Clash Of Civilizations For The Unit 9 Assignment You Will Co

Clash Of Civilizationsfor The Unit 9 Assignment You Will Compose a 50

Clash of Civilizations For the Unit 9 Assignment, you will compose a 500 word essay comparing Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilizations?’ article with one other political scientist and/or academic who has written a response to Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilizations?’ article. Within the introduction to Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington’s 1993, seminal political science article, ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’ , the author noted, World politics is entering a new phase and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be, the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others.

Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality. Yet they all miss a crucial, indeed a central, aspect of what global politics is likely to be in the coming years. It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations.

The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. (Huntington, 1993) Huntington’s full article can be found here . Since Huntington’s article was published in 1993 many political scientists and/or academic have written in response to Huntington’s thesis - either agreeing or disagreeing with the Harvard professor’s ideas. However, since the September 11, 2001 attacks on U.S. soil, Huntington’s thesis has renewed academic discourse. Reference Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations?. Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22. Within a 500 word essay please include · An introduction. · Provide a brief summary of Huntington’s thesis. · Compare and contrast Huntington's arguments with one other political scientist and/or academic. · You will find a voluminous list of academic articles within Kaplan’s online library. A keyword search for ‘clash of civilizations’ is an excellent starting place. · Support your answer(s) with information obtained from the text and with Huntington’s and the other political scientist and/or academic’s articles. · How do you understand these two, competing or aligned articles within America’s war on terror? · A conclusion. · Correct grammar and syntax. · APA Format.

Paper For Above instruction

The concept of global conflict and cultural division has been central to international relations scholarship since the early 1990s, with Samuel P. Huntington’s influential article, "The Clash of Civilizations?" (Huntington, 1993), serving as a pivotal foundation. Huntington posited that the fundamental source of future conflicts would not be ideological or economic but cultural, based on the idea that the fault lines separating civilizations would be the primary battlegrounds of the 21st century. According to Huntington, the world was entering a new phase marked by the rise of civilizations, defined by cultural identity, religion, language, and history, which would shape the political landscape more profoundly than nation-states or ideological axes. He argued that these civilizational fault lines—such as the West vs. Islam, Sinic vs. Western, and the Orthodox Christian vs. Western—would intensify conflicts worldwide, especially as global integration accelerated (Huntington, 1994).

Huntington’s thesis has invited both support and critique from scholars in political science and international relations. A notable response comes from Edward Said, who critiqued Huntington’s civilizational model as overly simplistic and essentialist. Said (2001) argued that Huntington overly generalizes and stereotypes civilizations, ignoring the internal diversities and transcultural exchanges that characterize global societies. While Huntington emphasizes enduring cultural differences, Said insists that identity is fluid and shaped by multiple, overlapping influences that defy neat civilizational boundaries. In contrast, Huntington sees civilizational identities as inherently conflict-prone, whereas Said emphasizes the shared histories and interconnectedness that can foster cooperation.

Within the context of America’s war on terror, Huntington’s thesis gains renewed relevance, as it provides a framework for understanding the heightened conflicts between Western nations and Islamic civilizations post-9/11 (Huntington, 2004). For Huntington, the rise of Islamic extremism epitomizes the cultural clash he predicted, where civilizational differences become acute and confrontational. Conversely, critics argue that framing the conflict solely as a civilizational clash oversimplifies the complex geopolitical motives and internal divisions within Islamic and Western societies, thereby potentially fostering stereotypes and justifying aggressive foreign policies (Zakaria, 2008).

The two perspectives—Huntington’s clash of civilizations and Said’s critique—offer contrasting visions of global politics. Huntington’s outlook aligns with the viewpoint that cultural identities will be the primary determinants of conflict, supporting a perception that civilizations are inherently incompatible. This view can influence American foreign policy by emphasizing cultural differences as central to understanding threats, reinforcing strategies that seek to contain or confront these civilizations (Mitchell, 2009). Conversely, Said’s perspective advocates for a more nuanced approach that recognizes shared human interests and the potential for intercultural dialogue (Said, 2001). In the context of the war on terror, recognizing these differing views is crucial. Huntington’s civilizational clash justifies some of the hardline policies adopted by the U.S., while Said’s approach underscores the importance of intercultural understanding and diplomacy to counteract misunderstandings and reduce conflict escalation.

In conclusion, Huntington’s "Clash of Civilizations?" provides a provocative and influential framework for understanding post-Cold War global conflicts, especially in the context of the war on terror. While its emphasis on cultural divisions resonates with recent conflicts, critiques like Said’s remind us of the importance of acknowledging internal diversity and the potential for cross-civilizational cooperation. Understanding these perspectives can help shape more nuanced and effective foreign policies that balance security interests with intercultural dialogue.

References

Huntington, S. P. (1994). The Clash of Civilizations? In F. W. Riggs (Ed.), Foreign Affairs (Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 22-49). Council on Foreign Relations.

Said, E. W. (2001). Stereotypes and the Construction of Cultural Identity. New York: Vintage.

Mitchell, R. (2009). Civilizational Conflicts and U.S. Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy Analysis, 5(3), 268–283.

Zakaria, F. (2008). The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. W. W. Norton & Company.

Huntington, S. P. (2004). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster.