by José de la Isla
HOUSTON — On Christmas Eve, political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, 81, passed away of natural causes. He was known for a 1993 article in Foreign Policy magazine that he turned into a book called “Clash of Civilizations and the New World Order.” He claimed conflict after the Cold War would center on cultural rather than ideological differences.
Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George H. W. Bush used Huntington’s new world order notion to define the period following the Cold War.
Huntington’s 2004 book, “Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity,” concerned his idea that our identity faced a possible cultural threat from large-scale Latino immigration. The notion was picked up by various ideologues and nativists to justify their prejudices. Some silly gooses out there hysterically took to talk radio, claiming some kind of “re-conquista” was in the works. Get this — they claimed Mexico was retaking parts of the Southwest. I heard Pat Buchanan saying as much on MS-NBC.
Huntington warned trends could “divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures and two languages.” Those who are familiar with the 1968 Kerner report about the riots of the times are familiar with that type of warning: “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and unequal.
”Anyone conscious during the past decade knows we are — and always have been — more than two.
It’s important to rehash this because Huntington — Reqiescat in Pace—expressed and inspired more fear than perspective about our national identity.
That became clear after reading “Man Without a Country” by Kurt Vonnegut, first released in 2005, two years before his passing.
There is much to recommend this short 146-page volume. It is a better warning about society and politics.Vonnegut, long thought of as a science-fiction writer and author of such classics as “Slaughterhouse Five” and “Breakfast of Champions,”is really an observer of our times. He was interested in science. He studied anthropology.
Vonnegut confessed, “It was a big mistake for me to take a degree in anthropology.”
It is probably a lucky thing he did. Its mission is to look for differences among groups of humans, unlike politics, which is mostly about leverage for one group over another. Recently I overheard a discussion between two 19-year-old classmates, one black, one white, both in their first year of college. One said her issue was they came from “different cultures.” They were from similar circumstances,socio-economic status.
She meant, I think, that she perceived a difference in someone who was not from her Long Island town, who shared her lifestyle, language inflections and attitudes about popular entertainment.
Differences, yes, but not about culture. It is mostly about how they identify. Some Japanese youth paint their hair bright, outlandish colors and dress in fantasy costumes to identify outside a homogeneous group. Identity can be voluntary and changeable. It is often what is called a meme. It is not prescribed; most culture is.
Here is where Huntington errs. He mistakes people’s identity and turns it into the plot of The Manchurian Candidate. It is not only a mistake to mislead this way but disingenuous. Consequently, many unsuspecting people turned a political situation into cultural superstition and threat.
The lesson? A nationality like ours ought never to become a cult.
Vonnegut says in his book, “Even the simplest jokes are based on tiny twinges of fear.” He asks, “What’s the white stuff in bird poop?”
The answer is “That’s bird poop, too.”
That’s why it’s best to read Huntington as if he were telling jokes.
The laugh’s on those who believed him.
[José de la Isla writes a weekly commentary for Hispanic Link News Service. He is author of The Rise of Hispanic Political Power (Archer Books). E-mail joseisla3@yahoo.com.] ©2008
