Stage_Setter

1. Critique of the author's thesis Huntington's Thesis is "The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great division among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural."1 Huntington supports his thesis by looking decades into the history of civilizations and analyzes conflicts between cultural groups. His thesis ranges from small villages to the construct of civilizations. He believes the differences between societies are so fundamentally different that the gaps in understanding, respect and ultimately acceptance of different cultures are so great that civilizations will constantly continue to clash. To say I'm an expert on many of Huntington's theories would be a great understatement but at the conclusion of my initial read I found his article to be dated and honestly somewhat ignorant. His theories reminded me of articles I read years ago in college from great anthropologist who studied ancient cultures and civilizations that disappeared centuries ago. I believe Huntington, in the development of this thesis did not weigh heavily enough the compounding gains cultures and societies have made in just the last 50 years. Are we truly destined to be forever trapped in a vicious cycle of a society that will inevitability fight' I don't think so. I firmly believe as each year passes "WE" become smarter and more connected. We as a global civilization can now instantly connect to each other and for the first time in history immediately and accurately understand the world we live in. This connection is what's going to pull our societies closer than any time in our history. ! __________________________ 1 Huntington, Samual P. “The Clash of Civilizations'” FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 1993:99, 100 2. Critique of the author's main argument. Whether I agree or disagree with Huntington's article about the Clash of Civilizations is immaterial. I’ve stated previously in this response and will continue to outline where I agree and disagree with Huntington’s theory but what I appreciate most about this article is the overwhelming responses his writings have generated on social media. It’s truly inspiring to search this article and see volumes of argument and discussion his work has generated and how it’s been embraced thought the world. There is no denying that weather you agree or disagree with his thesis it undoubtedly generates health discussions. There are points in Huntington’s main argument "the dominating source of conflict will be cultural”2 in my opinion that are dated and inaccurate. In his thesis he basis many of his arguments and findings on theory's that do not take into effect the growth of the internet, social networks and the ability our society to connect. The development of technology in the West has connected the world like never before. We now live in a world where religious and cultural differences can be openly discussed in the security of our living rooms without the threat of reprisal (to an extent). It is my belief that societies that don’t have the ability to connect to the social mainstream are at an extreme disadvantage. This may resort to these societies settling their differences based off their historical traditions, which ultimately may lead to conflict ! . ! _____________________________ 2 Huntington, 1993:99 ! 3. Logical analysis and critique of how the theorist describes threats, challenges, and opportunities. Huntington’s article poses several threats, challenges and opportunities. The Challenge I found with his article is Huntington continues throughout the article to make vague claims about the “cultural fault lines separating civilizations from one another.” 3 These claims throughout his article are similar to statements you may hear form Psychic’s on late night TV who continue to “wow” the audience with claims and predictions that are just vague enough to be true. As I read through his article I continued to look for evidence of solid research, unfortunately this was difficult to find. The threats exist when Huntington claims in order for a country to truly change the elitists of that country must support the change. I believe that if you’re lucky enough to become one of the country elites you may be hesitant to adopt change, especially if you believe that change will affect your financial stability and power you retain. The same can be said about the general population, it may be difficult to sway the opinion of local nationals if they’re comfortable with their current lifestyle. The opportunity exists when civilizations have become so poor and fragile that they are willing to look to other cultures, specifically the West, for examples of different ideologies. ! ! ! _____________________________ 3 Huntington, 1993:100 4. Points of agreement and points of disagreement. Do you agree or disagree' With what key points' As I stated previously in my response I generally disagree with many of Huntington’s points. The point where I disagree most comes in his chapter “why civilizations will clash.” Huntington claims “the people of different civilizations have different views on the relations between God and man, the individual and the group, the system in the state, parents and children, husband and wife, as well as differing views of the relative importance of rights and responsibilities. These differences are the product of centuries. They will soon not disappear.” 4 This is I believe Huntington’s poorest argument. How could you possibly predict the differences in culture of society that have been produced over centuries will soon not disappear' One man with a digital camera can change the world in an instant just as one man standing in front of a tank can inspire millions. I believe that we are connected like no other time in history and to have the ability to instantly look at another culture and truly understand and be empathetic to their pain and needs is going to change this world. I believe that as children around the world are raised with access to global information the hatred and resentment cultures hold against each other will undoubtedly change for the better and will in fact soon disappear. ! ! ! ! _____________________________ 4 Huntington, 1993:101 5. Explanation of what this theory means for your future in the military. How does it relate to the current operational environment' Where you may go' Against what enemy' Did you evaluate the theorist’s work for its relevance to professional military education (PME), specifically ILE' This theory, albeit in my opinion not accurate, does a fantastic job of allowing the reader to take a closer look at how we view our perceptions of different societies around the world. I've had the remarkable honor of deploying seven times in a military career lasting over 23 years. I've experienced cultures from every corner of the world and have firm beliefs in regard to my views on religion, global politics and education. I believe that when we deploy we have an obligation to show the rest of the world what a functioning society can produce. Militaries around the world may not share cultural beliefs but when Soldiers from two different parts of the world are standing shoulder to shoulder in a fight all the differences immediately transition to a unified effort. I feel as we continue to deploy our views, technology and beliefs will spread positive influence to cultures that may be looking for inspiration to change. This theory can be applied to ILE students by encouraging new ways of thinking about other cultures. You don't have to agree with Huntington but you cannot deny that his arguments encourage a higher level of critical thinking about what our future may hold.