1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

The Clash of Civilizations Theory

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by Mango, Oct 7, 2001.

  1. Mango

    Mango Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    10,252
    Likes Received:
    5,709
    Samuel P. Huntington came out with the theory that the basis for world conflicts has changed. Here is a summary of his idea:

    <A HREF="http://www.thenewspapertoday.com/editor/">From the Editorial Page of TheNewsPaperToday Friday, October 05, 2001</A>

    <i>

    Managing Diversity

    Secularism must mean confronting bigots, fanatics and zealots of all religions without fear or favour

    Huntington's 'Clash of Civilisations' theory has been revived in the wake of the September 11 attacks. India's multi-civilisational entity is a refutation of his theory. But we cannot deny the need for an intensified inter-faith interaction on a sustained basis in our society.

    JAIRAM RAMESH,
    Politician and analyst

    Three words other than Osama Bin Laden are capturing world headlines these days --"clash of civilisations". This phrase came into public discourse dramatically with Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilisations?" in the summer 1993 issue of Foreign Affairs, published by the New York-based Council of Foreign Relations. Subsequently, the Harvard professor of political science expanded his article into a book The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of World Order that came out in 1996. Huntington's work has been analysed and debated, applauded and heralded, criticised and condemned. September 11, 2001 has brought it back into sharp focus across continents.

    Huntington defines a civilisation as a culture writ large involving values, norms, institutions and modes of thinking to which successive generations in a given society have attached primary importance. Saying that religion is the defining characteristic of civilisations, Huntington identifies seven contemporary civilisations --Western, Latin American, Sinic, Japanese, Hindu, Islamic and African. He rejects the notion of a Buddhist or Jewish civilisation. He contends that while the lines between civilisations are seldom sharp, they are nonetheless real.

    Conflicts can occur within civilisations. But what pre-occupies Huntington is the larger issue of conflicts between and among civilisations, between what he calls "core states" of different civilisations. According to him, the Soviet-Afghan War of 1979-89 was the first war of civilisations while the 1990-91 Gulf War was the second such confrontation. Wars can also occur on a smaller scale across "fault lines" between civilisations, as for instance, in Kashmir. Rich diasporas play a key role in sustaining such conflicts.

    Having said that future wars are going to be civilisational in nature as a result of growing resistance to the spread of western universalism, Huntington proceeds to give his remedies for peace and harmony. In a multi-civilisational world, he writes, there are three rules that need to be followed. First is the abstention rule: core states must abstain from intervention in conflicts in other civilisations. Second is the joint mediation rule: core states should negotiate with each other to contain or to halt wars between states or groups from their civilisations. Third is the commonalties rule: peoples in all civilisations should search for and attempt to expand the value, institutions and practices they have in common with peoples of other civilisations. Huntington calls for an international institutional order restructuring, based on civilisations as the surest safeguard against a world war.
    <b>
    Huntington devotes considerable attention to the collision between Islam and the West. To be sure, anti-Muslim prejudices in western societies and the policies of western governments, particularly in West Asia, have fuelled great resentment amongst Muslims worldwide, but the problem, Huntington says, is deeper. He argues that the absolute nature of Islam that merges religion and politics, the absence of the concept of non-violence in that faith and the fact that it lacks one or more core states that could effectively mediate conflicts have all combined to make Islam a source of global instability.
    </b>
    While addressing a seminar organised by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation on India in Bonn in May this year, Dietmar Rothermund, the eminent German historian and scholar on India, spoke on how there is a danger that instead of Huntington learning from India, some elements in India will learn from Huntington and make his scheme a self-fulfilling prophecy. While referring to India as a civilisation-state, Rothermund cautioned that such a reference must mean an affirmation of diversity rather than an assent to Huntington's scheme of civilisational blocks.

    Huntington visited India in January 1998. His lectures here evoked a jubilant response from RSS-BJP ideologues who saw in his theories a vindication of their own world view.
    </i>



    Huntington's article in <i>Foreign Affairs</i> Summer 1993 can be found at these two locations:

    <A HREF="http://www.lander.edu/atannenbaum/Tannenbaum%20courses%20folder/POLS%20103%20World%20Politics/103_huntington_clash_of_civilizations_full_text.htm">Clash of Civilizations?</A>

    <A HREF="http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/grads/dperkins/ps555/Huntington.htm">Clash of Civilizations?</A>


    A rebuttal to Huntington's concept is next:

    <A HREF="http://www.coloradocollege.edu/Dept/PS/Finley/PS425/reading/Huntington2.html">Responses to Samuel P. Huntington's "The Clash of Civilizations?"</A>

    Recent events bring Huntington's theory back into focus.

    Is bin Laden's appeal to the Muslim world in line with Huntington's idea or just coincidence?


    Mango
     
    #1 Mango, Oct 7, 2001
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2001
  2. treeman

    treeman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 1999
    Messages:
    7,146
    Likes Received:
    261
    Makes alot of sense. Although I am wary of anything that has the CFR attached to it...
     
  3. Jeff

    Jeff Clutch Crew

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    22,412
    Likes Received:
    362
    I think that it really isn't religion-specific so much as it is cultural-specific. Voltaire actually wrote about the things all civilizations and their societies have had in common since the dawn of civilization. In his studies, he found that every culture that has ever existed has believed in a world "beyond the changing."

    The idea here that every society has had a majority of its people believe in a world beyond this one - an afterlife for example. Each of us has approached it differently depending upon our circumstances. Where people live, the types of illnesses and hardships they face, the color of their skin, the types of food they eat and so on all influence what they believe.

    While I find the ideas interesting, it seems that his view is one that is narrowly limited to a very specific frame of reference and bounding only the religions and beliefs that work within his concept.
     
  4. sw4real

    sw4real Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 1999
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    3
    yeah, w/ such flagrant disregard for the truth it's no wonder the bjp rejoiced at his lectures..
     
  5. Steve_Francis_rules

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 1999
    Messages:
    8,467
    Likes Received:
    300
    Thanks for pointing out this idiotic statement. I became seriously annoyed when I read that line.
     

Share This Page