RatnaKapur -- "Human Rights in the 21st Century: Take a Walk on the Dark Side"
1. What are the empirical and theoretical flaws that Kapur exposes in the narrative of human rights progress? Can you think of additional flaws? Can you think of any responses to the flaws that she identifies?
2. What is the reactionary critique of human rights that has emerged? How might this critique be framed in relation to domestic rather than international human rights? Are there domestic examples comparable to the examples of Iraq and Afghanistan that Kapur discusses?
3. Why is history so key to understanding contemporary human rights? What is the argument that Kapur is making and what are its human rights implications?
4. Can you think of domestic examples of the liberal project of assimilation? Of human rights responses rooted in essentialism and/or paternalism? Examples of Canadian incarceration, internment and/or elimination of the "other"?
5. Kapur argues it is important to confront the dark side of human rights. Why is it important? Do you agree?
6. What are the ways Kapur suggests we might move forward with thoughtful reflection on both the critique and the potential of human rights? Can you think of additional ways forward?