A Clash of Civilizations?

[Lou]

What do you think? Following a global clash of ideology, is the world becoming embroiled in a clash of civilizations?

I had heard of this thesis by Huntington a little while back, but didn't give it much thought. Honestly, when I first heard of the theory, I thought it was the creation of some right-wing pundit playing upon a racist or xenophobic base. And then I realized that this was an established academic positing the idea, as well as a man who is no stranger to the halls of the powerful (presidential advisor, member of National Security Council, co-authored a Trilateral Commission report, founded Foriegn Policy, apparently endorsed by the CFR's Foriegn Affairs...)

Well, I'm in no position to offer an in-depth critique of his theory; firstly, I haven't read his article or book, and secondly, even if I did, I know very little about the intricate network of culture, society, history, politics, conflict, etc., etc. I know many of you on this board are very intelligent individuals, and I'd like to see what you think of Huntington's theory. For anyone interested, there is a Wikipedia article (from which I got most of my information).

The one thing I want to leave with this thread a concern of mine: I saw it suggested (Wikipedia) that Huntington's proposal was a self-fulfilling prophecy. I am afraid of his theory establishing a new Cold War mentality, "us against them." For those cold warriors and xenophobes across the United States, the theory is a quick validation of their fears of Islamofascism or Islammunism or immigrants "destroying this country and its values." Rather than seeing immigration, illegal or otherwise, as a socioeconomic phenomenon, this theory lends an "academic" air to the idea of a literal 'alien invasion' aimed at undermining this country. Besides a fear of a xenophobic and nationalist backlash, I also am wary of this theory becoming an excuse for certain politics. Rather than looking into the multitude of causes of certain foriegn policies, one might just look at the borders of Huntington's "civilizations" and think, "Well, there's that clash again."

[INDK]

I think it is worth viewing as a potential cause of conflict, but it needs to be taken into context. There is little empirical evidence to support that "civilizational" identities have been an important part of international politics in the past. A study by Russett, Oneal and Cox found that when variables such as joint democracy and contiguity were controlled for, these variables had more explanatory power than "civilizational" identities when it came to war proclivity. In the cases of civil wars, or Huntington's "cleft countries" there may be a bit more evidence to support the relationship.

You are very right to argue that the "Clash of Civilizations" could be used as justification for certain prejudices. Thats why we would do well to note that Huntington is the same person who spent most of the seventies declaring that Catholic countries could never democratize and is now forced to conveniently ignore Indonesia and Turkey when talking about how Islam is a barrier to democracy.

That said, I don't think that we can completely overlook cultural differences. Actions by both Republicans and Democrats in the United States that would have seemed innocuous at home have offended foreign officials when we were in their countries. I feel a certain amount of cultural understanding is necessary, though Huntington tends to ignore that any cultural diffusion is possible. In the 1950s, it would have been impossible to imagine McDonalds in China or even the huge number of Chinese, Japanese and Thai restaurants in the United States.

Overall, I think that the "Clash of Civilizations" should be seen as a warning of what will happen if we are not careful.