Huntington has received many critiques from various academic writers who have either challenged him via their qualitative or quantitative researches. I will discuss some of them in this section and share my views on them. One of them is Paul Berman. In his book Terror and Liberalism, Berman (2003) argues that distinct cultural boundaries as described by Huntington (1993) do not exist in the present day. He argues that there is neither “Islamic Civilization” nor a “Western Civilization”, and that the evidence for the civilization clash is not convincing, especially when talking about relationships between United States and Saudi Arabia. In addition, he also shares that many Islamic extremists spent a significant time living and studying in the Western world. Berman (2003) also stated that conflict arises due to philosophical beliefs various groups share or do not share, regardless of cultural or religious identity. I share the view of Edward Said who responded to Huntington’s thesis in his 2001 article, “ The Clash of Ignorance”. He argued that Huntington’s categorization of the world’s fixed “civilizations” omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture. Said (2004) also argues that the clash of civilizations thesis is an example of “ the purest individious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science …show more content…
The first is a rejection of the Clash thesis as fabricated myth for perpetuating Western dominance and justifying its aggrandizing policies. The other is of the Clash being inevitable due to the essentially and radically different ethos of Islam that makes it impossible to reconcile with the West. Sajjad (2013) thus added that Muslims needed to prepare for the approaching Clash. In his article, Sajjad (2013) interestingly shared some analysis from the non-Western world point of view on the flaw of Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations as
Classical liberalism is a theory of democracy that saids the best kind of government is one
...taken the form of universalization of those same structures across the world through reforming measures or through discourses in the Muslim world, thus creating conflicts as noted by Majid. The main weapon of this power relationship is observing and differentiating between good and bad, thus ingraining binary oppositions with the western values at the superior end. Thus, the western hegemony is like a beauty myth which is an unattainable western standard which is not only undesirable but harmful for the non-west. Still, they are coerced to adopt this standard due to a constant gaze and pressure from the West. Therefore, there is a need to revert this gaze and dismantle the western hegemony and power structures through the proliferation of ideas; ideas that take root not merely from the power elite or existing structures but stem from individual and provincial needs.
Violent Jihad as a struggle against one’s enemies has its root in [these] situations. When the Islamic religion spread over the region, Jihad became a religious tenet and assumed the form of a peaceful, internal struggle to strive for the good and reject the evil in one’s action. Violent, external conflict was never r...
Richard Wright: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984. Rampersad, Arnold, ed., pp. 113-117. Richard Wright: A Collection of Critical Essays.
I wonder if his fifth claim, which is actually a preemptive defense, is the least well supported because he comes back to explicitly stating it. He can only defend motive, but not necessarily his selection. I think he is trying to give the view that he got from descending into “the bowels” of their correspondence, writings, etc., but he does them no favors either. (For example, he calls Huntington and Villard and others “portly male
In this essay, I posit that despite the harsh clashes between liberalism and republicanism, both elements play important roles in American politics, and their marriage has given birth to a unique America. I will begin by giving brief explanations about liberalism and republicanism, before showing how their dynamic interaction has given rise to American exceptionalism. It is also important to note that the slight emphasis on liberalism more than republicanism that is also evident in the US Constitution.
Conrad Kottak, in the eleventh chapter of his textbook on cultural anthropology sought to deconstruct ethnicity in the modern world and how it has evolved over time. He wrote that “ethnicity is based on actual, perceived, or assumed cultural similarities” (Kottak 2012). While ethnicity is based in differences, he discussed at length the origins of race and ethnicity and the diverging opinions as to where it all began, then diverged. He argued that humans are cultural rather than biologic and contrasts in society great affect how humans organize and define themselves. There was a overview of ethnicity structures in Asia, specifically in Japan and Korea, as well as the United States and Brazil. Kottak also defined what the word “nation” really means and its connotations; assim...
Nicholas Carr has many strong points in his article. He successfully proves that what he has to say is worthy of his readers time, and that maybe we should all take caution to how much time we spend on the
Orientalism as termed by Edward Said is meant to create awareness of a constellation of assumptions that are flawed and underlying Western attitudes towards the Muslim societies. Evidence from his 1978 book “Orientalism”, states that the culture has been of influence and marred with controversy in post colonial studies and other fields of study. Moreover, the scholarship is surrounded by somehow persistent and otherwise subtle prejudice of Eurocentric nature, which is against Islam religion and culture (Windschuttle, 1999). In his book, Said illustrates through arguments, that the long tradition in existence containing romanticized images of Islamic stronghold regions i.e. Middle East, and the Western culture have for a long time served as implicit justifications for the European and American Imperial ambitions. In light of this, Said denounced the practice of influential Arabs who contributed to the internalization of Arabic culture ideas by US and British orientalists. Thus, his hypothesis that Western scholarship on Muslim was historically flawed and essentially continues to misrepresent the reality of Muslim people. In lieu to this, Said quotes that, “So far as the United States seems to be concerned, it is only a slight overstatement to say that Muslims and Arabs are essentially seen as either oil suppliers or potential terrorists. Therefore, very few details such as human density, the passion of Arab-Muslim life has entered the awareness of even the people whose profession revolve around reporting of the Arab world. Due to this, we have instead a series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world presented in such a way as to make that world vulnerable to military aggression” (Said, 1980).
Throughout history, Western civilization has been an emerging force behind change in foreign societies. This is the concept that is discussed in the article the West Unique, Not Universal, written by Samuel Huntington. The author makes a very clear thesis sentence and uses a variety of evidence to support it. This article has a strong very convincing point. The thoughts expressed in this article can be related to a lot of events throughout history.
On the Harmony of Religion and Philosophy gives us insight to the philosophical views of a certain sect of Islam, and how it influenced it 's followers to view the world around them. Although it is helpful, this is written from a very biased position and it cannot be said that the views of the author are the views of Muslim culture as a whole. There is a constant attack on another religious group throughout the article that helps us to understand what this specific sect deems right and wrong through comparison of the groups.
If you recall my main point in “The Clash of Civilizations?”, I argued that the conflicts of the future will dominantly be due to cultural differences (Huntington, 1993). However, Said argues that instead of cultural differences, conflicts will stem from the ignorance that different cultures have when it comes to the other (Said, 2001). I defend my argument by pointing out that although Said believes the conflicts will stem from ignorance, the conflicts are still between civilizations. For Said’s argument to make sense, he has to admit that there are and always will be differences between these cultures that are of a sufficient scale, in order for one side to be ignorant about the beliefs and values of the other. The result of either civilization not understanding or accepting the practices of the other side’s culture is their eventual conflict (Huntington, 1993). Therefore, the basis of Said’s point supports my hypothesis that future conflicts will firstly, be between civilizations, and secondly, be due to their differences in culture.
In 1992 within a lecture Samuel P. Huntington proposed a theory that suggests that people's cultural and religious identities will undoubtedly be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world, this theory is known as the Clash of Civilizations. Therefore this essay provides a criticism of this theory, whether I agree or disagree with it and also the aspects I like or dislike about the theory as a whole.
Modern day society is engrossed in a battle for protection of individual rights and freedoms from infringement by any person, be it the government or fellow citizens. Liberalism offers a solution to this by advocating for the protection of personal freedom. As a concept and ideology in political science, liberalism is a doctrine that defines the motivation and efforts made towards the protection of the aforementioned individual freedom. In the current society, the greatest feature of liberalism is the protection of individual liberty from intrusion or violation by a government. The activities of the government have, therefore, become the core point of focus. In liberalism, advocacy for personal freedom may translate to three ideal situations, based on the role that a government plays in a person’s life. These are no role, a limited role or a relatively large role. The three make up liberalism’s rule of thumb. (Van de Haar 1). Political theorists have
conflicts. The focus of this paper is to explore the ideas and beliefs of the