Parenti Assumptions
Some assumptions to consider
Here are some assumptions I have identified in Parenti’s article. Have a look and see if you can think of
any others. Feel free to use these in your paper, but be sure to write them in your own words. And
remember—saying it’s an assumption is not the same as saying it’s wrong. We as readers have to
decide whether the assumptions are true or not, based on our own knowledge, judgement, and values.
Your job in the Critique paper is to do just that: identify the assumption, explain why it is important for
Parenti’s argument (both of which I have done here) and then give your reasons for agreeing or
disagreeing, completely or partially.
Claim
Importance for argument
Excessive preparation for war can make planning for peace impossible. If it were possible to prepare
for war and peace
simultaneously, some of
Parenti’s concerns about
military planning would be
unnecessary
Companies like GE, Boeing, Raytheon, and Lockheed depend on war First part of a three-part
argument: They depend on war,
therefore they promote war,
and that influences policy
Companies that depend on war therefore promote war
See above
Companies in the military-industrial complex have an important effect See above
on policy
America’s military capacity is “overdeveloped”
Helps develop his idea that
military planning will make
other kinds of adaptation
difficult or impossible
Arizona’s recent immigration law is xenophobic (based on an irrational Since the Arizona law is the
fear of, and hostility toward, people of a different culture or nationality) only example he provides to
support the claim that these
developments “help promulgate
a xenophobic and bellicose
[warlike] ideology,” this is
crucial for showing that
military planning will erode
democracy, one of his key
ideas.
Human-caused climate change is a real and significant problem
This is an assumption Parenti
shares with his sources. It is
fundamental to the whole
project of preparing for the
effects of climate change: no
climate change, no effects.
Climate change is a nonlinear process (does not simply increase in a Not terribly important—more
smooth and predictable way—see the glossary for a more detailed
of an aside to characterize how
explanation).
scientifically accurate the
planners are
The 2007 “Age of Consequences” report is the most “scientifically
Not terribly important. Simply
literate” report of those he discusses.
characterizing the different
reports.
War is more likely in places that were colonized or dominated by the Helps Parenti show how
European powers and the US (war “follows the history of imperialism military planning will harm the
and the uneven development of capitalism on a global scale”)
most vulnerable, those who
have been made poor by the
“uneven development” of
capitalism.
Underdeveloped nations in the “Gap” or “periphery” have been and
Part of Parenti’s effort to show
still are taken advantage of by the wealthy industrialized nations (they why military planning is
are “not so much excluded … as … historically exploited and
harmful, since it continues the
politically subjugated”).
pattern of exploitation.
It will be impossible for the wealthy nations to protect themselves from Supports his argument that
the conflicts caused by climate change.
military solutions are not viable
in the long run.
Military planning will lead to racism, surveillance and repression. (He Part of showing why military
actually has a longer list, including “xenophobia” and “militarism.” I solutions are not a good idea.
think, though, that he tries to prove these two with examples such as
the Arizona law—which he considers a xenophobic law—and the
quotes, which he uses to prove the claim of militarism. So those are not
assumptions, because he tries to prove them. But I do not see anywhere
in the article where he tries to prove the idea of racism, surveillance or
repression, so I would count these as assumptions.)
Things to watch out for
Confusing supported claims with assumptions
Remember that an assumption is a claim the author does not even try to prove. So if Parenti offers any
evidence at all—even if the evidence is insufficient, irrelevant, or unrepresentative—he’s still trying to
prove the claim and so it is not an assumption.
Here are a couple examples of claims that Parenti does try to support, and so are not assumptions:

The development of the security industry, or what he calls the “new economy of repression,”
encourages war-making and hostility toward immigrants (“helps promulgate a xenophobic and
bellicose ideology”). The example of Arizona’s immigration law, and support for it by the private
prison industry, is a piece of evidence to support this connection. Thus, even though he provides
only one piece of evidence, he is still trying to prove the point. It is not an assumption.

Barnett’s “Core” and “Gap” corresponds to the old division between the imperial powers and the
nations they conquered (“in reality, this new map is just the old map—the geography of empire.”)
By providing the examples of Wallerstein and Mill, he is trying to prove that the old geography is
the same as what Barnett describes, so this is not an assumption.
Parenti’s assumptions vs. his sources’ assumptions
Since so much of Parenti’s argument is quotes from, or descriptions of, reports by other people, it’s
important to distinguish between his assumptions and theirs. In some cases they overlap (for example,
he and they both assume that climate change is real and that it will cause social and economic
problems), but we still need to respect the difference between them.
Here are a couple of assumptions from Parenti’s sources (the reports) that he does not share:

“Once again, warfare would define human life.” This is what Parenti is hoping to avoid, as we see
in his final paragraph. He believes that we can approach the problem differently, although he does
not say much about that alternative. But he certainly does not assume that it is true. He believes that
it is what is called a “self-fulfilling prophecy.” If we believe it and prepare too much for war we
will make it come true.

“Altruism and generosity would likely be blunted.” Here, too, this quote from one of his sources is
directly contrary to what Parenti would like to see happen. We see this in the final paragraph when
he advocates “greater cooperation and economic redistribution.” Cooperation and altruism are
closely related, though not identical. The whole point of Parenti’s article is to say, “Look, this
military planning is happening but it will create a future we don’t want.” The quote about altruism
being blunted is part of the destructive path (as he sees it) the military planners are taking us down,
not his view of the subject.
Remember to read “Tips on Writing about Assumptions” (the last link in the Critique Paper section of
the website) for more on how to do this part of the paper—and what not to do.