Changes

'''Samuel Phillips Huntington''' ([[born ]] [[April 18]], [[1927]]) is a [[political science|political scientist]] known for his [[analysis ]] of the [[relationship ]] between the military and the civil [[government]], his investigation of ''[[coup d'etat]]s'', and his [[thesis ]] that the central [[political ]] actors of the [[21st century]] will be [[civilization]]s rather than [[nation-state]]s. More recently, he garnered widespread attention for his analysis of [[threats ]] posed to the [[United States]] by modern-day immigration. He is a professor at [[Harvard University]]. Huntington came to prominence as a scholar in the 1960s with the publication of ''Political [[Order ]] in Changing Societies'', a [[work ]] which challenged the conventional view of [[modernization]] theorists that [[economic ]] and [[social ]] [[progress ]] would bring [[about ]] [[stable ]] democracies in recently [[Decolonization|decolonized]] countries.

In ''Political Order in Changing Societies'' Huntington argues that order is the most important characteristic of states. Order is threatened when the level of mobilization exceeds the level of institutionalization within a [[society]]. Huntington is concerned that, as a result of economic [[development]], political mobilization will increase faster than the appropriate institutions can arise, thus leading to instability. As a solution he advocates a stronger emphasis on institution building in development, most importantly the establishment of stable [[party system]]s. He remains highly skeptical of less institutionalized political mobilization and protest, which made him the target of heated criticism by [[student activism|student activists]] at the [[time ]] of the book's publication in [[1968]]. ''Political Order'' is widely considered one of the classical works in post-war political [[science ]] and is still required readings for most [[graduate student]]s in [[political science]] in the U.S.

In the 1970s, Huntington applied his [[theoretical ]] insights as an advisor to the Brazilian military dictatorship. In 1972 he discussed with representatives of the [[Medici]] that had approached him and one year later he produced a paper entitled "Approaches to Political Decompression", in which he warned against the risks of a rapid liberalization and proposed gradual steps and a strong party state after the [[image ]] of the Mexican [[PRI]]. After a drawn out [[transition]] [[process]], [[Brazil ]] became fully democratic in 1985. Huntington has frequently cited Brazil as a success and alluded to his own [[role ]] in his 1988 presidential address to the [[American Political Science Association]], commenting that political science had "played a modest role in this process". Critics such as the British political [[scientist ]] Alan Hooper point to the fact that Brazil today has an especially unstable party [[system]], in which the best institutionalized party, [[Lula da Silva]]'s [[Partido dos Trabalhadores]], emerged in opposition to the controlled transition process. Moreover, Hooper claims that the [[lack ]] of civil [[participation ]] in today's Brazil goes back to the top-down transition process.

In [[1993]], Huntington ignited a major debate in [[international relations]] with the publication in the journal ''[[Foreign Affairs]]'' of an extremely influential and often-cited article entitled "The [[Clash of Civilizations]]?" The article contrasted with [[another ]] political thesis regarding the core dynamics of post-Cold War [[geopolitics]] expressed by [[Francis Fukuyama]] in "[[The End of History]]." Huntington later expanded the article into a [[full]]-length book, published in [[1996]] by [[Simon and Schuster]], entitled ''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of [[World ]] Order''. The article and the book articulated his views that post-Cold War [[conflict ]] would occur most frequently and violently along [[cultural ]] (often civilizational, e.g., [[West]]ern, [[Islam]]ic, [[Sinic]], [[Hindu]], etc.) instead of [[ideological ]] lines, as under the [[Cold War]] and the bulk of the [[20th century]]. Huntington believes that this cultural organization better describes the world than the classical [[notion ]] of variegated sovereign [[state]]s.

He surmised that to [[understand ]] conflict in our age and in the [[future]], cultural rifts must be [[understood]], and culture (instead of the state) must be accepted as the locus of [[war]]. Thus, he warned that Western nations may lose their predominance if they fail to recognize the [[irreconcilable ]] [[nature ]] of this brewing tension.

Critics (see ''[[Le Monde diplomatique]]'' articles) call ''Clash of Civilizations'' the theoretical basis to legitimize [[aggression ]] by the US-led West against [[China]] and the world of Islam. However, Huntington has also argued that this shift in geopolitical [[structure ]] requires the West to strengthen itself internally, abandoning democratic [[universalism ]] and incessant interventionism.

The influence of Huntington's [[ideas ]] on US policy has been likened to that of British historian [[Arnold_J._Toynbee|A.J. Toynbee]]'s controversial [[religious ]] theories of the early 20th century on [[Asian]] leaders.

The latest book by Huntington, ''[[Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity]]'' was released in May [[2004]]. The [[subject ]] is the [[meaning ]] of [[United States|American]] [[national identity]] and the possible [[threat ]] posed to it by large-scale [[Latino]] [[immigration]], which Huntington warns could "[[divide ]] the United States into two peoples, two [[culture]]s, and two [[language]]s". Like ''The Clash of Civilizations'', this book has also stirred controversy, and some have accused Huntington of [[xenophobia]] for lauding [[WASP|America's Anglo-Protestant]] [[identity ]] and disparaging [[other ]] [[value ]] systems.

In 1986, Huntington was nominated for membership in the [[National Academy of Sciences]]. Nominations are voted on by the entire academy, but most votes, which are by scientists who are mainly unfamiliar with the nominee, are token votes. This status quo was disturbed when [[Serge Lang]], a [[Yale University]] [[mathematician]], began challenging Huntington's nomination. Lang campaigned for [[others ]] to deny Huntington membership and was eventually successful, with Huntington [[being ]] nominated and rejected twice.

Huntington's prominence as a Harvard professor and (at the time) director of Harvard's Center for International Studies contributed to the coverage by publications such as ''The New York [[Times]]'' and ''The New Republic''.

Lang was largely inspired by the writings of [[Neal Koblitz]], another mathematician, who accused Huntington of misusing [[mathematics ]] and engaging in [[pseudo-science]]. Lang's accusations included claims that Huntington had distorted the historical record and used pseudo-mathematics to make his conclusions appear more convincing. Lang's side of the controversy is covered in his book ''Challenges''.

* "It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. [[Nation ]] states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of [[global ]] [[politics ]] will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future."

* "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or [[religion ]] but rather by its superiority in applying organized [[violence]]. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

* "In the emerging world of ethnic conflict and civilizational clash, Western [[belief ]] in the [[universality ]] of Western culture suffers [[three ]] problems: it is [[false]]; it is immoral; and it is dangerous...Imperialism is the necessary [[logical ]] consequence of universalism." (''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, P. 310'')

*[http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2530&page=0 A list of comments, mainly critical ones, on ''Who Are We'' on Foreign Policy], available to (freely) registered users. Among the writers are a [[number ]] of eminent scholars of immigration and [[Latin ]] American studies.

*[http://www.psa.ac.uk/journals/pdf/5/2000/Hooper%20Alan.pdf An article by Alan Hooper ] that criticizes the impact of Huntington's advice during the transition process on the quality of [[democracy ]] in Brazil.*[http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles/Shirazi_Huntington.htm "Your New Enemies" by Said Shirazi] - A [[leftist ]] critique of Huntington.