U.S. caught in clash of civilizations

Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity By Samuel P Huntington

Political scientist Samuel P Huntington made telling predictions about the current state of the world with his "Clash of Civilizations" theory almost a decade ago. Recently, he made headlines again with a new thought-provoking book, "Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity," which tries to redefine the meaning of the American nation.

Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the American people reelected President George W Bush as a war leader, despite a stalemated situation in Iraq with prolonged bloody battles fought with a dubious cause and criticism arising from all corners of the world.

In an interview with Kyodo News on postelection America and the world, Huntington, a professor at Harvard University, said the United States is now going through a period of religious "Great Awakening."

I think one has to make the point that Americans overall are a very religious people, much more religious than Europeans or Japanese. In the 17th and 18th centuries, people who came here, in often cases, were fleeing religious prosecutions. Religiosity was reinforced by the feeling prevalent among the Framers of the Constitution that there should be freedom of religion for people to organize their churches and practice their religion. No government censorship of religion meant that religious groups in this country had to compete for followers. As a result, one of the striking things about religion in the U.S. is the large number of different denominations, sects and groups that we have.

We have gone through several religious revivals. They are called "Great Awakenings." We had one before the (American) revolution, which many historians say created the basis for the revolution, another in the early 19th century, which generated all sorts of reforms, including the abolitionist movement to abolish slavery.

I think we are going through such a period of Great Awakening now. The movement is in a way meeting a great concern of the American people about the decline of morality and traditional values.

Are Great Awakenings in the American history related in some way or other to changes in the international environment?

That is an interesting question. In some sense I suppose they coincide with the changes in the international environment. The first Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s coincided with the intensification of the wars between the British and the French, which were fought in part here in North America. It certainly played a major role in promoting the development of an American sense of nationality.

In the 1830s and 1840s there was this feeling of "Manifest Destiny" and we fought wars with the Indians in the South and the West, and with the Mexicans and annexed half of Mexico territory at the end of the war. During the Progressive Period (when the next religious revival happened), a hundred years ago, certainly the U.S. was emerging as a major world power.

The current (Great Awakening), with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the U.S. as the only superpower, it seems to me, has reinforced the sense of confidence in ability to go out and change the world in ways in which we think it should be changed. That is very notable in the policies of the Bush administration.

We are witnessing a rise of nationalism in reaction to economic and other sorts of globalization of economic. How does it relate to religious revival?

There is global resurgence of the importance of religion in a wide variety of countries. We see the identity of countries increasingly taking on more of religious character. In countries like India, Turkey, Israel, not to mention Iran, you have had religious movements develop, challenging the secular definition of those countries' identities by their (modern) founding leaders in the early 20th century, such as Nehru, Ben-Gurion, Ataturk and the Shah of Iran.

It is a fairly widespread phenomenon that people are thinking of their country in more religious terms. Even in secular Western Europe, religion is becoming more important. By enacting a new law banning Muslims scarves in schools, the French feel the need to reassert their religious identity which happens to be the tradition of secularism. That is their religion.

On the other hand, your new book said, although we see rise of religiosity and nationalism in the general public, elitists are becoming more and more secular and global in their activities.

The elites in countries increasingly have to operate on a transnational, international basis. They have to be able to participate in global organization, whether they are business or professional or charitable or whatever. But this is still a relatively small number of people. In most countries, including in the U.S., the bulk of the population does not live in the international world. They are not involved in international institutions, except to the extent that they become affected by the decisions made by the elites.

Many American-based corporations have been closing their factories here in the U.S. and moving them to Mexico, China or other places where labor costs are much less. That makes a great deal of sense from the viewpoint of the globalized elites, but from the viewpoint of the nonglobalized workers, it doesn't. That is a major gap that has appeared in the American society.

In some respects, yes. There is the simple fact that if you want to succeed in the United States, because it is a leader in globalization, that you have to be able to operate in an international environment. There is certainly a difference here between the nationalistic public and the internationalistic, cosmopolitan elites. The data I set forth in my book show the American people among the most nationalistic people in the world.

From the enlightenment to the end of Cold War, it was a long period of ideologies. Is it over now and has that of religions started again?

Secular ideologies clearly are not important the way they were during the 20th century, when they played a crucial, defining role in international politics. I think it is perfectly possible that new secular ideologies develop and, in a decade or two in the future, again play a role. But for the moment, it seems to me, that it is culture, and particularly religion, which defines peoples' identities and the relationship among them.

Well, in some cases, they are also the basis for cooperation though. I don't think there is any necessary inherent conflict between peoples with different religions. Conflicts start over political power, over control of particular territory or resources. But if they continue, they tend to become redefined as religious conflict. The Irish nationalist movement that developed in the 19th century was not led by Catholics. It was led by Presbyterians who wanted Ireland to have greater autonomy and independence from the British. And it only gradually became redefined over the course of years as a conflict between the Protestant British and Irish Catholic.

In the recent conflicts, as in Palestine or Chechnya or Kashmir, you see secular leaders, who usually were more moderate, increasingly being replaced by religious leaders, who are usually more extreme. And, when a conflict becomes defined in religious terms, it also usually becomes more difficult to work out an accommodation or a compromise. Secular leaders can compromise on control of territory or on sharing of power, but if it is religious issues then compromise becomes much more difficult.

I think Japan certainly can play a much active and positive role in world affairs. Japan has a certain stature in the world in that it is not seen as a threat to anybody. This puts Japan in a position to play an even more active role than it has in trying to accommodate differences and in preventing conflicts. (Kyodo News)

What an intellectual giant Sam is. I had the pleasure of designing and implementing a graduate seminar on "Civilizations in Conflict -- the Impact of Islamic Fundamentalism on Western Civilization". Huntington and 9/11 were the motivating factors in my research effort at this very late period in my life.

Huntington's "Clash" and Bernard Lewis' works were of paramount importance in the development of the work -- as well as Kaplan, Pipes, Giddes, etc.

IMHO, Huntington has provided a monumental service to our nation with his recent important work. I do believe a large segment of our country has directly benefited by the issues he has raised -- not the least is his discussion of the impact of demographics and time upon our cultural composite and ultimate national structure.

Respectfully, dkp

Clash of Civilizatio:

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Clash of Civilizatio, click below:
	click here >>>	Clash of Civilizatio	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

Gompers, Samuel - (founder and pres. of AFL, an immigrant)

"America must not be overwhelmed. Every effort to enact immigration legislation must expect to meet a number of hostile forces and, in particular, two hostile forces of considerable strength. One of these is composed of corporation employers who desire to employ physical strength (broad backs) at the lowest possible wage and who prefer a rapidly revolving labor supply at low wages to a regular supply of American wage earners at fair wages. The other is composed of racial groups in the United States who oppose all restrictive legislation because they want the doors left open for an influx of their countrymen regardless of the menace to the people of their adopted country."
(Letter to Congress, March 19, 1924)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.