Rating: 
Summary: A useful read
Review: Huntington made it to bestselling list after the September 11. Well, for many people, the terrorist attacks vindicated his highly controvercial points. On one side, Huntington seems right in his predictions of re-alignment of civilizations, especially so far as he claimed the the West and Russia would ultimately unite against Islam. What is missing, however, is exploration of whether the cultural divides and civilizational differences are being promoted from below or from above; whether it is culture and religion or money and interests that shapes the clashes; and while he claims that modernization in the third world does not entail westernization, the deep internal divisions within moslem countries in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks (upper and middle classes still striving to make money on trade and lower underclasses parade with Bin Laden portraits) signals that it just might be the case that economic development might not change values of elites and middle classes but it might change interests and promote a domestic base of the opposition against radicalism. All in all, a useful book, and, although there are several weaknesses in the argument, every parsimonious scheme suffers from these flaws.
Rating: 
Summary: Irrelevant data to bolster a false premise
Review: "There are lies, big lies, and then there are statistics" goes the saying. A researcher focusing on the wrong data is bound to end up with the wrong conclusions. Also, a biased scientist looking for a specific conclusion, can get there by relying on irrelevant data, all the while appearing to build a logical case.These are the problems with this book. No one can quarrel with the linear logic followed by the author once you accept the premise of the book, given that the points made and numbers presented are correct. But the premise is false and these are the wrong points and numbers. When Huntington counts the number of Christians vs. non-Chritians in the world, it looks interesting but it is irrelevant to his topic. Our "civilization" didn't get where it is by being Christian, but by adopting at the Renaissance a more secular interpretation of government and society. When Huntington, writing in 1996, waxes lyrical about the fast economic growth of some Asian countries, he is clearly focusing on the wrong data since most of these economies collapsed in 1997-98. When Huntington chooses to show manufacturing output by "civilization", one must wonder why the data shown stops at 1980, since the USSR line virtually imploded after that. Share of manufacturing output is also useless as a proxy for GDP and GDP per capita. So why bother showing it? Wrong premise, wrong data. Catchy title though !
Rating:
Summary: Europhile Civilization Theory Nicely Stated Globally Applied
Review: "Clash" is a thoughtful theoretical work, with many an insight on the nature of civilization, its history, and its dynamics. It is also a well-written book, with many a nice turn of phrase. While drawing from comparative historians like Carroll Quigley and Arnold Toynbee, and theorizing in his discourse, Huntington also applies theory to current and future international affairs. Huntington aspires to "present a framework, a paradigm, for viewing global politics that will be meaningful to scholars and useful to policymakers." On the whole he succeeds by focusing attention on the diverse major cultures worldwide, their relationships with each other, and the irrelevancy of Cold War policies to a post-Cold War world. He categorizes cultures into civilizations and sub-civilizations. My only critique of the framework is in the hierarchy of his groupings. His count of full civilizations is nine: Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu, Orthodox, Buddhist, and Japanese. I would reduce that to five by making Japanese a sub-civilization of Sinic; Buddhist of Hindu; and Germanic, Latin, and Slavic (Orthodox) of Western. In addition, I would discuss more the Iranian, Arabic, and Turkish sub-civilizations of Islamic (which he mentions) and Dravidian (which he does not) of Hindu. But these changes would not much affect his conclusions. The apparently global Westernism amongst non-Western ruling classes is shallow; the adoption of English is just the adoption of inter-cultural communication. Despite the prevalence of French language and culture among the Western ruling classes from 1600 to 1900, the peoples of the West did not all become French. Not will the peoples of the world become American. One of his more interesting insights is that Modernity, itself dislocating and alienating people, creates the need for new meaningful identities and accentuating the civilizational awareness' of people to replace the weakened local village, town, or tribal awareness'. In this way, as well as in the increased communications between civilizations, Modernity heightens the clashing of civilizations. "If non-Western societies are to Modernize, they must do it their own way not the Western way and, emulating Japan, build upon and employ their own traditions, institutions, and values." In places Huntington's analysis is good as far as it goes, but needs to go farther. For instance, the persistence of civilizational affiliation is discussed. A consideration of Turkey as a state torn between Islam and West is interesting. Huntington does not go back as far as he should: as part of Greek and Roman empires, Turkey was Western for 1500 years, from 300 BC to 1200 AD. But he considers that since Mustafa Kemal, Turkey has tried to Modernize as well as Westernize. It seeks to become a member of the EU. It also has a rising awareness of its Muslim nature, and the ruling military and political leaders have suppressed it. A similar analysis of Pakistan's dual Muslim - Indic nature would also interest. Huntington as an aside advocates the expulsion of Turkey (and Greece) from NATO: "NATO... should recognize the essential meaninglessness of having as members two states each of which is the other's worst enemy and both of which lack cultural affinity with the other members." A chapter on inter-civilizational issues is the weakest in the book. Weapons proliferation is mistakenly not attributed to the West. A section on human rights and democracy is superficial, and immigration is substantively but incorrectly analyzed. Dar al-Islam is thoughtfully and well considered. Similarities are highlighted between the Islamic Resurgence, on the one hand, and Protestant Reformation; and waqfs and other Islamic organizations, on the one hand, and early 20th century American political machines. The increasingly extreme nature of the Resurgence is attributed to Cold War politics, the relative ease of repressing secular opposition; and in some cases high dependence on foreign support. Western hypocrisy and double standards are enumerated. While noting the lack of a cohesive Islamic core, however, he notes the Western dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire in this context but fails to note the Western suppression of possibles successors in that role within Islam (or Africa). India gets too little ink, but concern about China seems overstated and premature. While in the long run (200 years) he is right about the likely eventual preeminence of China worldwide, his medium term (50 year) speculation is conditional on an unlikely concatenation of events in the shorter time frame. Huntington does not mention the crisis of an aging population China will confront as a result of its 'one child only' policy. In China succession is irregular and the continuity of government is neither routine or assured. The invisible hand of economics is still too restrained. The invisible hand of politics does not operate freely at all, limiting the resources from which the government can draw. Most fundamentally, China does not have a combination of legally established differential, proportional, and integral controls on society that in the West are exercised by executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. Until both hands are freed, China will be far from achieving its economic and political potential. The author's train of thought travels well and carries far. I don't always agree with the routing, but the destination is worthwhile. He runs off the rails only once in a brief late tirade implying that multiculturalism risks American Civil War II and Collapse of the USSR II. "The multiculturalists are, as Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. [from 'The Disuniting of America'], said, 'very often ethocentric separatists who see little in the Western heritage other than Western crimes.'" This ad hominem critique must be based on some straw man definition of multiculturalism ( Schlesinger's?) with which I am not familiar and is not articulated in the text. Modernity permeates the world more each day; the West washes over the surface and runs off. Huntington's mindfulness of the distinction between the West and Modernity informs his framework all the way through to his conclusion that the "Western belief in the universality of Western culture suffers three problems: it is false; it is immoral; and it is dangerous."
Rating: 
Summary: Too vague
Review: I was duly impressed by Huntington's "Political Order in Changing Societies," since it was a fairly solid work backed by extensive research. While it did have its flaws, it generally maintained a strong regard for accuracy and specificity in its arguments. However, this book was very much a disappointment, particularly because of its overgeneralization of modern and historical issues. Like any book that attempts to make sweeping arguments about global society, "Clash of Civilizations" almost charicatures groups of nations and ignores the interrelationship between them. It can do this because Huntington operates with extremely vague notions of "civilization" and "culture." Oriental, Japanese, Islamic, Western: Huntington isn't very clear on how specifically each nation-state manifests these qualities, nor where these particular qualities come from. For example, he never addresses why Islam can thrive in Western nations, even though the values that Islamic nations seek differ widely from Western ones. Moreover, he never deals with countries with strong multiethnic populations, like Eastern Europe, India, or even racial tensions in the United States. Rather, he is more content to leave this point vague, although this is by far the critical point of his thoughts. On the positive side, however, Huntington does write a provocative thesis that helps to reenergize theory in international relations. Furthermore, from his other writing and this one, I have no doubt that he believes culture is an essential and important idea in shaping global politics, and it is certainly refreshing to see this when most of the discourse focuses on international economics, almost forgetting that culture even exists sometimes. My concern is that he approaches culture too narrowly sometimes. While he does respect it, he is not afraid to throw important parts of it out when making sweeping statements about mankind. My sense is that this book would not be this popular except for 911 (aka. 9/11, Sept. 11 attacks, etc.). I also worry that because of its overgeneralization, it is a perfect fit for people who are hurting over this matter, but have not taken the time to step back and consider how the lack of specificity and accuracy can cloud reasoning. As a result, while I am glad that this book can turn new heads towards international relations, I hope that readers will pay attention to his shortcomings, which are many in this case.
Rating:
Summary: Elegantly Simple & Amazingly Descriptive Framework
Review: With the end of the Cold War, some writers wondered if it was "the end of history." However, Samuel P. Huntington postulates we are simply entering a new era of history in which "civilizations" (which are a function of religion, culture and ethnic roots) will be more important than political or economic ideology in determing geopolitics. Huntingon describes eight civilizations that include African, Eastern Orthodox, Hindu, Islamic, Japanese, Latin American, Confucian/Sinic & Western. Rather than the bipolar power structure of the last half of the 20th Century, Huntington's new world order is multipolar and multicivilizational. Within Huntington's book, the West is and will remain the most powerful civilization for some time into the future. Yet it will face increasing rivalry from Islamic societies and the Confucian society led by China. Huntington counsels that, in the future, avoidance of major intercivilizational wars requires core states within each civilization to refrain from intervening in conflicts within other civilizations. This will obviously require a new kind of discipline for leading nations. Huntington's assessment of the militaristic legacy of Islam, the "indigestibility" of Muslims and the "bloody borders" of Islam is thought provoking, enlightening and supported with solid analysis. Huntington also argues the absence of a strong "core state" within the Islamic civilization is "destabilizing." Whereas many books of this genre seem to be long on analysis and short on solutions, Huntington provides both and does so in an elegantly simply framework that is amazingly prescient in predicting how events around the world have developed since the book was published. Many people may choose to differ with Huntington's brilliant, bold, and provocative observations, but his ideas deserve apt and thoughtful consideration from policy makers and interested citizens as they shape their own opinions about current events. A very interesting read!
Rating:
Summary: Enlightening and thought provoking
Review: This book does for global politics what Thomas Friedman's book The Lexus and The Olive Tree does for global economics. Prof. Huntington is compelling in his premise, well substantiated with facts and examples, that religious civilizations have supplanted governmental ideologies and national boundaries as the basis worldwide for political and economic alliances, enmities and conflicts. Written in the mid-1990s, the book is surprisingly prescient in some of its speculations regarding subsequent recent events. The author explores clearly and in well-organized fashion the demographic and attitudinal factors underlying current world affairs, including much elucidation of events in the Balkans, Asia and the Arab World.In the early going the book the book tends to be a bit academic and jargony, but readers should give it a chance, because once it gets past the basic definitions - which are interesting and important in laying the groundwork for the rest of the book - it gives way to a much more lucid and free-flowing style. Overall, it is very helpful to the reader in understanding the recent, current and future world picture.
Rating:
Summary: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
Review: A very well researched book that suddently came again into the high-light after September 11th. Although easily written, but due to the complex subject, it must be read in installments. Unless the reader has an elevated level in international politics or a field near to it. The book is an excellent base for those working within the media and / or the international envirnoment. In order to creat an own opinion about this complex situation, every mature citizen should read this book and use it as a reference material. A further edition should cover the recent developments.
Rating: 
Summary: The owner's guide to the current world that we live in!
Review: Written in the early 90s, you will think that he has a time-machine because of its relevince to today--China, Islam (Afganistan, 9-11), Russia, etc. I have changed all of my paradigms about how the world works and what is actaully going on. The material is very timely and well written. Any one interested in the world will enjoy and benefit from this book.
Rating:
Summary: Washington Elites Oblivious to Other Countries Cultures
Review: Washington Elites Oblivious to Other Countries Cultures Although America has increasingly become a more multiethnic society, the Washington elites have a total lack of understanding for the cultures of other countries. Just because a family in Beijing or Tokyo eats at a local McDonald's restaurant, it does not mean that they share the same cultural or political values as Americans. "The Clash of Civilizations" is an important book which serves as a wakeup call to the Washington elites who have mismanaged foreign policy with the rest of the world. Debacles like the Vietnam War would have been avoided if the Washington elites retained some understanding of Asian culture and civilization. As the book states, attempts by the Washington elites to impose American cultural values on others will inevitably lead to backlash and blowback. It is not surprising that institutions like the IMF and the World Bank that are controlled by the Washington elites are widely resented by developing nations across the world. We need a new global world order that respects the indigenous cultures of developing nations.
Rating:
Summary: A piece of political propaganda
Review: This is a good example of how an indifferent book can become famous, when backed by a powerful lobby, whose ideology and policy it supports. There is little point in commenting on the contents: it manifests a profound lack of historical knowledge and a misrepresentation of modern day politics. Effectively it defines the West as what is convenient for its present politics, ignoring or distorting all world history before the Cold War era. It is a good intellectual alibi for the foreign policy of a part in the Republican party, important as a piece of history because it amounts to a declaration of their intentions, very influential for political propaganda, but as a piece of scholarship or a factual description of world politics it is simply junk.
|
