Kennedy vs. Shy: America's Experience With War Compared
This paper compares two landmark essays on the American experience with war: David M. Kennedy's "War and the American Character" (1976) and John Shy's reflections from A People Numerous and Armed (1971). The analysis argues that Kennedy's essay better captures the broad historical picture of America's wars by emphasizing geographic isolation, low military expenditures, and the psychological impact of Vietnam on public attitudes. Shy's essay, while insightful, is critiqued as overly theoretical and focused on military mentality. The paper also briefly applies Lewis Coser's conflict theory to American wartime cohesion, drawing connections between internal and external conflict and national identity.
- Introduction: Thesis favoring Kennedy over Shy introduced
- David M. Kennedy's Essay: Geography, spending, casualties, and Vietnam costs analyzed
- John Shy's Essay: Shy's theory-heavy approach and Vietnam critique examined
- Lewis Coser and Conflict Theory: Coser's conflict theory applied to WWII and Vietnam
- Conclusion: Kennedy judged the more balanced historical analyst
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its comparative argument in concrete historical data — army sizes, per capita military spending, and casualty figures — giving the thesis measurable support rather than relying solely on subjective impression.
- It situates both essays in their historical moment (1971 and 1975–76) while also evaluating them against later events, demonstrating critical awareness of how context shapes interpretation.
- The critique of Shy's "Further Reflections" addendum is a strong moment of direct, evidence-based pushback that shows independent scholarly judgment.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative textual analysis: rather than summarizing each essay in isolation, it reads them against each other and against a shared historical record. The author uses specific quotations from both Kennedy and Shy to anchor evaluative claims, and applies Coser's sociological framework as a third lens to assess group cohesion during wartime — showing how theory can be layered onto historical narrative.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a thesis favoring Kennedy, then devotes a substantial middle section to Kennedy's argument, followed by a parallel treatment of Shy that includes direct criticism. A shorter final section applies Coser's conflict theory to WWII and Vietnam. The structure is essentially a block comparison — one author fully treated before the other — which suits the length and the strength of the thesis.
Introduction
Which historian — David M. Kennedy or John Shy — best represents the American experience with war? While reading their respective essays, it is necessary to consider the context of the time in which each was written. Kennedy penned his essay in 1975, and Shy wrote his in 1971. In terms of world events subsequent to both essays — in particular the advent of terrorism on a colossal and destructive scale on September 11, 2001 — vast amounts of military and political change have since emerged.
Notwithstanding the tumultuous global changes since the 1970s, both essays remain timeless in their intelligent analysis and important in their forthright accuracy regarding U.S. history and war. They provide valuable reading for any student of the period. However, Kennedy's essay, in this writer's view, best reflects the broad picture of America — its peoples, its geography, its politics, and its wars. While Shy's writing is also informative, he tends to approach the subject from a theoretical point of view and spends too much time examining the mentality of the military, rather than presenting a balanced historical position. Further comparisons of the two essays are offered in the sections that follow.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.