Religion in politics covers various topics related to the effects ofreligion onpolitics. Religion has been claimed to be "the source of some of the most remarkable political mobilizations of our times".[1] Beyonduniversalist ideologies, religions have also beeninvolved in nationalist politics. Various political doctrines have been directly influenced or inspired by religions. Some religious strands supportreligious supremacism.
Various strands ofpolitical Islam exist, with most of them falling under the umbrella term ofIslamism.Graham Fuller has argued for a broader notion of Islamism as a form ofidentity politics, involving "support for [Muslim] identity, authenticity, broader regionalism, revivalism, [and] revitalization of the community."[2] This frequently may take asocially conservative orreactionary form, as inwahhabism andsalafism. Ideologies which espouseIslamic modernism includeIslamic socialism andpost-Islamism.
Christian political movements range fromChristian socialism,Christian communism, andChristian anarchism on theleft, toChristian democracy onthe centre,[3] toChristian supremacy andChristian fascism on theChristian right and theChristian Identity movement.
Religious Zionism seeks to create areligious Jewish state.
TheKhalistan movement aims to create a homeland forSikhs.
Hindu nationalism exists in theHindutva movement.
Extremist forms of religious politics includereligious terrorism, examples include:
Religious political issues may involve, but are not limited to, those concerningfreedom of religion, applications ofreligious law, and the right toreligious education.
States have adopted various attitudes towards religions, ranging fromtheocracy tostate atheism.
A theocracy is "government by divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided".[5]Modern day recognised theocracies include theIslamic Republic of Iran[6] and theHoly See,[7] while theTaliban andIslamic State are insurgencies attempting to create suchpolities. Historical examples include the IslamicCaliphates and thePapal States.
A more modest form of religious state activity is having an officialstate religion. Unlike a theocracy, this maintains the superiority of the state over the religious authorities. Over 20% (a total of 43) of the countries in the world have a state religion, most of them (27) being Muslim countries.[8] There are also 13 officiallyBuddhist countries such asBhutan,[9] while state churches are present in 27 countries.
In contrast to religious states,secular states recognise no religion. This is often called the principle of theseparation of church and state. A more strictly prescribed version,Laïcité, is practiced inFrance, which prohibits all religious expressions in many public contexts.[10]
Some states areexplicitly atheistic, usually those which were produced byrevolution, such as varioussocialist states or theFrench First Republic.
There have also been cases of statescreating their own religions, such asimperial cults or theCult of Reason.
Understanding religion’s impact onpolitical behaviour is essential because of its complex relationship to the individual: for a political subject, faith is at once anideology and anidentity.[11] As a result, political scientists are divided on whether to consider it alongside otherethnic cleavages such asrace,language,caste, andtribe, or whether to recognise it as a separate, special kind of political influence.[12]
Daniel N. Posner holds the former perspective: that religion should be conflated with identity. He underlines that identity is important in politics not because of some “passions [or] traditions it embodies”, but because it reflects “the expected behaviour of other political factors”.[13] In such aframework, religion is treated as afungible label that can be ‘activated’ and constitute a criterion for membership in anethnic group.[14]
The latter perspective has been argued by relatively recent scholars, advocating for “(More) Serious”[11] attention to religion in Comparative Politics. Grzymala-Busse outlines three often overlooked characteristics of religion which differentiate it from other markers ofidentity:
Considering these characteristics, it becomes possible to consider religion as a unique identityvariable with immense power. Several analyses even regard religion as avariable so potent that it is able to reinforce other identities, and as a result allows religious components insecular spheres ofsociety (see: Iversen and Rosenbluth, 2006; Trejo, 2009; Grossman, 2015).[16][17][18]
There have been arguments for and against a role for religion in politics.Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has argued that "faith and state should be kept separate" as "the most sinister and oppressive states in the world are those that use God to control the minds and actions of their populations", such asIran andSaudi Arabia.[19] To this,Dawn Foster has responded that when religion is fully unmoored from politics it becomes all the more insular and more open to abuse.[19]
{{cite news}}:|last= has generic name (help)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
