Click to go to the New Humanities Reader home page
For Students
For Teachers
Sample Assignments by NHR Teachers

Mary Kaldor, "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control" and:

For more assignment ideas involving this essay, please visit the Kaldor link-o-mat.

Kaldor: The Future of American Militarism

According to Mary Kaldor, America is transitioning to a new kind of militarism, one aimed at allowing us to fight wars without casualties. At the same time, the US is becoming a major player in various multinational peacekeeping efforts. Evaluate the tensions between these two roles for the American military by using Kaldor's ideas to examine "America's Army," the video game released online by the US Army (http://www.americasarmy.com). You can examine either the video game itself, or the variety of texts surrounding it, such as its forum.

Drafts must be 3 pages long. Final papers must be 4 pages long.

Barclay Barrios, Rutgers University, Fall 2002

From War and Global Change.

Writing assignment:

How do we achieve objectivity if some states admittedly have a more prominent role in designing the international humanitarian law? What is the role of the USA in this process? 

Food for thought:

In her complex essay, Mary Kaldor distinguishes between the so-called "modern war" (inter-state war, characteristic of the development of the modern states from the fifteenth century to the break of the Cold War) and its disintegration and ramifications (Netforces, New American Militarism, Neo-Modern Militarism, and Protectionforce) in recent history. The USA is assigned a specific role in the new warfare developments, the one that Kaldor describes as the New American Militarism. Discuss this phenomenon and Kaldor's supporting claims. Do you agree with Kaldor's view that America is the "last nation state" that still has the capacity to act unilaterally and if yes, what are the implications of such acting? The USA obviously partakes in other types of modern warfare which Kaldor delineates. Do you deem Kaldor's typology accurate and exhaustive? Most importantly-is her final solution of controlling war by the "extension and application of international humanitarian law" (Kaldor 395) satisfying? 

Sanja Bahun, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Globalization and Global Realization.

Kaldor explores the differences between 'modern' and 'new' or postmodern warfare--how hierarchical, disciplined armies dedicated to eliminating competitors, protecting borders and upholding the rule of law have given way to compartmentalized, unstructured coalitions generally held together by extreme political ideology. She cites two, interlinking developments for this change--the destructiveness of war and globalization.   

For your first paper I want you to develop an argument in which you explore how social structure, national identity and political ideology have effected these changes.  

Questions to ponder:

  • How has the fear of the unthinkable (mutual annihilation) given way to fear of the unacceptable (occupation by a foreign country, religious intolerance)?   What are the effects of these changes
  • How does the U.N. peacekeeping efforts effect regional or cultural conflicts?  Is peacekeeping another form of cultural hegemony?
  • How are contemporary ideologies being addressed under the auspices of globalization?

Molly Burke, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Tradition and the Rights of the Individual.

Back to top

Kaldor and Gladwell: Context and the War on Terrorism

In your last paper you were asked to consider the possibilities and limits of “rethinking” to alter the world. In his chapter, “The Power of Context (Part One),” Malcolm Gladwell argues for another way to understand and effect change. While Gladwell looks at the epidemic of crime in New York City in the mid 1980s and the dramatic drop in crime rates a decade later and Mary Kaldor points to “new wars” as an epidemic at the beginning of the 21st century, they both focus on the contagious nature of violence. How does the “Power of Context” help explain why the US is involved in a “war on terrorism” and how does it suggest possible resolutions to this conflict?  Was September 11 a “little thing?” Does Gladwell’s theory have predictive value? That is could it tell us, ahead of time, whether or not the humanitarian approach could “tip” the current epidemic of violence and war to a time of relative peace? What other “signals” or environmental shifts could work to cause this change? Are human’s reactions to violence and war an intrinsic part of how we’re structured or are they subject to small shifts in situation?

Piper Kendrix Williams, Rutgers University, Spring 2002

From Tradition, Modernity, and Change: Assessing the Value of Re-thinking in an Evolving World.

Back to top

Nussbaum, Gladwell, Kaldor: The Power of Context and Global Change

Malcolm Gladwell argues that change can be accomplished simply by altering the smallest values of an environment. While the Power of Context seemed to be effective in New York City, how effective might it be on a global scale? For this essay, consider the function of the power of context in effecting global change.

Barclay Barrios, Rutgers University, Fall 2002

From War and Global Change.

Back to top

Kaldor and Nussbaum: War and Human Capability

Although Martha Nussbaum's immediate concern is the plight of women around the world, her articulation of the central human functional capabilities has implications for all human beings. Form a project in which you consider the impact of the military and war--in its new and traditional forms--on human functional capabilities.

Drafts must be 4 pages long. Final papers must be 5 pages long.

Barclay Barrios, Rutgers University, Fall 2002

From War and Global Change.

Back to top

Mary Kaldor, Martha Nussbaum, Frans de Waal, and Lani Guinier

In her essay, "Women and Cultural Universals," Martha Nussbaum articulates some of the reasons that have been used to justify the denial of basic human rights to women throughout the non-Western world.  She argues that this trend should and can be reversed by combating some of the limiting beliefs that make such oppression possible.  At one point, she writes, "Acknowledging the other person as a member of the very same kind would have generated a sense of affiliation and a set of moral and educational duties. That is why, to those bent on shoring up their own power, the strategem of splitting the other off from one's own species seems so urgent and so seductive" (Nussbaum 473).  

Analyze this quote in detail, and use it as your starting point to take a position on whether Nussbaum shares the same perspective on universality that de Waal, Guinier, or Kaldor argue for, in their respective essays.  Do you think the issues at stake in each of these authors' essays are place-specific or are truly universal (regardless of location, species, race, color, gender, etc.?)  Explain why in detail.  

Remember to connect Nussbaum with at least one of the previous authors you read, through a thoughtful analysis of ideas; and not just a common set of terms, parallelisms, or simplified summaries.

Ameer Sohrawardy, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Issues of Difference.

Back to top

de Waal, Guinier, Kaldor: What is to be gained by "rethinking the world"?

In the selections from The Ape and the Sushi Master we’ve read, Frans de Waal provides us with an optimistic interpretation of human nature, advocating an understanding of human evolution as shaped by “kindness,” rather than “fitness.” He argues, “At least in some cases, we seem to be dealing with the genuine article: a good deed done and intended” (333). Lani Guinier, in “Second Proms and Second Primaries: The Limits of Majority Rule,” argues for a hopeful revision of American politics, one that will fulfill the “ideal of reciprocity… [and] the moral authority” of democracy (339). Both writers rethink old and static ideas in order to construct a better world. In “Beyond Militarism, Arms Races and Arms Control,” Mary Kaldor analyses the nature of armed forces and war in the post-Cold War period. She also extends a new way to think, extending the “humanitarian approach” as a way out of  “wars that cannot be won” (9). All three writers implicitly suggest a role for individuals in changing human, national, and global relations, subscribing to a belief in an essential human equality. Given the world Kaldor describes, does it make sense for the individual to re-think the world? What’s at stake? For whom? In beginning this paper you may want to consider the following: de Waal and Guinier provide specific ways to rethink: for example, in the “survival of the kindness” model, locating acts of intended kindness and altruism and in a proportional system of politics, achieving reciprocity. Use these and other specifics to think though concrete ways to achieve the “humanitarian approach” Kaldor calls for.

I will evaluate your paper by looking at:

1. Your project: You should express and support your own idea about the assigned topic and use textual evidence from de Waal, Guinier, and Kaldor to help develop and support your claim.

2. Your organization: You should express, explain, and explore a central claim in each paragraph. Your paragraphs should connect logically to each other. The paragraphs should all work toward developing your central project.

3. Working with Texts:  Choose relevant concept quotations and examples. Explain the connections between this evidence and your larger project.

4. Your sentence clarity and correctness: Proofread your essay carefully for grammar and spelling errors.

Piper Kendrix Williams, Rutgers University, Spring 2002

From Tradition, Modernity, and Change: Assessing the Value of Re-thinking in an Evolving World.

In "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control," Mary Kaldor describes the different types of armed forces that have developed in the world following the Cold War. She offers the "humanitarian approach" and the institution of "laws of war" as strategies that will prevent both a "war of global annihilation" and the present "series of real wars that cannot be won" (394). Just as Guinier rethinks the ideals of democracy and de Waal rethinks the role of kindness in evolutionary theory, Mary Kaldor suggests ways for changing the position of national armed forces in contemporary society.

How does Kaldor's humanitarian approach ask you to reevaluate Guinier's "system of proportionality" and de Waal's "survival of the kindest"? Did reading Kaldor help you recognize strengths and weaknesses in Guinier and de Waal?

This paper asks you to compare and evaluate these three approaches to revising the world. To answer this question, you might want to consider if proportional voting or majority rule would fit into Kaldor's "humanitarian approach." Does Kaldor's essay question assumptions regarding kindness, altruism, or human goodness? Is altruism a prerequisite to peacekeeping and "humanitarian law enforcement?" You can develop a project based on your own ideas and questions, but be sure to evaluate the action horizons of each author.

Carrie Preston, Rutgers University, Spring 2003

From Re-Vision, Tradition and Public Life.

Frans de Waal, Lani Guinier, and Mary Kaldor all propose alternative models for examining ways in which human beings perceive themselves and their places in society.  All three suggest changes to conventional ways of thinking; which they propose will then result in a greater understanding and regard for our fellow inhabitants of Earth - regardless of whether those inhabitants are of the same race, nationality, or even species.  

Mary Kaldor proposes that the United States must seriously consider humanitarian law as one way of controlling the "new" warfare.  To what extent does Kaldor's proposition that we need to re-think our foreign military policies and actions rely on the reciprocity of human altruism to overcome fundamental differences of race, culture and national identity?  Refer to both de Waal and Guinier's essays while responding to this question, and evaluate whether global justice (as Kaldor proposes it) "is the only way to minimize the exclusive political appeal" of belligerent military networks (Kaldor 397).  

Remember to connect Kaldor, Guinier, and de Waal through a thoughtful analysis of ideas; and not just a common set of terms, parallelisms, or simplified summaries.

Ameer Sohrawardy, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Issues of Difference.

Back to top

Faludi, Guinier, Kaldor: Tradition and Exclusion

In "The Naked Citadel," Faludi explores the distinctive culture of the Citadel, a state-funded military institution in South Carolina, which, until the controversial case of Shannon Faulkner, was exclusively male. The faculty, administration, alumni, and cadets who opposed admitting women were deeply invested in, and committed to, the traditions and rituals that have developed since the institution was founded in 1882. The reason most frequently cited for excluding Faulkner and other women was, "She would be destroying a long and proud tradition" (256). Both Guinier and Kaldor also discuss cultures and traditions that are exclusive. In "Second Proms and Second Primaries: The Limits of Majority Rule," Guinier offers two examples of majority rule that exclude a specific minority group: racialized voting in Phillips County and the prom at Brother Rice High School. According to the judge in the case of Whitfield, et al. vs. State Democratic Party, "Americans have traditionally been schooled in the notion of majority rule…" (qtd. in Guinier 342). Similarly, in "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control," Mary Kaldor discusses the "new wars" involving informal or private military networks ("netforce"), which cohere around "an extreme political ideology based on the exclusive claim to state power on the basis of identity - ethnic chauvinism or religious communalism" (386).

Using Faludi and either Guinier or Kaldor, consider why these traditions exclude certain groups, genders, and/or races. There are thousands of traditions ranging from the familiar and formal ritual of Christian Communion or Jewish Shabbat to the private rituals of a family surrounding various holidays.

Are all traditions inherently exclusive, or can traditions and cultures be fully inclusive? Are traditions a positive or negative force in human society, and what right, if any, should they have to exist?

To help you write this essay, you might want to consider the relationship between traditions and family groups, violence or war, citizenship, gender roles (masculinity, femininity), political power, and/or religion.

Carrie Preston, Rutgers University, Spring 2003

From Re-Vision, Tradition and Public Life.

Back to top

Scott, Faludi, and Kaldor: The Transcript Test

In your last paper, I asked you to take a position on the inclusiveness or exclusiveness of traditions and to determine if traditions have an inherent right to exist. In class discussion, we discovered that there could be a contradiction between the publicly stated claims of a tradition and the behaviors or actions that the tradition actually produces. We also realized that certain groups might have the power to enforce traditions and that others might participate in traditions with varying degrees of willingness and compulsion. James C. Scott's "Behind the Official Story" offers an approach for understanding and explaining the interactions between dominant and subordinate groups. He suggests that "public transcripts," the open interaction between those involved in unequal power relations often conceal the real distribution of power and the "hidden transcripts" that take place "offstage," outside of the "power-laden context," and between members of the same group (555).

For this paper, you must apply Scott's explanatory model to the unequal power relations that Kaldor and/or Faludi discuss.

You must first determine where structures of dominance appear in their essays and then decide how to distinguish between the dominant and subordinate groups. Who holds the power, and how do you know (or why is it impossible to come to a decision)? Do the authors (Kaldor or Faludi) give you the public transcripts or the hidden transcripts in their essays? Scott insists that "by assessing the discrepancy between the hidden transcript and the public transcript we may begin to judge the impact of domination on public discourse" (555). Can you, using Scott's framework, evaluate how power relations influence discourse in the examples you have chosen? That is, does Scott's approach work?

Carrie Preston, Rutgers University, Spring 2003

From Re-Vision, Tradition and Public Life.

Back to top

Mary Kaldor and Eric Schlosser

Writing assignment:

What are, in your opinion, the consequences of the prominent economical, cultural, and military spreading of the USA on the world scene?

Food for thought:

Eric Schlosser takes up the complex question of the success of the fast-food industry as representative of the process of the spreading of American values, tastes and interests worldwide. Is the "cheap food" of poor quality a real paradigm of the American way of life? What other paradigms can you think of (country music, Hollywood movies, etc.)? What do they have in common? It is not incidental that McDonald's executives describe the company's ever-spreading presence in the world as "global realization:" "Americanization" of eating habits around the globe connects and equalizes people of different races, religions, and societal status, thereby emerging as a new and powerful lever of globalization. Schlosser seems to imply that the globalization thus achieved is mainly conducted by the USA. How does this phenomenon relate to Kaldor's idea of globalization and peacekeeping forces as its military articulation? Both Kaldor and Schlosser seem to suggest that globalization is inevitable. Who, Kaldor or Schlosser, views the process of globalization in a better light? With whom do you agree and why?

Sanja Bahun, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Globalization and Global Realization.

Globalization has offered access to products, information and communication, but not without tension. Based on Schlosser's essay and what you've read from the Kaldor piece, how do you explain the tension between globalizing forces and its backlash, or what some writers have called "localization?" How do you think the forces of globalization and localization compete. To what extent do they complement each other?"

Jack Jarmon, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Back to top

Mary Kaldor, Eric Schlosser, and Amy Chua

Writing assignment:

What are the ways in which the US can recuperate its image and reestablish itself as a positive role-model in the apparently inevitable process of globalization? Should the US try to do that at all? Combining all three readings, position yourself towards these issues and present your own argument in a persuasive manner.  

Food for thought:

Kaldor, Schlosser, and Chua explore the role of America in present-day global military, economic and cultural changes. The authors delineate both positive and negative impacts of US dominance on the world scene and the consequences it has on the image of the USA in the eyes of other nations. Amy Chua, in particular, engages in the discussion of anti-American sentiment on the most immediate basis. She perceives in this recent phenomenon not only valid nation-based attempts to resist "Americanization" and humiliation in the face of a culturally and economically dominant state, but also a more complicated process of "demagogue-fueled mass resentment against a market-dominant minority" (Chua 231). The visible (and often terrifying) costs of the anti-American climate cry for a solution to this complex cultural and socio-political development.   

Sanja Bahun, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Globalization and Global Realization.

Back to top

Mary Kaldor and Amy Chua

In your first paper you explored the effects of war on contemporary social structure. You began to think about how the world has reacted to globalization, rising nationalism/fundamentalism and new technology. Kaldor talks of the 'new' warfare as having a vested political and economic interest in continued violence (Kaldor 388).  Now Chua discusses reaction to globalization and efforts by highly focused groups to find satisfaction by violently appropriating that which is owned and controlled by the market dominant minorities. What are the connections between Americanization of other cultures, loss of national identity, and a single world community? How is this attempt at homogenization an answer to the violence in contemporary culture? In what way might you believe it is the reason for it? 

Questions to Ponder:

  • Is it right to try to impose our values and culture on other countries and societies? 
  • Would a more culturally sensitive approach by American businesses to the community make our presence there more palatable?
  • Why do you think 'they hate us'?
  • How does the 'new' warfare give radical organizations like Al Qaeda, Shining Path, and others a feeling of righteousness, power, and control?

Molly Burke, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Tradition and the Rights of the Individual.

Back to top

Mary Kaldor, Amy Chua, and Martha Nussbaum

In "Women and Cultural Universals," Nussbaum maintains that it is important to have both internal and external capabilities to achieve Central Human Functional Capabilities. Although her immediate concern is the plight of women in achieving these capabilities, they have implication for all humans. In previous papers we have discussed globalization and the effect it has had on changing cultures. We recognized that there are several ways to view globalization--some observers might argue that globalization will produce a richly diverse world society. These people might point out that just as American culture flows into places like India and China, so the values and outlooks of other societies flow into the US as well. Others will argue that globalization is a form of cultural hegemony that consumes local culture in an effort to create a single world culture. 

For your next paper, I would like you to examine the concern of balancing society's responsibilities as outlined in Nussbaum's list of Central Human Functional Capabilities against globalization and its effect on established local customs. Rather than arguing "for" or "against" globalization, however, I want you to explore the complexities of the issue.  

Questions to Ponder:

  • Is there a connection between the fears that market dominant minorities will "swallow up" a country's culture and the idea that giving women autonomy will undermine the morals and values of society?
  • Is Nussbaum's list of Central Human Functional Capabilities biased by her upbringing? Would these capabilities make sense in China, Japan, Senegal, Egypt or Brazil?
  • What is the impact of the military and war--in its new and traditional forms--on human functional capabilities?
  • What similarities are there to America's global cultural, economic, military and political might to those same controls wielded by countries that oppress women by denying them personal autonomy? 

Molly Burke, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Tradition and the Rights of the Individual.

Back to top
Copyright © 2006
Houghton Mifflin Company
All Rights Reserved
Site Feedback: Richard E. Miller 
rem@newhum.com