The rhetorics of violence in Joshua: Foucauldian Power, Israelite Identity, and the Ethics of Interpretation

The goals of this project are manifold. First, I will attempt to discover evidence in the book of Joshua that will lend support to the theory of a Josianic influence enacted in the 7th century BCE. I will do this through an analysis of the rhetoric in selected stories in Joshua using the ideas of Foucault. Second, I will address the significance of this kind of analysis as having potential for the emancipation of oppressed peoples. The first section delineates scholarly discussion on the literary and historical context of the book of Joshua. These scholarly works are foundational to this study because they situate the text within a particular period in history and within certain ideologies. Chapter 2 discusses the work of Foucault and how his ideas will be applied to particular texts of the book of Joshua. The focused analysis of these texts occurs within chapters 3 to 6. Chapter 7 presents an integration of the observations made through the analyses performed in the previous chapters and expands on the ethical significance of this study.

Too Many Bad Cooks Spoiling the Broth? Effectiveness of NGOs in Addressing Child Labour in El Salvador

The reaction of the first world to the persevering plight of a large part of the third world varies. In response to the sometimes glaring disparities, many international organizations and multinational corporations have recently adopted a pro-development rhetoric with relation to the problem of global poverty. However, the rhetoric rarely translates into action. As David Bacon discusses, leaders of corporations and organizations now tend to conclude their speeches by expressing a desire to reduce the suffering of the third world. However, when it comes to agreeing on specific concessions that could indeed improve the world-wide economic situation, first world countries are reluctant to act. A good example of this type of behavior is the current negotiation of the WTO, the “development round of Doha,” in which the United States along with the European Union pressure countries of the developing South to open up their markets, while at the same time refusing to remove or even decrease their own agricultural subsidies. The first world civil society observes the behavior of international organizations and western based multinational corporations as ineffectual. Taking the matter in its own hands, especially in the past couple of decades, this civil society has created a countless number of development-oriented nongovernmental organizations. These are supposed to compensate for the lack of action by international organizations. Development NGOs are believed to be more locally responsive as well as free of business or political considerations in choosing their strategies, and thus generally more efficient than IOs. However, if they really were how they are alleged to be, the problems of the third world would already be ameliorated by a significant amount, if not completely eradicated. Do development-NGOs indeed possess the characteristics that they claim to possess? What is their real affect on human rights? And how effective are they in their work?

The Emerging Civil Society in China and Its Impact on Democratization

Recent years have seen an emerging civil society in an authoritarian China. The authoritarian embrace of civil society challenges the conventional wisdom that civil society is closely linked to democracy. In Beijing, the rhetoric of civil society linked less to democracy than to modernization. However, does civil society development have any impact on democratization in authoritarian regimes? The thesis tries to provide a tentative answer by studying civil society and democratization in post-Mao China. As a result of economic development and political reforms, gradual political liberalization has marked a shift of state-society relations that gives rise to a certain degree of democratization and a growing civil society. The thesis uses a statistical correlation study to examine the relations between grassroots democratization and civil society development. The study concludes that civil society development may have contributed to democratization at the grassroots level but not on the national level. The impact of civil society on democratization depends on the political structure of the state and will remain limited unless the government allows for further state-led democratic openings.

Opting out of oppositionality : toward an informed and engaged "third wave" feminism

I begin by citing a definition of "third wave" from the glossary in Turbo Chicks: Talking Young Feminisms at length because it communicates several key issues that I develop in this project. The definition introduces a tension within "third wave" feminism of building and differentiating itself from second wave feminism, the newness of the term "third wave," its association with "young" women, complexity of contemporary feminisms, and attention to multiple identities and oppressions. Uncovering explanations of "third wave" feminism that go beyond, like this one, generational associations, is not an easy task. Authors consistently group new feminist voices together by age under the label "third wave" feminists without questioning the accuracy of the designation. Most explorations of "third wave" feminism overlook the complexities and distinctions that abound among "young" feminists ; not all young feminists espouse similar ideas, tactics, and actions; and for various reasons, not all young feminists identify with a "third wave" of feminism. Less than a year after I began to learn about feminism I discovered Barbara Findlen's Listen Up: Voices From the Next Feminist Generation. Although the collection nor its contributors declare association with "third wave" feminism, consequent reviews and citations in articles identify it, along with Rebecca Walker's To Be Real: Telling the Truth and Changing the Voice of Feminism, as a major text of "third wave" feminism. Re-reading Listen Up since beginning to research "third wave" feminism, I now understand its fundamental influence on my research questions as a starting point for assessing persistent exclusion in contemporary feminism, rather than as a revolutionary text (as it is claimed to be in many reviews). Findlen begins the introduction with the bold claim, "My feminism wasn't shaped by antiwar or civil rights activism ..." (xi). Framing the collection with a disavowal of the influence women of color's organizational efforts negates, for me, the project's proclaimed commitment to multivocality. Though several contributions examine persistent exclusion within contemporary feminist movement, the larger project seems to rely on these essays to reflect this commitment, suggesting that Listen Up does not go beyond the "add and stir" approach to "diversity." Interestingly, this statement does not appear in the new edition of Listen Up published in 2001. And the content has changed with this new edition, including several more Latina contributors and other "corrective" additions.