises more likely to end in stalemate or decisive outcomes. By contrast, both reciprocating and trial-and-error …

This dissertation explores the how external threat from militarized interstate disputes and interstate rivalries affect the relationship between the state and the ethnic groups within its borders. Specifically, it finds that national identity, the preservation of ethnic regional autonomy, and the formation of ethnic-based militias are all influenced by states involvement in international conflicts. In Sub Saharan Africa, discriminated groups are less likely to identify with their national identity and when the state is involved in an interstate dispute, while the rest of the country increases their likelihood to identify with the nation, discriminated groups cling to their ethnic identity. During and interstate rivalry, ethnic groups face a heightened risk of the state taking away their autonomy over a region. If the rivalry becomes too intense or the ethnic group shares kin with the rival, the ethnic group has lower chance of losing their autonomy during rivalry. Finally, ethnic minority seeking to form a militia are able to form one faster if their ethnic group is well represented in the military's rank and file or if their co-ethnics in the rank and file had combat experience in an interstate dispute were military force was used. Ethnic groups that are well …

While there have been several rich studies that have provided insight into the teachings of Xenophon that emerge from a careful reading of the Cyropaedia, the problem of reconciling the apparent good rule of Cyrus with the ruin of his empire persists. I argue that this problem can be reconciled by focusing on the problem that Xenophon initially informs us he is interested in, political stability.

This dissertation addresses the puzzle of whether rebel group origins have an effect on rebel wartime behavior and the broader dynamics of civil conflict. Using a quantitative approach over three empirical chapters I study the relationship between rebel origins and conflict onset, duration and intensity, and wartime group capacity. Two qualitative cases examine the relationship between rebel origins, wartime group capacity, and adaptation during war, further unpacking the theoretical mechanisms linking group origins and conflict dynamics. I posit that rebel groups emerge from pre-existing organizations and networks that vary along military and civilian dimensions and condition the development of military and mobilization capacity of their successor insurgent groups. Groups with more developed militarization and mobilization mechanisms prior to conflict are likely to enter into civil conflict earlier in their existence and fight in longer and bloodier conflicts. I also find a strong relationship between origins characteristics and the development of military and civilian wartime capacity. Origins exert a strong legacy effect on the type and strength of intra-war capability, indicating that significant rebel adaptation is difficult.

This dissertation examines the relationship between violent organized crime and foreign direct investment (FDI) through sub-national analysis focused on the case of Mexico. The results indicate that FDI decisions vary based on the type of violent organized crime.

I investigate Rousseau's formulation of how the people and their government act as sources of civic education and censorship. I define censorship broadly to include all institutionally or publicly enforced moral or policy views. Using Rousseau's Letter to M. d'Alembert as a starting point, I examine the way in which public morals and opinions structure political discourse, determining the influence of laws and the limits of institutions. I argue that while law can force the people to tacitly conform by threat of punishment, it cannot compel the people's will. Unlike classic liberal approaches that separate morality and law, Rousseau emphasizes a reciprocal influence between them, and contends that their relegation to separate spheres enervates the laws and further distances the people from legislation. Public opinion and its product, morals, resist attempts at government censorship, but themselves demand compliance. As a result, Rousseau argues, social and political freedom necessitate a certain uniformity of public opinion and law. That uniformity, however, requires a civic education reinforced by both an institutional and public form of censorship. In addition to a more general civic education, reason and conscience, two key intellectual and psychological traits, require cultivation and proper direction, resulting in the individual's identification …

This dissertation examines the dynamic intersections of the relationship between migration and the far-right through three empirical, stand-alone chapters. The first substantive chapter re-evaluates existing theories of far-right support using a novel theory and comprehensive dataset to assess how immigration opinion and immigration levels interact to shape individual far-right support. The findings suggest that increases in asylum-based migration are associated with increased far-right voting, but that this is effect is mainly observed in those with negative or neutral opinions toward immigration. The second substantive chapter examines the other side of this relationship by analyzing the impact of far-right electoral and legislative success on asylum-recognition rates in EU member states. The results of empirical analyses show that when far-right parties gain legislative seats, the expected rate of asylum approvals decreases. This suggests that far-right parties in legislatures have measurable effects on migration outcomes. Finally, the third substantive chapter uses original field research to assess how far-right politics impacts the lived experiences of immigrants in France and Switzerland, relying on a small survey and interviews conducted in the field. The results show that immigrants are generally aware of far-right parties and distrustful toward them. However, undocumented migrants and asylees are among the …

While the Arab Spring has resulted in numerous different political outcomes across the Arab world, conventional theories of democratization are lacking in explaining these divergent outcomes. Developing a theory of democratization, strategic importance and external intervention, I examine the relationship between national strategic importance and democratization. I argue that strategically important states will be targeted by external actors in attempts to stifle or thwart democracy because democracy may upset the status quo that foreign actors benefit from. I do not find support for the hypothesis that strategic importance and democratization share a general negative relationship, however, I find moderate support that strategic importance is related to the timing of regime breakdown, democratic breakdown and democratic transition. Furthermore, in examining the cases of Bahrain, Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, I highlight key moments of external intervention and influence that impacted the democratization attempts of each case.