I think subsuming political and economic conflicts into some grand 'clash of civilisations' theory or 'the West versus the rest' binary is a particularly insidious form of ideological deception.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
About the idea of a clash between cultures, between civilisations, I don't believe in it. It's something some political leaders tried to use, and that the media tried and are still trying to sell us, in order to simplify the world and their work.
People today sometimes get uncomfortable with empirical claims that seem to clash with their political assumptions, often because they haven't given much thought to the connections.
People like to say that the conflict is between good and evil. The real conflict is between truth and lies.
For better or worse, I've been involved in the description of political conflict.
Lack of understanding of interrelatedness has caused numerous divisions and conflicts that are the cause of many major challenges in the world such as war, violence, terrorism, economic disparity, and exploitation.
In politics, religion and other areas of culture, people disagree on the worth of competing ideas. There is no equivalent to the scientific method that can determine in a robust way which ideas match the real world, and which ones can be ruled out. So conflicting ideologies persist indefinitely.
Be skeptical of concepts that divorce war from its political nature, particularly those that promise fast, cheap victory through technology.
Conflicts are never caused in any simple way by identity, culture or economics. Where resources are scarce, or there are strong historical memories of conflict, small events are more likely to inflame passions.
To a degree, the West is reaping what it sowed from a major strategic blunder in the aftermath of 9/11 - the entire concept of a war on technique, that is, terrorism. Defining the enemy when fighting a concept was impossible.
What we are witnessing now is a clash of civilisations, not just between states but within them.