Title

反美主義:文明衝突亦或權力政治?

Translated Titles

Anti-Americanism: The Clash of Civilizations of Power Politics?

DOI

10.7084/LIS.200505.0035

Authors

楊吉林(Chilin Yang)

Key Words

文化衝突 ; 全球化 ; 美國霸權 ; 權力政治 ; clash of civilizations ; globalization ; American hegemony ; power politics

PublicationName

語文與國際研究

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2期(2005 / 05 / 01)

Page #

35 - 46

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

全球化是當前影響世界各國社會發展與國際政治的重要因素,全球化也往往被許多國家保守派人士視為等同於美國化,遂導致反美主義蔓延。杭廷頓在分析全球國際局勢變化時指出,後冷戰時期的國際衝突將是以文化為導向;文化相近的國家容易整合利益並形成結盟,而文化差異較大的國家之間發生衝突的機會也大。九一一事件發生後,許多人士認為杭廷頓的理論正確地預測了國際局勢的發展方向,也將該事件歸因於文化衝突,更認為是回教基本教義派對於美國勢力與文化的反撲。若延續此一思維,世界各地反美主義的興起乃是文化衝突的必然結果。 然而仔細分析當前反美主義的發展與形成,吾人不難發現強調以軍事力量為後盾的美國強勢外交政策才是問題的癥結所在,而蘇聯瓦解後的後冷戰單極國際體系也間接地促成了反美主義的蔓延。反美主義在世界各國有不同的形成背景、意涵與表達方式,若以文化衝突的單一解釋是難以說明問題的本質,而現實主義所強調的權力政治仍應是反美主義的癥結所在。

English Abstract

Currently globalization has been considered as an influencial factor in the social development of most countries around the world, and conservatives in those societies tend to view it as an undesirable trend of cultural Americanization. As a result, anti-Americanism has emerged or intensified throughout the world. Samuel Huntington, in analyzing the future development of world politics in early 1990s, pointed out that global conflicts had been dominated by cultural identity after the Cold War: in other words, cultural identity issue can be taken as an indicator in predicting future conflicts among nations. In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attack, many Americans believe that Huntington x as right and the terrorist attack can be interpreted as a backlash from the Muslim fundamentalist forces against the spread of American culture. Following this argument, anti-Americanism is, obviously, a foregone conclusion of the clash of civilizations. Nevertheless, if we exam thoroughly the issues at hand, we will realize that instead of cultural conflicts it is the American dominant foreign policy and practices that should be blamed as the main cause of the anti-Americanism spread. Moreover, the monolithic structure of the world polity emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union also contributed to the diffusion of anti-Americanism. The fomentation, significance, and expressions of anti-Americanism vary from region to region, country to country, and it would be incorrect to interpret the phenomenon in terms of clash of civilizations alone. The analysis of this paper indicates that the Realist perspective of power politics still better explains the issue of anti-Americanism in an era of globalization.

Topic Category 人文學 > 語言學
人文學 > 外國文學
Reference
  1. (2005).High Hopes, Hard Facts.Newsweek,14-19.
  2. (2003).On the rise.The Economist,10-11.
  3. Ankie Hoogvelt(1997).Globalization and the Postcolonial World.Baltimore, MD:The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  4. Ankie Hoogvelt(1997).Globalization and the Postcolonial World.Baltimore, MD:The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  5. Barry Rubin(2002).The Real Roots of Arab Anti-Americanism.Foreign Affairs,81(6),73-85.
  6. Carla Power,Christopher Dickey(2002).Muhammad Atta`s Neighborhood.Newsweek,140(25),36-40.
  7. Reason
  8. Corey Robin(2004).Grand Design:How the 9/11 Unified Conservatives in Pursuit of Empire.Washington Post,B01.
  9. New Statesman
  10. David Rothkopf(1997).In Praise of Cultural Imperialism.Foreign Policy,Summer,38-53.
  11. Edward W. Said(1993).Culture and Imperialism.New York:Random House, Inc..
  12. Moving Ideas Network
  13. Francis Fukuyama(1992).The End of History and the Last Man.New York:Free Press.
  14. Jack Miles(2002).Theology and the Clash of Civilizations.CROSSCURRENTS,Winter,451-458.
  15. James Anderson.American Hegemony after 11 September: Allies, Rivals and Contradictions.
  16. Straits Times
  17. New Statesman
  18. John Rossant,Pete Engardio,Dexter Roberts,Susan Postlewaite,Paul Starobin(2001).The Roots of Resentment.Business Week,46-47.
  19. Joseph S. Nye, Jr.(2003).The Velvet Hegemon: How Soft Power can Help Defeat Terroristsim.Foreign Policy,74-75.
  20. Kenneth N. Waltz(2000).Globalization and American Power.The National Interest,Spring,46-56.
  21. Margaret J. King,Jamie O`Boyle(2002).Idea and Value Exchange Worldwide: American Culture in the World.The Journal of American Culture,25(1),1-8.
  22. Foreign Policy
  23. Michael Mandelbaum(2003).The Ideas that Conquered the World.New York:Public Affairs.
  24. Richard Lambert(2003).Misunderstanding Each Other.Foreign Affairs,82(2),62-74.
  25. Richard Pells(2002).American Culture Goes Global, or Does it?.The Chronicle of Higher Education,48(31),7-15.
  26. Ronald Inglehart,Pippa Norris(2003).The True Clash of Civilizations.Foreign Policy,63-70.
  27. Russell Berman(2004).Anti-Americanism in Europe: A Cultural Problem.Stanford:Hoover Institution Publication.
  28. Sameul Huntington(1997).The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.London:Simon & Schuster.
  29. Monthly Review
  30. Samuel Huntington.The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of world Order,34.
  31. Sophie Meunier(2000).The French Exception.Foreign Affairs,79(4),104-116.
  32. Stanly Hoffmann.Clash of Globalization.
  33. The Benevolent Empire(1998).Foreign Policy,111,24-35.
Times Cited
  1. 鍾宛諭(2007)。拉丁美洲新興左派興起因素之研究。淡江大學拉丁美洲研究所碩士班學位論文。2007。1-147。 
  2. 黃長泰(2007)。911事件後小布希政府中東政策:文明衝突論之觀點。政治大學外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班學位論文。2007。1-219。