An inspection of the vital concept in the clash of civilisations exposes several flaws and contradiction in Huntington’s thesis. In Huntington’s paper, civilisation is termed to be “the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other class." Civilisation has been going on and on for decades. People have been civilised by highest cultural groups to lowest cultural groups. Moreover, civilisation is determined by its core and enduring, values, modes of thinking, norms and institutions. In this paper, I therefore criticise Huntington’s ideas of civilisations as he point out some of his notions, the map and paradigms, euphoria and harmony, sheer chaos and many more. The approach of Huntington begins with his system of which it becomes difficult for different categorization with the issue of clash. Huntington's thesis has dominated public discourse since it was first launched in 1993. The world can’t be one world, conflict among countries has been going on and on, even today countries are fighting for oil and petroleum, in this matter, the world can’t be one, euphoria and harmony can’t be flourished because of conflicts that abide the world. “The end of the Cold War meant the end of significant conflict in the global politics and the emergence of one relatively harmonious world.” The world can’t be harmonious in the sense that political leaders don’t share similar views in the political environment, they differ in how they perceive their views and ideas in the global scale, therefore conflict arise. The world ideas cannot be ended; the world can be boring without evil. The way Samuel Huntington cherish his ideas, they can be proven false, for... ... middle of paper ... ...he context of West and East, he asserts that their conflicts flow from two countries religion and the civilizations accumulated on them, and the continuing pattern of conflicts between the two civilizations rises. In conclusion, Huntington appears as a cultural thesis in the clash of civilisations, he then request that the major distinction among people is that they are not political, economic and ideological, they are cultural. If distinction possesses primacy, it is accompanied by the world’s conflicts. Some of the facts he stated in his thesis are unproven, and the world they cannot be one because, wars they still taking place even today, countries are still fighting. These prove that, Huntington ideas are adequate because they can be criticised and proven false. Post-cold war cannot be shaped only by cultural factors; it can also be shaped by political factors.
Perhaps of the most obvious differences between these two civilizations was in their political beliefs. Two political forces constructed the new form of government in Western Society, known as Nationalism and Liberalism. Nationalists argued that the state should be linked to a single basic culture, and all other natio...
But, utilizing both Napoleon’s ideas on national hegemony and also Hegel’s views on the evolution and progression of consciousness clearly show that the Orient, particularly in the era after Sykes-Picot, was a region doomed to conflict and turmoil. This internecine conflict infamously linked to the Orient has now clouded our scholarly and geopolitical understanding of the area, making it our scholarly imperative to analyze and assess the modern Orient as 1) a product of Anglo-French interests and 2) as a region arbitrarily categorized into states entirely unprepared for the prospect of nation
In the years since the early 90’s, Huntington’s premise have not been proven wrong. Along the years, various conflict occurred around the world in which can be identified as the examples of the clash of civilizations. Certainly, other factors such as politics, economics and military also contribute in many conflicts, yet the most catastrophic and chaotic ones are inevitably occurred in the dispute between civilizations. Between Orthodoxy and Islam there was wars in Bosnia, Kosovo and the Caucuses, between Islam and Africa there is Boko Haram, between Islam and the Hindu civilization happened a perpetual terrorism, between Orthodoxy and the West occurred wars in Croatia and Slovenia and the current crisis in Ukraine, and of course, between the West and Islam, there was the phenomenon of Charlie Hebdo, not to mention about the widely-known 9/11 tragedy. The clashes
Along the coasts of Asia, pirates raided countless ships; within Palestine and Jerusalem, armies fought holy wars; on the steppes of the Mongols, the Great Khans expanded their already massive empire. Conflict and war in ancient Asia drove important changes in technology, trade, and religion.
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
He argues that world history should not be viewed as separate, unconnected cultures of east and west, but rather that they were all connected in multitudes of ways and must be studied as such. Pointing out the inadequate ideal of separating the world into two sections which are not equal in geography, culture, population, or history itself, he instead poses a solution to the world history viewpoint: Studying the world through its interrelations between cultures and geographical locations. Hodgson’s proposed view of large scale history not only makes sense theoretically, but logically as it proves through the pages that the history or the world cannot simply be divided, but must be studied as a whole to be truly
Ideology, Knowledge and the escalation of new ideas led to a better life and society that made positive impacts on Western Civilizations. There were many idea’s that were explored and implement into the daily lives of the people and for the most part it turned out to be a good impact. Although there were some bad ideas that caused suffering to the society at the time. They learned from what they witnessed and created something that would work better for the most part. In this essay I am going to use some primary sources that support my idea that society benefited from the new “ideas” but I will also use an example to explain how it caused a negative impact too.
J.M. Coetzee’s novel Waiting for the Barbarians presents a story with an allegorical message in regards to the human condition. The book works to challenge humanity, and imperialism by investigating the limits of human cruelty and compassion. Coetzee undertakes this from a unique perspective; the novel itself transcends any one historical framework and allows the author to deal with history on his/her own terms. This structure provides a platform to deliver a deeper, more general message to the reader that in principle applies to myriad societies throughout history, present day, and possible future civilizations as well as to the individuals within these societies. Amongst the most salient concepts Coetzee explores in his work deals
Analysing The West: Unique, Not Universal. 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 statement and uses a variety of evidence to support it. This article has a very convincing point.
The Western culture has evolved over a span of several years with various civilizations specializing in specific aspects of life or nature. In essence, Western civilization dates back to the BCE periods when Ancient Greece, Mesopotamia, and Ancient Rome reigned. Each of the Western civilizations came with a clear lineage that portrayed such attributes as property rights, free market economy, competition, personal freedoms, and innovation (Perry, 2013). Besides, the western civilizations came at different periods with some of the attributes evolving or remaining unchanged throughout the lineage. However, the non-western civilizations contributed towards such attributes to a given extent, primarily because of the interactions among
...n possess in the world, precisely in respect to conflicts. With the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, civil war in Syria, the Arab Spring, the Russian invasion of Georgia, and numerous other conflicts; it is clear that globalization does not end conflicts completely.
In regards to the degree in which conflict was present in Prehistoric North America, disagreement within the archaeological community as to the extent that which it occurred exists in spite of the plentiful amount of evidence in the form of defensive structures, iconography, materials of war, and skeletal remains. Each article of this Literature Review covers a different region of the North American continent, and between them the various kinds of evidence come with. Across the continent, a trend of violent indication can be found, but the disagreement comes from the nature of the people, the cause of the war, and the impact war had on polities, and vice versa. Using Patricia Lamberts “A North American Perspective” as a reference to chronology of the regions study, (excepting the Eastern Woodlands which I chose to begin with due to relevance in class) I hope to piece together a clearer picture of how the evidence of conflict varies, and what factors might influence the differences in causation of warfare across the continent.
...Other, here and elsewhere, is indeed a product-symbolic and material-of the same process that created the West” (Trouillot 2003:28).
A civilization is the starting point of a society. Civilizations have existed for millions of years and are the basic unit of structure for a society. Civilizations were the base of great societies such as Egypt and Rome. If not for civilizations these societies would not have flourished or even existed.
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.