Clash of Civilization Complete Article

Clash of Civilization Complete Article

Outline

1.      Introduction

2.      Definition of civilization and its major features

3.      Level of clash of civilization

o   Micro level

o   Macro level

4.      Why civilizations clash?

5.      Kin country syndrome

6.      Islam vs the West

7.      West vs the Rest

8.      Implication for the west

9.      Implication of the article on global politics

o   Arguments in favor of the implication of Article

§  The west versus the Islam

§  The West versus the Rest:

§  Problems with in Torn Countries:

§  The Confucian-Islamic Connection:

o   Arguments against the implication of article

§  Definitional requirements

§  Clashes are based on economic dominance and national interests

§  Master Slave Relationship among civilizations

10.  Criticism on Article

o   Epistemological problem

o   Methodological problem

11.  Conclusion

The Highlighted part of this outline is same as of article. So for further reading one must study his organza article.

The rest is given below.

Arguments in favor of the implication of Article

The West versus the Islam

According to Samuel P. Huntington there will be chances of Reemergence of Muslims as a unity which threaten the western values of liberalism, individual freedom, capitalism and democracy. The natural resources of Islam may the cause of this pressure on west. So west must have to conquer Islam in order to fulfill its desire of global dominance. Fascist and communist are no longer be the danger of these western values but Islam is directly challenger them. So if we witness from the global politics then there is clash in Islamic borders either due to their internal failure or due to the external interventions or attacks. This clash is highlighting when war in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen Saudi Arab conflict, iran Saudi Arab cold war and proxy wars, Palestine dispute, and Kashmir problem. There are chances of unification of many civilizations to work together against one common big civilization. So it is happening.

The West versus the Rest:

According to Samuel P. Huntington the dominance of western liberal values and their culture is the clear indication of implication of this article and these values are in clash with rest civilizations of the world like Chinese and US new cold war, reemergence of Russian and with Islamic civilization too. On the other hand international organizations like UNO and IMF are also in the favor of western dominance. Even critics said that liberalism and its spread through media, education, and economy is new form of colonialism in which western values are in clash of rest of the world values. Similarly due to globalization the interaction among civilization increase the civilization consciousness among civilization that result into clash within and among these civilization. 

Problems with in Torn Countries:

Those countries whose leaders’ desire to pursue a bandwagoning strategy and trying hard to make their countries closer to western liberal developed values but their history, culture, and traditions are contradictory to these western values. Like Turkey, Mexico, Russia. The number of those states is increasing which means penetration of western values in other countries lead to clash within civilization that lead to civil war or weakening democratic process. On the other hand weakening the states’ writ increase the more chances of intervention of western values among states and society divided into pro western and anti western that resulted into more conflicts. .

The Confucian-Islamic Connection:

Those nations who want to get rid from western influence are in search of other options. These nations are trying to develop their own military, economic power by joining hands with rising Chinese influence in global politics, economy and power balance. China, Pakistan, Israel, India, North Korea, Iran and even Russian reemergence put severe danger of clash with the western civilization. The connections of these civilizations as Huntington said will lead to damage the western values. Asianization of world instead of European and American influence put sever danger of clash between civilizations.

Arguments against the implication of article

First of all if we look at the current and future global crisis then these clashes are not due to civilizations or cultural conflicts but because of economic dominance national interests. Because there are lot of civil wars in Africa and middle east which are not due to those reasons as mentioned by Samuel due to economic failure, government and administrative shortcomings or influxes of multinational corporations whose interests are dominating the state’s sovereignty.

Secondly if we look the definition of civilization as mentioned b Samuel then there is no country in the world which fulfills this definition completely. Even within the civilizations there are lot of other civilizations who are under threat and creating challenge to the state itself. So there is no country in the world which fulfill the requirement of as a whole one civilization.  For example The East Asian Islamic countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei; and Iran and Arab Countries; Muslims of Central Asian region and Muslims of the sub-continent have grown up in their own historical, cultural and political struggle and imperative. Each of these have different views on global issues. Professor Huntington has laid one sided emphasis on conflicts and contradictions among different civilizations with the neglect of their coexistence and blend.

There is always in the history a Master Slave relationship in world politics. Super and developed powers always trying to dominant the global small and weak nations. These dominant powers are not only influence them politically, but economically and socially too. Small nations dependent of strong nations for industries and research and development point of view. So big powers direct them for their own benefits. So if we look at the global politics then true Islamic confusions connection is not available because same relationship of master slave is dominant in the case of Chinese global policies.

Criticism on clash of civilization:

Epistemological Critique:

From epistemological point of view the clash of civilizations does not come up with a new model as it nearly fits with political realism theoretical perspective. The clash among civilization is prescribe in Realism school of thought.

Methodological Critique:

This article portrays weakness in three dimensions. i.e. methodological dimensions (unable to portray clear distinction between his own model of that of realism in politics.), discipline approach (it presents a confessional mode of analysis.), and correlative propositions (his  personification of enormous entities called " the west "and "Islam")

Ethical Critique:

Huntington’s thesis is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It increases the chances of occurring the expected event by verifying its own accuracy. John Ikenberry says that Huntington’s thesis is the civilizational equivalent of the security dilemma. According to Muhammad Asadi further adds that Huntington’s thesis serves two purposes. First, it enables the extraction of manpower and funds from the American people for the ulterior motives of American elites. Second, it alters the agenda of the rest of the world, particularly the underdeveloped part of it, away from domestic issues, and towards conducting America’s wars.

Conclusion: