Critical Review The Clash of Civilizations – Samuel P. Huntington
...ghest form of cultural groupings that define peoples. This definition is a good one and Huntington has based his article mainly on the theme of cultural entities clashing with each other. However Huntington doesn’t go into much depth when analysing culture. He talks of sub civilizations and overlapping of civilizations but no real definition of a culture. He does nevertheless talk a lot of Islam and the West and their “so called” future clashes. Huntington is an American political scientist; hence his knowledge of the West is rich. Huntington’s knowledge of Islam could be best described as ethnocentrism, “ethnocentrism can be defined as: making false assumptions about others' ways based on our own limited experience. The key word is assumptions, because we are not even aware that we are being ethnocentric... we don't understand that we don't understand” (http://www.iupui.edu/~anthkb/ethnocen.htm, 8/11/2004). This is the basis of Huntington’s argument. Huntington is saying that the West is great and the rest of the world is inferior. Huntington is being ethnocentric he has limited experience of Islam and Confucianism. The Cold War created a post-colonial situation. The problem with applying Huntington’s theory is, “that cultures and civilizations are now portrayed as playing the roles that nation-states played during the Cold War” (http://www.e-alliance.ch/culturalcrisis.jsp, 8/11/2004). The problem with this is that civilizations should evolve naturally reacting with their own environments. Huntington suggests that cultures need to be policed, a very Western perspective, when actually civilizations should be respected and assisted. Post cold war capitalism defeated communism and showed the rest of the world that the western way of thought and life is the dominant force in today’s civilized world. Capitalism exploits the less fortunate keeping the West dominate and other civilizations weak. With relevance to the present day capitalism is at war with Islam and Confucianism. Huntington’s articles significance pre 9/11 was just a viewpoint that stated the obvious rivalries between Islam and the West. Huntington clearly stated that countries that cannot join the West, due to reasons such as culture and power, compete with it on economic, political and also military levels. Huntington stated that this is achieved through the promotion of internal development and the combining forces with non-western countries. However post 9/11The Confucian-Islamic connection is the key force threatening the West’s status in the modern world system. Terrorism could be perceived as a product of interference from the West and its constant exploitation of other states that are less fortunate on grounds such as economics and power. Huntington’s article was reprinted on the front cover of the Times after September 11th suggesting that Huntington had predicted the obvious. However is it an effective paradigm? In my opinion Huntington is a typical realist and policymaker. He writes with bias towards a realist perspective and also as a policy maker he wants to stay in a job. It is quite clear that Huntington’s article “The Clash of Civilizations” is an extremely strategic piece of writing. He writes in black and white arguing that the West is the West and Islam is Islam, meaning that there is no cultural diversity in either and all think the same. Edward W. Said argues that Huntington’s thesis heavily relies on sources such as, “The Roots of Muslim Rage” by Bernard Lewis, which do not analyse the intricacies and internal dynamics of civilizations. Huntington fails to realise that speaking for a whole culture or religion is just down right absurd not to mention ignorant (Said, The Clash Of Ignorance, 2001). The structure of “The Clash Of Civilizations” has been proved effective if looking at it from a very biased Western perspective. Huntington has managed to mislead the reader with regard to labels such as Islam and the West. It is far too easy to pigeonhole society and put everything and everyone in boxes. Terms such as these confuse and mislead the mind and have encouraged the West to look at the world as us against the rest. Huntington has formed an article that is inaccurate and unsympathetic to cultures he knows nothing about. His unnecessary reference to Mexico wanting to become a Northern American country is a good example of a fact filler in an article that’s only real concern is to identify the unsavoury relationship between the West and Islam. “The Clash Of Civilizations” is an excellent article with reference to defining civilizations and the way in which the world now functions. The article subdivides important factors i.e. why civilizations will clash and Huntington analyses each subheading. Yet when talking of the Confucian-Islamic connection Huntington’s tilt towards the West is again easily observed. “Almost without exception, Western cou...