Dallmayr Fred - Civilizations and world order: geopolitics and cultural difference

LEXINGTON BOOKS

Lanham Boulder New York Toronto Plymouth, UK

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Civilizations and world order : geopolitics and cultural difference / edited by Fred Dallmayr, M. Akif Kayapnar, and smail Yaylac.

pages cm. -- (Global encounters : studies in comparative political theory)

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-7391-8606-0 (cloth) -- ISBN 978-0-7391-8607-7 (electronic)

1. International order--Philosophy. 2. International relations and culture--Philosophy. 3. Civilization, Modern--Philosophy. 4. Geopolitics. I. Dallmayr, Fred R. (Fred Reinhard), 1928- editor of compilation. II. Kayapnar, M. Akif, 1975- editor of compilation. III. Yaylac, smail, 1982- editor of compilation.

JZ1308.C559 2014

327.101--dc23

2014022607

TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

Printed in the United States of America

Ahmet Davutolu

Civilizational Revival in the Global Age

Using the terms civilization and globalization in singular or in plural reveals not only a linguistic preference but also a position in understanding orderboth conceptually and historically. When the plural form of the concept of civilization is reserved for historical reference while its singular version is employed in reference to present and future, this preference rests on certain basic presuppositions: (i) throughout history different civilizations emerged and survived with their own geographical and historical differences; (ii) the radical changes of the modern era accelerated by scientific and technological instruments created a new historical flow directed towards the formation of a monolithic global culture; (iii) this historical flow will is led by an active/subject/dominating civilization that is able to control and re-create these instruments; (iv) the passive/object/dominated civilizations are disappearihng in the course of this process; (v) and there will effectively be only one civilization in future which will mark the end of history.

On the other hand, using the concept of civilization in the plural (civilizations) to refer not only to historical phenomena but also to present and future existence also relies on a set of certain assumptions: (i) the historical existence of different civilizations is not only a result of external factors but also a reflection of human nature and will; (ii) therefore the existence of different civilizations has been and will continue to be a richness of human culture; (iii) the relationship among civilizations has been characterized by interaction rather than absolute hierarchy and annihilation; (iv) human nature cannot be limited, monopolized, dominated, or controlled by a monolithic structure regardless of its instrumental supremacy; (v) the categories of active/subject civilization and passive/object civilizations reflect a presentism of conjectural phenomena rather than a substantive and pervasive historical process; (vi) and there might be fluctuations and transformations in inter-civilizational relations, but there are and will always be different civilizations.

These differing perspectives can be noticed both in the writings of classical historians of civilizations and in the recently developing literature on civilizations as new actors of international relations. Arnold Toynbees analysis of civilizations, for instance, provides us with differentsometimes even conflictingexamples of these two alternative approaches. The most striking example for the first approach regarding the existence of a singular civilization in the future is Toynbees prediction back in the 1930s that out of twenty six civilizations no less than sixteen are by now dead and buried