The co-existence and mixture of various civilizations

Some analysts attribute the recent blasts in London to a clash between Christian and Islamic civilizations. I don't think so.

The human history sees indeed conflicts between states, nationalities and regions out of reasons of civilization (such as religion). But from a general perspective of history evolvement, assimilation and mixture form the mainstream of civilization development in different states, nationalities and regions. In my opinion, civilization is not the root cause of conflicts between states, nationalities and regions, and different civilizations can co-exist and intermingle.

In 1922, after a visit to China Bertrand Russell wrote an article entitled Chinese and Western Civilization Contrasted, in which he pointed out that exchanges between different civilizations had long been repeatedly proved milestones in human civilization development. Greece learned from Egypt; Rome drew on the experience of Greece; Arab used the Roman Empire for reference; Europe modeled on Arab in the Middle Ages while copied the Byzantine Empire during the Renaissance.

If we look into the history of Chinese culture, we can particularly discover that conflicts between different cultures caused by cultural reasons are constantly transient, while mutual assimilation and merging between the cultures remain the leading force. China once had various regional cultures during the periods of Spring and Autumn (770-476 B.C) and the Warring States (475-221 B.C), with major parts of the country forming and holding their respective cultures, but later they gradually blended into a largely unified culture of the entire Chinese nation.

The introduction of Buddhism in the early 1st century all the more testifies to the possibility of co-existence of two cultures. India's Buddhist culture entered China in a peaceful way, and there had never been a culture-caused war between Buddhism, which is alien, and local Confucianism and Taoism. There only occurred three conflicts out of political and economic reasons, during which the imperial government clamped down on Buddhist monks. But for most of the time, the three cultures lived side by side in peace.

Based on historical experience, I believe that the "clash of civilizations" theory of Samuel P. Huntington is one-sided and serves US strategy. Although his theory touches sharply some conflicts caused by "civilization", such as that between Palestine and Israel in the Middle East, that in Kosovo and even the Iraqi War, which all contain some cultural factors (religion and values), but a closer observation will show that they are fundamentally caused by "political and economic" reasons rather than cultural ones.

We must note that presently there has been no conflict between many cultures despite their difference in civilization. For example, no serious clash happened between China and India, China and Russia and even China and Europe for rather a long period of time, especially during the recent decade. So, the "clash of civilizations" theory cannot give a correct picture of today's world, much less of the prospect of the human society. It is the "coexistence of civilizations" that points the way out for the human society, a goal that must be strived for.

This comment by Tang Yijie is carried on the first page of People's Daily Overseas Edition, July 27, and is translated by People's Daily Online