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.
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
Additionally, by destabilizing tradition, humanity appeals to its own originality and individuality by progressing to better forms of living. Thus, conformity to tradition is dangerous to the individuals within society because it stifles the growth by making us unaccustomed to conceiving
But is that their wishes? Some continue extreme hostility towards the people trying to discover them. Maybe it’s because we are so different than these societies. Maybe it’s because we may actually be very similar. All in all, the dominant culture places value on technology which leads to independence and disconnection, whereas in indigenous culture relies heavily on traditions which leads to connection and
Researchers have attempted to utilize Hofstede's metric to measure individual cultural orientation but they discovered truly a couple of methodological challenges with the metric. Particularly, the greatest issue was a psychometrically disillusioning result. Invalid source specified. While society is characterized at the national level whether an individual shows such a cultural orientation consistent with the national culture needs? There exists a massive diversity of culture among members of any nation and to measure that diversity we needed a scale that could measure individual cultural orientation.
According to Hans Weiler, one of the conventional assumptions that differentiate them apart is that they require different areas of knowledge. Theoretical knowledge is broad and generic, conceptual and nomothetic. Practical knowledge, on the other hand, is singular and situational. In correlation to that, the works of Karl-Otto Apel, Paul Roth and others have triggered a controversy wherein traditional scientific models and/or theories are deemed to be critically limited when it comes to social realism. It, of course, does not directly go to say that they are completely irrelevant, but rather that there is a demand for an even more all-encompassing concept of understanding alongside these particular happenings in a social scenario.
Then, he asserts that the 9/11 events exacerbated an antipathy towards ‘Arab-Middle Eastern-Muslim’ Other and created a new form of racism due to cultural differences in the post-Cold War reality. He strongly advocates that this newly promoted idea of “cultural racism” is nothing more than new political suasion to hold to inherent power and dominance by the empire over the Muslim Other (Semati, p. 257). This essay will describe and discuss the following premise: How can we understand political undertone in the concept of cultural racism and specifically how it relates to Islamophobia and the idea of “brown” as a racial
The task has however been made impossible by methodological nationalism, which has subsumed the society under the nation-state. Cosmopolitanism must not be confused with globalization. Even though they both express basic concepts of dualism, such as domestic and foreign, which have become ambiguous of late. Due to this ambiguity, cosmopolitan turn is thus necessary for understanding the global that we live toady. The methodological cosmopolitanism will open the up the horizon by demonstrating how man can make the empirical investigation of boundary crossings and other phenomena that relate to transformation
Mid-Term Examination The Clash of Civilizations and Its International Implications By: Meidina Felita Alifandra 016201400183 IRE 2014 Diplomacy 2 Semester 7 I. Introduction As being stated by Samuel P. Huntington, the Clash of Civilization is a hypothesis in which the primary sources of conflicts in the post-cold war era are more dominant to the people’s cultural and religious identities. Civilization has three attributes which are the objective elements – language, history religion, customs, and institution; the subjective elements – variable levels of self-identification; and civilization itself is dynamic – they rise and fall, divide and merge. II. The Relation between the “Kin-Country” Theory by Samuel P. Huntington and The U.S. Attitudes Towards the Palestinian-Israeli Issues.