The clash-of-civilizations paradigm serves to prolong dominance

Evidence

At its heart, Said’s critique challenges the motivations of those, including Lewis and Huntington, who rely on a clash of civilizations paradigm to make sense of the world in general and the relationship between Islam and the West in particular. Such a paradigm feeds on conflict and division, thereby “increasing the rifts between people in order to prolong our dominance.” What we need is not conflict but community, not a clash but a coming together of people across cultural barriers to face the dangers that threaten the entire human race. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 233

Categorization

• XREF: Challenges the clash framework the reader’s own orientation text may lean on; a key critical counterpoint. — connects to: Justifying everywhere war requires reviving the archaic category of common enemies of humanity — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 830; Bernard Lewis supplied the clash of civilizations thesis to American foreign policy — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 213; Emphasizing essential cultural difference feeds the clash-of-civilizations frame — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 256 (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• Emphasizing essential cultural difference feeds the clash-of-civilizations frame #corroborates (0.60) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 256
• Clash-of-civilizations rhetoric ideologically legitimized both foreign wars and domestic attacks #expands (0.60) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 421
• Dominant ideology recruits the dominated by neutralizing rival ideologies’ antagonism #corroborates (0.55)
• Clash-of-civilizations ideology animated the Trump administration’s core policies #exemplifies (0.55) — Arsalan Iftikhar, Fear of a Muslim Planet_ Global…, 685
• The War on Terror was ideologically framed as a civilizational clash #expands (0.50)