[GSlob]

"Would you say that the cultures(or groups) were fighting within the primitive civilization?"
Yes, of course. And how was it that the states of Western Europe, while being the members of the same [sociologically] Western Civ, were fighting against one another all the time, even when speaking the same language? A common civilization does NOT preclude internal conflicts between the states, or between other constituent units [Japan, the extreme case of a state coterminous with the civilization, had quite a period of competing and warring mini-states, aka daimyo-led provinces and regions].
"And for the record, the primitive civilization does not exist on reservations. If so, why are houses and automobiles used?"
If the civilization IS the sociology, as was stated earlier in the elaboration on Huntington, then the material objects and their technological level [be they computers or stone axes] are irrelevant. Houses and automobiles come under the heading of economics, and also of culture, being the source of the fragments for the future archaeologists and ethnologists. "Primitive" pertains to the sociology of human societies found on the reservations, and thus denotes their civilizational level.

[quiverfull]

[If the civilization is the sociology then the material objects....] economics -is very relevant.
If I am reincarnated as a low-class servant, then its pretty unwise for me to think I will become the king. If I believe that the gifts I have been given are a gift and should be used to the best of my ability - then I may be anything to the extent of my gifts.

what a civilization adopts as its belief system (morals) will play out in its economics and "culture"