Suchergebnisse

Since late 2000s, the political landscape in Bangladesh moved from democracy to an authoritarian kleptocracy, and experienced a new set of political and social narratives. This paper aims to contest some of these dominant/official narratives which have been discursively constructed and promoted by the secularist parties (including the ruling regime) and groups in Bangladesh over recent years. Examining the sociopolitical and historical facts and figures of the country, we have identified five major contested narratives related to (a) Bengali nationalism in East Pakistan, (b) foundational ideology of Bangladesh's war of liberation, (c) state-sponsored Islamization in Bangladesh, (d) pro-liberation and anti-liberation dichotomy, and (e) war crimes trial. Drawing on a robust content analysis of the credible secondary sources substantiated by qualitative interviews, we have examined these dominant narratives and found that they are not supported by historical evidence and popular mandate, yet have been constructed largely to support and legitimize the current authoritarian regime. The paper offers both counter-narratives and some pragmatic policy recommendations to elude increasing polarization and sociopolitical instability and foster a peaceful democratic society in Bangladesh. ; Published version

In this paper I analyze Cécile Laborde's conception of justificatory secularism. Laborde points out that in her formulation and defense of the conception of justificatory secularism, she follows Rawls' conception of political liberalism to a certain extent. For that reason, I first provide a sketch of Rawls' conception of political liberalism. Then I focus on justificatory secularism, trying to show to what extent it displays similarities with the conception of political liberalism, but also how it differs. I am interested in whether justificatory secularism represents a better alternative to the conception of political liberalism or whether these two conceptions should be considered complementary. ; U ovom radu analiziraćemo stanovište sekularizma opravdanja koje je nedavno formulisala Sesil Labord. Labord jasno ističe da prilikom formulisanja i odbrane koncepcije sekularizma opravdanja u određenoj meri sledi Rolsovo shvatanje političkog liberalizma. Zbog toga ćemo u ovom radu najpre ponuditi skicu Rolsove koncepcije političkog liberalizma. Potom ćemo analizirati stanovište sekularizma opravdanja i nastojaćemo pritom da ukažemo u kojoj meri ono ima sličnosti sa koncepcijom političkog liberalizma, ali i u kojoj meri se od nje razlikuje. Tako da će nas prvenstveno interesovati da li koncepcija sekularizma opravdanja predstavlja bolju alternativu u odnosu na koncepciju političkog liberalizma ili na te dve koncepcije treba gledati kao na komplementarne

This study demonstrates how profoundly Turkey's main social clevage –Islam versus Secularism – is produced and reproduced by political parties in their attempts to form coherent sociopolitical bloc as a basis of mass support. The main purpose is to challenge the paradigm which understands social cleavages to be part of a 'social structure' that exists prior to political articulations. According to this standard perspective, social cleavages create the demand for political parties.

The classical liberal concern for freedom of religion today intersects with concerns of equality and respect for minorities, of what might be loosely termed 'multiculturalism'. When these minorities were primarily understood in terms of ethno-racial identities, multiculturalism and freedom of religion were seen at that time as quite separate policy and legal fields. As ethno-religious identities have become central to multiculturalism (and to rejections of multiculturalism), specifically in Western Europe in relation to its growing Muslim settlements, not only have the two fields intersected, new approaches to religion and equality have emerged. We consider the relationship between freedom of religion and ethno-religious equality, or alternatively, religion as faith or conscience and religion as group identity. We argue that the normative challenges raised by multicultural equality and integration cannot be met by individualist understandings of religion and freedom, by the idea of state neutrality, nor by laicist understandings of citizenship and equality. Hence, a re-thinking of the place of religion in public life and of religion as a public good and a re-configuring of political secularism in the context of religious diversity is necessary. We explore a number of pro-diversity approaches that suggest what a respectful and inclusive egalitarian governance of religious diversity might look like, and consider what might be usefully learnt from other countries, as Europe struggles with a deeper diversity than it has known for a long time. The moderate secularism that has historically evolved in Western Europe is potentially accommodative of religious diversity, just as it came to be of Christian churches, but it has to be 'multiculturalised'.

Recently, Bangladesh celebrated its half-century of independence and victory, the Golden Jubilee, with great ceremony and circumstance. The birth centenary of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the architect of Bangladesh, was also celebrated with due dignity. On this crucial double occasion, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has administered oaths simultaneously all over the country (United News of Bangladesh, 2021). All of the nation's citizenry shared the vision of a new Bangladesh, a Bangladesh that is corruption-free, non-communal and democratic. In other words, a future Bangladesh built in the light of the principles and ideals of the Father of the Nation - towards his Sonar Bangla (Golden Bengal). […]

It is conventional to see individualisation or privatisation as one of the chief responses to religion in modernity. In this paper, I explore a different line of argument, the attempt to align religion with the cohesion of communities. I take my starting point in antiquity, specifically Varro's idea of political theology and its critique in Augustine's City of God. I then show how these ideas were picked up and transformed by various thinkers since the seventeenth century: Rousseau, de Maistre, Boland, Comte, and Durkheim. It becomes clear that both liberal and conservative thinkers during these centuries found the notion attractive that religion is needed as a bond holding societies together. This created a problematic relationship between religious and political dynamics.

The Iranian 2009 massive anti-regime protests in the wake of the contested presidential elections and the Arab Spring have taken the scholars of Middle Eastern Studies and the international community by surprise. It seems that, despite the very diverse outcomes of the uprisings in Iran and across the Arab world, Middle Eastern societies are in the very middle of what has been called an 'unfinished revolution' (Sakbani 2011). Despite the confusion that affected the academic community following the surprising events of the past few years, a great amount of studies have been produced in order to identify the roots and make sense of the uprisings. For the most part, however, explanations for the events refer to and are based on well-known theoretical debates and paradigms. In the case of the Arab world, the fall of long-standing authoritarian regimes has revived scholarly interest for the transition to democracy paradigm, whereas studies on the resilience of authoritarian regimes are now perceived as over-estimating authoritarian rulers' grip on society. In addition, the electoral success of Islamist parties has re-ignited scholarly enthusiasm for the rather trite debate on the compatibility between Islam and democracy. In the case of Iran, similar debates centred on democratization versus authoritarian persistence and on the relationship among Islam, democracy and modernity have been animating academic discussions for the last two decades. The 2009 crisis strengthened 2 scholars' perception of Iranian society as democratic, liberal, secular and in conflict with the authoritarian Islamic regime. Indeed, many social scientists of Iranian Studies support the idea that the explosion of political and social crisis in Iran, such as the 2009 uprising, demonstrates the existence of that liberal, secular and 'modern' civil society willing to shake a backward and authoritarian regime off. These four books elaborate on this interpretative line of inquiry, setting forth interesting arguments for an analysis of the current ...

When the "jurisdictions" of religion and science overlap, the conclusions they each reach sometimes conflict. For example, religiously conservative views towards sex or the formation of the universe may be undermined by the secular instruction students receive in public schools. With respect to normative matters, such as views towards sex, courts have resolved the conflicts by stating that public school teachers can neither directly contradict religious beliefs nor compel adherence to the secular view. However, with respect to empirical matters, such as how planets formed, courts have implicitly recognized—although never expressly stated—that a different standard must apply. So long as sufficient evidence exists to support an empirical claim, a public school may teach it. The fact that it directly contradicts a deeply held religious belief, as does evolution for example, is irrelevant. How far does this principle extend? If scientific evidence leads us to conclude that a particular aspect of God cannot be true, can this be taught in the public schools? In order to explore this issue, I first lay out a framework that isolates the tension that exists between religion and science and that introduces the concept of the memist God. Second, I examine the extent to which science has spoken to the question of God's existence and I determine that it has certainly addressed one particular aspect. Specifically, science has disconfirmed the claim that the theist God has the power to violate the laws of physics. Last, once the issues are properly identified and the framework set, I explore whether teaching the non-existence of the theist God would violatethe underlying values of the religion clauses. I conclude, first, that teaching that the theist God does not exist would not violate any of the underlying values and second, that the consequences of doing so are not as far-reaching as may be initially believed.

In order to avoid both religious intolerance and religious indifference, we need to develop a positive notion of an open laicity or secularity that permits us to respect our religiously plural as well as secular contemporary situation. Open laicity or secularity is the practical and political consequence of a Protestant theology and spirituality. It represents a critical answer to the disaster of secularism and laicism. Most of the difficulties in the discussion between traditionalist Christians (Orthodox, Catholic, or Evangelical!) and modern, critical Christians (Protestant, Catholic, and maybe some Orthodox too!) come from a confusion between the danger of secularism and laicism, that this article criticizes very deeply, and the positive reality of a secular world, grounded in the very biblical and theological understanding of a created world, in which God has given to all human beings the task to behave in a rational, responsible, creative, and respectful way.

Abstract: Secularism is one of the most controversial concepts in Islamic thought. This concept which is rooted in Western history is not only opposed and rejected by some Muslim thinkers, but also critically accepted by some other Muslim thinkers. Muslim thinkers with various scientific backgrounds such as Abdul Karim Sorous, Nasir Hamid Abu Zayd, Nurcholis Madjid tend to accept the concept critically. This paper with descriptive analysis method shows that the elaboration of the concept of secularism by these thinkers not only shows the problematic and controversial concept of secularism, but also proves that the concept is transformed into the Islamic tradition both socio-historical, political, and philosophical. Sekularisme menjadi salah satu konsep yang paling kontroversial dalam pemikiran Islam. Konsep yang berakar dari sejarah Barat ini bukan hanya ditentang dan ditolak oleh sebagian pemikir Muslim, namun juga diterima secara kritis oleh sebagian pemikir Muslim kontemporer. Pembahasan artikel ini dengan metode komparatif dan deskriptif kualitatif serta dengan pendekatan filosofis menemukan bahwa pemikir-pemikir muslim mengkritik sekularisme model Barat, dan merekonstruksi makna sekularisme sesuai dengan konteks sosial, politik, dan kepercayaan masyarakat muslim. Atas dasar temuan ini, artikel ini menyimpulkan bahwa konsep sekularisme mengalami transformasi dan pergeseran makna dalam pemikiran Islam. Keywords: Secularism, Islamic Thought, Transformation, Abdul Karim Sorouh, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd Abstrak: Sekularisme menjadi salah satu konsep yang paling kontroversial dalam pemikiran Islam. Konsep yang berakar dari sejarah Barat ini bukan hanya ditentang dan ditolak oleh sebagian pemikir Muslim, namun juga diterima secara kritis oleh sebagian pemikir Muslim lainnya. Pemikir-pemikir Muslim dengan berbagai latar belakang keilmuan seperti Abdul Karim Sorous, Nasir Hamid Abu Zayd, Nurcholis Madjid cenderung menerima konsep tersebut secara kritis. Makalah ini dengan metode deskriptif analisis menunjukkan bahwa elaborasi konsep sekularisme oleh pemikir-pemikir tersebut bukan hanya menunjukkan betama problematis dan kontroversialnya konsep sekularisme, namun membuktikan pula bahwa konsep tersebut ditransformasi ke dalam tradisi Islam baik secara sosio-historis, politik, maupun filosofis. Kata kunci: Sekularisme, Pemikiran Islam, Transformasi, Abdul Karim Sorouh, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd

This article tackles the problem of religious radicalism. Religious radicalism is here interpreted as a protest against the pathology of secularism characterized by the privatization of religion. The privatization of religion is a process in which religion is regarded as an irrational and personal element, so that it cannot play a public role. In order to meet the pathology of privatization, this article offers the paradigm of post-secularism as proposed by Juergen Habermas that opens up the possibility for religion to actively participate in the public sphere. Furthermore, this writing argues that in post-secular society characterized by the public role of religion, it is essential to build a democratic and rational dialogue between religion and philosophy, faith and reason. A bridge that connects both is public reason. This article also shows that the post-secular condition opens up opportunities for theology to promote tolerance in a pluralistic society and to strengthen the public engagement of religion. This can avoid reducing religion to private piety without public responsibility while promoting the public engagement in religion in order to liberate the marginalized and oppressed.

Secularism has emerged as a central category of twenty-first century political thought that in many ways has replaced the theory of secularization. According to postcolonial scholars, neither the theory nor the practice of secularization was politically neutral. They define secularism as the set of discourses, policies, and constitutional arrangements whereby modern states and liberal elites have sought to unify nations and divide colonial populations. This definition is quite different from the original meaning of secularism, as an immanent scientific worldview linked to anticlericalism. Anthropologist Talal Asad has connected nineteenth-century worldview secularism to twenty-first century political secularism through a genealogical account that stresses continuities of liberal hegemony. This essay challenges this account. It argues that liberal elites did not merely subsume worldview secularism in their drive for state secularization. Using the tools of conceptual history, the essay shows that one reason that "secularization" only achieved its contemporary meaning in Germany after 1945 was that radical freethinkers and other anticlerical secularists had previously resisted liberal hegemony. The essay concludes by offering an agenda for research into the discontinuous history of these two types of secularism.

Since the 2010–11 popular uprisings that swept the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), rap music has served commentators to channel stories of disenfranchisement and oppression among the region's youth. Accounts that portray rappers as significant political actors, however, reproduce narratives of 'resistance' that focus on opposition to governance but overlook social inequalities. Further, the case studies of two Moroccan rappers illustrate that commentators value criticisms of social inequalities as long as they are not framed with a religious ethos. Terms such as Islamist rap serve to discredit dissent, proving that when it comes to reporting on Moroccan rap, journalists and academics disregard local expressions of grievance more related to class issues than to modes of governance. Through discourse analysis, open-ended interviews and ethnography (2011–15), this article argues for the urgency of listening to important voices of social and political dissent silenced due to a disregard for class biases.

The classical liberal concern for freedom of religion today intersects with concerns of equality and respect for minorities, of what might be loosely termed 'multiculturalism'. When these minorities were primarily understood in terms of ethno-racial identities, multiculturalism and freedom of religion were seen at that time as quite separate policy and legal fields. As ethno-religious identities have become central to multiculturalism (and to rejections of multiculturalism), specifically in Western Europe in relation to its growing Muslim settlements, not only have the two fields intersected, new approaches to religion and equality have emerged. We consider the relationship between freedom of religion and ethno-religious equality, or alternatively, religion as faith or conscience and religion as group identity. We argue that the normative challenges raised by multicultural equality and integration cannot be met by individualist understandings of religion and freedom, by the idea of state neutrality, nor by laicist understandings of citizenship and equality. Hence, a re-thinking of the place of religion in public life and of religion as a public good and a re-configuring of political secularism in the context of religious diversity is necessary. We explore a number of pro-diversity approaches that suggest what a respectful and inclusive egalitarian governance of religious diversity might look like, and consider what might be usefully learnt from other countries, as Europe struggles with a deeper diversity than it has known for a long time. The moderate secularism that has historically evolved in Western Europe is potentially accommodative of religious diversity, just as it came to be of Christian churches, but it has to be 'multiculturalised'.

This study consists of two main themes. The study primarily focuses on the founding cadres of the Republic, who seemed to have a goal of keeping distance from religion, had the motive of keeping religion under control. In this context, the main claim of the study is that the Republic of Turkey has a "Césaropapist" thought rather than "Secularist" patterns. Even though some practical disengagements regarding to the social life, such as the change of alphabet, regulations for dress, reciting the call to prayer in Turkish, were implemented, administrative staff and institutional structures continued to carry the characteristics of Ottoman Empire. While the existence of the Presidency of Religious Affairs is used to ensure the regulation of religion under the control of the state; On the other hand, this institution is manipulated by the political elites as the "ideological state apparatus" since religious beliefs have the potential to shape social life. The result of the study is that the Republic of Turkey is not secular, on the contrary, Césaropapist, and the Presidency of Religious Affairs has become the "ideological state apparatus", supported by some historical, political and sociological examples. ; Bu çalışma iki ana temadan oluşmaktadır. Çalışma ilk olarak; din ile arasına mesafe koyma gibi bir hedefi varmış görünen Cumhuriyetin kurucu kadrolarının aslen, dini kontrol altında tutma güdüsüne odaklanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, çalışmada öncelikle, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti'nin "Laik" örüntülerden ziyade "Sezaropapist" bir düşünceye sahip olduğu iddia edilmektedir. Toplumsal hayata ilişkin bir takım pratik kopuşlar (alfabe değişikliği, kıyafet kanunları, Ezan'ın Türkçeleştirilmesi gibi) sağlansa da asıl olarak yönetim kadroları ve kurumsal yapılar Osmanlı'nın devamı niteliğindeydi. Çalışmada odaklanılan diğer kısım bu bağlamda ortaya çıkmaktadır. Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı'nın varlığı, bir yandan devletin kontrolü altında dinin düzenlemesini sağlamak için kullanılırken; diğer yandan bu kurum, dini inançların toplumsal ...