A review by David Orton
 
             
            
            
   The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order
                         
               
    by Samuel P. Huntington. Simon & Schuster, 1996, 
                        
          
         367 pages, softcover, ISBN 0-684-84441-9, Ca$23.
 
        "The revolt against the 
West was originally legitimated by asserting the
                 
    universality of Western values; it is now legitimated by
asserting the
                 
    superiority of non-Western values." p. 93 
    
                
"The West is...attempting to integrate the economies of 
non-Western societies
                 
    into a global economic system which it dominates." p. 184
 
 
        
Introduction
            
This is a complex, erudite and thoughtful book, which has changed how
I look at the international social and
         political order. It is required as 
a post-September 11th, 2001 insightful reading, even though it was published
         several years before this wake-up
event. The author, a US political scientist, was "the director of security
         planning for the National Security 
Council" in the White House regime of Jimmy Carter. So Huntington has had 
         access to a lot of very interesting 
behind-the-scenes data denied to lesser mortals. The ideas in this book were
         first presented in a lecture at the 
Washington "American Enterprise Institute." It is strange for this reviewer 
to urge 
         others to read a book which has on 
its cover endorsements by people (reactionaries from my perspective) like 
         Henry Kissinger, Zbrigniew Brzezinski, 
and newspapers like The New York Times, The Washington Post, 
         and The Wall Street Journal. 
This also is a book which has been denounced by some on the Left as written 
         by a right-winger and therefore, presumably, 
of no significance.  The negative references to 
this book which I seem
         to frequently encounter in post September 
11th readings, perhaps have to do with the thesis advanced that the
         West is in a period of increasing
tension,  particularly with two civilizations: the Islamic and the Sinic
world (China 
         and countries in close geographic
orbit/influence). Huntington is no liberal or left winger, he accepts the
West
         "restraining" the military power of
 Islamic ("Islam has bloody borders") and Sinic countries, and "maintaining"
         technological/military superiority 
over other civilisations. (p. 312)
 
            
I believe the endorsements by the US Establishment can be understood 
because of the author's "realism" and
         the provision of what is seen as sage
 interventionist advice: "The preservation of the United States 
and the 
         West requires a renewal of Western
identity. The security of the world requires acceptance of global
         multiculturality." (p. 318)  By Western civilization/identity, I am following Huntington's
analysis, and speaking of
         that civilization which arose around 
700 or 800 AD, and whose components today include Western Europe 
         (NATO membership), North America,
the settler countries of Australia and New Zealand and possibly Latin
         America, although this area of the 
world is yet to determine its ultimate orientation.
 
            
As someone who had been shaped in my past thinking by an engagement 
with Marxism, where religion is 
         essentially defined as an "opiate", 
I have come to see, since September 11th, that various religions, including 
Islam, 
         are far more important in the consciousness 
of people than I had previously believed. Religions, mediated by 
         cultures, help shape how people engage 
with the social world and with the natural world. (The natural 
world
         concern is, unfortunately, not to
be found in this book.) But Huntington's book has helped my understanding
of
         how "Civilizations" appear to thrust 
humans towards the re-sacralizing of human societies. For deeper greens, this
         is not the re-sacralizing (making
sacred in an animistic sense) of the natural world, necessary to stop the
Earth's
         despoliation through capitalist commodification. 
Also, theocratic or religion-based societies seem to need "out"
         groups for self-definition purposes. 
Not everyone, it seems, can be "chosen", and we have such words as "heathen",
         "infidel" and "goy" to help define 
the religiously unwashed. In Huntington's book, true friends require true 
enemies:
         "For peoples seeking identity 
and reinventing ethnicity, enemies are essential, and the potentially most 
         dangerous enmities occur across the 
fault lines between the world's major civilizations." (p. 20)
 
       
Civilizations and discontent
            
Huntington is saying that today in global politics it is civilizations, 
not ideologies or nation states, that become the
         driving force of what passes for social
 order/disorder. The countries in this world are grouping themselves around
         or in alliance with the core or leading 
states of the various civilizations with which they identify. Some civilizations, 
         e.g. Islamic and African, have yet 
to see the definite emergence of "core" states. The author speaks of seven 
or 
         eight major civilizations in our world: 
Western, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu, African, Latin American (?), Orthodox -
         Russian, Buddhist and Japanese. The 
end of the Cold War has come to mean that peoples are not divided along
         ideological lines but along civilizational 
lines. In these civilizational self-identities, there is little room for ecology
         (which is not discussed in this book), 
but there seems to be an increasingly central role for religion: "To a very
         large degree, the major civilizations 
in human history have been closely identified with the world's great
         religions..." (p. 42)
 
            
As Huntington points out, the war in Bosnia was a war between representative
 states allying themselves with
         three distinct civilizations and religions: 
"Western governments and elites backed the Croats, castigated 
the
         Serbs, and were generally indifferent 
to or fearful of the Muslims." (p. 289) On the other hand,
the Spanish
         Civil War in the 30s was a struggle 
between ideologies and political systems. 
 
This is how the author describes the evident resurgence of religions which we see around us:
        
        "The religious resurgence throughout 
the world is a reaction against secularism, moral relativism,
                 
and self-indulgence, and a reaffirmation of the values of order, discipline, 
work, mutual help, and
                 
human solidarity. Religious groups meet social needs untended by state bureaucracies... 
The 
                 
breakdown of order and of civil society creates vacuums which are filled by
religious, often
                 
fundamentalist groups." (p. 98)
 
            
Civilizational identity increasingly guides the orientation of nation 
states. This book is about how we now define
         ourselves and what this means for
contemporary  political activity. The author has a conventional US anti-
         communist view, "democracy" is capitalist-style 
democracy, and he sees NATO as "the security organization of
         Western civilization" (p. 161) 
in the aftermath of the Cold War. Reading this book, whether or not we "like" 
the
         analysis, shows, for those who seek 
a deep green world with Earth-centered values which are also socially just, 
         what we have to contend with and understand.
 
            
Cultural or civilizational definitions have come to the foreground. 
Huntington seems to be saying that the 
         United States should not fight battles 
it cannot ultimately win (the current Bush Administration does not seem to
         be listening), but that interventions 
in world political affairs should be to assist Western civilization. This, 
from 
         someone who takes it for granted that 
the US is the leader of Western civilization, even though this civilization,
         arguably the most powerful at the
present time, is in decline relative to other, ascending, civilizations.
For 
         Huntington, the underlying assumption 
is that "Western" civilization is in some sense "the best" and other 
         civilizations also need this Western 
heritage. Yet there is not an out-and-out Western arrogance in this book,
         because the author opposes the "parochial 
conceit that the European civilization of the West is now the universal
         civilization of the world." (p. 
55) Any claims to Western "universalism" for Huntington are self-delusions,
 "pretensions"
         and "dangerous." Western civilization 
should be seen as unique but not universal. He differentiates between
         "Westernization" and "modernization" 
and says that other civilizations through their various nation states are
         seeking to modernize, not westernize. 
Huntington also believes that each major civilization should be represented
         on the Security Council of the United 
Nations with at least one seat. The present Council reflects only post-World
         War II reality.
 
        
Contradictions and disagreement
            
1. Ecological ignorance. This would be my primary criticism of this 
book and its enormous weakness. The
         author shows absolutely no awareness 
of the ecological impact of increased economic growth on the Earth and
         non human life forms. More economic 
growth/strength simply leads to more influence for a nation and increased
         military spending for Huntington.
He is totally anthropocentric in orientation. (Huntington is aware of the
         population pressure resulting from 
the pro-natalist Islamic religion.) His basic ecological limitation is shown 
when
         the author defines "self" solely in 
social and cultural terms, with world citizens ending up in one civilization 
or another.
         While this is, I believe, unfortunately 
the existing social reality, as deep greens we are first and foremost 
         "Earthlings." The Earth is our basic 
reference and the carrier of primary values. It is this ecocentric world view
         which gives basic meaning to our lives, 
not support for a religion, a state, a civilization, a cultural community, 
an
         extended family, etc. All humans,
irrespective of their religious beliefs or civilizational allegiance, need
to come to
         think of themselves first as Earthlings. 
This must come to fundamentally shape their basic self- identity before
         anything else. Given this, we need 
for our social identities to draw from all civilizations, not just the West.
            
2. There is an absence of any class analysis or any consideration of
the role played by trans-national corporations
         in this book.
            
3. Huntington seems to accept a multicivilizational world but not apparently
for the United States. This is a policy
         of exclusivity for large minorities 
of US citizens: "A multicivilizational United States will not 
be the United 
         States; it will be the United Nations." 
(p. 306)
        
    "The futures of the United States and of the West depend 
upon Americans reaffirming their commitment
         to Western civilization. Domestically 
this means rejecting the divisive calls of multiculturalism. 
         Internationally it means rejecting 
the elusive and illusory calls to identify the United States with Asia...
         Americans are culturally part of the 
Western family; multiculturalists may damage and even destroy that
         relationship but they cannot replace 
it. When Americans look for their cultural roots, they find them in
         Europe." (p. 307)
 
        
Conclusion 
            
I have found this book very helpful, with its focus on the new role 
played by civilizations and world religions in
         contemporary politics. One can say 
that Marxism has paid little attention to cultural factors but where this
 
         "Western" ideology has had ongoing 
longevity, is where it has engaged with what seem to be compatible Confucian
         and Taoist values!
 
            
I do find the analysis in The Clash of Civilizations 
as "too inevitable." If Huntington's views hold out, then there
         is little hope to exit the environmental 
quagmire which we are into. Yet as well as raising the deep ecology flag, 
all
         of us need to address the role of
religious fundamentalisms: Christian, Islamic, Judaic, Hindu, etc. and how
to
         undercut them. This book is useful 
in this latter regard. Living in any theocratic state, no matter which religion 
it is 
         based on, would be very bad news for 
most of us, as for fellow non human Earthlings. We cannot overcome
         religious fundamentalism, if we ignore 
social injustice and also attempt to impose on others our "own" Western
         economic fundamentalism.
 
            
I think it is necessary to try and outline, for those of us in the 
West, what are the positive accomplishments of
         this civilization which need upholding. 
It is a civilization which has accomplishments as well as crimes to its history.
         If we do not do this, then the capitalist 
economic fundamentalists will put forward their paradigm, e.g. free markets,
         rule of law, individualism, competition,
 etc. as the "legacy" of the West which we should defend and, if necessary, 
         if those in the White House have their 
way, what we should be prepared to die for.
        
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
        January 6, 2003
 
            
        Printed in the online journal   The 
   Trumpeter,    Vol. 19.2:  http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/content/v19.2/
           
 
To obtain any of the Green Web publications, write to us at:
Green Web, R.R. #3, Saltsprings, Nova Scotia, Canada, BOK 1PO 
                              E-mail us at: greenweb@ca.inter.net