Much time has passed since his theory was first broached, so the questions really are meaningful now.“Civilization” in itself is a troublesome concept these days. All talk of “culture” and “civilization” is relatively new to the world; these are concepts gifted to us by the modern age we inhabit. “Culture” seems to elicit abstract ideas, while “civilization” elicits more concrete ones. In fact, when we think of civilization, we often tend to think about the institutions on which our societies depend, such as politics, military, economic organizations. Yes, these are all closely linked to our conception of civilization.
But if the above is true, then which civilizations that exist on earth are we really talking about these days? And, thus, which civilizations are we expecting will actually “clash”? After all, the whole world is now the West! There are many people who believe the borders of the West can no longer be determined. There are, of course, geographical borders that determine where Europe lies. In fact, we can even point to the cultural geography that defines Europe. But the West is very different in this respect.
From the very start, I never thought that any useful theory of clashes could be elicited using the concept of “civilizations.” Some choose to replace the word “civilization” with “religion,” so that what we are talking about becomes a “clash between religions.” The Sept. 11 attacks did nothing to weaken this idea. But despite George W. Bush and the neocons, this idea was rejected by respected thinkers and religious authorities in both the Christian and Islamic worlds. And almost ignoring the very tough religious foundation that had been set, they decided to swivel their attention to “dialogue between religions.”
The dialogue that ensued between religions basically underscored just how shaky Huntington's theory really was. When we thought about the topic only in terms of “civilization,” there was clearly another reality: When looking at the general flow of our daily lives, we noted that there really was not more than one civilization at hand, or that the “civilizations” Huntington was talking about just were not there. In truth, we have left the era of plural civilizations behind us. As modernity spreads across the face of the earth, civilizations die. And with no more than one civilization, who exactly is going to clash? From methods of production to models of organization, from media to transportation, from building styles to sitting styles, everything and everyone in the world is becoming more and more alike. Asians get aesthetic operations to achieve more rounded eyes, while Turks from the Black Sea region busy themselves with rhinoplasty, trying to achieve the perky “ski-jump” style of nose associated with the West. On another level, police all over the world, from London to Paris, from İstanbul to Tehran, all work the same way, using the same batons to disperse crowds of students in the same manner. Political slogans, ideals, concepts all seem the same. A law is formed in the arena of international politics and deemed a “universal law.” For the most part, people aren't protesting these developments. This appears to indicate that when we are talking about the humans of this world, there are no longer multiple civilizations at hand. After all, who can oppose the hegemonic civilization surrounding us? Whoever dares to is immediately turned into the “other.” At the same time, though, many things are on the wrong track.
It has always seemed to me that the proponents of this theory of “clash of civilizations” were people who really wanted to see these clashes take place. There really are many factions rooting for clashes to occur. And it is terror that is the most effective instrument used in seeing this theory of clashes turn into reality. After every act of terror, there is always a period of trauma. And two things emerge from this trauma. One is a tightening and tension that occurs in the West and in democracy itself. Certain restrictions are placed on civil liberties and rights. From the perspective of democracy, of course, this isn't good at all. The second thing that emerges after terror is that, from a cultural angle, Islam is pushed further and further out of the global system. Neither of these reactions augurs well for humanity, though.
