Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions?
Every phase of American foreign policy has found its supporters in American academia. The Cold War had its famous academicians who not only justified American foreign policy at that time but later became prominent decisionmakers. Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Baezinski are still remembered as succes...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
International Institute of Islamic Thought
1994
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/4d533c0320df4cd5a7cc9cfdf144b190 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:4d533c0320df4cd5a7cc9cfdf144b190 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:4d533c0320df4cd5a7cc9cfdf144b1902021-12-02T17:49:49ZClash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions?10.35632/ajis.v11i1.24672690-37332690-3741https://doaj.org/article/4d533c0320df4cd5a7cc9cfdf144b1901994-04-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ajis.org/index.php/ajiss/article/view/2467https://doaj.org/toc/2690-3733https://doaj.org/toc/2690-3741 Every phase of American foreign policy has found its supporters in American academia. The Cold War had its famous academicians who not only justified American foreign policy at that time but later became prominent decisionmakers. Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Baezinski are still remembered as successful academicians who became policymakers. However, only one prominent scholar has been able to survive the Cold War with his credibility intact while maintaining his influence on American foreign policy: Samuel P. Huntington. In his recent article on "The Clash of Civilizations" (Foreign Afsairs 77:3), Huntington attempts to predict the scenario of the New World Order that will have to be dealt with by the West. He then seeks to influence not only American foreign policy, but that of the entire West. His opening argument is that the old topology of conflict will be replaced by conflicts of civilizations. The world will be divided according to existing civilizations (i.e., western, Islamic, Confucianist, Hindu, Buddhist, Latin American, and possibly African). He then MITOWS the list of enemies to two civilizations: Confucianism and Islam. This short commentary will concentrate on the reasons behind Huntington's article in order to uncover the decay that is eating away at the beautiful face of the West. The Supremacy of Western Civilization From the beginning, Huntington attempts to convince the reader that the West represents a homogeneous culture. In addition, he infers that its culture and civilization is desired because it is superior and therefore natural for it to dominate. Here, he lacks the necessary credibility to provide a reason for such supremacy. Such a worldview is not new, for the same mentality helped to form similar justifications for westem colonialism: "civilizing mission" and the "white man's burden" are the predecessors to Huntington's arguments. Indirectly, Huntington calls upon the nonwestem world &I join westem civilization. He assumes that some nonwestem civilizations might accept westem dominance faster and easier than others. The obstacles for joining, which are most difficult for Islamic and Confucian societies, can be traced to their cultures. He argues that such societies will not only reject westem civilization, but that they will develop their own economic and military capabilities through cooperation with each other. But why should he nonwestem world "join" the West, especially when "join," in Huntington's dictionary, means "dependent" or "servant" of the West, not ... Mohammed M. KarabalInternational Institute of Islamic ThoughtarticleIslamBP1-253ENAmerican Journal of Islam and Society, Vol 11, Iss 1 (1994) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Islam BP1-253 |
| spellingShingle |
Islam BP1-253 Mohammed M. Karabal Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| description |
Every phase of American foreign policy has found its supporters in
American academia. The Cold War had its famous academicians who not
only justified American foreign policy at that time but later became
prominent decisionmakers. Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Baezinski are
still remembered as successful academicians who became policymakers.
However, only one prominent scholar has been able to survive the Cold
War with his credibility intact while maintaining his influence on American
foreign policy: Samuel P. Huntington.
In his recent article on "The Clash of Civilizations" (Foreign Afsairs
77:3), Huntington attempts to predict the scenario of the New World
Order that will have to be dealt with by the West. He then seeks to influence
not only American foreign policy, but that of the entire West. His
opening argument is that the old topology of conflict will be replaced by
conflicts of civilizations. The world will be divided according to existing
civilizations (i.e., western, Islamic, Confucianist, Hindu, Buddhist, Latin
American, and possibly African). He then MITOWS the list of enemies to
two civilizations: Confucianism and Islam. This short commentary will
concentrate on the reasons behind Huntington's article in order to uncover
the decay that is eating away at the beautiful face of the West.
The Supremacy of Western Civilization
From the beginning, Huntington attempts to convince the reader that
the West represents a homogeneous culture. In addition, he infers that its
culture and civilization is desired because it is superior and therefore natural
for it to dominate. Here, he lacks the necessary credibility to provide
a reason for such supremacy. Such a worldview is not new, for the same
mentality helped to form similar justifications for westem colonialism:
"civilizing mission" and the "white man's burden" are the predecessors
to Huntington's arguments.
Indirectly, Huntington calls upon the nonwestem world &I join westem
civilization. He assumes that some nonwestem civilizations might accept
westem dominance faster and easier than others. The obstacles for
joining, which are most difficult for Islamic and Confucian societies, can
be traced to their cultures. He argues that such societies will not only reject
westem civilization, but that they will develop their own economic
and military capabilities through cooperation with each other. But why
should he nonwestem world "join" the West, especially when "join," in
Huntington's dictionary, means "dependent" or "servant" of the West, not ...
|
| format |
article |
| author |
Mohammed M. Karabal |
| author_facet |
Mohammed M. Karabal |
| author_sort |
Mohammed M. Karabal |
| title |
Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| title_short |
Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| title_full |
Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| title_fullStr |
Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions? |
| title_sort |
clash of civilizations or clash of religions? |
| publisher |
International Institute of Islamic Thought |
| publishDate |
1994 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/4d533c0320df4cd5a7cc9cfdf144b190 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT mohammedmkarabal clashofcivilizationsorclashofreligions |
| _version_ |
1718379347761430528 |