Editing Westernization (section)

==Views==
===Kishore Mahbubani===
[[Kishore Mahbubani]]'s book entitled ''The Great Convergence: Asia, the West, and the Logic of One World'' (Public Affairs), is very optimistic.{{Why|date=August 2014}} It proposes that a new global civilization is being created. The majority of non-Western countries admire and adhere to Western living standards. It says this newly emerging global order has to be ruled through new policies and attitudes. He argues that policymakers all over the world must change their preconceptions and accept that we live in one world. The national interests must be balanced with global interests and the power must be shared. Mahbubani urges that only through these actions can we create a world that converges benignly.

[[Samuel P. Huntington]] posits a conflict between "the West and the Rest" and offers three forms of general action that non-Western civilizations can react toward Western countries.<ref>{{cite book |doi=10.1007/978-1-349-62397-6_6 |chapter=The Clash of Civilizations? |title=Culture and Politics |year=2000 |last1=Huntington |first1=Samuel P. |pages=99–118 |isbn=978-1-349-62399-0 }}</ref>
# Non-Western countries can attempt to achieve isolation to preserve their own values and protect themselves from Western invasion. He argues that the cost of this action is high and only a few states can pursue it.
# According to the theory of "[[Bandwagoning|band-wagoning]]" non-Western countries can join and accept [[Western values]].
# Non-Western countries can make an effort to balance Western power through modernization. They can develop economic, and military power and cooperate with other non-Western countries against the West while still preserving their own values and institutions.

Mahbubani counters this argument in his other book, ''The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East''. This time, he argues that Western influence is now "unraveling", with [[March to Modernity|Eastern powers]] such as China arising. He states:
{{blockquote|…the 5.6 billion people who live outside the West no longer believe in the innate or inherent superiority of Western civilization. Instead, many are beginning to question whether the West remains the most civilized part of the world. What we are witnessing today…is the progressive unwrapping of these many layers of Western influences.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mahbubani |first1=Kishore |title=The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East |date=2009 |publisher=PublicAffairs |isbn=978-1-58648-628-0 |pages=129–130 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zdw3hyNPj34C&pg=PA129 }}</ref>}} He explains the decline of Western influence, stating reasons as to the loss of Western credibility with the rest of the world.
# There is an increasing perception that Western countries will prioritize their domestic problems over international issues, despite their spoken and written promises of having global interests and needs.
# The West has become increasingly biased and close-minded in their perception of "non-Western" countries such as China, declaring it an "un-free" country for not following a democratic form of government. 
# The West uses a double standard when dealing with international issues. 
# As the biggest Eastern populations gain more power, they are moving away from the Western influences they sought after in the past. The "anti-Americanism" sentiment is not temporary, as Westerners like to believe – the change in the Eastern mindset has become far too significant for it to change back.

===Samuel P. Huntington===
In contrast to territorial delineation, others, like the American political scientist [[Samuel P. Huntington]] in ''[[The Clash of Civilizations]]'', consider what is "Western" based on religious affiliation, such as deeming the majority-[[Western Christianity|Western Christian]] part of Europe and North America the West, and creating 6 other civilizations, including [[Latin America]], [[Confucian]], Japanese, [[Islamic]], [[Hindu]] and [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Slavic-Orthodox]], to organize the rest of the globe.<ref>{{cite web|last=Graham|first=James|title=Samuel P. Huntington's Clash of Civilizations|url=http://www.historyorb.com/world/clashofcivilizations.php|publisher=History Orb|access-date=12 April 2013}}</ref> Huntington argued that after the end of the [[Cold War]], world politics had been moved into a new aspect in which non-Western civilizations were no more the exploited recipients of Western civilization but become another important actor joining the West to shape and move the world history.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Murden |first1=Simon |chapter=Cultures in world affairs |pages=414–427 |editor1-last=Baylis |editor1-first=John |editor2-last=Smith |editor2-first=Steve |editor3-last=Owens |editor3-first=Patricia |title=The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations |date=2011 |publisher=OUP Oxford |isbn=978-0-19-956909-0 }}</ref> Huntington believed that while the age of [[ideology]] had ended, the world had only reverted to a normal state of affairs characterized by cultural conflict. In his thesis, he argued that the primary axis of conflict in the future will be along cultural and religious lines.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.slideshare.net/mehbaliyev/rashad-mehbaliyev-civilizations-their-nature-and-clash-possibilities|title=Civilizations, their nature and clash possibilities (c) Rashad Mehbal…|last=mehbaliyev|date=30 October 2010}}{{self-published inline|date=April 2023}}</ref>

===Edward Said===
In ''[[Orientalism (book)|Orientalism]]'' [[Edward Said]] views Westernization as it occurred in the process of [[colonization]], an exercise of essentializing a "subject race" in order to more effectively dominate them. Said references [[Arthur Balfour]], the British Prime Minister from 1902 to 1905, who regarded the rise of nationalism in Egypt in the late 19th century as counterproductive to a "benevolent" system of occupational rule. Balfour frames his argument in favor of continued rule over the Egyptian people by appealing to England's great "understanding" of Egypt's civilization and purporting that England's cultural strengths complemented and made them natural superiors to Egypt's racial deficiencies. Regarding this claim, Said says, "Knowledge to Balfour means surveying a civilization from its origins to its prime to its decline – and of course, it means being able to...The object of such knowledge is inherently vulnerable to scrutiny; this object is a 'fact' which, if it develops, changes, or otherwise transforms itself...[the civilization] nevertheless is fundamentally, even ontologically stable. To have such knowledge of such a thing is to dominate it." The act of claiming coherent knowledge of a society in effect objectifies and others it into marginalization, making people who are classified into that race as "almost everywhere nearly the same." Said also argues that this relationship to the "inferior" races, in fact, works to also fortify and make coherent what is meant by "the West"; if "The Oriental is irrational, depraved (fallen), childlike, "different..." then "...the European is rational, virtuous, mature, normal." Thus, "the West" acts as a construction in the similar way as does "the Orient" – it is a created notion to justify a particular set of power relations, in this case, the colonization and rule of a foreign country.