(Sumblog 13) Clash of civilizations

Samuel Huntington talked about the "clash of civilizations." This concept states that a lot of the conflict that goes on in societies across the world has to do with culture. Now, this clash with CULTURE does not mean that it is a clash of "boundaries" such as countries, states, or continents. There could be many cultures in a single country and that could in itself cause conflicts. This theory has been proven to be true in many ways. However, I see how this theory could have it's downsides.

This concept has the potential to divert our attention from the shared fundamental concerns of all states, such as strategic, economic and national interest. This common platform of understanding is lost and that can end up leading to a misunderstanding the "other".

What is dangerous about the theory is that it is self fulfilling. People who believe in this "clash" are bound to act in a hostile manner toward the perceived "other," which will essentially create the clash. The theory only provides ammunition to extremists on both sides who will create conflict rather than striving for cooperation and eliminating this clash. It encourages us to seek out our differences rather than our similarities.

Perhaps the real clash is between those who believe in the inevitability of dialogue and those who profess and act upon this idea of a  clash of civilizations. The sides in this clash are determined not by religion, culture, or civilization, but by moderation on one side and extremism on the other.

Giddens and Modernity (SumBlog 12)

During class we talked about modernity and Giddens view on it. I have found that what Anthony Giddens refers to as "radicalized modernity" in his work is often referred to as "postmodernity" by other theorists.

To me radicalized modernity is what is used to describe the current era of modernity which grew out of  economic, political, and social conditions of industrial modernity. Industrial modernity focused on order,  science, social control by institutions such as the state and family, and much more.
Radicalized modernity is  where we see the after-effects of industrial modernity. This increases consumption, the breakdown of the family and other socializing institutions, impersonal social contact, and issues of trust and risk. These all are issues that are relevant to Giddens' work.
So Giddens doesn't believe that we've necessarily gone beyond the era of modernity, which is what the prefix "post-" indicates in "postmodernity." Instead, he says that we are facing is a radicalized form of modernity. theorists that state we are living in postmodern times have failed to point out the precise content of what postmodernity entails. 

As we discussed in class, Giddens' idea of modernity leads to almost a snowball effect. No matter what we do, society will keep changing and we have to change with it.