Samuel Huntington - The Clash of Civilisations - Political Forum

Brother Oz · #1 (**permalink**) 04-02-2007, 08:24 PM

You have no doubt all heard the phrase "The Clash of Civilisations" many a time, this is the book that started it, "The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of the World Order" (or rather the expansion of the journal article that started it, which was entitled "The Clash of Civilisations?"). I'm reading it at the moment, and I wondered if anyone else has read it, and what they thought?
Or if you've read the original journal article... I can only get the first page off the net, so I'm just reading the book.

emptypepsi · #2 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 05:32 AM

I got about half-way through COTC on a road-trip to Wisconsin in 2003 and never finished it (it was somebody elses copy). From what I read, it wasn't that bad but I can remember wrinkling my forehead at some of his implicit suggestions. I read another book by the same guy called "Who Are We?" It wasn't too bad, but that being said, I don't agree with him on some things in that book either.

Brother Oz · #3 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 06:18 AM

Which things did you disagree with him on?

emptypepsi · #4 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 05:48 PM

Well, let me first say that I believe Huntington did a very good job of going into each culture and belief system. He gave them the mark of importance within societies of their respective areas of the world. I can honestly say I learned a little from what he had to say on them. And I don't disagree with his overall premise reagrding the West and it's role in the world.

That being said, the parts I was able to get through (I really should go back and finish it), I felt he was really writing this book in a "Middle East vs the West", not a real "Clash of all civilizations". Look at China. Are we at war with them? Talk about tension all you want, but there is no cultural battle with us there - at least not now to speak of.

He astounds me in some parts. I remember that Huntington dismissed universalism and argues for accepting cultural diversity as the driving force in the political realm. That was great, but then I get the feeling that he thinks there's no way we can all coexist. I felt like I was getting messages from both sides of his mouth.

I'll remind that I never finished this book, and this was over three years ago. I have changed in three years and this thread has made me think about picking it up again. : )

Brother Oz · #5 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 06:09 PM

Yes, that's something I noticed. He says it'll be the "west versus the rest", but only Islam is fighting the west (that is a very simplified argument in itself: many leaders of Islamic states are pro-west). Latin America and Africa are pretty much out of it. India trades well with the west. So does China. Though there are tensions, Russia also trades with the west.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · #6 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 07:32 PM

The book is on my reading list though I have not read it.

I know what the premise of the book is and I believe that history has disproved a clash of civilizations time and time again.

WWI tens of millions of Europeans killing each other
WWII tens of millions of Europeans killing each other

Russo-Chinese war of 1969 - two communist armies killing each other
Chinese-Vietnam War in the 1970's - two communist armies killing each other

If you look at Middle Eastern history, you will see that it is rife with Arabs and Muslims killing each other. Many Muslims look at the first 4 or so caliphs as the greatest caliphs in their history. I believe either two or three of them were killed in factional fighting among the Muslims, including Mohammand's son-in-law.

In southeast Asia, you can look at the Chinese-Vietnamese rivalry, and the Cambodian-Vietnamese rivalry.

Going back to Europe again, for centuries the British and the French supported the Ottoman Empire (Muslim) against the Russian empire to keep the Russians out of the Meditterranean. They actually went to war with Russia (the Crimean War) to accomplish that.

There are many more examples as well.

emptypepsi · #7 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 07:45 PM

Never thought about it that way. Maybe the civilizations and cultures most alike will destroy each other in greater numbers and instances than those of others. This really makes me want to go back and read it. Like I said, different time and different person...

Again, I'm not denying Middle East/West tension. One has to be blind not to see it, but I'm just acknowledging WEB's point. My main beef was that he had two main themes which just cancelled each other out -- coexisting of cultures is important and advances us!...but we can't coexist or we'll destroy ourselves!

Brother Oz · #8 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 09:54 PM

WEB, he didn't argue that the Clash of Civilisations has been happening, but that it will happen.
Which I don't think is true. He wrote the original article in 1993, the book in 1997. Since then, the most brutal war in terms of casualties has been between Africans. The biggest war today does involve the west, but mostly it's Muslims killing each other. Although some in Latin America have had tension with the west, generally it's been peaceful. Africa is at peace with the west, as are the Sinics and the Hindus. Hey, South Korea has 2000 troops supporting America in Iraq!

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · #9 (**permalink**) 04-03-2007, 10:06 PM

OK, that's cool. Man, I would like to have the time to read the book.

emptypepsi · #10 (**permalink**) 04-04-2007, 05:39 PM

Exactly. I'm sort of dissapointed in myself. I used to read a new book each month. I haven't finished one in over 3 months! - school and all. : /