Analysis of The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel P. Huntington

Huntington introduced a very controversial and debatable theory of clash of civilizations seems to prove itself correct, with the Western Christianity on one hand and the Orthodox Christianity and Islam on the other. He states that clash of civilization is unavoidable and is predicted in the near future. Today, we can already see those tensions and conflicts between civilizations, due to differences in cultures and traditions. While West is becoming more modern, the Islamic world is going back to its roots. Traditions, language and religion separate two civilizations causing conflicts that lead to violence (Huntigton, 25). This clash was mostly highlighted in 9/11 terroristic attack, which separated the West from the East.

Civilization: The West and the Rest, presented by Niall Ferguson, is a documentary in which Ferguson reveals what he calls the six killer applications which has helped Western civilization dominate over everyone else. These six applications are competition, science, property, medicine, consumerism, and work. Ferguson asks many questions over the course of the series as well as provides examples as to how Western civilization has surpassed other nations and empires. Ferguson’s main question in each episode is, “If we lose our monopoly over apps like these, could Western civilization be consigned to history.” This paper will analyze Ferguson’s questions and the examples he provides for the killer applications of competition, science, property, medicine, consumerism, and work, as well as his conclusions as to why the West has risen to the top, how the rest are passing up the West, as well as his conclusions to if the West can remain above the rest.

“conflict occurring between individuals or social groups that separated by cultural boundaries can be considered “cross-cultural conflict.” But individuals, even in the same society, are potentially members of many different groups, organized in different ways by different criteria” (Avruvh, 1998, p.6).

Samuel Huntington’s controversial article “The Clash of Civilizations?” was first published in Foreign Affairs in 1993 and was subsequently turned into a book in 1996 titled The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. As this paper will show Huntington’s work can be seen as a product of the post-Cold War context it was written in. Huntington’s article takes a new perspective on the new world order and outlines a different way a thinking about how future world conflicts will unfold. Since the initial journal article was published in 1993 there has been a great deal of response from academics and also from Huntington himself. A majority of the responses come in the form of critiques, with the authors offering their own insight into how the post-Cold War World will operate. Although the validity of Huntington’s arguments have been questioned, it did create a great deal of controversy in the academic world. As Huntington explained in the preface of his 1996 book, the original article published in Foreign Affairs created more discussion in three years than any other article published in the journal since the 1940s.

Philosophers Sigmund Freud and Eric Hobsbawm present two explanations of the origins of civilization in their books Civilization and its Discontent and Nations and Nationalism since 1780, respectively. In doing so, each philosopher establish a distinct, and somewhat similar, definition of civilization. According to Freud, “’civilization’ describes the whole sum of the achievements and the regulations which distinguish our lives from those of our animal ancestors.” (Freud, 63) There are distinct features of a civilization, such as beauty, the “encouragement of man’s higher mental activities – his intellectual, scientific and artistic achievements” (Freud, 69) and the social relations between men. While Freud refers to this union of a group

Although many of us have used the words culture and civilization interchangeably, Huntington spends a great deal of time differentiating between the two. Cultures have a commonality; ancestry, religion, language, history, values, customs, and institutions. These commonalities will define cultural groups; and the largest cultural group possible, at the broadest level, is a civilization. “Culture is the common theme in almost every definition of civilization”.

A civilization refers to “a particular and distinctive type of human society” (Strayer, pg. 90). Civilizations aren’t always different from one another nor are they the exact same. Each civilization has some form of a unique characteristic that differentiates itself from the rest. For example, the Ancient Egyptians and the Hindus from Ancient India. They both have a permanent arrangement of societal roles, yet they aren’t constructed or operated in the same manner. These two locations are the main topics of this discussion/comparison.

Both authors, Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama, don’t have any conflicting views but have different perceptions as to how they see the world after the revolution and the cold war. Samuel believes that the west is dominating the world, changing cultures and customs of other countries. However, Francis analyzes the positive aspects of how the liberal democracy in the west is more powerful than all other democratic nations and he portrays how western dominance is effective and healthy for most of the nations.

In Samuel P. Huntington’s article “The West: Unique, Not Universal,” he addresses his audience with a very controversial question: Is Western Culture universal or unique? Huntington elaborately opens up this question with research and examples to explain and persuade readers that the West will never be a universal culture for all, but rather a unique culture that will be accepted by those who appreciate it. For decades now, historians and scholars have debated with one another to determine who is right and wrong. However, from a handful of articles from different scholars, Samuel Huntington’s statement that the West is unique rather than universal is supported and even further elaborated on by these particular sources. A common understanding between all the sources, that must be noted, is that a civilization’s culture is not comprised of material goods but rather their culmination of their religion(s), values, language(s) and traditions. While although there are scholars out their that negate the West is unique, a large amount of scholars still argue and strengthen Huntington’s argument that the West has unique and exclusive characteristics that make them distinctive and rare.

In addition, civilization is a word that is defined by external reasons instead of internal reasons. It means that a nation has an opportunity to join to another civilization if its people wanted, while its culture is evolved by itself. For example, Russia had a chance to become a part of the West in history. Until the 1992, the survey showed that 40 percent citizens preferred the West, while 36 percent people had opposing views. However, according to Huntington, Russia will belong to the Slavic-Orthodox civilization in the future, which is a parallel civilization to the West civilization. However, whatever Russia will be, it cannot change its culture radically. Russia cannot become a Muslim country. It cannot change its traditional food in their important festival. It cannot speak Chinese. A culture can develop itself slowly in the long term, but it cannot become another culture entirely. Culture is a fundamental feature towards a nation. Therefore, a civilization is fragile and changeful, while a culture is strong and

In the example of Yugoslavia there really isn’t one specific ethnicity because there had been centuries of inter-marriage making it impossible to have an ethnically pure civilization. This is one aspect where Huntington gets closer to the truth when he write “People can and do redefine their identities and, as a result, the composition and boundaries of civilizations change,” like when Yugoslavia broke up all of sudden citizens were no longer Yugoslavs and were instead, Bosnians or Serbs examples of how new boarders changing everything . Huntington explains this best, “Civilizations are dynamics; they rise and fall; they divide and merge,” talking all about how the past of civilizations can be dragged up and used to fuel the splits and modeling of new civilizations and nation states . Power’s uses this to show how nationalism fueled by ethnic purity can cause a need for actually military presences and not international aid/presence is given, where orders can prevent them from being useful.

Reacting to the theory of Fukuyama, Samuel P. Huntington resumed the expression "Clash of civilizations" in 1993 and speculates that it is mainly cultural and religious identities

So what exactly is the clash of civilizations? This was briefly addressed in Samuel Huntington’s paper “The clash of civilizations?”. In order to explain the term, let’s first look into what civilization is. Person does not simply get to choose the civilization he/she simply belongs to. Communists can become democrats and vice versa, but Russians can never become Americans or Arabs cannot become European. In the conflict between civilizations the question is “What are you?”, it is something given and cannot be changed. Conflicts between countries are inevitable and with the way things work it is just a matter of time, before one country would not be comfortable with what other country is doing. In that case, cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised and resolved than political and economic ones [1]. The clash of civilizations often occurs on two levels. Micro-level is when small

Today more than ever, individuals and societies are built as an integration of different cultures and carry different characteristics that construct their unique identity.

Samuel Huntington, the author of the clash of the civilisations believes that the World will eventually divide in accordance with cultural lines, and not political lines. According to Huntington, “the thriving East Asian and Muslim societies will soon challenge Western dominance, and the United States being the World leader will need to reevaluate its policies on foreign invention and domestic immigration to remain a major player.” During the Cold War, the world was divided into the First, Second and Third Worlds. Huntington views these ties as insignificant now and states that the remaking of the World order will be based upon cultural similarity. The different thriving civilisations according to him today are the Western civilisation comprising of North America and Western Europe, the Muslim civilisation, the Orthodox Civilisation led by Russia, the Chinese civilisation, the Hindu civilisation, the Japanese civilisation, the Latin American civilisation and the African civilisation. Huntington’s proposition of the division of the World according to cultural lines has been backed by the use of various examples by him; examples of events that have taken place in the past.