The Surge of Identity Politics and Comparison between the Political Thoughts of Samuel P. Huntington & Amartya Sen: A Divisive or A Cooperative Global Order?
Reviewing Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington’s ‘A New Era in World Politics’ and Nobel-Winning Economist Amartya Sen’s ‘The Violence of Illusion’
In addition to Joseph Nye’s Soft Power, Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and John Mearsheimer’s Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations is perhaps the most influential idea in international politics of the past decades. Particularly since September 11th 2001 and the global War on Terror that followed, Huntington’s claim gained widespread support both among the public and the policy world, even though most academics considered the idea to be worryingly simplistic and based on shaky evidences.
As Richard Belts writes, “Even practical policymakers who shun ivory-tower theories are influenced by Huntington’s ideas.”
In Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (2007), Amartya Sen goes further and says Huntington’s idea is dangerous and must be roundly rejected: “A major source of potential conflict in the contemporary world is the presumption that people can be uniquely categorized based on religion or culture.”
The insistence, if only implicit, of choiceless singularity of human identity not only diminishes us all, Sen says, it also makes the world more flammable.
The most significant contribution of Amartya Sen is the way in which he demolishes the theoretical foundation of the “clash of civilizations” which have had a profound impact on current political thought and actions of government and societies. The alternative to the divisiveness of one preeminent categorization is not only unreal claim that we are all much the same. That we are not rather, the main hope of harmony in our troubled world lies in the plurality of our identities. And these are the primary bones of discontent between Huntington’s writing ‘A New Era in Global Politics’ and Sen’s works on ‘The Violence of Illusion’.
Differences between Huntington’s ‘A New Era in World Politics’ and Sen’s ‘The Violence of Illusion’
First, Pre-eminence of Cultural Identity vs. Illusion of Singular Identity
Huntington strongly opines in favor of prioritizing the cultural identity as a person’s first and foremost identity. None of a person’s multiple identities, can be taken as the person’s only identity. Sen further goes on adding that the choice-less singularity creates this flammable illusion of singular categorization.
Second, Civilization Affiliation vs. Recognition of Competing Affiliations
Huntington believes ‘civilization’ to be the highest grouping of cultural identity, taking it to be a human’s most significant form of identity. And the most dangerous cultural conflicts are those along the fault lines between two (or more) civilizations. Whereas Amartya Sen believes that the force of a bellicose identity can be challenged by the power of competing identities. This leads to other ways of classifying people, which can restrain the exploitation of a specifically aggressive use of one particular categorization.
Third, Imposing Supremacy of Civilizational Identity vs. Convincing Others
As Huntington asserts the supremacy of the Western Christian civilization, he adds that West is and will remain for the many coming years the most powerful civilization. On the contrary, Sen notes that how others perceives us, may vary from self-perception. And includes that campaigns to switch perceived self-identities have been responsible for many atrocities in the world, making old friends into new enemies.
Fourth, Clash of Cultures vs. Denial of Choice and Responsibility
In the view of Professor Huntington, 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. While Sen believes that there will be war based on cultural differences, Sen believes that these wars or conflicts will occur only when there will be blind acceptance of imposed identities. On the other hand in the view of Professor Sen, traditional inequalities survive by the unquestioning acceptance of received cultural belief. This blind acceptance creates the opportunity for denial, and conformist behavior.
Fifth, Clash of Civilizations vs. Misconception of Civilizational Incarceration
Huntington opines that conflict between civilizations will be the latest phase in the evolution of conflict in the modern world. Nation-states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. Contrarily, Sen critiques that the foggy perception of Huntington overlooks the extent of internal diversities within these civilizational categories. The limitations of such civilization-based thinking can prove to be just as treacherous for programs of dialogue among civilizations.
Sixth, The Seven or Eight Major Civilizations vs. More than a Federation of Religions
According to Samuel Huntington, civilization identity will be increasingly important in the future, and the world will be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations. These include Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African civilization. Whereas Amartya emphasizes that the world, because of its diverse diversities, should be seen as a collection of people, and not as mere federation of religions or civilizations.
Seventh, Orthodox, Militant Muslims vs. Intellectual Diversity of Muslims
Prof. Huntington thinks population explosion in Muslim countries and the economic rise of East Asia are changing global politics. The Muslim population surge has led to many small wars throughout Eurasia, and the rise of China could lead to a global war of civilizations. Opposite to that Prof. Sen strongly asserts that Islam, as a religion, does not obliterate responsible choices for Muslims in many spheres of life. Rather the champions of ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ like to suppress all other identities of Muslims in favor of being only Islamic.
The Resemblance: Between Huntington’s ‘A New Era in World Politics’ and Sen’s ‘The Violence of Illusion’
At first glance and without going into the arguments, it is fairly easy to perceive that both Huntington’s and Sen’s opposing positions are at different ends of a spectrum, the only commonality between them being the apparently utter naiveté shown by both the writers. Therefore the temptation may be there to say that the truth is somewhere in between them but this could not really be valid since past history has shown us a very different scenario.
This is not to say that the world would be free of non-civilizational clashes. Tutsis and Hutus have clashed within the same country. Two warring factions have been the cause of ongoing ruination of Sudan. India has been a constant witness to sporadic Hindu-Muslim riots. So, you can have cases of conflicts and wars within nations.
Concluding Remarks
If Huntington’s hypothesis is a ‘Doomsayer’s guide to war and conflict; and how not to survive it’ then Amarty Sen’s ‘Identity & Violence’, may just work as the vaccination toward ideological contagion.
This is not to say that the world would be free of non-civilizational clashes. Tutsis and Hutus have clashed within the same country. Two warring factions have been the cause of ongoing ruination of Sudan. India has been a constant witness to sporadic Hindu-Muslim riots. So, you can have cases of conflicts and wars within nations.
It can be said that in terms of macro-analysis of the clash-factors, Huntington has vastly been closer to the truth, while Amartya Sen shows fine insight into the micro-level entities that divide people.
References:
Mahmuda, F. (2019). A Divisive or a Co-operative Global Order? [Comparison between Samuel Huntington’s ‘A New Era in World Politics’ and Amartya Sen’s ‘The Violence of Illusion’. Academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/41389282/A_Divisive_or_a_Co_operative_Global_Order_Comparison_between_Samuel_Huntingtons_A_New_Era_in_World_Politics_and_Amartya_Sens_The_Violence_of_Illusion
