Some other countries have a fair degree of cultural homogeneity but are divided over whether their society belongs to one civilization or another. These are torn countries. Their leaders typically wish to pursue a bandwagoning strategy and to make their countries members of the West, but the history, culture and traditions of their countries are non-Western.
Turkey (Gulf War, NATO and EU, still elements of Muslim society exist)
Mexico (is attempting to imitate the United States and to join it in the North
American Free Trade Area, still elements of a Latin American country exist)
Russia (President Yeltsin is adopting Western principles and goals and
seeking to make Russia a "normal" country and a part of the West. But there is still question of the unique way of Russia)
To redefine its civilization identity, a torn country must meet three requirements. First, its political and economic elite has to be generally supportive of and enthusiastic about this move. Second, its public has to be willing to acquiesce in the redefinition. Third, the dominant groups in the recipient civilization have to be willing to embrace the convert
6. Huntingdon uses the phrase 'the West and the rest': do you think he and his theory are against 'the rest', i.e. does he presume Western cultural superiority? Is there something inherently confrontational about his division of the world into such clear-cut civilizational chunks, a sort of threatening 'us versus them' model? Or not?
Huntington shows by the article the power of the West in terms of political issues, economical problems, financial assets and others, however, he doesn't implement the superiority of the West
He does not threat us and them. He shows the differences and the similarities, while affects of the West may seem the most influential.
How does Huntingdon propose for the West to relate to the Rest?
This will require the West to maintain the economic and military power necessary to protect its interests in relation to these civilizations. It will also, however, require the West to develop a more profound understanding of the basic religious and philosophical assumptions underlying other civilizations and the ways in which people in those civilizations see their interests. It will require an effort to identify elements of commonality between Western and other civilizations. For the relevant future, there will be no universal civilization, but instead a world of different civilizations, each of which will have to learn to coexist with the others.
Do you think the 'clash' theory that he proposed just before the collapse of the Soviet Union has been borne out by events since then?
Yes, Crimea, Syrian conflicts, ISIS, sanctions against Russia
CLASSICAL ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION
What is Sufism?
there is another trend in medieval Islam, Sufism.
Sufism is mysticism. It has its roots in the prayer and fasting of Muhammad and his Night Journey and Ascent to Heaven. However, gradually, like philosophy, Sufism was drawn into the fold of orthodox Islam, so that Islam at its richest contains philosophy, mysticism, tradition and law – a synthesis found in most influential form in al-Ghazali
|
|
2. What is ‘radical Sufism’? What is ‘orthodox Sufism’?
At times Sufis behaved (a bit like the philosophers) as if the orthodox law-based practice of Islam did not apply to them, as if they were beyond that. In their intimacy with God, some saw themselves as almost divine, and their followers considered the saints (wali in Arabic = friend of God) as superior to the prophets and Muhammad. However, gradually, like philosophy, Sufism was drawn into the fold of orthodox Islam, so that Islam at its richest contains philosophy, mysticism, tradition and law – a synthesis found in most influential form in al-Ghazali.
3. What is the difference between Shi’ite and Sunni Islam?:
Mainstream orthodox Sunni (traditional) Islam came to be associated with an imperial system, headed by the Caliph, which differed little from the Byzantine and former Persian empires that early Muslims had seen as being degenerate religiously and politically. The Shi’ites believed that Muhammad’s cousin, Ali, should have become leader of the community. Islam would then have been led by truly religious figures, imams, rather than worldly political figures and it would not have sunk into compromise
4. What are the problems in talking of an Islamic "Middle Ages"?
The main problem of talking about Islamic "Middle Ages” that this term began to be used in Italy in the 16-17 centuries, i.e. during the Renaissance. It implies a "middle" age between a bright Classical era (Greece and Rome), and the rebirth (renaissance) of classical learning and scholarship, with this middle era being also a 'dark ages'.. This schema, in other words, ignores the role of the more advanced Christian and Islamic East in helping Western Christendom emerge from a period of stagnation (a judgment that some would also question).