Suchergebnisse

Islam and secularism; Islam and state

Introduction : why Muslims need a secular state -- Islam, the state, and politics in historical perspective -- Constitutionalism, human rights, and citizenship -- India : state secularism and communal violence -- Turkey : contradictions of authoritarian secularism -- Indonesia : realities of diversity and prospects of pluralism -- Conclusion : negotiating the future of Shariʻa

Secularism as an ideology and a framework of governance evolved in the West, but this Western inheritance had no relevance to secularism in India. It was Jawaharlal Nehru who gave currency to it in India. Hindu masses had not the slightest notion of what secularism meant or should mean. They saw it as an invitation for social and communal harmony and as a concession to the minorities. Ultra Hindu groups such as the Hindu Mahasabha and the Rashtriya Sweyam Sangh were hostile to the idea of secularism. Muslim responses were even more varied. Muslim theologians rejected it on theological grounds. Muslims who were influenced by liberal and leftist ideologies espoused it. A large number of Muslims were sceptical whether the Indian State could remain secular for long. For them the presence of Nehru at the helm of affairs was a greater assurance that they would be treated fairly. Therefore, they decided to wait and watch. However, subsequent developments weakened the thrust towards secularism. The developments include Jaiprakash Narayan's idea of non-statal politics and the legitimacy it provided to the forces which had been and were opposed to secularism from the start. The current situation is a continuation of that process.

This work will examine the juxtaposition between political and novelistic intentions that distinguish Orhan Pamuk's treatment of secularism. While Pamuk's work can be read as a fierce critique of state-imposed secularism in Turkey, he is simultaneously a great champion of a liberal secularist ideology, on which his texts are based even as they claim to be dialogic and polyphonic. This paper will set out the ways in which Pamuk frames the competing political claims of secularism and Islam – key issues on a global scale as well as in Turkish politics – in order to decipher its implications for the contemporary world and the future. Given Pamuk's status as a global writer, it is essential that his texts are analysed for their ideological underpinnings, so that any conclusions drawn from them are problematized and seen in a broader context. By analysing Snow, along with a selection of Pamuk's other novels and writings, this article will explore Pamuk's view of secularism generally, and specifically its function in Turkish society, and in doing so will draw out the tensions in his case for liberal secularism. In order to do this, it will draw upon some recent critical scholarship on secularism including Ziaudddin Sardar, Talal Asad, Saba Mahmood and T. N. Madan.

One of the main characteristics of our societies is the existence of a plurality of believes, religious or not, which affect the way people live. The current essay is a defense of secularism as de the best way to achieve a peaceful & just coexistence among these different believes. Taking as the core of it the respect for human rights & the correlative "neutrality" of the State in relation to religious issues, the author thinks that secularism is the best way to defend the common good &, at the same time, the differences which are legitimate inside the community. These differences must rest on the proclamation of the equality among all human beings (human rights). For this reason secularism opposes to multiculturalism, which puts the emphasis in the differences even beyond this very basic idea of equality. Adapted from the source document.

At a time when many public commentators are turning against multiculturalism in response to fears about militant Islam, immigration or social cohesion, Tariq Modood, one of the world's leading authorities on multiculturalism, provides a distinctive contribution to these debates. He contends that the rise of Islamic terrorism has neither discredited multiculturalism nor heralded a clash of civilizations. Instead, it has highlighted a central challenge for the 21st century - the urgent need to include Muslims in contemporary conceptions of democratic citizenship. In the second edition of this popular and compelling book, Modood updates his original argument with two new chapters. He reassesses the relationship between multiculturalism, cosmopolitanism and assimilation, demonstrating that multiculturalism is crucial for successful integration. He also argues that while multiculturalism poses a significant challenge to existing forms of secularism, this challenge should not be exaggerated into a crisis. In so doing, Modood adds new vigor to the claim that multiculturalism remains a living force which is shaping our polities, even as its death is repeatedly announced. -- Publisher description

Prominent observers complain that public discourse in America is shallow and unedifying -- This debased conditions often attributed to, among other things, the resurgence of religion in public life. Steven D. Smith argues that this diagnosis has the matter backwards: it is not primarily religion but rather the strictures of secular rationalism that have drained our modern discourse of force and authenticity. Thus Rawlsian "public reason" filters appeals to religion or "other comprehensive doctrines" out of public deliberation. But these restrictions have the effect of excluding our deepest normative commitments, virtually assuring that the discourse will be shallow. Furthermore, because we cannot defend our normative positions without resorting to convictions that secular discourse deems inadmissible, we are frequently forced to smuggle in those convictions under the guise of benign notions such as freedom and equality. Smith suggests that this sort of smuggling is pervasive in modern secular discourse. He shows this by considering a series of controversial, contemporary issues, including the Supreme Court's assisted-suicide decisions, the "harm principle," separation of church and state, and freedom of conscience. He concludes by suggesting that it is possible and desirable to free public discourse of the constraints associated with secularism and "public reason

This article explores the phenomenology of post-secularism in Indonesia. Populist Islamic movement strike for islamization public sphere as a sign of post-secularism in Indonesia. The islamization proceeded both in government dan the public sphere. These phenomena show that the community of urban Muslims can't leave religious aspects in the public sphere. This research uses the qualitative-description method and library research models. The first result of this research shows that Islamic populism is coming from the urban Muslim middle class who have access to the modern world. Second, the populist Islamic movement who did islamization of the public sphere shows the strengthening of religion's role in the public sphere.

In this article, I argue that a universalistic thrust of secularism should not be located in a Habermasian deontological liberal principle of the priority of universal morality over particularistic ethical doctrines. I show that Habermas cannot plausibly demonstrate that this principle can be invariably applied across different cases. However, in order not to succumb to parochialism, the failure of the deontological model should not prompt us to give up on the search for a universalistic drive behind secularism. To this end, I advocate a Derridean critique of religion and secularism as an alternative solution. By deconstructing the Kantian dichotomy of faith vs. knowledge, Jacques Derrida shows that secularism is, paradoxically, both a concrete socio-political regime and a possibility for a radical change.

The EU's values of transnational peace, cooperation, secularism, rationality, and protection of civil liberties and human rights are amongst the most valuable legacies of the Enlightenment. The European project has weathered several crises in the first third of the 21st century, including a change of political direction in the United Kingdom. Brexit is viewed as a consequence of the UK's flawed electoral system, exposed as susceptible to hijacking by militant and disruptive minorities. The future of European values must be protected from politically unreliable systems such as the UK's FPTP. ; La Unión Europea se fundamenta en la cooperación pacífica entre naciones, así como en la razón, el secularismo y la protección de los derechos humanos y las libertades individuales. Todos ellos son valores propios de la Ilustración. El proyecto europeo ha sufrido varias crisis en el primer tercio del siglo XXI, entre ellas la salida del Reino Unido del club comunitario. El Brexit se explica como una consecuencia de la vulnerabilidad del sistema electoral británico, cuya circunscripción electoral individual por mayoría simple es poco representativa y fácilmente manipulable por minorías militantes y rupturistas. El futuro de los valores europeos debería protegerse de sistemas políticos poco fiables como el first past the post británico.