Suchergebnisse

An exploration of religion & politics in Central Asia notes that neither Islam nor liberal democracy has filled the ideological vacuum left by the collapse of communism. Instead, the rapid growth of Islam has been accompanied by the formation of political systems described as "secular authoritarianisms." It is argued that the Taliban's seizure of power in Afghanistan had a significant impact on the political dynamics in Central Asia. The threat of Islamic extremism has led to a strengthening of authoritarian tendencies & a lessening of democratic freedoms. The seriousness of the threat is evaluated in relation to each state's historical experiences, internal conditions, regional rivalries/disputes, & international interests. It is concluded that the legacy of the Russo-Afghan conflict has hindered post-independence nation-building; the intensification of regional rivalries has worsened internal development while created an unpredictable external environment; Islam's cultural/political growth has stifled democratic trends; radicalization has increased authoritarianism; & the pursuit of their own interests on the part of international forces has enhanced the growth of Islamic radicalism. J. Lindroth

ObjectiveThis article explores how religion shapes Latino opinion regarding religion and public life.MethodsThis article uses a 2006 national survey of Latinos (N = 4,016) conducted by the Pew Research Center. The data are investigated through logistic regression and ordered logit.ResultsReligion does have a substantial influence on how Latinos view the role of the church in politics. Specifically, Latinos with higher levels of religious behavior and more orthodox beliefs were significantly more supportive of religion being involved in politics. Religious affiliation also mattered.ConclusionReligion is a powerful influence on how Latinos feel about the role of religion in politics. This influence mirrors findings from studies of the general population (Jelen and Wilcox, 1995; Guth et al., 2006; Smidt, 2007), giving support to the notion that there is little difference between Latinos and the general population when it comes to the influence of religion.

Political science is in same time old and young science. Old, if we have in mind politics as subject of research, and young if we think about institutions in which politics is only subject of research or education. Having in mind religion as subject of political science research, we can easily conclude that all books in early history of mankind, which were dedicated to political topics, had for the first subject religion. That is clear if we remember that first forms of political organizations in old Babylon, Egypt and Israel are inseparable connected with gods. Gods gave legitimacy to those states. But so political science institutions in generally so political sciences of religions, or politologie des religions in French, was born late. The first subjects of research in political sciences institutions were: state, political regimes, political parties, theory of politics, political systems, etc. Religion was studied very rarely. Modern political science was born under influence of French intellectuals: Diderot, Rousseau, Voltaire etc. They considered that religion will disappear with education and development. Their compatriot Alexis de Tocqueville thought contrary to their prognosis. The time gave right to Tocqueville. In the second part of XX century when the world development was the highest, religion maintained its position in big part of globe and became stronger in a lot of states. That created big challenge for political science. Many of political scientists started with research concerning influence of religion into politics. That create, as the first step, centres for research of relations among religion and politics as is labaratoire RELIGION ET POLITIQUE at Institute d'etudes politiques in Paris or l'Observatoire du Religieux at Institut d'etudes politique in Aix EN Provence en Frence, and finally that created special scientific discipline among political sciences which name is Religion and politics, Political Science if Religion, Politologie of Religion or Politologie des religions in French. Politologia della religione in italien or Religionspolitologie in German.Key words: Religion, Politics, Political Science, Development, Lecturing

The study of religion holds great promise for the study of identity, institutional origins, the state, and the strategies of institutional actors in comparative politics. Doctrinal differences translate into distinct patterns of state institutions, economic performance, and policy preferences. Religious attachments affect voting and popular mobilization. Churches can become powerful institutional players that lobby, influence policy, and form effective coalitions with both secular and denominational partners. Finally, natural religious monopolies and (conversely) resolutely secular countries show how churches have played a central role in the struggle of nations and states. The relationship is thus mutual: religion influences political attitudes and institutions, and politics affects religious practice and political activity. Adapted from the source document.

The following was due to appear as the Introduction to the six articles of the special issue on: 'Political Religions and the Sacralisation of Politics' published in TMPR issue 6.3. Owing to an oversight in the last stages of production, the introduction by Peter Lambert and Jie-Hyun Lim was omitted, and is republished here as an Appendix to the double issue 8.3/4 on the occasion of the publication of five more articles based on the same conference in a featured section. (See the Editorial Statement and the Introduction by Robert Mallet and Peter Lambert. The original articles can be obtained via the Web at http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g727349332.) Its relevance to the current issue lies mainly in the organiser's explanation of the aims of the RICH project on mass dictatorship, which has a direct bearing on the featured theme of 'heroisation'. The editors would like to apologise to Peter Lambert, Jie-Hyun Lim and RICH for the original error. Adapted from the source document.

This article discusses the theoretical differences between civil religion, political religion, & their relationship based on the non-optional. While Emilio Gentile has provided a foundation to explore civil & political religions, he has not provided a definition for his understanding of what a religion is & the possible antithesis to religious organization. In order to define the civil & political variants of religion accurately, a solid understanding of religion, its place in history, & how it has changed needs to be addressed. This article explores a definition of religion that understands the civil & political variants by situating them within the non-optional element of religion. Crucial to the non-optional element is the idea of "choice." It is, therefore, the conclusion of this article that choice, the non-optional basis of religion, is the core difference between what is a civil religion, a political religion, & a religion. 1 Figure. Adapted from the source document.

The commitment of the courts to the essentials of the Seeger-Welsh formulation will serve to protect individuals and communities of faith in the emerging postmodern world from unwarranted regulation of religion at the hands of government. The same formulation may also protect the rights of atheists if an atheist can demonsrate that his or her beliefs constitute the most comprehsenive framwork by which s/he lives and guides and fundamentally directs her/his life. If this be so, then atheism should probably qualify as tantamant to or equivalent to religion for constitutional purposes. However, the Supreme Court should still take up this matter for clarification. D. Knaff

Explores the usurpation of religion by fascist & other totalitarian regimes to further their own ends. Attempts by these governments to forge new moralities from existent religious beliefs are seen as efforts to engineer a new model of human being. In conveying the complexities of the relationship between political religions & social evil, the response of European Christians to pseudo-religious totalitarian dictatorships is explored. Grim experiences severed Christian Europe's ties to the extreme Right but clerics ignore the massive loss of life & misery resulting from Marxism & continue to flirt with ideologies of the totalitarian Left. A. E. Sadler

This study investigates the factors that affect variations in secular attitudes toward politics. The literature suggests that modernization may weaken traditional bonds with religious adherence and the state can assume an important role in this endeavor through mass education, industrialization, and other factors. However, this explanation is incomplete in light of the resurgence of religious movements. This study argues that economic inequality increases the positive evaluation of the role of religion in politics through its effect on religiosity and participation in religious organizations. Employing a multilevel analysis on 40 countries, this study demonstrates that inequality decreases attitudes toward support for two dimensions of public secularization: the secularization of public office holders and the influence of religious leaders in politics. Simultaneously, the effect of modernization on these attitudes varies. The results also suggest that although inequality diminishes secular attitudes of all socioeconomic groups, its effect is nonlinear, with a greater effect on the poor. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]