Analyse “clash of the civilizations” as a perspective on globalization. What are the advantages and disadvantages of utilising a “civilizational” approach? PDF

Preview

Summary

94% essay - Analyse “clash of the civilizations” as a perspective on globalization. What are the advantages and disadvantages of utilising a “civilizational” approach?...

Description

Question 2) Analyse “clash of the civilizations” as a perspective on globalization. What are the advantages and disadvantages of utilising a “civilizational” approach?

Introduction

Samuel P. Huntington, an American political scientist, best known for his controversial and thought-provoking 1993 article, the "Clash of Civilizations”, looked into the future with the aims to describe the world post the cold war while putting forward a thesis. In an attempt to do this he captured the end of the cold war precisely, which turned out to be what today we call ‘globalization’. Giddens (1990) defines Globalization as “the intensification of worldwide social relations linking distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many thousands of miles away and vice versa.” Through the universal integration of ideas, cultures and media, the advancement in communication and technology allows different civilizations to exchange ideas and ways. In Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilisation’ theory he set out what he predicted were the reasons to why civilizations would collide. He also projected that a number of civilizations would “clash” due to the difference of cultures and religion. Huntington assumed that this ‘clash’ was most likely going to happen between eight major civilisations which included Islamic, Japanese, SlavicOrthodox, Hindu, Latin American, Confucian, Western and possibly African Civilization. While also stating that the most likely case of a clash was between the west and other civilizations. (Chiozza, 2002). With these assumptions Huntington predicted some events where civilizations have collided and doing so he was correct. In this essay I will discuss why these assumptions and predictions of clashes were accurate and why he was correct to do so, while using the well-known example of 9/11 to display his ideas. I will also analyse Samuel

P. Huntington’s theory of the “the Clash of Civilisation” in relation to contemporary Globalization, while using relevant examples to highlight some of the advantages and disadvantages of developing a “civilization” approach. External sources will be referred to in order to heighten understanding and analysis of Samuel P. Huntington’s theory of the “Clash of Civilization”

The “Clash of Civilization” Theory and Globalization.

Samuel P. Huntington (1993) described civilisation as ‘the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species. It is defined both by common objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs, institutions and by the subjective selfidentifications of people”. While civilizations can be differentiated from each other on the basis of language, tradition, history and most importantly religion he predicted that cultural differences would be the main source of future global conflict rather than ideology. (Huntington, 1993). It is also key to note that differences don’t always lead to conflict and conflict doesn’t always escalate to violence. Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” is an accurate example of cultural differentialism theory which depicts different cultures which aim stubbornly to remain different. Huntington believes an accurate example of this theory is between the Islamic and western culture. While globalization has adapted them slightly they still remain distinctly different at the core. He believed that most civilizations will separate themselves from others through the faults in cultures. It can be agreed that we are now more interconnected due to being more technically advanced today and also being more accessible due to the advances in communication. As of today we are more global which some agree that there is room for more conflict due to differences in civilization and also within

civilizations. While the conflict aspect of being more global can be described as a disadvantage, being more interconnected also has its advantages as there is the opportunity to have and increased amount of interaction among different civilisation, which also forces people to be increasingly conscious and awareness of different civilizations. This allows people to broaden their ideas and also allows them to learn the ways of other traditions of different cultures. One of the many ideas that Huntington had about Islam civilization and Muslim which caused a lot of controversy was that there was an increased chance of a clash between civilisations if Muslim’s and non-Muslims were living in close proximity of each other, while he also believes that Muslims are to blame for the conflict as they supposedly were the cause of violent conflict in the past. (Ritzer, 2012).

Religion and The clash of the West.

Samuel Huntington classifies civilization into common elements which include “language, history, religion, customs, institutions, and by the subjective self-identification of people” (Norris, et al., 2002). While many of the major clashes revolve around culture and religion Huntington believed that religion was the most defining of civilization. There is a strong connection between culture and religion, as religion is an element of culture. While language is also important to a person’s culture as it allows communication among others, religion provides a framework for culture and one can agree that the most dominant thing that differentiates culture is religious differences. While there is, also the possibility of religion as a global force causing clashes of civilizations but often clashes can also take place within a culture. Huntington believed that this ‘clash’ was organised into seven/eight different civilizations, however 20 years on Haynes et al., (2013) strikes down Huntington’s idea that civilization can be divided into 7/8 categories as he believes now that we are more global

there are many different norms, ideas, beliefs and cultures which cannot be categorized into 7/8 civilizations. In the current glocal world it is hard to tie some identities into one civilization. As different sets of norms and beliefs are now living side by side, due to the world being more globalized, Huntington believed that the possibility of a clash is more likely. The most notable example of two cultures colliding due to religious and cultural differences include the Christian West and Islamic world. While religion has provoked ample conflict due to clashes of civilisation, it also promotes forgiveness and peace. For example when a natural disaster strikes, religious and cultural differences are set aside within a community in order to aid for those in need. Religion has also been an element of some collisions. An event which highlights Huntington’s theory of the “clash of civilization” is the 9/11 attack. On September 11th buildings which were of symbolic value to America were targeted by Islamic Terrorists. It can be said that terrorists targeted these buildings as they were symbols to the western culture, while also being symbols of capitalism. The clash of these two cultures resulted in the loss of many lives while also putting countries on the verge of a war due to the clashes of religion, culture and essentially civilisation by attacking the west through America. While the events of 9/11 support Huntington’s predictions of the “Clash of Civilization” he didn’t forecast the attack of 9/11, but he somewhat he predicted the context in which an attack of similar event of clashes would emerge. While it is believed that “9/11 was not the start of a clash of civilizations but rather the last gasp of transnational Islamist radicalism” (Barker et al., 2013)

The “Clash of Civilization” today.

In the case of 9/11 it was not the beginning of a “Clash of Civilizations” but rather a conflict of developments rather than the last pant of transnational Islamist. It is taught that the “Clash

of Civilization” is no longer relatable and can be believed to be misleading. This is arguable as it is still likely to have clashes of civilizations in a Globalized world as the world is so connected through technology and through the movement of people, cultures are now less diverse as it is believed that Globalization has a negative effect on culture diversity. This is predominantly due to the development of technology and communication, as it is clear that we are all now more interconnected than ever, as we are now more modernised than ever. While in a contemporized context John O. Voll believed that “The great conflicts of our time are not clashes of civilizations, they are clashes and competitions between different modes of modernity: ‘a clash of modernities,’ not a ‘clash of civilizations.’” (Voll, n.d.). In recent times we have seen the attack on Paris, Bagdad and Beirut which were carried out by a religious group rather than an entire religion. To blame these attacks on the Islamic and say it is another clash of civilizations would be inaccurate, as it is a terrorist group made up of a group of different cultures rather than an one individual civilization.

A “civilizational” approach

One can describe a “civilizational” approach as something which allows one to consider religious, cultural and other values and ideas in different societies. It also allows us to understand the global in the local. One advantage may include the advancement of culture, as we are more global now than ever we now have the ability to learn new foreign languages while staying in our native countries and also eating international foods from restaurants in our local towns. This really shows how the World is becoming a smaller place and the interactions among people of different civilizations are increasing. Due to this increase in interactions among different civilisations, there is an increase in people’s consciousness and awareness of different civilizations. Huntington (1993) uses the example of “an Ibo may be

from Owerri or Onitsha which are regions in east Nigeria. In the city of Lagos he is simply an Ibo while in London he is a Nigerian but in New York he is an African.” This highlights that we are more conscious and aware of the differences between civilizations. One can agree that there will never be a common culture, despite the world becoming more globalized and the levels of interaction between different civilizations increasing. The cultural differentialism theory which supports the “Clash of Civilization” will be reluctant to adapt and become a part of a common culture. Although there is still a certain degree of culture changed due to globalization but the culture still remains different at the core as it is reluctant to change and adapt to other cultures as they strive to uniqueness, this may not be a disadvantage as it allows certain civilizations to maintain their culture and traditions while others become more alike. (Huntington et al., 2010) In today’s contemporary society, the majority of modern societies have been Westernized, this does not mean they have become more modern but rather are becoming more common than not. Although many societies are becoming more Westernized, it can be seen that Japan and Singapore have become more modern in recent decades but they are a valid example of how modernized does not mean Westernized as they are clearly not. (Ritzer et al., 2010)

Conclusion

To conclude it can be said that Samuel Huntington has used his theory to predict some of the biggest attacks which have took place to date, it can also be said he was correct in doing so, in today’s globalized world, while his theory is still understandable, it is almost inaccurate as we are no longer able to split the world into seven or eight civilizations. As we advance through technology and communication we are also diversifying our ideas, norms and beliefs making the world so diverse that it is not possible to categories it. In a world which is

becoming more and more globalized, we are forever changing and developing and civilization is too changing. While a ‘civilizational’ approach also gives scope of a common culture or the increased consciousness and awareness of the differences between civilizations, it is almost necessary for a changing globalized world where different cultures, religions and norms are now more interconnected than ever due to globalization.

Bibliography Barker, J., Haynes, J., Welch, D., Murshed, S., Eriksson, J., Inoguchi, T. and Senghass, D. (2013). The Clash of Civilizations Twenty Years on. Bristol, UK: e-International Relations. Chiozza, G. (2002). Is There a Clash of Civilizations? Evidence from Patterns of International Conflict Involvement, Journal of Peace Research, [online], volume 39 issue 6. Available: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022343302039006004 [Accessed 23 Mar. 2017] Giddens A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford University Press: Stanford, CT. Huntington, S. (1993). The clash of civilization. [Online] Available at: http://public.wsu.edu/~appleton/gened111/coc.pdf [Accessed 22 Mar. 2017]. Huntington, S., Ajami, F., Mahbubani, K., Bartley, R., Binyan, L., Kirkpatrick, J., Weeks, A., Piel, G., Hoffmann, S., Muller, J. and Moïsi, D. (2010). The Clash of Civilizations: The Debate. 2nd Ed. New York: Foreign Affairs, pp.85-89. Norris, P., Inglehart, R., (2002) Islam & the West: Testing the ‘Clash of Civilizations’ Thesis (Harvard University and the University of Michigan) Ritzer, G. (2010). Globalization: a basic text. 1st ed. Malden (MA): Wiley-Blackwell, pp.246-249. Ritzer, G. and Atalay, Z. (2010). Readings in Globalization: Key Concepts and Major Debates. 1st ed. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.39-41. Voll, J. (n.d.). The Impossibility of the Clash of Civilizations in a Globalized World. [Online] Acmcu.georgetown.edu. Available at: https://acmcu.georgetown.edu/the-impossibility-of-theclash [Accessed 22 Mar. 2017]....