Political Science

Huntingtons (1993) thesis in The Clash of Civilizations is based on the assumption that the world requires perpetual conflict to go on existing, which is why civilizations must clash in the post-Cold War era.  The author insists, in particular, that Islam must certainly clash with the West during this period.  Although Huntingtons prophecy has been fulfilled, especially after the events of September 11, 2001, there are real people in the world, including scholars, who believe that this clash of civilizations is sustained by separatists, bigots or racists alone.  Hence, this clash was neither unavoidable, and nor is it impossible to put an end to it.  In other words, Huntingtons arguments are valid only in the viewpoint of those that are ignorant, as Said (2001) would claim.  

How Huntingtons Arguments are Valid
Said states that Huntingtons article, The Clash of Civilizations was intended to supply Americans with an original thesis about a new phase in world politics after the end of the cold war.  Unfortunately, racism has always plagued America, which is why countless Americans did not question Huntingtons main argument  that Islam and the West must clash, as the Muslims try to obtain great wealth and military power to counter Westerners.  Said also notes that there are uncountableeditorials in every American and European newspaper and magazine of note adding to this vocabulary of gigantism and apocalypse, each use of which is plainly designed not to edify but to inflame the readers indignant passion as a member of the West, and what we need to do.  Toward the end of his article, Huntington uses words that former President George W. Bush seemed to have memorize, apart from innumerable brainwashed Americans who do not always learn to question the tactics of political framing that the West must protect its interests in relation to...clashing civilizations.

Barber (1996) validates Huntingtons main argument in his book, Jihad vs. McWorld How the World Is Both Falling Apart and Coming Together-And What This Means for Democracy.  Jihad vs. McWorld is a war being waged at present.  Although the word, Jihad, is distinctly Muslim, to Barber the Jihad side of this battle is one driven by parochial hatreds, whereas the McWorld side of this war is about universalizing markets (53).  Barber does not believe that either side is democratic in the context of globalization.  The Jihad is fought between cultures, civilizations, tribes or nations.  McWorld, on the other hand, is about fast music, fast computers, and fast food, that is, massive consumption with utter disregard for everything else (Barber, 53).

AVAAZ.org The World in Action is an organization asking for signatures on its petition, Stop the Clash of Civilizations (AVAAZ.org The World in Action 2008).  The organization mentions the Middle East conflict to further validate Huntingtons arguments.  Huntington claims that Islam has bloody borders, and uses India-Pakistan conflicts to illustrate this.  With the example of Prophet Muhammads cartoon published by the Western press, showing the Islamic leader of faith as a terrorist, Sen (2006) also validates Huntingtons main argument by stating that it is possible to provoke and infuriate sects or groups and raise racist passions for the clash of civilizations  in particular, the clash between Islam and the West.

Why Huntingtons Arguments are Invalid
Huntington writes that Islamic fundamentalism is becoming increasingly popular.  But, Sen and countless peaceful Muslims around the world disagree with that, claiming that they do not know a single violent fundamentalist.  Moreover, Huntingtons argument that Muslims may become allies of China to win a war against the West must be considered invalid because it has not happened yet.  Muslims and the East Asians have not yet attained economic and military power equal to that of the West either.  Hence, Huntingtons argument that this would eventually happen must also be considered invalid today.

Both Sen and Said are of the opinion that Huntingtons main argument about the clash of Islam and the West is shallow because it talks only of those who identify with one group as opposed to all others even if they belong to multiple groups.  For example, a European Muslim may not be willing to denounce his or her European identity at the same time as he or she refuses to denounce Islam.  AVAAZ.org The World in Action claims that there is no clash of civilizations rather, the problem lies with politics.  To put it another way, political games call for brainwashing of gullible people by way of the media.  Such people include Axel W., a Nazi who recently killed an Egyptian woman in a German court.  He had referred to as a terrorist.  She was only a medical doctor for the Germans.  Huntington cannot include her among the enemies of the West.  Thus, his arguments had to be addressed by distinguished scholars such as Sen and Said.