Skip to main content

Global Human Rights, Peace and Cultural Difference: Huntington and the Political Philosophy of International Relations

  • Wolfgang Kersting (a1)

In 1989, the age of power political realism ended. The conditions were set to replace the prevailing Hobbesian model of peace by deterrence with the considerably more challenging Kantian model of peace by right. If, however, Huntington's paradigm of fighting civilizations were right, we would have to forget Kant and remember Hobbes. Sober rationality, healthy distrust, striving for power accumulation and all the other instruments from the realist's toolbox of political prudence are very well suited to facilitate political self-assertion in an age of violently clashing cultures. However, this helplessness is not well grounded. Considering that from the very beginning liberalism is a theory of religious and ethical pluralism and well-experienced in dealing with problems of multiculturalism, it is at least possible to argue for a weak liberal universalism which provides normative foundations for a global order of peacefully living together. Of course, conceptual and moral modesty is crucial. If the human rights doctrine wants to defend its universal claim in the face of cultural diversity (which is defined as culturally different interpretations of a good, true and perfect human life), it has to restrict itself to the conditions of esse: the pre-cultural and sheer natural conditions of human being and human coexistence. However, the formulation of the conditions of bene esse (which enable human flourishing, let persons thrive and furnish human living with sense and significance) has to be left to culture and its authorities and belief systems which buttress a cultural constitution of meaning, both theologically and metaphysically. Traditional natural rights theory knew that both have to go together, and that the esse-enabling duties necessarily enjoy priority. No cultural conception of thriving life and existential significance can be accepted which contradicts the fundamental imperatives and conditions of pure human existence and coexistence.

Hide All


1 Fukuyama, Francis, ‘The end of history?’, The National Interest, 16 (1989).

2 Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1993), p. xii.

3 Kojève, Alexandre, Introduction à la lecture de Hegel, 2nd edn (Paris: Gallimard, 1968); on Kojève's conception of history see Auffret, Dominique, Alexandre Kojève: La Philosophie, l'État, la fin de l'Histoire (Paris, 1990).

4 , Fukuyama, ‘End of history?’, p. 18.

5 Gehlen, Arnold, Einblicke (Frankfurt/M.: Klostermann, 1975), p. 126.

6 Huntington, Samuel P., ‘The clash of civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs, 72 (1993), 2249; cf.Huntington, Samuel P. et al., The Clash of Civilizations? The Debate (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996); Huntington, Samuel, Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order (New York, 1996).

7 And even Fukuyama had to accept being subsumed under the formula of his opponent, although only abroad: his book Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, published in 1995, was distributed in Germany under the title The Conflict of Cultures: Who Wins the Struggle for the Economic Future?

8 Cf. Küng, Hans, Projekt Weltethos (Munich: Piper, 1990); Küng, Hans and Kuschel, Karl-Josef (eds), Erklärung zum Weltethos (Munich: Yale University Press, 1993).

9 Ackerman, Bruce A., The Future of Liberal Revolution (New Haven and London, 1993).

10 Kersting, Wolfgang, ‘Philosophische Friedenstheorie und internationale Friedensordnung‘, in Recht, Gerechtigkeit und demokratische Tugend (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 1997), 316–52.

11 Cf. Huntington, Samuel P., ‘The coming clash of civilizations, or, the West against the Rest’, New York Times (6 June 1993).

12 , Huntington, Clash of Civilizations: Remaking, p. 92.

14 Ibid., p. 318.

15 Cf. ibid., p. 42.

16 Lapid, Yosef and Kratochwil, Friedrich (eds), The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory (London: L. Rienner, 1996).

17 Jepperson, R. J. and Swidler, A., ‘What properties of culture should we measure?’, Poetics, 22 (1994), 359–71, 359.

18 Cf. Waldron, Jeremy (ed.), Nonsense upon Stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the Rights of Man (London: Methuen, 1987), p. 145.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Kantian Review
  • ISSN: 1369-4154
  • EISSN: 2044-2394
  • URL: /core/journals/kantian-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed