Critique of clash of civilization WVLS 313 17-Apr-15 N .MKIZE 23684879 The theory of clash of civilization The clash of civilization is a theory by Samuel Huntington which states that peoples cultural and religion identities are the root source of conflict in the post-cold war. Clash of civilization is a theory referencing the clash of cultures ( Choeung.slide share).according to Huntington ( 1996,p84) “the most pervasive, important, and dangerous conflicts will not be between social classes, rich, poor, or other economically defined groups, but between peoples belonging to different cultural entities” . Huntington also states that conflicts between civilizations are likely to be caused by religious means. And this is to the fact that civilizations are distinguished from other culture through history, language, culture and most important religion (Huntington, 1993, 25). Huntington states that people’s culture and religion will be the main cause of conflict from onward.
Abstract As van Dijk said in 1998, Critical Discourse Analysis basically concerns itself with the study, dissection and thorough analysis of words in texts. Those words may either be written or spoken. The main idea behind this is to out the blatant truth about power, dominance, inequality and bias. Furthermore, it helps to investigate these sources and determine the ways in which the texts are misinterpreted on social, political and historical levels. This paper studies the influential tactics of the President of United Sates’ (Obama) community discourse other than the hidden thought of the same, preserved in his inaugural discourse.
Who is She? Gender Roles in the ‘Arab World’ The Middle East. A region regularly considered as stagnant, uniform, and backwards, seems to be cemented between modernity and tradition, concepts commonly used as polar opposites in the linear theory of social change. Modernity, associated with concepts as change, progression, and growth, seems to be in contrast with tradition, comprising the static, the old and the authentic. As philosopher Marshall Berman states “To be modern is to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world – and, at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are.” (1982, 16).
The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II by John W. Dower provides an excellent overview of the “American Century” that Henry Luce coined in the 1940s. In his essay, “The American Century,” Luce “called on all Americans ‘to accept wholeheartedly our duty and our opportunity as the most powerful and vital nation in the world and in consequence to exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such purposes as we see fit and by such measures as we see fit’” (Dower, 13). Dower takes the concept of the “American Century” and continues by discussing throughout each chapter the violence that erupted from the United States following World War II. Through his analysis, he concedes that the United States, as a nation
The culture of nationalism was the product of application of new methods of governing and the spread of market relations. To really understand nationalism amongst the Jews and Arab Muslims in the Middle East, one must first understand how and why nationalism came about and the role of the governments in this process. Nationalism, which came about during a process of world modernization did not happen over night. As James L. Gelvin discusses in his The Modern Middle East: A History, the period of transformation from a system of world empires to a modern world system, also known as nation states, began as early as early 16th century. A system of world empires meant that the world was made up of large empires who were self-dependent economically, spread by military campaigns, and earned wealth and power through conquest and taxes from their subjects.
LECTURER.> IVAR HENDLA. Defenders of modern imperialism and colonialism, long pleaded their case in terms of the white man’s burden, they reasoned that it was the obligation of advanced nation to help the people of backward nations. (Perkin, Palmer. 2007). Imperialism has a wide range of meaning as different people have varying levels of understanding, some definitions of imperialism include “ imperialism is a policy which aims at creating, organizing and maintaining an empire (which is a state of vast size
The essay provided an outline on each theory before going on to explain the theory’s view on what causes wars. After I evaluated and juxtaposed, it led me to the conclusion that even though there are changing and opposite explanations to answer the question of what causes wars, realism provided the most relevant answer. It seems as if the balance of threat against a potential hegemony has been the most relevant answer as to what causes wars. I can also conclude from this that because states are the primary actors in international relations they will seek to expand their power because they believe it is an essential element in an anarchical
Liberalism, along with realism, is one of the main schools of thought in international relations.According to liberals, international relations is not only controlled by the relationship between states but also includes and emphasises the role of other actors. During WWI and WWII the main academic competitor to the Realist paradigm was idealism., They looked into numerous beliefs of realism and recommended possible ideologies to alter the world pursuing supremacy and conflict into a unique one in which peace and cooperation amongst states might conquer. The faith that liberals have is that substantial universal cooperation is possible and power politics can be moved at the core of the realist paradigm. (Lawrence 1913, 3-5)
ASTRI CRISTIN 016201400023/ DIPLO 4 JOURNAL: THE RADICAL MIDDLE: BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN MUSLIM AND WESTERN WORLD (Gomaa,Ali; Un Chronicle; 2012; 49; 3; Technology Collection pg.4) The emergence of Clash of Civilizations it caused the increasing the dispute between cultural region and the most obviously between the Islamic and Western. Incidents that convincingly the dispute between Muslim and Western, we can see from terrorist attack of 9/11, the war on Iraq and Afghanistan and never ending conflict between Israel and palestina. Those incidents are the highest profile examples of a global state of affairs whose ramifications extend to even the very local and regional levels In Ali’s view, he said that no matter how pessimistic the landscape seems to be, we must not allow ourselves to concede to the inevitability of a trajectory which ends in the proverbial clash of civilizations. Further, it is an obligation to respond proactively to the tensions of our world by working actively and methodically to ameliorate them, so as to replace instability with stability, hostility with friendship, and animosity with alliances. In his view, he acknowledges the efforts of many international dialogue forums and institutions including the United Nations in bringing all sorts of people to the table to engage in genuine intercultural dialogue over the past few decades.
In the twentieth century, precisely at the end of 1970s and beginning of 1980s a new school of criticism has appeared to uncover the veil of colonialism. This school is known as the post-colonial theory. The most known critique who publically introduces this critique is Edward Said. Post-colonial theory concentrates on the hegemony of the West over the East or the domination of the Occident over the Orient. To prove their power and to dominate the east; the west needed to implant their superiority and civilization against the "other".