Culture of Civilizations

The Culture of Civilizations:
The Interaction of Culture within Civilizations
Political Anthropology
11/26/2002
Political Anthropology
11/26/2002
The Culture of Civilizations:
The Interaction of Culture within Civilizations
In 1993, when Samuel L. Huntington wrote his world−renown article concerning the new shift away from the
classical nation−states toward a new world of civilizations, he kept in mind a very broad and general sense of
the term culture. In his thesis, Huntington states that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will
not be primarily ideological or primarily economic, conflict will be cultural. (Huntington, p.22) While trying
to define what culture is, Huntington gives an example of how culture works in order to define a situation:
The culture of a village in southern Italy may be different from that of a village in northern Italy, but both will
share in common Italian culture that distinguishes them from German villages. European communities, in
turn, will share cultural features that distinguish them form Arab or Chinese communities. Arabs, Chinese and
Westerners, however, are not part of any broader cultural entity. They constitute civilizations. A civilization is
thus the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity people have short of that
which distinguishes humans from other species. (p. 24)
With the use of very eloquent language and a very reasonable example, Samuel Huntington takes the term
culture, something very personal within each society, and stretches it out in order to have it represent an entire
society. Culture is not a term that can be generalized nor equally shared amongst many countries; villages,
regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups, (p. 23−24) are all different cultural groups. Culture is of
the utmost importance to individuals, it reflects who they are, where they are from and what they believe in. It
is not something that should be imposed on arbitrarily, but something that various communities work on to
ameliorate themselves. Small towns have culture, regions within a country have culture, even large countries
have culture, but to say that it is possible to have Britain, France, and the USA all constitute a general western
culture is too broad.
Huntington tells us that there are seven or eight different civilizations in the world Western (USA, Western
Europe and parts of Eastern Europe), Confucian (Northern and Eastern Asia), Japanese (which constitutes the
only single−country civilization), Islamic (Arab, Turk, Malaysian), Hindu (the Sub−continent),
Slavic−Orthodox (Eastern Europe, ex−USSR), Latin American (Central and South America), and maybe
African. (p. 25) He then precedes to tell us that there are two factors in defining a civilization, one by common
cultural objective elements, which are language, history, religion, customs, and institutions. The second factor
in defining a civilization is by the subjective self−identification of people.(p. 24) However, this concept of
self−identification, without any current evidence, is arbitrary. For the purpose of this argumentation, the
concept of self−identification contradicts this concept of culture. If a group of people can capriciously choose
what civilization they want to belong to with out having similar cultural elements, then the boundaries of
civilizations will soon fade away. Turkey, for example, self−identifies with the Western Civilization but their
1
culture, language, history and religion clearly places them in the Islamic Civilization. Thus, self−identification
cannot be used as a clear definer of culture.
Huntington states that in a very compelling manner, that the differences between these elements are what
separate one civilization from another. However, if these same five elements are studied and applied within
the individual civilizations, one will find compelling reasons why either this list of cultural elements is
limiting or the list of civilizations needs growing. In the chart below one can see how only a few civilizations
have similar cultural elements within their own villages, regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups,
(p. 23−24) and especially within the separate countries that encompass each civilization. When trying to
categorize these civilizations, it is very important to avoid making general comments and concentrate on the
particularities of each one.
Cultural
Elements
Civilizations
History
Language
Western
Very different
history among
each Western
state, inclusive
colony/mother
country
relationship
Huge
spectrum of
very different
languages.
Anglo−Saxon
and Romance
seem to be the
dominant root.
Confucian
Similar
Very different
languages
Japanese
Similar
Similar
Islamic
Arab, Turkish,
Very different
Malaysian.
nations, very
Very Different
different
just among
history.
those.
Hindu
Similar
Similar
Customs
Even
though it
has been
argued that
the
differences
are
minimum,
each culture
group is
very
different
from the
other.
Many
different
customs and
traditions
throughout
all these
countries
Similar
Though
similar
religions
produce
similar
customs, in
this case,
the great
variety of
nations
offer a great
variety of
customs.
Similar
Institutions
Religion
Similar
The only true
religion
practiced by
Westerners
would be that
of a
non−secular
state, but
religions are
varied
through out
the west.
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
2
Slavic−Orthodox Similar
Latin American Similar
All suffered
through
imperialism,
Africa
but all
countries have
very different
history
With 7 recent
entries into
Many
NATO,
different
Slavic−Orthodox
Very different. nations with
Similar
has lost 7 nations
different
to the West
customs.
Similar
Similar
The most
varied
languages in
the world
Very
different
customs.
Similar
Similar
Similar
Similar
Many
different
religions.
From what is seen in this chart, the biggest differences lie within what Huntington considers to be the more
important civilizations, the Western and the Islamic civilization. The problem here is that Huntington groups
too many nations and people into each civilization, especially in these two. This is where the arguments of
Eric Wolf come into play.
Eric Wolf, the author of Envisioning Power, explores the concepts of power and culture within three cases
studies of three very different groups, the Kwakiutl of the northwestern coast of the North American Pacific
Ocean, the Aztecs from Mesoamerica, and the National Socialist Germany of WWII. Throughout the study,
Wolf tries to answer the question of how culture and ideology ties in with the use, and in many times, abuse of
power. Huntington would likely agree with Wolf's findings since the former believes that Western civilization
has come to power through the use of culture and self−identification, as defined by him. However, it is
difficult to assess whether Huntington's theory is truly correct since Western Civilization encompasses too
many different cultures.
With another look at the chart on the previous page, one can observe the great differences among Western
civilization. If Western civilization encompasses North America and Western Europe, then they do not share
many cultural factors in common. History: Their history is very different, Europe is a much older region than
North America, even though they share some history because of colonialism, they are both separated by a
diverse history and evolution.
Language: Their languages are very diverse, from Romance to Anglo−Saxon roots.
Customs: Their customs would probably be the most different factor not only among European nations, but
also among Europe vs. North America.
Religion: The majority of the West is considered to be Christian, nonetheless the West is not know as being a
secular civilization like Islam is considered to be Muslim. Christianity is the major religion, with many
different sub−religions associated to it. Even though these religions originate from the same foundation, they
are all different and with distinct customs. Along with all the different Christian religions, the West has also
become a safe haven for other religions. So therefore, religion is not a cultural factor that the entire Western
civilization has in common.
Institutions: The institution that the West shares in common is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO). So the only solid factor holding these two regions together is not cultural, but instead is political and
military. However, within the second page of Huntington's analysis, he very clearly states that it is far more
3
meaningful now to group countries not in terms of their political or economic systems or in terms of their
level of economic development but rather in terms of their culture and civilization. (p. 23)
If NATO and the arbitrary form of self−identification of people is basically the only two factors that classifies
a country within Western civilization, then the seven newly appointed members to NATO from the
Slavic−Orthodox civilization now become Western. According to Huntington civilizations are dynamic; they
rise and fall; they divide and merge. So therefore, as long as these seven countries fit the same profile as the
rest of the Western civilization, being members of NATO and self−identification of the people, then yes they
now do belong to the Western civilization. According to Wolf, however, this just broadens the definition of
culture. If a civilization is to grow to the size that Huntington proposes with his civilizations, it is important to
have a central control of power, economic, political, military, and have a common culture. If this is not
established, then a civilization is too large and it needs to be divided. In the case of the Western civilization, it
is clear that the difference is between North America and Europe. By dividing Western Civilization into these
two separate civilizations, the cultural elements would become much more similar.
By trying to use a loose definition of culture and concentrating on the generalizations instead of the
particularities, Eric Wolf clearly responds to Samuel Huntington's theory by trying to remove these
generalizations that were made when arbitrarily choosing these civilizations:
I have characterized the beginnings of anthropology as part of a wider orchestration of claims against the
Enlightenment vision of the rule of universal reason. These diverse counterclaims were incorporated into a
concept of culture that emphasized the particularities of different peoples, each with its separate history and
language and with distinctive qualities of mind that shaped its authentic being. (Wolf, p. 286)
It is clear to Wolf that when speaking of culture and of power, one cannot be so general, as culture is
particular to a certain people. If culture is Huntington's main focus to categorize civilizations, then Wolf
would tend to believe that Huntington is being too universal.
In modern times, our world is becoming a much smaller place to live in. As our economic barriers fall, giving
way to a new system of globalization, culture becomes increasingly more important. If we begin to undermine
the importance of each nation or group of nations' culture, we begin to undermine who we are. What makes
this world so impressive is the diversity in which we live in. To say that our cultural barriers will soon fade
away, is to remove the importance that culture has on our everyday lives. Huntington is very accurate in
saying that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily
economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural.
(Huntington, p. 22) However, it would not be wise to over generalize the boundaries between these cultures
and civilizations. Differences among nations and groups of people do exist, and they will continuously be a
part of our everyday lives. This is why it is important to carefully classify a civilization by the particularities
of its culture, and not by a broad sense of who belongs together, or by the arbitrary conclusions of one person.
Work Cited
Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations, Foreign Affairs. Summer 1993.
Wolf, Eric R, Envisioning Power University of California Press. Los Angeles, 1999.
4