Politics of Secularism

This paper uses evangelical reflections on the meaning of "rights" to explore the juridification of religion in contemporary England. Drawing on sixteen months of participatory fieldwork with evangelicals in London, I argue that English evangelicals' critiques of Christian-interest litigation reflect the interaction of local theologies with developments in the law's regulation of religion, developments that have contributed to the relativization of Protestant Christianity even as historic church establishment is maintained. Through an exploration of the tension between the goals of (rights-based) individualism and (Christian) relationalism as they concern the law, I show how litigation can affect religious sub-jectivity even in the absence of a personal experience with the pageantry of the court.

For more than a decade, criticisms levied against Muslims and Islam in Western European countries such as France and the Netherlands have been shielded under the auspices of a call for increased security and a desire to protect liberal secularism. An example of this can be found in the recent move by the Dutch cabinet to implement legislation to ban the burqa in public places such as schools, hospitals, government buildings, and public transportation. The proposed Dutch ban follows the French parliament who implemented similar legislation in 2011 restricting the presence of discernible religious symbols such as burqas and niqabs from the public sphere. In a statement to the press, Prime Minister Mark Rutte, explains the proposed ban " had nothing to do with religion, " but rather it is intended to help facilitate " recognizable communication " (qtd. in " Netherlands Plans "). He clarifies " In a free country like the Netherlands, everyone has the right to dress how they choose, no matter what others think. That freedom is only limited in situations when it is essential for people to look at each other " (qtd. in " Netherlands Plans "). In this statement the restrictions placed on full face-veils are steeped in concerns of contemporary cultural conflict, inflamed by language that claims that Muslim immigrants to the Netherlands need to be better integrated. In France and the Netherlands, full face-veils have become symbols of " religious extremism " that are actively legislated against. As such they are tied to a series of judgments and evaluations that situate them as objectionable cultural objects and indicative of problematic immigrant groups. Defined as " extremist " or " politically dangerous " this vision of full face-veils is based on normative conceptions of the subject. When considered in relation to the secular, violence is done to those who are visibly different, marked by religious symbols that are understood through binaries such as objectionable/unobjectionable, Western/Eastern, Islamic/Christian, religious/secular further problematizing them. These schisms have intensified in the aftermath of 9/11 and the global war on terror creating a rift between secular and religious worldviews. There is no greater symbolic target of this schism between the secular and the religious than the burqa. The polarization of these two groups, secular and religious has gained further strength when they are posited in relation to the nation state. Within this context secularism is invoked as that which protects the state, defines it, and transforms practices related to public and private life via institutions. This paper explores the invocation of normative dispositions of secularism and security in light of the increasing restrictions placed against Muslim women in the public sphere in France and the Netherlands within dominant discourse. Drawing from the draw work of Saba Mahmood, Judith Butler, and Talal Asad I explore how bodies are marked as " different " within public spaces, through a discussion of the schism between the secular/religious. Such an examination is significant as these legislations are some of the most prohibitive in the West.

Jürgen Habermas und Talal Asad zählen zu den bedeutendsten Protagonisten des Diskurses um die postsäkulare Gesellschaft. In der vorliegenden Arbeit unternehme ich eine vergleichende Lektüre zentraler Schriften beider Autoren. Dabei versuche ich, möglichst präzise zu beschreiben, wie Habermas und Asad einen neuen Blickwinkel auf die Verhältnisbestimmung von Religion und Gesellschaft in der Gegenwart freigeben und plausibilisieren.
Einen zentralen Stellenwert schreibe ich der Tatsache zu, dass hierfür von beiden der Begriff der ‚Übersetzung‘ herangezogen wird. Ziel der Untersuchung ist es folglich, erste systematisierende Vorstöße bezüglich des Begriffspaars ‚Religion übersetzen‘ zu leisten. Dabei gilt es ein Bündel an Forschungsfragen zu beantworten: Wie wird der Begriff der Übersetzung verstanden? In welcher Art und Weise kommt Religion im Werk der Autoren zur Sprache? Auf welche Aspekte der Religion soll sich die Übersetzungsleistung beziehen? Wer sind die Subjekte dieser Übersetzung? Und schließlich, welche Chancen und Probleme bringen die beiden Ansätze für eine politiktheoretische Perspektive auf religiös-gesellschaftliche Fragestellungen mit sich?

The contribution of Ambedkar in building secular deemocratic India is matchless. Through his writings and struggles he oriented his work around the values of Liberty, Equality and fraternity. The movements and struggles led by him underlined that social justice is the non negotiable part of s secular democracy.

Under Turkey’s neoconservative government, the Directorate of Religious Affairs deploys state-employed religious functionaries to provide Sunni Muslim citizens with advice and guidance on family life. By inculcating government-sanctioned sensibilities and dispositions related to kinship, these Islamic authorities have become instrumental to extending state power into the domestic lives of the religious majority. This particular entwinement of religion with state power is no aberration. Indeed, the Turkish case reveals a contradiction that lies at the heart of secular governance: the continuing involvement of religion in the politics of the family despite the assumed separation of religion and politics. Secular states may appropriate religious discourses and authority in regulating intimacy and the family while aligning these with biopolitical rationalities, as well as with secular laws and expertise. [secularism, kinship, family, intimacy, governmentality, the state, expertise, Islam, Turkey].

This research article will explain about the rise of secularism which was a by product of the oppression by the Roman empire during the ancient times. We have experience 4 different shifts because of the rise in rationalist beliefs. Allah has very clearly explain in the Qur'an about Dajaal and its effects. There this article is a study of how the thought process has changed and how Allah has predicted the effects of one's belief in the Qur'an.

This article deals with one of the perennial questions of legal and political philosophy, i. e., how the state should relate to religion? It makes a distinction between five models: (i) the atheist state, (ii) the theocratic state, (iii) the model of an official state church, (iv) the multiculturalist state, and (v) the agnostic state (or secular state). The authors reflect on the legitimacy of each of these models. Some states reclaim their right to adopt an official religion as their state religion or as the religious Leitkultur of their country (model iii). Others favor the support of religion as long as this is premised on the equal rights of all religions (model iv). And others think that the state can only support equal citizenship if the state does not support any religion whatsoever (model v).

One of the major challenges facing modern-day secular states is the issue of social integration. The issue discussed in this article is how it is possible to arrive at unifying values in a multicultural society that is characterised by secularisation and disintegration of the Christian hegemony of former times on the one hand and by the emergence of cultural and religious diversity on the other. The analysis is centred around Norwegian kindergarten, which represent a key institution for communicating values and morals in contemporary Norwegian society. The objects clause states that the kindergarten is based on the fundamental values of Christian and humanistic heritage and traditions, combined with values that are expressed in different religions and philosophies and that are also clearly expressed in the Declaration of Human Rights. I argue that the objects clause can be understood as a form of ‘common ground strategy.’ This can be seen as a possible unifying values base and a key strategy for future social integration, across cultural affiliations.

This article deals with one of the perennial questions of legal and political philosophy, i. e., how the state should relate to religion? It makes a distinction between five models: (i) the atheist state, (ii) the theocratic state, (iii) the model of an official state church, (iv) the multiculturalist state, and (v) the agnostic state (or secular state). The authors reflect on the legitimacy of each of these models. Some states reclaim their right to adopt an official religion as their state religion or as the religious Leitkultur of their country (model iii). Others favor the support of religion as long as this is premised on the equal rights of all religions (model iv). And others think that the state can only support equal citizenship if the state does not support any religion whatsoever (model v).

This chapter explores a proposal that multicultural equality require some type of public multifaithism in a civic context where state–religion connections flourish. An establishment of religion, suitably pluralized, can offer one way forward. It deserves consideration as a practical option, especially if it would be the least disruptive and the least threatening to those for whom establishment is important or those who are uncomfortable with multiculturalism. Given the goal of citizen equality for democracy, this challenge deserves an adequate response: how will ethnoreligious groups receive appropriate recognition unless existing state–religion connections are sufficiently pluralized? By attaining that goal, a multiculturalism in which religion is just one of a number of valued identities and forms of social organization can be recognized as such in a public and political way.

The disintegration of the Soviet empire and the decrease in ideological tension within the Security Council has allowed the United Nations to respond effectively to crisis and issues that threaten international security, safety and peace. Since the fall of the Soviet Union an ever growing amount of United Nations members have propagated and shown willingness to approach peace-keeping on a multi-lateral level. Among the many suggestions, an increasing idea has risen among the members to implement a standing army at the United Nations.

In this essay, Talal Asad reflects on politics in contemporary Egypt and its relationship with Islamic tradition. Against the background of the Egyptian revolution of January 2011 and its following events, including hostility towards the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters, Asad not only looks at the links between the modern secular worldview and Islam but fundamentally for the aspects of this tradition that, according to secularists, are incompatible with the modern sovereign state. Assuming a critical stance on modern practice and discourse – aimed at undermining Islamic tradition – the author explores the possibilities of reintegrating this tradition into the post-2011 Egyptian democratic path but using it only as a model for how liberal states can benefit from a kind of embodiment of customs and ethical principles offered by tradition.

Arguably, the point of politics is not to transcend to a higher level where conflict no longer exists, but to manage conflict through a generally agreed upon mode of conflict resolution: a political system. The fact of pluralism in liberal democracies shows that people are not likely to agree upon a single monological discourse with which to justify all law and policy. On the other hand, the remarkable peacefulness of liberal democracies shows that people generally accept its modus operandi of managing conflicting claims and ideals. To expect more than this is both strangely otherworldly and may be the first step towards domination, religious or otherwise.

This article suggests that the Gezi Park protests in general, and particularly the presence there of the Anti-Capitalist Muslims is a valuable example for studying the ambiguity and complexity of the secular/Islamic paradigm in Turkey. Conducting field research on the formation of the Anti-Capitalist Muslim identity, I argue that the secular/Islamic divide is politically produced, and potentially vulnerable to contestations and transformations, for it opens the socio-political landscape to the production of multiple secularisation projects beyond this divide.

"What is secularism? Can secularism be compatible with post-colonial democracies? In the last years, a wide literature emerged in post-colonial societies has been focused on the notion of secularism and its relation with democracy. In this respect, the case of India is particularly relevant. In this country, “Nehru-Gandhi consensus” on the secular rule was based on the recognition of the difficulty to overcome the deep religious antagonisms emerged in the aftermath of the declaration of Independence. However, critics of secularism have shown that the process of secularisation in India has presented ambivalences and disintegrative potential.
This paper is concerned with the criticisms raised by two influential Indian scholars, namely Partha Chatterjee and Neera Chandhoke. In particular, it is focused on their critiques of Rawls’ model of political tolerance. Can the model of “reasonable pluralism” be useful in divided societies like India? I will show that the arguments raised by Chandhoke and Chatterjee cannot grasp key issues involved in this model. Although these two scholars present two distinct strategies of criticism (cultural relativism versus universalism of the principle of moral equality), both are likely to disregard the asymmetry between democratic legitimacy and justification, in other words both assume that liberal models of tolerance and reasonability would be acceptable and fully justified only by liberals."

It is Marathi version of HINDUTVA: SAVARKAR UNMASKED.
Based on the documents of Hindu Mahasabha & RSS it shows the real face of 'Veer' Savarkar who betrayed the Freedom Struggle, formed coalition governments with the Muslim League in 1942, demanded promulgation of 'Manusmriti' as Indian constitution and supported the two-nation theory of Muslim League.
It is also available in English, Hindi, Malayalam, Kannada, Punjabi.

Precies twee jaar na de mislukte coup tegen Erdoğan vaardigde het Turkse regime op 15 juli 2018 een decreet uit dat de autonomie van alle kunstenaars aan staatsinstellingen aan banden legt. Het is een zoveelste aanval tegen de vrije kunsten in Turkije, terwijl de politieke ruimte intussen één groot theater lijkt te worden. Wat staat er tussen de macht en het verzet op het spel?

As Derrida suggests in the opening pages of The Other Heading, the question of Europe is both “a question that will always be of current interest” and the product of the pressure exerted by a particular imminence.  The question, and the response to this question — what is Europe? — always refers both to the ever-present (the essential Europe), the particular or contingent (Europe as it is), and demands an equation or conciliation of the two.  In the two decades since the publication of Derrida’s text, the question of Europe has been promoted by the apparent crisis of an engagement with two imminent Others: in the form of the seemingly permanent presence of Muslim migrants and demands by Turkey to gain membership in Europe.  In response to these Others, a dual and seemingly contradictory definition of Europe has emerged — Europe as secular and Christian.  Europe is secular in relation to its Muslim migrants, and Christian in the face of secular/Muslim Turkey.  Within this dualistic definition, often voiced by the same figures, no contradiction, excess or difference is permitted.  Instead, a socio-historical paradigm in which Christianity and the secular form a necessary and symbiotic relationship is evoked.  This chapter will investigate this response to the imminent question of Europe and suggest that Derrida’s notions of Europe as difference-to-oneself, of the other heading, and the other of the heading, permit an opportunity to re-evaluate the relationship between Europe, Christianity and the secular, and open new possibilities for a Europe to come.

This paper explores the relationship of historical narratives to contemporary political theory by considering the merits of the rival theories of pluralism and democracy presented by John Rawls and Charles Taylor. While Rawls and Taylor appear to agree on the importance of an overlapping consensus, by situating the idea within their respective historical narratives of modern democracy and pluralism, this paper demonstrates how the two theorists differ in their understanding of the problem of pluralism and how it relates to modern democracy, resulting in competing conceptions of an overlapping consensus. Rawls’s historical account showcases the ability of once hostile religious doctrines to overcome their aggressive tendencies through the experience of well-functioning, mutually beneficial political arrangements over time. Therefore, Rawls’s idea of overlapping consensus seeks permanent arrangements to resolve the tension. In contrast, Taylor characterizes pluralism and modern democracy as in an enduring dilemma, produced by profound shifts in self-understandings, one that cannot be forever solved and thus requires repeated creative solutions. Therefore, Taylor’s conception of overlapping consensus is flexible, emphasizing dialogue and mutual understanding between citizens. Drawing on interpretivist approaches to social science, this paper argues for the possibility of evaluating these two narratives, arguing that Taylor offers a comparatively more compelling narrative on the grounds that it can better account for the conditions of modern democratic life and the sociological dynamics in contemporary Western religious belief, resulting in a more desirable means of addressing this form of democratic anxiety.

By 1996 the tacit application of selected terms of the new constitution of South Africa and an unreported case regarding the Bible had effectively displaced the belief in the Bible by 75% of the population with a new state religion based on humanism

BAGIAN 1 PENDAHULUAN Singapura, seperti kita ketahui, merupakan Negara muda modern dengan basis ekonomi terbuka. Bersama dengan Hong Kong, Korea dan Taiwan, Singapura memulai perjalanannya dari Negara dunia ketiga di Asia menjadi Negara maju. Namun kita dapat mebandingkan diantara keempatnya bahwa pencapaian Singapura merupakan suatu pencapaian yang outstanding sebelum era 2010. Lalu apa hubungannya kemajuan ini dengan sekularisme? Para pendiri Singapura sadar bahwa, dalam pilihan basis ekonomi terbuka, mereka berada diantara modernitas barat yang individualistik dengan identitas Asia yang berorientasi pada kelompok. Seperti halnya dengan pencarian sejarah mereka, maka Singapura juga sadar pentingnya identitas bangsa mereka. BAGIAN 2 SEKILAS FAKTA TENTANG SINGAPURA Singapura tidak dipungkiri memiliki segudang fakta yang menjadikannya sangat unik. Negara yang secara teritori terbilang sangat kecil tapi seklaigus adalah salah satu pemimpin ekonomi dunia, bangsa yang sangat makmur, tertib, bersih dan teratur serta berpendidikan. Ditambah lagi, Singapura memiliki keberagaman populasi yang cukup variatif, terdiri dari 74% etnis Cina, 14% etnis Melayu, 9% etnis India serta 3% Eurasia dan lain-lain. Jika dilihat dalam komposisi agama, Negara ini 1 terdiri dari 33% Buddhist, 18% Kristen, 18% tidak menganut agama apapun, 15% Islam, 5% Hindu dan keyakinan lainnya sebanyak 9%. Yang menarik disini adalah 18% yang tidak menganut agama apapun tersebut disebut "Sekular", dan kelompok 2 ini sebenarnya tidak memiliki perlindungan secara hukum sebagaimana para

This chapter in the e-book book Nations Under God (available at http://www.e-ir.info/2015/08/26/edited-collection-nations-under-god-the-geopolitics-of-faith-in-the-21st-century/) examines the competition between religious and secular political actors in modern society.

Bhagat Singh on Communal Riots and their Cure (Sampradayik dangen aur unka illaj) [First Published: in Punjabi monthly Kirti in June 1928]. This important article by great martyr BHagat Singh is relevant even today as religious polarization is the main trick in the hands of the rulers like the British to divide people.

Contrary to many of the predictions of secularization theory, religion seems to be at the heart of political contests in avowedly secular nation-states. While religious identities seem to define many modern polities or political orientations, "spiritual but not religious" (SBNR) has arisen as a growing identification that eschews these forms of "organized religion." The politics of the spiritual in contemporary worlds points toward neoliberal emphases on flexible labor and self-making, but also indexes a longer genealogy of the categories of religion and superstition in colonial contexts. From Reformation invectives against superstition to colonial regulations against superstitious practices, a history of the distinction between "true" and "false" religion has informed the more recent separation of spirituality from religion proper. Emerging in the 19th century, movements emphasizing personal spirituality in opposition to organized religion both extended post-Reformation visions of true religion while also adopting some of the very practices that European reformers had deemed false religion. To complicate matters further, the notion of religion that spirituality came to oppose also contradicted what scholars have deemed a "Protestant" theological bias in the formation of the modern category of religion. This bias asserts that personal dispositions rather than outward manifestations are the essence of religion, but the "organized religion" that spirituality opposes is defined precisely by outward manifestations of structure and power. In this way, spirituality both extends and rejects the contradictory poles of the modern category of religion as both the essence of community and an eminently personal affair. Spirituality does not simply foreground these shifting poles of religion and not-religion in the modern era, but also highlights contemporary transformations in the category of politics itself. The emphasis on personal experience and self-transformation in "spiritual but not religious" movements points toward a similarly therapeutic register in movements for restorative justice or human rights. No longer confined to the realm of collective contests for state power, contemporary politics often speaks in the psycho-juridical register of spirituality. Defying the predictions of secularization theory, which proclaim the separation of church and state, religion does not seem to be going away as a public, political force. While many of the great social theorists of the 19th and early 20th centuries predicted the retreat of religion in the face of scientific rationality and the rise of the secular state, more recent events have led scholars to reappraise these tenets of secularization. Rather than withdrawing from the public sphere and eschewing political contestations, religious groups seem to be at the very heart of the most vibrant political conflicts in ostensibly secular states. Nor can this apparent politicization of religion be tied to any simplistic division between the secular West and the improperly secular rest.

https://oxfordre.com/religion/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-222?print

Italian Marxist thinker, Antonio Gramsci, who is well known for his works stressing on the importance of creating hegemonic projects against prevailing social structures, had written widely about 'Common Sense' in his Prison notebooks. According to Gramsci, common sense is everyday thinking which helps us in making sense of the things around us. It has a past and a tradition, and is therefore a product of history, which includes various political discourses. It is also constituted of contradictory components. It is constituted by notions which are formed by dominant interests as well as those which are counter-hegemonic. For example, the desire for a more equal world could be found within the common sense of an otherwise xenophobic and reactionary white working class individual. In short, within the common sense, there are components which can be used by proponents of both progressive as well as reactionary political formations to further their ends. Different political movements which have emerged in the USA as a result of the economic crisis are a telling point of this situation. While the progressive movements like " Occupy Wall Street " demanded an immediate resolution of the extremely in-egalitarian economic structure to resolve the crisis, reactionary formations like Tea party demanded the repealing of government subsidies to those individuals whom they believed were unfairly benefiting from it. Both movements were able to galvanize masses in their favour. The Shabrimala episode has also bought out similar options in front of political formations in Kerala. They can either appeal to the relatively egalitarian values present in the Malayali common sense, formed as a result of renaissance and Left wing movements, or to its reactionary patriarchal components. While the BJP unsurprisingly has decided to milk the opportunity for communal benefits, and thus appeal to reactionary components of the common sense, even the Congress has decided to join the bandwagon. Unlike the BJP, which is appealing merely to the Hindu population, the Congress has gone a step ahead and is appealing to believers at large, who according to them are facing attacks from the government run by atheists. On the other hand, the CPM and the other constituents of the LDF are presently involved in conducting large scale public gatherings not only in favour of the verdict, but also consistently reminding the Malayali public about renaissance movements in Kerala, its leaders, and how the steps taken by the Left at the moment is akin to these positions. Clearly, they are appealing to the progressive constituents of the common sense. In this context, let us examine the charges levied by the Congress against the CPM. These charges are to be treated with far more seriousness, because unlike the BJP,

An RTI application filed in Karnataka has brought to light alarming figures of enormous government funding sanctioned for construction and renovation of Churches in the State, which raises serious questions about State funding of evangelical activities of Christian missionaries in India. Four RTI applications were filed on 26 March 2016, addressed to the Directorate of Minorities Welfare in Karnataka, seeking information on funds granted to Christian minority organisations, Churches, Christian groups and associations that have received funds from the Government of Karnataka for construction, repair and renovation of churches. The information was sought separately for the financial years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16. The reply received from the Joint Director of the Directorate of Minorities Welfare, dated 19 May 2016, provides year-wise figures of funds granted to these institutions. The RTI response reveals that in the year 2015-16, a total of Rs. 1484.60 lakhs (Rs 14.85 crores) was granted for repair and renovation of churches alone. In the year 2014-15, Rs 1498.32 lakhs was provided in grants for construction of new " Community Halls " (Samudaya Bhavana) and Rs 1656.33 lakhs for repair and renovation of churches. In the year 2013-2014, Rs 672.10 lakhs was granted for construction of new " Community Halls " and Rs 1230.85 lakhs for repair and renovation of churches. The extent of government funding of construction and renovation of churches in Karnataka reinforces the concern many Hindus have been expressing about the discriminatory nature of secularism in India and the dangerous consequences of rampant proselytization which is a direct fallout of such state support to Christian evangelists in India.

DULLO, Eduardo. Política secular e intolerância religiosa na disputa eleitoral. In: Paula Montero. (Org.). Religiões e Controvérsias Públicas: experiências, práticas sociais e discursos. 1ed.São Paulo/Campinas: Terceiro Nome/Unicamp, 2015, v. 1, p. 27-47