Suchergebnisse

Examines the experience of Indonesia as a prime example of Islam's compatibility with democracy. The three main schools of thought in Islam regarding the relation between religion & state are described, along with equally controversial views within the Muslim world in regard to the relation between Islam & democracy. Although most Indonesians are Muslims, the nation's founders believed Indonesia should not be a theocratic state, but should uphold patriotic, humanitarian, & religious values. Religion is important in the private lives of the people, but they acknowledge diversity, & are basically egalitarian in their outlook, a necessary ingredient for democracy. It is noted that one of the five guiding principles upon which the Republic of Indonesia is based recognizes the existence of Almighty God, but religion functions as a moral support, not a state ideology. The emergence of political parties is examined as an indication of a healthy democracy. It is contended that Indonesia exemplifies a nation in which religion plays a vital social/moral role while remaining outside the power struggles of the political sphere. J. Lindroth

Papers presented at a national workshop on "60 years of secularism and pluralistic democracy in India", jointly organized by Centre for Study of Society and Secularism and Department of Political Science and Development Administration of Gandhigram Rural Institute, held at Chennai in April, 2010

AbstractAt the height of the influence of the secularisation thesis religion was understood to be absent from affairs of state and the law, including international politics and international law. As the critique of secularisation gained momentum this master narrative fell apart, and a new consensus began to take shape. The notion that religion had been ignored and should be 'brought back in' to International Relations took centre stage among many academics and practitioners. The assumption is that restoring religion in the right way will help address the problems associated with having ignored religion in IR, paving the way for the marginalisation of violent religion and globalisation of religious freedom. This article undertakes a critical analysis of this restorative narrative and the religious and political world it is creating. It then proposes a different approach to the intersection of religion and world politics after secularism. This approach draws attention to the authority of transnational actors such as the United States, United Nations, and European Union to shape the public administration of religious affairs globally. Channels through which this is accomplished include the promotion of religious freedom, humanitarian intervention, foreign aid, nation building and democratisation, counterterrorism and peace-building efforts, and the pronouncements of supra-national courts.

Examines the two concepts of secularist thinking that have dominated 20th-century US political culture. Positive & a negative secularism, similar to Berlin's (1958) terms of positive & negative liberty, have had an impact on the institutions & practical politics of the current cultural conflict. Negative secularism, similar to First Amendment reasoning, holds that religion should not be established in the political framework, while positive secularism wishes to triumph over religious faith & to leave religion, at best, without influence in the political realm. Negative secularism implies a theoretic possibility that religionists & nonreligionists could be equal players in political decision making & that citizens have the freedom to participate according to their individual consciences & to associate in moral communities possessing political freedoms. Positive secularism contains the sinister features that fuel crusades, but there is a need to recognize that vibrantly pluralistic religious life offers the greatest potential for respect of the dignity of human life. L. A. Hoffman