The Clash of Civilizations: a Summary of Samuel Huntington's Controversial Political Analysis and Its Critics

Samuel P. Huntington in his book “ The Clash of Civilizations”has predicted that the source of conflict in the new world shall not be ideological or primarily economic, as the great divisions among humankind and dominating source of conflict shall be cultural.Although nation states will remain to be the most powerful actors in world affairs, yet the principal conflict of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different

“The Decline of the West” was written when the financial crisis was at its highest. Our society was falling apart because people started using money they did not have. Like Mike and his family, a lot of people have seen that the worst fear was coming true – that there has been a decline of the west. Many people, including Mike’s family, were suddenly in debt.

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.

The period 1450s saw an existence of powerful cities such as Asia, Africa, and Americas with established trading networks over land and sea. Societies in Asia and the Middle East were the world leaders in economics; in science and technology; and in shipping, trade, and exploration until about AD 1500 (Goldstone, 2009). Europe emerged from the Middle Ages and entered its Renaissance, well behind many of the advanced civilizations elsewhere in the world and did not catch up with and surpass the leading Asian societies until about AD 1800 (Ibid). This history leads one to enquire what was so special that the West did or have to rise to the current global stature that it has become. Though presumptions have been to point to a unique European defined path to success, these have been cast by a cloud of doubt following Japan’s rise as the second largest economy in the 1980s leaving the questions about the western origins of political and economic ideas and institutions (Rosenthal and Wong, 2010).

A hegemon must have a certain level of control or even supremacy over these areas to actually be a hegemon and sustain this power. The notion of America as hegemonic in the international community is ingrained in both Western views and in the opinion of other nation-states, as some view globalisation and Americanisation as two separate issues and not just the consequence of American supremacy. The USA believes itself a superior nation, “standing taller and seeing further”, and this is true to a certain extent, although a distinction will be made in this essay between the USA’s global dominance and its possible weaknesses, and the rise of other actors in the international community. This essay assess the extent to which America’s superiority allows for its global domination and how sustainable its hegemony is, eventually coming to the conclusion that although powers like China are rising, they are not equal to, or even sustainable competition to America. Whilst America does dictate globally in regards to militarily, economics and social norms and ideals in most aspects, the rise of China and the so-called Asian Century does pose a minor threat, although as explained in

Zakaria describes what he terms the rise of the rest as a consequence of the continuous efforts of American politicians and diplomats urging countries to “open their markets, free up their politics, and embrace trade and technology” (60). The basis idea of this book highlights the United States road to being a global superpower and how its stagnation during recent decades have caused a striking shift from America being the world’s only actor to a weakening, less dominating player in the international system. Although this realization is alarming, this actually means good for America. Ultimately, Zakaria describes a world where countries are “more open, market friendly, and democratic” (242) because of the good old United States.

For all one knows, Samuel P. Huntington could be right about the reasons for this “clash” he describes as being “global”, a clash which occurs in the near future. Let that future hold its destiny in its hands for now. You may remember his argument, about the source of our “great division” being cultural and “not primarily ideological.” It is this that I plan to expand on but not at the expense of explaining it in totally non-characteristic manner. To further augment how culture will cause this apparent “clash of civilizations,” I have attempted to map-out what I consider outstanding focuses in the process of this “clash.” The

To conclude, Huntington’s is wrong to assume that Western ideas do not resonate with Eastern civilizations. The West did not always follow Western ideas like the separation of church and state throughout its history with the city of Seville showcasing how much property the Church held. Religious liberty and keeping your customs was occurring in the Eastern nation as

Although Western culture has been defined by both Christian and secular values across the course of time, the West’s primary goal is to achieve economic supremacy, using Christian and secular philosophies, as well as colonization and technological innovation as means to achieve this goal.

While reading this article I was able to iidentify ways Huntington talks about and uses religion in his assessment of world affairs, the composition of civilizations, and how civilizations interact with each other. Democracy is like religion it can be seen as a imperialistic venture if it is not grown at home. trying to convert a person is always a act of bigotry. Without the ideology of collectivism, the new enemy would then be based on culture or maybe even religion. I believe that Huntington identifies the civilization in the religious divisions because " civilization is a cultural entity."(2) All groups for example: ethnic groups, religious groups, regions, nationatilies, and villiages has distinct cultures at all different levels. However,

Huntington and Fukuyama have opposite points of view about how the world will looks like in the future. Huntington thinks that the civilization identity will be increasingly important in the future, and the world will be divided between seven or eight major civilizations because the most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural differences, separating these civilizations from one another. However, Fukuyama argues that all the people on planet want to live in liberal – democratic regime especially after discrediting of socialism, monarchy, fascism, and other types of authoritarian rule. He supports his point of view by saying that modernity, democracy and free market have a stronger cultural foundation

Huntington thesis stated in his opinion that the great differences among people and the dominating source of conflicts would be due to differences in culture. He also stated that key conflicts in global politics will take place due to different civilizations among nations.

“In the post-Cold War world,” said Samuel Huntington, “the most important distinctions among peoples are not ideological, political, or economic. They are cultural” (21). Although some of his notions have caused a big controversial debate, his foresight on the importance of culture has been proofed. Homi Bhabha in his The Location of Culture (1994) has paid a special attention to cultural identity, and Stuart Hall in his article, “The Questions of Cultural Identity,” has divided identity into two categories—personal identity and community identity—claiming that the latter one is social or cultural identity. And as far as I am concerned, personal identity in a sense can be counted as cultural identity. Inhabiting in a cultural and social world

‘Civilization,’ a term defined as ‘the state of human society that is very developed and organized,’ has frequently carried immense weight in American official rhetoric. Historically speaking, however, since its emergence as a concept in the late-eighteenth century in Western Europe, acts of extraordinary violence and brutality have been committed in the name of civilization. In his critique on Huntington’s The Clash of Civilizations thesis, Edward Said asserts

It is true that the end of the Cold War has shaper a unipolar world in which many countries aspired to the American dream, but the 9/11 events have revealed American interests in the Middle East, and consequently have reshaped the world’s centers of power. Krauthammer (2003) believes America has the power to control the world if it chooses so because it was given the tools for such actions: “The choice is ours. […] History has given you an empire, if you will keep it” (p. 155). However, Ferguson brings solid arguments that America does not have the power to provide sustainable support for its military and economic power because it lacks the capacity to provide human capital to control these two powers. Even though American has the power to exercise world leadership, it cannot do so because it does not have the right tools.