| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
| The Shi’a and Sunni: An Islamic or a Secular Approach? |
04 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
Secularism and identity politics
There is a broader point to consider about secularism. Its advocates argue that religious rule is exclusive: minorities that do not subscribe to the religious outlook of the ruling elite can expect persecution through discrimination, second-class treatment and rights violations. The secular assumption is that religious or sectarian discrimination and conflicts are tackled best by separating religion from state.
The secular approach, however, assumes that public and private spheres can be delineated neatly. Whilst religion can be removed explicitly from state insofar as references to it in constitution and legislative sources, religious identity is not easily separated from public life. Personal and private beliefs can influence decision-making in all walks of life and factor into political choices, even determine the agendas and campaign rhetoric of secular political party themselves, the recent U.S. elections being a case in point. More importantly, a secular framework does not prevent the possibility of religious groups, sects or cults forming alliances and participating in popular politics according to their religious identity or interests, making it no less susceptible to competing religious agendas.
This is of particular relevance in regions of diverse religious association and in which religious identity is an important part of asserting cultural heritage. Secularism in India has done very little to end communal violence, or Hindu-Muslim tensions. The B.J.P., a Hindu nationalist party, whilst declaring its commitment to India's secular constitution, ultimately appeals to the hopes of the Hindu majority by virtue of its religious nomenclature and links with organisations such as the V.H.P.-the World Hindu Congress. Religious identity is a prominent feature in secular Indian politics with a considerable contingent of its politicians in key areas playing on the fears of the religious majority and minority, the impact often erupting into the violent bloodshed in states such as Gujarat in which local politicians are accused of complicity. The politics of religious identity post-colonial India led to the emergence of Pakistan and India as two distinct secular nation states but on a communal divide and with it the bitter religious and national rivalry since. Even within Europe, sectarian violence and tension in Northern Ireland demonstrates that where religious identity has been a big enough issue, mixed with colonial mismanagement in the case of Northern Ireland, even a mature secular democracy has difficulty in dealing with religious differences. Secular states can therefore be just as easily susceptible to inter and intra religious conflict.
Arguably, the increase in diffuse and disparate religious beliefs in Europe, many of which break with traditional Christianity as they explore alternative ways of expressing religiosity and spirituality, have meant that religious groupings and identities have not existed in the sense they do in some non-western settings. Although religious sects with large followings such as Protestantism and Catholicism still exist, the rise of the nation state in Europe arguably shifted the balance in favour of national rather than religious identity. Additionally, the Protestant reformation, which heralded the emergence of secularism, occurred in Europe and against a backdrop of centuries of mismanagement and oppression in the name of religion. The separation of church from state was considered to have rid Europe of the intellectual constraints imposed by the Church and accelerated the path to its rise as the predominant centre of intellectual and political power. In so doing, the European psyche concerning religion is always set against this backdrop and ensures that the role of religion, particularly as the principal factor in defining identity, is rendered marginal.
Relegating religion to a private sphere does not mean that it will not play an important part in defining identity. And in those regions where it does, the constraint of secular non-religious temporal law does not mean that religious identity will not assert itself in public and political life. As religious interest groups or even sectarian blocks seek to influence political agendas, religious tension can be just as rife. Particularly with the Shi'a and Sunni, limiting the scope of Islam does not provide a pro-active agenda to deal with the causes of disagreement between them. Having no inherent view on the debate other than to define its remit, a secular system would not have the intrinsic ability to prevent an escalation of tension.
| |
| |
| |
| |
« First < 2 3 4 5 6 >
Page 4 of 6 pages
| |
|
|
