Advertisement

Theory of Civilizational Clash

  • Takashi Inoguchi
  • Lien Thi Quynh Le
Chapter
Part of the Trust book series (TRUST, volume 3)

Abstract

This chapter examines the politics of civilizational clash focusing on Samuel Huntington (The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon and Schuster, New York, 1997). It has been given enormous attention after the Cold War once capitalist democracy prevailed over communist dictatorship. ‘Democracy is the only game in town’ has become a cliche and in turn civilizational clash has seemingly replaced democracy as the zeigeist of the post-Cold War global politics. Religiously flavored and adversarially toned, the theory of civilizational clash was propounded by Huntington. Collet and Inoguchi (Jpn J Polit Sci 13(Part 4):553–585, 2012) has tested its four hypotheses against AsiaBarometer Survey data and shown that overall they are not empirically and theoretically valid. Perhaps most importantly, the subtlety, complexity and the context-dependency of culture are not very well understood and skillfully handled as Foucault and Bagehot advise.

References

  1. Bremmer, I. (2013). Every nation for itself: Winners and losers in a G-zero world (Reprint ed.). New York: Portfolio Penguin.Google Scholar
  2. Coker, C. (2019). The rise of the civilizational state. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  3. Collet, C., & Inoguchi, T. (2012). Is globalization undermining civilizational identities? A test of Huntington’s core state assumptions among the publics of greater Asia and the Pacific. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 13(Part 4), 553–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper, R. (2004). The breaking of nations: Order and chaos in the twenty-first century (Reprint ed.). London: Grove Press.Google Scholar
  5. Debray, R. (2019). Civilization: How we all became American. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, P., Jacobson, H., & Putnam, R. (Eds.). (1993). Double-edged diplomacy: International bargaining and domestic politics. Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  8. Gourevitch, P. (1978, Autumn). The second image reversed: The international sources of domestic politics. International Organization, 32(4), 881–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grant, J. (2019). Bagehot: The life and times of the greatest Victorian. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  10. Huntington, S. (1997). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  11. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Inoguchi, T. (1998). Japan’s foreign policy under US unipolarity: Coping with uncertainty and swallowing some bitterness. Asian Journal of Political Science, 6(2), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inoguchi, T. (2007a). How to assess world war II in world history: One Japanese perspective. In D. K. W. Hock (Ed.), Legacies of world war II in south and east Asia (pp. 138–151). Singapore: Institute of South and East Asian Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Inoguchi, T. (2007b, June 27–28). Religion, peace and international relations in Asia. Meeting of Experts of the International Commission for Peace Research, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, pp. 19–23.Google Scholar
  16. Inoguchi, T., & Fujii, S. (2013). The quality of life in Asia: A comparison of quality of life in Asia. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Katzenstein, P. (2010). A world of plural and pluralist civilizations: Multiple actors, traditions, and practices. In P. Katzenstein (Ed.), Civilizations in world politics: plural and pluralist perspectives (pp. 1–40). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Mikami, S., & Inoguchi, T. (2010). Diagnosing the micro foundation of democracy in Asia: Evidence from the AsiaBarometer survey, 2003–2008. In Y.-w. Chu & S.-l. Wong (Eds.), East Asia’s new democracies: Deepening, reversal, non-liberal alternatives (pp. 246–292). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Mowle, T., & Sacko, D. (2007). The unipolar world: An unbalanced future. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Patterson, O. (1992). Freedom: Vol. 1: Freedom in the making of western culture (Reprint ed.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Posen, B. (2003). Restraint: A new foundation for U.S. grand strategy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Putnam, R., & Campbell, D. (2012). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  23. Sharma, R. (2016). The rise and fall of nations: Forces of change in the post-crisis world. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  24. Singer, J. D. (1961). The level-of-analysis problem in international relations. World Politics, 14(1), 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Waltz, K. (1959). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Waltz, K. (2000). Theory of international politics. New York: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  27. Zakaria, F. (1997). The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 22–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takashi Inoguchi
    • 1
  • Lien Thi Quynh Le
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Asian CulturesJ.F. Oberlin UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.College of EconomicsHue UniversityHueVietnam

Personalised recommendations