Samuel Huntington Defines Culture As Term Paper

It was generally a peaceful method of setting personal and social example of moral and caring behavior so others will join Islam because of its clear advantage for human desire for better, honest and non-violent life. But during history especially in the early days of Islam, Jihad by sword was an acceptable method, although never the only option. By its definition Jihad is therefore, global. Yes there is a global Jihad that wishes to establish Islam every where in the world through acts of terrorism and religion imposition. The war is best understood as a global insurgency, initiated by a diffuse grouping of Islamist movements that seek to remake Islam role in the world order. They use terrorism as their primary but not as their sole tactic. Therefore they offer the best approach to defeating global jihad but in a single country.

David J. Kilcullen theory is devoted to counterinsurgency (COIN). He focuses on the human and his security. The theory disregards what may sound right in favor of what actually works in the face of terrorism. Instead of attacking terrorists and in thus killing people Kilcullen focuses on providing security instead. The theory advocates that America ought not to wage its war on terror by targeting the enemy directly but by using all means, military and civilian, to protect indigenous locals from the enemy living among them, thereby drawing the locals to their safe side.

Therefore question would be answered through establishing what is the role of Jihad and what cultural conflicts it is imposing on the world and how it needs to be solved by providing security to other people who sometime maybe Islam but are not propagating the terrorism ideologies. The way to go here is to provide security to the whole world where global jihad is rooted instead of using violence which is likely to kill other innocent people in the world. (Kilcullen, 2009)

The death of Osama bin Laden over the weekend symbolizes a war against terrorism that was global. However something to note is that this is not a war against the Islam world initiated by the west. Islam is not the new enemy...

...

The celebration of Osama's death across the board signifies that the world and not only America is no longer divided by cultural factors.
Lewis and Huntington theories are under threat because the world has become a global market and thus the issue of culture is fading away unlike before when each nation was independent. Economic and political nature of globalization coupled with the rapid advances in communication is driving the world to be a global village with one civilization and different cultures.

The theories are losing meaning due to the migration and interactions of people. Cultures have been diluted as people move from one area to another. The new and emerging narratives that advocates for democracy in all countries show a shift from the cultural shift where the rights of people are recognized, justice is carried out and all other components that bring democracy.

Certain types of inequality, in particular, will be seen to be particularly fertile ground for conflict; other types maybe more benign. And if the attempt to reduce poverty through economic growth lead to initial increases in the 'wrong' type of inequality, the conflicts this engenders may dissipate beneficial effects of poverty reduction on conflict.

Lastly due to the activeness of terrorism and its impact on the world, for instance the September 11 bombings, there are drastic measures that are being applied to stop the violent waves castrated by the terrorist. This saw the killings of Osama through violence measure. The use of force or violence has been the emerging narratives replacing dialogue in situations to fight terrorism

REFERENCES

Edward W. Said, The Class of Ignorance, Vintage, New York, 2000.

Hardcover, Globalization, Poverty and Conflict: A Critical 'Development' Reader:; 1 edition. Amazon, 2004

Huntington, Samuel and Schuster, The Clash of Civilizations and The Remarking of World Order, Touchstone, New York, 1996

Kilcullen, David, The Accidental Guerilla: Fighting small wars in the midst of a big one, 2009

Sources Used in Documents:

REFERENCES

Edward W. Said, The Class of Ignorance, Vintage, New York, 2000.

Hardcover, Globalization, Poverty and Conflict: A Critical 'Development' Reader:; 1 edition. Amazon, 2004

Huntington, Samuel and Schuster, The Clash of Civilizations and The Remarking of World Order, Touchstone, New York, 1996

Kilcullen, David, The Accidental Guerilla: Fighting small wars in the midst of a big one, 2009


Cite this Document:

"Samuel Huntington Defines Culture As" (2011, May 06) Retrieved April 25, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/samuel-huntington-defines-culture-as-42219

"Samuel Huntington Defines Culture As" 06 May 2011. Web.25 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/samuel-huntington-defines-culture-as-42219>

"Samuel Huntington Defines Culture As", 06 May 2011, Accessed.25 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/samuel-huntington-defines-culture-as-42219

Related Documents

Huntington's Clash Of Civilization confirm or refute Huntington's clash of civilizations thesis Huntington's clash of civilization Scholars, journalists, and policy makers have adopted and popularized the ideas of Samuel P. Huntington, who was a professor of government at Harvard University, to explain the emerging post-cold war world. According to Huntington, the world is divided into a number of distinct civilizations that are irreconcilable because they hold to entirely different value systems (Huntington, 1993,

" The book argues that the reality of history is a "ludicrously compressed and constricted warfare," Said continues; but indeed Huntington cannot grasp the notion that there are no strictly defined Muslim cultures but to make his book work he has to build a case that there is such a stereotypical, predictable Muslim culture. Said goes so far as to say that Huntington's book attempted to give his original article a

Any of these conflicts might seem limited when they start, but given the cultural differences involved, at any time they could turn into a broader cultural war involving not a small part of the Middle East but all of it, and that sort of war would be a major threat to world civilization, a Huntington shows in his book. Khater (2004) offers a look at many documents of Middle Eastern

Cold War has brought renewed interest in civilizations as a source of identity and conflict. The Cold War had allowed the world to be divided into two distinct camps: one directed by Communist philosophy and the other directed by democratic ideals. This division often resulted in considerable conflict but at least everyone occupied a definable position. All this changed, however, with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The collapse of

The second case of cultural reaffirmation that Huntington discusses is that of Muslim societies which have followed a different path towards the reassertion of their cultural identity. In these societies, religion has been the main factor of cultural distinctiveness and influence. Huntington argues that religion is the main factor which distinguishes Muslim societies from the others, and that the resurgence of Islam "embodies the acceptance of modernity, rejection of Western

4. Explain each of Samuel Huntington's 8 cultural paradigms. What does this model for culture and civilization around the world have to do with terrorism? What are the implications for law enforcement if terrorism has deeper roots -- namely, rooted in a clash of civilizations? Also, what are the implications for American foreign policy in terms of our efforts to thwart terrorism? First, the post-Cold War reorganization of nations causes