In the early 90s, Samuel P. Huntington did a study called the Clash of Civilization; a popular study predicting the change of the face of global politics. According to Huntington, the face of world politics was to change in phases. The change was to be caused by cultural differences in the different parts of the country. Humankind would be divided greatly and the because of their differences in culture. Huntington’s main argument is that in future, conflicts will be caused by the fault lines that separate cultures and this will lead to separation of civilizations (Phil Arena, 2012). Several other political theorists have come out to argue the pros and cons of Huntington’s thesis. So far, most of the theorists focus on the extent to which the prediction has come to pass. Most of them look at how the trend has changed after the 90s and whether or not the political picture is completely different than it was.
Summary of Huntington’s Thesis
Conflict cannot be avoided. People get into conflict even in instances that they try to avoid it. During conflict, all individuals have their own rights despite where they come from. It is the responsibility of the individuals to know their rights. According to Huntington, this is the future of politics in this new concept.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The clashes on civilization, according to Huntington, were close to becoming unpredictable. The professor assumes that it truly will be new a new concept talthough it still is not clearly comprehensible. However, the Harvard University professor states that a few civilized reasons will be enough to cause conflict and that people will fight against each other before they can reach a consensus. He specifically points out the differences that exist between people of the Islamic religion and those from the west. In the future, several issues will arise between the two groups and shared space will be a reason for conflict. The predictions, that were then the future, have come to pass over time.
Huntington saw the Islam religion as a massive force that was not friendly to people living in the west because those belonging to the religion felt inadequate and had their pride wounded. In a famous statement, Huntington was quoted saying insinuating that the borders of Islam are bloody.
Comparison of Arguments
Most of the scholars that critique Huntington’s thesis come from the Middle East and a few of them from different parts of the world. Most of them argue that, over time, people are becoming more socially aware of their differences and accepting the fact that for society to thrive, individuals have to learn how to tolerate each other. A number of people see diversity as a good thing as it helps bring in different ideas that may be helpful to society.
Conclusion
As time passes, things are changing and so is the way people are thinking. Now more than ever, people are likely to embrace the things that benefit them economically and socially. One of the most famous statements from Huntington was that the borders of Islam are bloody. This was in the 90s when people tended to ignorant and did not care about their happiness as much as they do today.
References
"The clash of civilizations’ theory is absolutely and completely dead". Retrieved from- http://mondoweiss.net/2014/03/civilizations-absolutely-completely#sthash.HfodtXxx.dpuf
Phil Arena (2012). What's Wrong with Huntington's Clash of Civilizations? Retrieved from- http://fparena.blogspot.in/2012/09/whats-wrong-with-huntingtons-clash-of.html
Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations , HOLLY FLYNN-PIERCY. Retrieved from- http://www.e-ir.info/2011/08/30/huntingtons-clash-of-civilizations/
