Defense republican, republican fight, republican front, republican meritocracy, equality republican, republican secularism, etc., expressions abound, especially during the electoral evenings, combining the adjective Republican to a noun. These expressions, familiar for many sound like recognition signals. They replay the rally reflexes of the divided dispersed forces against the supposed enemies of the Republic. Adapted from the source document.
Contemporary discussions of secularism in India have been constrained by the tradition-modern (western) dichotomy. For some, secularism is originally a Christian doctrine adapted to modern western conditions, & means the strict separation of church & state. It is also predominantly a single-value doctrine, motivated either by liberty (as in the United states) or equality of citizenship (as in France) more suited to single-religion societies than to the socio-cultural context of India where it is more appropriate to rely on resources of multiple & indigenous religious traditions for the sake of quite different values of peace & toleration. Others argue that India has the civilizational resource from which to retrieve its own conception of secularism captured best by the phrase 'sarva dharma samb-hava' (equal respect for all religions). I argue instead that India has worked out a distinctive conception of the secular that was at once Indian & modern. This remains a practical conception rather than a coherent doctrine or theory, & can thus be called Indian secularism only by extension. This conception builds on traditional resources as well as on the legacy of the British colonial state but innovatively transforms them. Many distinctive features characterize it. First, it deals simultaneously with inter-religious & intra-religious domination. Second, it has an explicit multi-value character. Third, it rejects strict separation. Separation does not mean exclusion or strict neutrality but what I call principled distance. Fourth, it implies neither respectful indifference nor active hostility but respectful transformation of religion. In short, secularism inherits the tradition of religious reform that began in India both prior to the advent of colonial modernity & because of a critical engagement with it. Finally, Indian secularism is an ethically-sensitive practical settlement & less a scientific, rationalist doctrine worked out by ideologues & implemented by political agents. Adapted from the source document.
Turkey is the only Muslim country in which laicism is enshrined in the constitution. State, politics & in Turkey are for the most part secularized. Moreover, Islam in Turkey has been politicized in two distinct ways: the state, in order to secularize the population, homogenize different ethnical & confessional groups & preserve the country's territorial integrity propagating a republican & ethno-nationalist state Islam; & by & social groups! so as to break the Kemalist monopoly on the interpretation of Islam & end restrictions on religious freedom. On the whole, the Kemalist interpretation of laicism is authoritarian & undemocratic. The extent to which it can serve as a model for other Muslim countries is therefore limited. Adapted from the source document.
This article traces the controversy generated by the political enterprise to legislate against full veils in the public space in France. The decision made in 2010 by the Conseil Constitutionnel validating the law and putting an end to the constitutional controversy could be interpreted as the byproduct of both a legicentric tradition and the French assertive secularism. Yet, stating this tells nothing about how this decision was made possible. Delving into the law-making process, the article shows how seriously the constitutional law has been taken into account and follows the way political stakeholders and legal experts have disputed and adjusted with one another. It highlights the virtue of process-tracing analysis to understand, how constitutional law frames the political game and determines the path of the law, and conversely how political and legal stakeholders manage to enlist the law to their political enterprise, forcing it to speak against full veils. Adapted from the source document.
There are today intense debates about Islam, secularism and democracy. The arguments raised by the various protagonists refer to implicit representations of the possible relationships between these three terms. They also refer to predetermined conceptions of the historical processes at work in contemporary Muslim societies. We might try to clarify the meaning given to each of these three terms and, consequently, take a new look at the concepts that are widely circulated in the contemporary debate. Adapted from the source document.
By comparing it with the secular feminism that appeared in some Muslim societies starting in the early 20th Century, and sketching its trajectory since its appearance in the 1980s, the novelty of Islamic feminism is brought to light. This movement devoted most of its efforts to defending the rights of citizenship and practiced a secular-nationalist, Islamic-modernist and humanitarian discourse. Islamic feminism, for its part, based its demand for social justice and absolute equality between the genders on sacred texts. Its development has consisted of two stages. In the first stage, which lasted two decades, a model of gender equality in Islam was elaborated on the basis of an innovative reading of the Koran and the fiqh (Islamic law). Although this model drew on the most recent analytical tools of the social sciences, it did not depart from the classical exegetical tradition. The second stage, which began only a few years ago, is characterized, on the one hand, by a desire on the part of its theoreticians to break free of this constraining framework of thought and, on the other, by efforts to construct a transnational movement. It would seem that, in Muslim circles, these two major trends of feminism (secular and Islamic) are today in the process of fusing. Adapted from the source document.
Secularism, Humanism, Québec, tolerance Laïcité et humanisme : un titre et deux mots de grande actualité tant au Québec qu’ailleurs dans le monde. Cet ouvrage, avec des contributions d’acteurs clés qui alimentent le débat sur le sens et la définition de la laïcité dans le Québec du xxie siècle, arrive à point nommé.Les textes de Thomas De Koninck, Jacques Dufresne, Georges Leroux, Guillaume Rousseau, Mathieu Bock-Côté, Normand Baillargeon, Mohamed Lotfi et Charles Le Blanc ne défendent pas une thèse particulière à propos de la laïcité. Ils forment plutôt un ensemble de réflexions polyphoniques qui se présentent comme une contribution philosophique, juridique, politique et sociologique à la question de la neutralité religieuse de l’État.À la fin du recueil figure un texte de Voltaire sur la tolérance, qui vient à la fois inscrire les questions abordées dans une perspective historique et illustrer le caractère continu d’un débat dont cet ouvrage se veut l’un des nombreux échos.