Neo-Modernization and Samuel T.

Huntington
Presented By: Lorraine Grace Gallegos-Ugsang

Neo-Modernization
Neo-Modernization emerged in tandem with post-modernism but which was given great boost in
the late 80s with the collapse of communism;
According to Huntington the process of modernization is the interaction of culture or civilization,
which he defines primarily in terms of language and religion;
With the process of modernization results in a strengthening of non-Western cultures and reduction
in the relative power of the West;
The modernization process consists of:
o The early phase in which Westernization promotes modernization;
o The latter phase in which modernization promote de-Westernization and the resurgence of
indigenous culture at both the societal individual levels.
Instead of viewing modernization as a convergence towards a homogenized world, Huntington
views this process as ultimately divisive.

Who is Samuel Huntington?
Notable Arguments

Political Order in Changing Societies
Released in 1968, just as the USs war in Vietnam was reaching its apex, which was a critique of
the modernization theory which has driven much US policy in the developing world in the prior
decade;
As societies modernize they become more complex and disordered;
If the process of social modernization that produce disorder is not matched by a process of political
and institutional modernization;
A process which produces political institutions capable of managing the stress of modernization
the result may be violence
Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century
There has been a third wave of democratization beginning with Portugals revolution in 1974;
Third Wave of Democratization a global trend which includes more than 60 countries throughout
Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Africa;
o Democratization is the transition to a more democratic political regime;
o Different patterns are often used to explain other political phenomena, whether a country
goes to war or whether it economy grows;
o Influenced by various factors, including economic development, history, and civil society
Clash of Civilizations
Post-Cold War conflict would most frequently and violently occur because of cultural rather than
ideological differences.
Brief Background on the Clash of Civilizations
Next Pattern of Conflict
World politics is entering a new phase, and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of
what will bethe end of history; the return of traditional rivalries between nation states; and the
decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others.
o The conflicts of the western world were largely among princes emperors, absolute
monarchs and constitutional monarchs attempting to expand their bureaucracies, their
armies, their mercantilist economic strength and, most important, the territory they ruled;
o In the process they created nation states, and beginning with the French Revolution the
principal lines of conflict were between nations rather than princes;
o As a result of the Russian Revolution and the reaction against it, the conflict of nations
yielded to the conflict ideologies, first among communism, fascism-Nazism and liberal
democracy, and the between communism and liberal democracy;
o During the Cold War, this latter conflict became embodied in the struggle between two
superpowers, neither of which was a nation state in the classical European sense and
each of which defines its identity in terms of ideology.
Civilization is a cultural entity. Villages, regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups, all
have distinct cultures at different levels of cultural heterogeneity;
o The culture of a village in southern Italy may be different from that of a village in northern
Italy, but both will share in a common Italian culture that distinguishes from German
villages. European communities, in turn, will share cultural features that distinguish them
from Arab or Chinese communities.
A civilization is the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity
people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species;
It is defined both by common objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs,
institutions and the subjective self-identification of people;
May involve a large number of people, include several nation states, blend and overlap, and may
include sub-civilizations;
They are meaningful entities. Dynamic, they rise and fall, and divide and merge. Civilizations also
disappear and are buried in the sands of time.
Why Civilizations will Clash
First, the differences among civilizations are basic. Civilizations are differentiated from each other
by history, language, culture, tradition and most importantly, religion;
o The people of different civilizations have different views on the relations between God and
man as well as differing views of the relative importance of rights and responsibilities,
liberty and authority, equality and hierarchy;
o These differences are the product of centuries, they will not soon disappear. They are far
more fundamental than differences among political ideologies and politics regimes.
Differences do not necessarily mean conflict, and conflict does not necessarily mean violence.

Second, the world is becoming a smaller place. Interactions between peoples of different
civilizations are increasing; and increasing interactions intensify civilization consciousness and
awareness of difference between civilizations and commonality within civilization.
Interactions among peoples of different civilizations enhance the civilization-consciousness of
people. It invigorates differences and animosities stretching or thought to stretch back deep into
history.

Third, the process of economic modernization and social change throughout the world are
separating the people from longstanding local identities. It also weakens the nation state as a
source of identity;
World religion has moved to fill this gap, often in the form of movements that are labeled as
fundamentalist.
o Such movements are found in Western Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, as well
as Islam. In most countries and most religions the people active in fundamentalist
movement are young, college-educated, middle-class technicians, professionals and
business persons.
The un-secularization of the world is one of the dominant social factors of life in the late twentieth
century.George Weigel;

Fourth, the growth of civilization consciousness enhanced by the dual role of the West. A West at
the peak of its power confronts on-West that increasingly have the desire, the will and the
resources to shape the world in non-Western ways.
A de-Westernization and indigenization of elites is occurring in many non-Western countries at the
same time Western cultures, styles and habits become more popular among the people.

Fifth, cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised
and resolved than political and economic ones;
Even more than ethnicity, religion discriminate sharply and exclusively among people;
A person can be half-French and half-Arab and simultaneously even a citizen of two countries but it
is more difficult to be a half-Catholic and half-Muslim;

Finally, economic regionalism is increasing.
o Successful economic regionalism will reinforce civilization-consciousness;
o On the other hand, economic regionalism may succeed only when it is rooted in a common
civilization;
o The European Community rests on the shared foundation of European culture and
Western Christianity;
o Common culture is clearly facilitating the rapid expansion of the economic relations
between the Peoples Republic of China and Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, and the
overseas Chines communities in other Asian countries. If cultural commonality is a
prerequisite for economic integration, the principal East Asian economic bloc of the future
is likely to be centered on China. Chinese-based economy of Asia is rapidly emerging as a
new epicenter for industry, commerce and finance. This influential network often based
on extensions of the traditional clans has been described as the backbone of the East
Asian economy.

Civilization identities will replace all other identities and nation states will disappear. Each
civilization will become a single coherent political entity.
Differences in civilizations are real and important. Civilization-consciousness is increasing.
Conflicts between civilizations will supplant ideological and other forms of conflict as the dominant
global form of conflict.
Security and economic international institutions are more likely to develop within civilizations than
across civilizations.
Conflicts between groups in different civilizations will be more frequent, more sustained and more
violent than conflict between groups in the same civilizations.
Violent conflicts between groups in different civilizations are most likely and most dangerous
source of escalation that lead to global wars;
A central focus of conflict for the immediate future will be between the West and several Islamic-
Confucian states;
For a relevant future, there will be no universal civilization, but instead a world of different
civilizations, each of which will have to learn to coexist with the others.

Criticisms on Huntingtons Clash of Civilizations
The starting point for his model is problematic to the extent he argues that Westernization
promotes modernization.
Western vs. Non-Western dichotomy and his broad categorizations of language and religion lumps
together vast groups of people who may have very little in common in terms of culture.
Huntingtons omission of factors such as colonial history, creates little more than a potentially
spurious relationship concerning his account of the link between modernization and socioeconomic
development and fails to account for this potential path-dependency issue.
Huntingtons taxonomy is simplistic and arbitrary, and does not take account of the internal
dynamics and partisan tensions within civilizations.
He neglects ideological mobilization by elites and unfulfilled socioeconomic needs of the population
as the real causal factors driving conflict.
His paradigm is nothing but realist thinking in which states become replaced by civilizations.