The “fault lines” between civilizations would be especially likely to erupt into violent conflicts, and the world would appear as if groups of civilizations are in confrontation with one another. Huntington’s “clash of civilizations theory” divides the world into eight civilizations, and predicts that international conflicts in the post-Cold War era will take place between them. Inexplicable International Conflicts in the Post-Cold War era. Furthermore, this theory, in terms of its world outlook level, is negative and destructive, and its negative impact on the building of a new world political and economic order cannot be ignored. It neither foresaw the form of international conflicts in the post-Cold War era, nor did it clarify the general trends of the era. In fact, Huntington himself has repeatedly emphasized that this theory is a simplification and has its limitations, but, “as a simple model of global politics, it accounted for more important phenomena than any of its rivals.” In this article, I argue that, precisely with respect to accounting for the most important phenomena of the post-Cold War era, the “clash of civilizations” is an erroneous theory. Researcher and Deputy Director of the Institute of European Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Director of the Marxism and European Civilization Research CenterĪmong the international relations theories put forward by Western scholars in the post-Cold War era, the American political scientist Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” has been most influential, and has drawn the most criticism. What’s Wrong with the “Clash of Civilizations”?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |