Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The clash of civilizations argument
Synopsis of "Clash of civilizations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The clash of civilizations argument
Bernard Lewis (1916- Present) was the one who initially coined the term, ‘clash of civilizations,’ in his influential article “Roots of Muslim Rage: Why So Many Muslims Deeply Resent the West, and Why Their Bitterness Will Not Be Easily Mollified,” published in The Atlantic Monthly, September 1990. This article appeared after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the beginning of identifying the new enemy of the United States of America. Being an expert on the Middle East and one of the West’s leading scholars of that region, Lewis has been frequently sought by policymakers for advice, especially by the Bush administration. In his article, he rejects all the obvious failures of American foreign policy he, thus, elucidates and gives other reasons
Intolerance, reluctant to welcome beliefs, views, or behavior that contrast from one's own. It has not been dissolved and may never be resolved. In the last several decades, we have seen our world look down on those who are different. It could be as little as they dress differently to a different ethnicity. We make assumptions that those who alter our views are the evildoers, and those are monsters. Monsters don't stay the same; they change as times do. When a new fear is created, the monster than shifts.
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
Since the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration has been calling every citizens and every nations to support his Middle East policy. Nonetheless, the U.S. has been involved in the middle-east struggle for more than half of the century, wars were waged and citizens were killed. Yet, political struggles and ideological conflicts are now worse than they were under Clinton’s presidency. As “President’s Address to the Nation” is a speech asking everybody to support the troops to keep fighting in Iraq, I, as an audience, am not persuaded at all because of his illogical fallacy in the arguments. In this essay, I will analyze how and what are the illogical fallacies he uses in the speech.
In the novel War and Peace In the Middle East, author Avi Shlaim argues that Arab nations have been unable to escape the post-Ottoman syndrome. In particular he describes how the various powers inside and outside the region have failed to produce peace. While some of Shlaim's arguments hinder the message, I agree with his overall thesis that the Middle East problems were caused and prolonged by the failure of both powers and superpowers to take into account the regional interests of the local states.
The pro-Israel intervention represented the US foreign policy reaction when the violation to regional stability was committed by Israel. The cases discussed above were evaluated against the US reaction to Israel’s regional behaviour; in terms of whether the Israeli behaviour served or hampered US interest in maintaining regional stability and whether or not the US opposed Israel when it acted in ways that the United States deemed undesirable. It was concluded that, as a general rule, Washington was ready to intervene to address any violation to the status quo in the Middle East system except when this violation was committed by its regional surrogate. Israel had contributed directly in destabilizing the Middle East system (pushing the system out of its equilibrium point) in several cases, four of which have been discussed above. These crises, in spite of their negative effect on regional stability, witnessed minimal US reaction.
As seen by the terrorist attacks of September 11th and afterwards this is not an easy approach, if even possible, and it asks for a unreserved commitment, the clear definition of interests within the international system, it asks for the use of force if necessary as well as the clear distinction when not, and it asks for a transformation of institutions and policies. Since this was not done early on, the examples provide the reasons of failure as well as a demonstration of a slow learning process in U.S. foreign Policy.
The first is a rejection of the Clash thesis as fabricated myth for perpetuating Western dominance and justifying its aggrandizing policies. The other is of the Clash being inevitable due to the essentially and radically different ethos of Islam that makes it impossible to reconcile with the West. Sajjad (2013) thus added that Muslims needed to prepare for the approaching Clash. In his article, Sajjad (2013) interestingly shared some analysis from the non-Western world point of view on the flaw of Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations as
Andersen, Roy, Robert F. Seibert, and Jon G. Wagner. Politics and change in the Middle East: sources of conflict and accommodation. 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1982. Print.
In both given articles, “The Roots of Muslim Rage” by Bernard Lewis, and “The Roots of Muslim Rage Revisited” by Nicolaas J.E. van der Zee, argue about the enhancement of the Muslim fundamentalism with different perspectives; however, I believe that Lewis’ view may be quiet misleading to the actual perception. Lewis indicates that Muslim fundamentalism is conceived through the Muslim community’s oppression and dissatisfaction with the West’s political involvement, as well as “Islam is a source of aggression” . In defiance of Lewis’ opinion, the word ‘Islam’ comes from the word peace as well as the will of submission to God. The notion of aggression and violence that Lewis conceptualizes to be the headline of Islam does not have any supporting
In 1992 within a lecture Samuel P. Huntington proposed a theory that suggests that people's cultural and religious identities will undoubtedly be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world, this theory is known as the Clash of Civilizations. Therefore this essay provides a criticism of this theory, whether I agree or disagree with it and also the aspects I like or dislike about the theory as a whole.
As we entered the new millennium, Edward Said’s article, “The Clash of Ignorance”, appeared in the October 22 edition of The Nation, in 2001. His paper was a critical response to my thesis which first appeared in 1993, “The Clash of Civilizations?”. The following years saw many adopting his argument as a valid counter to my thesis. However, I believe that his argument builds more to the notion of the clash of civilizations stated in my paper, strengthening it, rather than weakening it. In this paper, I will discuss and address the arguments that he had put forward.
Gerner, Deborah J., and Philip A. Schrodt. "Middle Eastern Politics." Understanding the contemporary Middle East. 3rd ed. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008. 85 -136. Print.
After 9/11 has induced negative attitudes towards Muslim peoples who tend to be strongly associated with any act of terrorism. The media has played a colossal role in developing such negative association wherein it constantly portrays Muslim people in combination with violent terrorist acts. It does so in a way that they both go hand-and-hand. In other words, it has made it as though the Islamic religion is synonymous with terrorism. The media has perpetuated Muslim stereotypes over the years that followed the 9/11 incident. Because of this, society has developed, and still has developed, this prejudiced mindset about the Islamic religion and the Muslim communities around the world. People immediately assume that any violent act being depicted through the media is the direct result of Muslims. They automatically generate this idea that the act was performed by a Muslim terrorist even when they were not involved whatsoever. Regardless of whether it was true or not, Islamic religion and its Muslim adherents are at the top of societies’ agenda just waiting for the evidence to be generated so that they can then safely blame them for such world affairs. Again, this has led to the attack on the Islamic religion itself wherein people have come to postulate Islam as an act of oppression, violence and hatred towards non-Muslims. Anti-Muslim sentiments and campaigns have resulted from such misinformation the media has been generating and feeding its viewers.
On the board on Monday morning, there were numbers one through five and they each had a religion written next to them. 1 was Hinduism, 2 was Christianity, 3 was Judaism, 4 was Buddhism, and I was lucky enough to get 5: Islam. Oh, I know so much about Islam culture and their religion, are you kidding? I don’t even know where Islam is. I’m just kidding, it’s not a country. There are many differences between Islam and the United states like our religion, clothes, and food, and becoming a Christian or a Muslim, but Islam is the second largest religion in the world, so it’s important to a lot of people. The followers of Islam are called Muslims. Becoming a Muslim is not an easy process. You must do a long list of tasks. After you become a Muslim you must do everything in your power to try to have a good Muslim lifestyle.
From the earliest and most basic history classes taught in school, students are presented with the concept of “civilization”, and how they rise and fall with time. These “civilizations” presented range from the Sumerian to Roman to Western Civilizations. As taught, when one civilization rises to power, another typically falls from power. This rise and fall typically includes a clash that brings one civilization to dominance and another to its knees. Samuel P. Huntington believes that the next “clash of civilizations” will occur between the “Western” and “Islamic” civilizations. Scholars have varying opinions on Huntington’s claim, ranging from supporting material to “The Clash of Ignorance” by Edward Said.