Published on September 27, 2024
Abstract
Presentation and critical assessment of Noam Chomsky’s “Hegemony or survival: America’s quest for global dominance” and Samuel P. Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations.” What do Chomsky and Huntington write about religion, power and violence? Description and comparison of their respective views.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE
RESULTS
We need to state that the literature that constitutes the base of this paper addresses the topics which unfolded in the past.
The matters of these books are connected to some specific political events and conjectures that changed in the present, but the main finds of them stand still mirroring the triad of religion, power, and violence.
Published in 2003, Noam Chomsky’s book “Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance” launches a series of affirmations regarding America’s plan to implement the “basic mission of global management” (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 17), under Bush II’s administration, creating a strong picture of what power and violence look like in an interconnected relationship.
The book offers a picture of solving the equation created by the alliance between religion, power, and violence. While the concept of power and violence are clearly stated in the book, the term religion is not visible per se but is definitely a component of the writing.
For example, religion is an issue in Algeria, where approximately 200,000 people were killed in eleven years since the military force canceled the democratic election after an Islamist party won (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 17).
Another clear image of religion as a component of violence and power is Islamic terrorism which, in Mr. Chomsky’s perspective, will intensify by attacking Iraq (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 100).
Going forward, Mr. Chomsky questions NATO’s intervention in Kosovo (Noam Chomsky, 2003, pp. 22-23) which was motivated by the idea that there were defending human rights.
Being a superpower and having the highest position in the political and military hierarchy, the United States of America concealed its implication in Kosovo with the image of a peacemaker.
This is an example of the balance between power and violence, highlighting that the one who rules is the one who can act as an oppressor while keeping an image of a saint.
The question of what means the prerogatives of power has an answer in what Mr. Chomsky calls the last revolution of the millennium. The author offers a solution to this question stating that those who have “the guns and the faith have the authority to impose their demands on the world” (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 21).
In this light, maybe there is a psychological bond between power and violence, an intrinsic development of violence in the case of those who hold the power.
This idea can appear as an explanation for the title of the book. “The American Empire Project” figures as a double way of seeing things – either one can initiate the fight having the fear of being conquered, or the other one will start the conflict and will end as the ruler of the world.
With this picture in mind and having all the prerogatives – military, economic, and political – any country that has the power is entitled to start a hegemonic action motivated by the simple fact that wants to survive – “Hegemony or survival”!
The image of America’s leaders who are eager to pursue the world’s dominion is illustrated by two events connected to each other by the same topic – nuclear weapons. In this regard, Mr. Chomsky reminds us of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 62) and of the emergency in Iraq (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 62).
The situation after WWII was the event that put America not only in the position of a great economic power but as one of the world’s leaders in the context of a devastated and weakened world that was subordinated to America from economic and political perspectives. (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 121).
Therefore, from Mr. Chomsky’s standpoint, the context generated a favorable climate for the United States which realized that it has the leadership and acted as if the world was its playground. So, the power led to violence, although those involved in oppression hide behind the mark of kindness.
Israel, while a small country, is presented as a serious military power. More than this, this territory started to look quite similar to “its patron”, America, recording “gaps in income, economy, and capital” (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 129).
In this context, the relations between Israel and the United States developed upon a fluctuating climate but with Israel maintaining a position of submission. This situation created continuous military conflicts in the Middle Eastern part of the world.
Emulating is a healthy way to progress in a normal situation, but, in the case of Israel, Mr. Chomsky brings to light not-so-happy features borrowed from America. This is an example of how power takes over principles and morality, leading to violence.
The last part of the book begins with the idea that humans need to act based on the principle of applying to others the same standards that they apply to themselves—a moral value that can be considered a mere truism that can be ignored.
Then the author concluded that America, by using its counterterrorism policy, is, in fact, engaged in the same type of action as terrorist states.
Taking into consideration the definition of terrorism, as it appears in a US Army manual and from the perspective of the British government, counterterrorism appeals to the same practices as terrorism, but, in this case, the violence is concealed by the idea of defense, human rights, etc. (Noam Chomsky, 2003, p. 135)
Regarding the link between power and violence, Mr. Chomsky states clearly that terrorism, seen as a form of savagery, is the weapon of those who own the control, leading the author to conclude that the US is “a leading terrorist state”. (Noam Chomsky, 2003, pp. 153-54)
“The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order” by Samuel P. Huntington was published in 1996, after the article “The Clash of Civilizations?” appeared in Foreign Affairs, in 1993, generated a series of debates. The book incited critics and has been analyzed by thousands of scholars, provoking the academic and political world as well, and leading to a polarizing attitude towards it.
Founded on the concept of civilization, as the title suggests, Mr. Huntington’s book begins with a post-Cold War era, after the fall of the Russian Empire, and states that with the disappearance of the old world, people will not be divided any more by appertaining to democracy or communism, but by a cultural antagonism. In search of an identity, and reconsidering the meaning of their ethnicity, people will fight over “the fault lines between the world’s major civilizations”. (Huntington, 1996, p. 20)
The author specifies that culture and cultural identity, which are the fundaments of civilization, will be the main factors that will lead to animosity, harmony, or neutrality between the people of the world. Therefore, from his perspective, the connection between violence and power will be dictated by the interference of the civilization and its main characteristics.
The book consists of five parts contributing to solving the equation of religion (seen as one of the main attributes of a civilization), power, and violence, and giving a broad standpoint on the main reason for future political conflicts.
In drawing a map of the world, Mr. Huntington relies on the concept that people identify “themselves in terms of ancestry, religion, language, history, values, customs, and institutions”. (Huntington, 1996, p. 21)
To accomplish this step of presenting the eight major civilizations (Sinic, Japanese, Hindu, Islamic, Western, Latin America, African, and Orthodox Russia) (Huntington, 1996, pp. 44-8), Mr. Huntington assigns the component of religion as being the most important one in terms of belonging and defining the concept of civilization (Huntington, 1996, p. 47).
It is interesting to notice that Jewish civilization is not mentioned as a major one, Mr. Huntington considers it as part of Christian and Muslim civilization due to the connection between them. (Huntington, 1996, p. 48)
The main dichotomy is the one between Western and Non-Western civilizations, identifying the West since 700 or 800 A.D. in three major geographical areas such as Europe, North America, and Latin America. Configured as a conglomerate of states, beliefs, and cultures, the West, from the author’s perspective, did not win due to its superiority but by using a visible violence towards Non-Western civilizations. (Huntington, 1996, p. 51)
Although of a great impact on Non-Western civilization, the Western world did not generate, from Mr. Huntington’s point of view, a major religion, since it is understood that the Christian religion was born in Judea.
Stating that religion is the main element of any civilization (Huntington, 1996, p. 59), and affirming that any conflict after the Cold War will be based on friction between identity and culture, means that religion can be considered one of the central reasons for arguments, disapproval, and wars (Huntington, 1996, p. 66)
Despite the tendency of modernization and globalization, the influence of the West over the rest of the world seems to fade, revealing a decline of Western supremacy. (Huntington, 1996, p. 82)
In this context, the world is assisting in a shifting of power and a process of indigenization through the restoration of religion called by the author “La revanche de Dieu”, even though there is an evident process of secularization. (Huntington, 1996, pp. 95-101)
The peak of this situation is that the movement of grouping is dictated by the fitting to a cultural identity that creates dissimilarities between people, making them start conflicts by virtue of common or different things.
Sustaining this perspective, Mr. Huntington came to offer four reasons why conflicts could appear. These four reasons are feelings of superiority, fear of and lack of trust in people, difficulty in communication, and lack of familiarity.
The book stipulates that “in the emerging era, clashes of civilizations are the greatest threat to world peace, and an international order based on civilizations is the surest safeguard against world war.” (Huntington, 1996, p. 321)
Though both of these books operate with the concepts of religion, power, and violence by offering perspective on how our world will configure in the future, there are elements of continuity and discontinuity.
Based on the principle of conflict, these two pieces of research are not meant to advance solutions, but to raise an alarm signal that the world can be involved in an immense and unprecedented conflict that could lead to the end of the globe.
Noam Chomsky presents in his book, “Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance”, the action started by the United States to pursue supremacy over the world. The whole foreign politics of the US is based, from the author’s perspective, on a complicated view of to be conquered or to be the one to dominate.
Though religion, per se, is not the immediate subject of the book, there is a subtle suggestion that the one who gains the power can be as well the one who imposes the religion.
Mr. Chomsky reminds us of the definition of terrorism (from a US Army manual and the British government perspective) by which it is stipulated that this action implies the achievement of a religious goal (among others) by using power and violence.
On the other hand, in his book, “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order”, Mr. Huntington states that religion is the major factor that marks the differences between civilizations. These disparities can lead to a global conflict.
The revival of religion in the domain of global politics is motivated by several factors that place this domain as a central one. Conferring the sense of identity and belonging, religion is the major factor in the fluctuating world of power and violence.
As the Western dominion seems to face and so cultural globalization, modernization, and uniformization. As a consequence, searching for an identity and going back to the religion is a way of keeping intact a civilization; therefore people will tend to remain faithful to their ancestry.
DISCUSSION / SUMMARY
As an answer to which is the relationship between religion, power, and violence, Mr. Chomsky’s and Mr. Huntington’s books offer two different perspectives that propose together a broader standpoint regarding the world’s configuration.
“Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance” stipulates that the United States pursue the position of the world’s leader hiding under the mask of the defender, who only wants to survive. Or no? Violence and power are the major attributes when analyzing US foreign politics which utilizes economic coercion, military force, and other forms of violence to keep its domination over geopolitics resources.
Acting under the excuse that defends human rights, the United States promotes an attitude of global dominance willing to make a profit and to have access to capital.
“The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order” presents a world where power and violence are interconnected to religion, seen as the major feature of civilization. In a post-Cold War era, the conflicts will be generated not by ideological or economic causes but by religious, cultural, and ethnic clashes.
In conclusion, the presented books are like two sides of a medal that addresses the connections between religion, power, and violence offering two perspectives that were praised as well criticized.
They still stand as two major pylons for domains such as politics, economics, military, and, not least, religion.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Huntington, S.P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
Noam Chomsky (2003). Hegemony or survival : America’s quest for global dominance. New York: Metropolitan Books.
