Religion Democracy and the Twin Tolerations

Religion, Democracy, and the Twin Tolerations

Page 1 of 21

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014.All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the l icence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of amonograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: UniversityLibrary of Southern Denmark; date: 08 May 2014

UniversityPressScholarshipOnlineOxfordScholarshipOnline

RethinkingReligionandWorldAffairsTimothySamuelShah,AlfredStepan,andMonicaDuffyToft

Printpublicationdate:2012PrintISBN-13:9780199827978PublishedtoOxfordScholarshipOnline:May2012DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199827978.001.0001

Religion,Democracy,andtheTwinTolerationsAlfredStepan

DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199827978.003.0005

AbstractandKeywords

Areall,oronlysome,oftheworld'sreligioussystemspoliticallycompatiblewithdemocracy?Thisis,ofcourse,oneofthemostimportantandheatedlydebatedquestionsofourtimes.Thischaptercontributestothisdebatefromtheperspectiveofcomparativepolitics.Morespecifically,itdiscussesthreequestions,theanswerstowhichshouldimproveourunderstandingofthiscriticalissue.First,whataretheminimalinstitutionalandpoliticalrequirementsthatapolitymustsatisfybeforeitcanbeconsideredademocracy?Second,howhaveasetoflongstandingdemocraciesthefifteencountriesintheEuropeanUnion(EU)actuallymettheserequirements,andwhatinfluentialmisinterpretationsoftheWesternEuropeanexperiencewithreligionanddemocracymustweavoid?Third,whataretheimplicationsoftheanswerstoourfirsttwoquestionsforpolitiesheavilyinfluencedbysuchculturalandreligioustraditionsasConfucianism,Islam,andEasternOrthodoxChristianitytraditionsthatsomeanalysts,startingfromacivilizationalasopposedtoaninstitutionalperspective,seeaspresentingmajorobstacles


Page 2 of 21


todemocracy?

Keywords:comparativepolitics,EuropeanUnion,polity,Confucianism,Islam,EasternOrthodoxChristianity,democratization

Areall,oronlysome,oftheworld'sreligioussystemspoliticallycompatiblewithdemocracy?1Thisis,ofcourse,oneofthemostimportantandheatedlydebatedquestionsofourtimes.Mygoalistocontributetothisdebatefromtheperspectiveofcomparativepolitics.Morespecifically,asaspecialistinpoliticalinstitutionsanddemocratization,Iintendtodiscussthreequestions,theanswerstowhichshouldimproveourunderstandingofthiscriticalissue.

First,whataretheminimalinstitutionalandpoliticalrequirementsthatapolitymustsatisfybeforeitcanbeconsideredademocracy?Buildingonthisanalysis,whatcanwetheninferabouttheneedforthetwintolerationsthatis,theminimalboundariesoffreedomofactionthatmustsomehowbecraftedforpoliticalinstitutionsvis--visreligiousauthorities,andforreligiousindividualsandgroupsvis--vispoliticalinstitutions?

Second,howhaveasetoflong-standingdemocraciesthefifteencountriesintheEuropeanUnion(EU)priortotheendoftheCold-Waractuallymettheserequirements,andwhatinfluentialmisinterpretationsoftheWesternEuropeanexperiencewithreligionanddemocracymustweavoid?

Third,whataretheimplicationsoftheanswerstoourfirsttwoquestionsforpolitiesheavilyinfluencedbysuchculturalandreligioustraditionsasConfucianism,Islam,andEasternOrthodoxChristianitytraditionsthatsomeanalysts,startingfromacivilizationalasopposedtoaninstitutionalperspective,seeaspresentingmajorobstaclestodemocracy?

Beforeaddressingthesethreequestions,letmebrieflygivesomequotationsfromSamuelP.Huntington'sTheClashofCivilizationsandtheRemakingofWorldOrder,anexceedinglyinfluentialstatementofacivilizationalperspectivethatrepresentsamajorcompetingperspectivetomyowninstitutionalapproach.

HuntingtongivesprimacyofplacetoChristianityasthedistinctivepositiveinfluenceinthemakingofWesterncivilization:WesternChristianityishistoricallythesinglemostimportantcharacteristicofWesterncivilization.2ForHuntington,Westernculture'skeycontributionhasbeentheseparationofchurch(p.56) andstate,somethingheseesasforeigntotheworld'sothermajorreligioussystems.InIslam,Huntingtonsays,GodisCaesar;in[Confucianism,]CaesarisGod;inOrthodoxy,GodisCaesar'sjuniorpartner.Huntingtonwarns:TheunderlyingproblemfortheWestisnotIslamicfundamentalism.ItisIslam.3

Clearly,acentralthrustofHuntington'smessageisnotonlythatdemocracyemergedfirstwithinWesterncivilizationbutalsothattheothergreatreligiouscivilizationsoftheworldlacktheuniquebundleofculturalcharacteristicsnecessarytosupportWestern-styledemocracy.


Page 3 of 21


Ifweapproachtheissuefromaninstitutionalistperspective,willwearriveatadifferentviewoftheprobableculturalboundariesofdemocracy?

DemocracyandCoreInstitutionsAllimportanttheoristsofdemocratizationacceptthatanecessaryconditionforcompletingasuccessfultransitiontodemocracyisfreeandcontestedelectionsofthesortdiscussedbyRobertA.Dahlinhisclassicbook,Polyarchy.Amongtherequirementsfordemocracy,Dahlincludestheopportunitytoformulateandsignifypreferencesandtohavethesepreferencesweighedadequatelyintheconductofgovernment.Fortheseconditionstobesatisfied,Dahlarguesthateightinstitutionalguaranteesarerequired:(1)freedomtoformandtojoinorganizations,(2)freedomofexpression,(3)therighttovote,(4)eligibilityforpublicoffice,(5)therightofpoliticalleaderstocompeteforsupportandvotes,(6)alternativesourcesofinformation,(7)freeandfairelections,and(8)institutionsformakinggovernmentpoliciesdependonvotesandotherexpressionsofpreference.4

MycolleagueJuanJ.LinzandIhavearguedthatDahl'seightguaranteesareanecessarybutnotasufficientconditionofdemocracy.Theyareinsufficientbecausenomatterhowfreeandfairtheelectionsandnomatterhowlargethegovernment'smajority,democracymustalsohaveaconstitutionthatitselfisdemocraticinthatitrespectsfundamentallibertiesandoffersconsiderableprotectionsforminorityrights.Furthermore,thedemocraticallyelectedgovernmentmustrulewithintheconfinesofitsconstitutionandbeboundbythelawandbyacomplexsetofverticalandhorizontalinstitutionsthathelptoensureaccountability.

Ifwecombinethesecriteria,itisclearthatdemocracyshouldnotbeconsideredconsolidatedinacountryunlessthereistheopportunityforthedevelopmentofarobustandcriticalcivilsocietythathelpscheckthestateandconstantlygeneratesalternatives.Forsuchcivil-societyalternativestobeaggregatedandimplemented,politicalsociety,andespeciallypoliticalparties,shouldbeallowedunfetteredrelationswithcivilsociety.

Democracyisasystemofconflictregulationthatallowsopencompetitionoverthevaluesandgoalsthatcitizenswanttoadvance.Inthestrictdemocraticsense,thismeansthataslongasgroupsdonotuseviolence,donotviolatetherightsofothercitizens,andstaywithintherulesofthedemocraticgame,allgroupsare(p.57) grantedtherighttoadvancetheirinterests,bothincivilsocietyandinpoliticalsociety.Thisistheminimalinstitutionalstatementofwhatdemocraticpoliticsdoesanddoesnotentail.5

Whatdoesthisinstitutionalthresholdapproachimplyaboutreligion,politics,democracy,andthetwintolerations?Specifically,whatarethenecessaryboundariesoffreedomforelectedgovernmentsfromreligiousgroups,andforreligiousindividualsandgroupsfromgovernment?

Democraticinstitutionsmustbefree,withintheboundsoftheconstitutionandhumanrights,togeneratepolicies.Religiousinstitutionsshouldnothaveconstitutionallyprivilegedprerogativesthatallowthemtomandatepublicpolicytodemocraticallyelected


Page 4 of 21


governments.Atthesametime,individualsandreligiouscommunities,consistentwithourinstitutionaldefinitionofdemocracy,musthavecompletefreedomtoworshipprivately.Inaddition,asindividualsandgroups,theymustbeabletoadvancetheirvaluespubliclyincivilsocietyandtosponsororganizationsandmovementsinpoliticalsociety,aslongastheiractionsdonotimpingenegativelyonthelibertiesofothercitizensorviolatedemocracyandthelaw.Thisinstitutionalapproachtodemocracynecessarilyimpliesthatnogroupincivilsocietyincludingreligiousgroupscanaprioribeprohibitedfromformingapoliticalparty.Constraintsonpoliticalpartiesmayonlybeimposedafteraparty,byitsactions,violatesdemocraticprinciples.Thejudgmentastowhetherapartyhasviolateddemocraticprinciplesshouldbedecidednotbypartiesinthegovernmentbutbythecourts.Withinthisbroadframeworkofminimalfreedomforthedemocraticstateandminimalreligiousfreedomforcitizens,anextraordinarilybroadrangeofconcretepatternsofreligious-staterelationswouldmeetourminimaldefinitionofademocracy.

Letusexplorethisargumentfurtherbymovingtooursecondquestion.Empirically,whataretheactualpatternsofrelationsbetweenreligionandthestateinlong-standingdemocracies?Howhavethetwintolerationsoffreedomfordemocraticallyelectedgovernmentsandfreedomforreligiousorganizationsincivilandpoliticalsocietybeenconstructedinspecificdemocraticpolities?

WesternEuropeandtheTwinTolerationsHowshouldonereadthelessonsofthehistoricalrelationshipbetweenWesternChristianityanddemocracy?HereIwouldliketocallparticularattentiontofourpossiblemisinterpretations.Empirically,weshouldbewareofsimpleassertionsabouttheactualexistenceofseparationofchurchandstateorthenecessityofsecularism.Doctrinally,weshouldbewareofassumingthatanyoftheworld'sreligioussystemsareunivocallydemocraticornondemocratic.Methodologically,weshouldbewareofwhatIwillcallthefallacyofuniquefoundingconditions.Andnormatively,weshouldbewareoftheliberalinjunction,famouslyarguedbythemostinfluentialcontemporarypoliticalphilosopherintheEnglishlanguage,JohnRawls,totakethetruthsofreligionoffthepoliticalagenda.6

(p.58) Whendiscussingtheprospectsfordemocracyinnon-Western,non-Christiancivilizations,analystsfrequentlyassumethattheseparationofchurchandstateandsecularismarecorefeaturesnotonlyofWesterndemocracybutalsoofdemocracyitself.Forsuchanalysts,areligioussystemsuchasEasternOrthodoxywherethereisoftenanestablishedchurchposesmajorproblemsfortheconsolidationofdemocracy.Similarly,whenanIslamic-basedgovernmentcametopowerinTurkeyin1996,therewerefrequentreferencestothethreatthatthispresentedtoWestern-styleseculardemocracy.Indeed,militaryencroachmentsontheautonomyofthedemocraticallyelectedgovernmentinTurkeyhavefrequentlybeenviewedasanunfortunatenecessitytoprotectseculardemocracy.ArethesecorrectreadingsordangerousmisreadingsofthelessonsoftherelationshipofchurchandstateinWesterndemocracies?

Toanswerthisquestion,letusundertakeanempiricalanalysisofthedegreetowhichthe


Page 5 of 21


separationofchurchandstateactuallyexistsinaspecificsetofWesterncountries,allofwhichforthelastdecadehavesatisfiedDahl'seightinstitutionalguaranteesandtheadditionalconditionsforademocracythatIhavestipulated,andhavesociallyandpoliticallyconstructedthetwintolerations.First,weshouldnotethat,asof1999,fiveoftheEU'sfifteenmemberstatesDenmark,Finland,Greece,Sweden,andtheUnitedKingdom(inEnglandandScotland)hadestablishedchurches.

TheNetherlandsdoesnothaveanestablishedchurch.Yet,asaresultofheatedconflictamongCatholics,Calvinists,andsecularizingliberalgovernmentsovertheroleofthechurchineducation,thecountryarrivedin1917atapoliticallynegotiatedconsociationalsettlementofthisissue.Itpermitslocalcommunities,iftheyareoverwhelminglyofonespecificreligiouscommunity,tochoosetohavetheirlocalschoolbeaprivateCalvinistoraprivateCatholicschoolandtohaveitreceivestatesupport.

GermanyandAustriahaveconstitutionalprovisionsintheirfederalsystemsallowinglocalcommunitiestodecideontheroleofreligionineducation.Germanydoesnothaveanestablishedchurch,butProtestantismandCatholicismareeligibleforspecialstateservices.Forexample,Germantaxpayers,unlesstheyelecttopaya9percentsurchargetotheirtaxbillintheformofachurchtax(Kirchensteuer)andtherebyofficiallybecomeamemberofthechurch(MitgliedderKirche),donothavetheautomaticrighttobebaptized,married,orburiedintheirdenominationalchurchor,insomecases,mayfinditdifficulttogaineasyaccesstothechurchhospitalsorold-agehomesthatreceivestatesupportfromtheKirchensteuer.ThusthevastmajorityofcitizensintheformerWestGermanypaidthestate-collectedchurchtax.

WhatdocontemporaryWesternEuropeanconstitutionsandnormalpoliticalpracticeindicateabouttheroleofreligiouspartiesingovernment?DespitewhatWesternanalystsmaythinkabouttheimproprietyofreligious-basedpartiesrulinginaseculardemocracylikeTurkey,ChristianDemocraticpartieshavefrequentlyruledinGermany,Austria,Italy,Belgium,andtheNetherlands.Inthetwentieth(p.59) century,probablythetwomosthostileseparationsofchurchandstateinWesternEuropeoccurredin1931inSpainandin1905inFrance.Bothofthesecountries,however,nowhaveafriendlyseparationofchurchandstate.Infact,since1958,theFrenchgovernmenthaspaidasubstantialpartofthecostoftheCatholicChurch'selementaryschoolsystem.VirtuallynoWesternEuropeandemocracynowhasarigidorhostileseparationofchurchandstate.Mosthavearrivedatademocraticallynegotiatedfreedomofreligionfromstateinterference,andallofthemallowreligiousgroupsfreedomnotonlytoworshipprivatelybutalsotoorganizegroupsincivilsocietyandpoliticalsociety.ThelessonfromWesternEurope,therefore,liesnotintheneedforawallofseparationbetweenchurchandstatebutintheconstantpoliticalconstructionandreconstructionofthetwintolerations.Indeed,itisonlyinthecontextofthetwintolerationsthattheconceptofseparationofchurchandstatehasaplaceinthemodernvocabularyofWesternEuropeandemocracy.

Asimilarcaveatshouldbeborneinmindconcerningtheconceptofsecularism.DiscursivetraditionsasdissimilarastheEnlightenment,liberalism,Frenchrepublicanism,andmodernizationtheoryhaveallargued(orassumed)thatmodernityanddemocracy


Page 6 of 21


requiresecularism.Fromtheviewpointofempiricaldemocraticpractice,however,theconceptofsecularismmustberadicallyrethought.Attheveryleast,seriousanalystsmustacknowledge,astable4.1makesclear,thatsecularismandtheseparationofchurchandstatehavenoinherentaffinitywithdemocracyandindeedcanbecloselyrelatedtonondemocraticformsthatsystematicallyviolatethetwintolerations.

Thecategoriesintable4.1arenotmeanttobeexhaustiveormutuallyexclusive,butsimplytoconveytherangeofdemocraticandnondemocraticstate-religiouspatterns.Theyshowthattherecanbedemocraticandnondemocraticsecularism,democracieswithestablishedchurches,andevendemocracieswithaveryunfriendlyseparationofchurchandstate.Oneobviouslycoulddevelopmanyothercategories.Mycentralanalyticpointstands,however.Ifwearelookingforthedefiningcharacteristicsofdemocracyvis--visreligion,secularismandtheseparationofchurchandstatearenotanintrinsicpartofthecoredefinition,butthetwintolerationsare.

MoreMisinterpretationsBuildingonourreadingoftheempiricalcontextofsuchphrasesasseparationofchurchandstateandsecularism,weareinapositiontoseewhyweshouldbewareofthreeothermajormisinterpretations.

1.Theassumptionofunivocality.Weshouldbewareofassumingthatanyreligion'sdoctrineisunivocallyprodemocraticorantidemocratic.WesternChristianityhascertainlybeenmultivocalconcerningdemocracyandthetwintolerations.Atcertaintimesinitshistory,Catholicdoctrinehasbeen(p.60)Table4.1}TheTwinTolerationsVarietiesofDemocraticPatternsofReligion-StateRelationsRelativelyStablePatterns

RelativelyUnstablePatterns

SecularbutFriendlytoReligion

NonsecularbutFriendlytoDemocracy

SociologicallySpontaneousSecularism

VeryUnfriendlySecularismLegislatedbyMajoritybutReversiblebyMajority

Noofficialreligion.Fullseparationofchurchandstate.Nostatemoniesforreligiouseducationororganizations.

Establishedchurchreceivesstatesubsides,andsomeofficialreligiontaughtinstateschools(butnonreligiousstudentsdonothavetotakereligiouscourses).

Societylargelydisenchantedandreligionnotanimportantfactorinpoliticallife.

Antireligioustoneinmoststateregulations(forexample,teachingofreligionforbiddeninstateandnon-state-supportedschools;nochaplainsofanyreligionallowedinmilitaryorganizationsorstatehospitals).


Page 7 of 21


Privatereligiousschoolsallowediftheyconformtonormalacademicstandards.

Organizationsandpartiesrelatedtoreligiousgroupsallowedtocompeteforpowerinpoliticalsociety.

Democraticallyelectedofficialsundernosignificantpressurestocomplywithreligiousdictatesconcerningtheirpublicpolicydecisions.

Fullprivateandpublicfreedomforallreligionsaslongastheydonotviolateindividualliberties.

Citizenscanelecttohavechurchtaxsenttoasecularinstitution.

Religiousorganizationsallowedtoministertotheirfollowersinsidestateorganizations(suchasthemilitaryandstatehospitals).

Nonofficialreligionallowedfullfreedomandcanreceivesomestatemonies.

Allreligiousgroupsfreetoorganizecivilsocietyandtocompeteforpoliticalpower,buthavelittleweightorsalience.

Significantpercentageofbelieverssemiloyalordisloyaltoregime.

Religiousgroupsallowedfullparticipationincivilsociety.

Allreligiousgroupscanparticipateincivilsociety.

Officialreligionaccordednoconstitutionalorquasi-constitutionalprerogativestomandatesignificantpolicies.

Allreligiousgroupscancompeteforpowerinpoliticalsociety.

marshaledtoopposeliberalism,thenation-state,tolerance,anddemocracy.InthenameofCatholicism,theInquisitioncommittedmassivehumanrightsviolations.JohnCalvin'sGenevahadnospaceeitherforinclusivecitizenshiporforanyformofrepresentativedemocracy.Formorethan300years,Lutheranism,particularlyinNorthernGermany,acceptedboththeologicallyandpoliticallywhatMaxWebercalledcaesaropapiststatecontrolofreligion.7


Page 8 of 21


Extrapolatingfromthesehistoricalsituations,numerousarticlesandbookswerewrittenontheinherentobstaclesthatCatholicism,Lutheranism,orCalvinismplacesinthewayofdemocracybecauseofitsantidemocraticdoctrinesandnondemocraticpractices.Later,ofcourse,spiritualandpoliticalactivistsofallthese(p.61) faithsfoundandmobilizeddoctrinalelementswithintheirownreligionstohelpthemcraftnewpracticessupportiveoftoleranceanddemocracy.Thewarningweshouldtakeawayfromthisbriefdiscussionisobvious.Whenweconsiderthequestionofnon-Westernreligionsandtheirrelationshiptodemocracy,itwouldseemappropriatenottoassumeunivocalitybuttoexplorewhetherthesedoctrinescontainmultivocalcomponentsthatareusablefor(oratleastcompatiblewith)thepoliticalconstructionofthetwintolerations.2.Thefallacyofuniquefoundingconditions.Thisfallacyinvolvestheassumptionthattheuniqueconstellationofspecificconditionsthatwerepresentatthebirthofsuchphenomenaaselectoraldemocracy,arelativelyindependentcivilsociety,orthespiritofcapitalismmustbepresentinallcasesiftheyaretothrive.Thefallacy,ofcourse,istoconfusetheconditionsassociatedwiththeinventionofsomethingwiththepossibilityofitsreplicationor,moreaccurately,itsreformulationunderdifferentconditions.WhateverwemaythinkaboutMaxWeber'sthesisinTheProtestantEthicandTheSpiritofCapitalism,noonewhohascarefullyobservedSouthKorea,Taiwan,orHongKongwoulddenythatthesepolitieshavecreatedtheirowndynamicformsofcapitalism.8WeshouldbewareoffallingintothefallacyofuniquefoundingconditionswhenweexaminewhetherpolitiesstronglyinfluencedbyConfucianism,Hinduism,Orthodoxy,orIslamcanemulateorre-create,usingsomeoftheirowndistinctiveculturalresources,aformofdemocracythatwouldmeettheminimalinstitutionalconditionsfordemocracyspelledoutearlierinthisessay.3.Removingreligionfromthepoliticalagenda.Intheirtheoreticalaccountsofthedevelopmentofajustsociety,contemporaryliberalpoliticalphilosophersJohnRawlsandBruceAckermangivegreatweighttoliberalarguingbutalmostnoweighttodemocraticbargaining.9Rawlsisparticularlyinterestedinhowapluralsocietyinwhichthecitizensholdavarietyofsociallyembedded,reasonable,butdeeplyopposedcomprehensivedoctrinescanarriveatanoverlappingconsensus.Hisnormativerecommendationisthat,onmajorissuesofquasi-constitutionalimport,individualsshouldbeabletoadvancetheirargumentsonlybyusingfreestandingconceptionsofjusticethatarenotrootedinoneofthecomprehensivebutopposingdoctrinesfoundinthepolity.Followingthislogic,publicargumentsabouttheplaceofreligionareappropriateonlyiftheyemploy,oratleastcanemploy,freestandingconceptionsofpoliticaljustice.

Rawls'sargumentisbothpowerfulandinternallyconsistent.Yethedevotesvirtuallynoattentiontohowactualpolitieshaveconsensuallyanddemocraticallyarrivedatagreementstotakereligionoffthepoliticalagenda.AlmostnoneofthemfollowedtheRawlsiannormativemap.

Politicsisaboutconflict,anddemocraticpoliticsinvolvesthecreationofproceduresto


Page 9 of 21


managemajorconflicts.Inmanycountriesthatarenowlong-standing(p.62)democracies,bothWesternandnon-Western,themajorconflictforalongperiodoftimewaspreciselyovertheplaceofreligioninthepolity.Inmanyofthesecases,thisconflictwaspoliticallycontainedorneutralizedonlyafterlongpublicargumentsandnegotiationsinwhichreligionwasthedominantitemonthepoliticalagenda.ThusintheNetherlands,asnotedearlier,religiousconflictswereeventuallytakenoffthepoliticalagendaofmajoritydecisionmakingbyademocraticbutnotliberalorsecularconsociationalagreementthatallocatedfunds,spaces,andmutualvetoestoreligiouscommunitieswithcompetingcomprehensivedoctrines.

Achievingsuchanagreementnormallyrequiresdebatewithinthemajorreligiouscommunities.Andproponentsofthedemocraticbargainareoftenabletowinovertheirfellowbelieversonlybyemployingargumentsthatarenotconceptuallyfreestandingbutdeeplyembeddedintheirownreligiouscommunity'scomprehensivedoctrine.

Onecanexpect,therefore,thatinpolitieswhereasignificantportionofbelieversmaybeundertheswayofadoctrinallybasednondemocraticreligiousdiscourse,oneofthemajortasksofpoliticalandspiritualleaderswhowishtorevaluedemocraticnormsintheirownreligiouscommunitywillbetoadvancetheologicallyconvincingpublicargumentsaboutthelegitimatemultivocalityoftheirreligion.AlthoughsuchargumentsmayviolateRawls'srequirementforfreestandingpublicreasoning,theyarevitaltothesuccessofdemocratizationinacountrydividedoverthemeaningandappropriatenessofdemocracy.Liberalarguinghasaplaceindemocracy,butitwouldemptymeaningandhistoryoutofpoliticalphilosophyifwedidnotleaveroomfordemocraticbargainingandthenonliberalpublicargumentwithinreligiouscommunitiesthatitsometimesrequires.

LetusnowturntoexploringthesegeneralargumentsinthecontextsofculturesheavilyinfluencedbyIslam.

IslamandtheFreeElectionsTrapThereisanextensivebodyofliteraturearguingthatmanykeyaspectsofdemocracyarelackingintheIslamictradition.ThelackofseparationbetweenreligionandthestateisseenasstemmingfromtheProphetMuhammad'sfusionofmilitaryandspiritualauthority.ThelackofspacefordemocraticpublicopinioninmakinglawsisseenasderivingfromtheQur'an,inwhichGoddictatedtotheProphetMuhammadthecontentoffixedlawsthatagoodIslamicpolitymustfollow.ThelackofinclusivecitizenshipisseenasoriginatingininterpretationsoftheQur'anthatarguethattheonlytruepolityinIslamisthefusedreligious-politicalcommunityoftheUmmah,inwhichthereisnolegitimatespaceforotherreligions.Certainly,withtheriseofIslamicfundamentalism,theseclaimshavebeenfrequentlyassertedbysomeIslamicactivists.EspeciallyinthecontextoftheAlgeriancrisisof199192,thisgaverisetoscholarlyassertionsthatIslamanddemocracyareincompatibleandtoargumentsintheWest'sleadingjournalsofopinionwarningagainstfallingintotheIslamicfreeelectionstrap.Accordingtothisview,(p.63)allowingfreeelectionsinIslamiccountrieswouldbringtopowergovernmentsthatwouldusethesedemocraticfreedomstodestroydemocracyitself.


Page 10 of 21


Anyhumanrightsactivistordemocratictheoristmust,ofcourse,acknowledgethatnumerousatrocitiesarebeingcommittedinsomecountriesinthenameofIslam.InAlgeria,boththemilitarystateandIslamicfundamentalistsslaughteredinnocents.Women'srightsareflagrantlyviolatedbytheTalibaninAfghanistan.InthenameofIslam,partsofSudanhavebeenturnedintokillingzones.Attheaggregatelevel,arecentattempttodocumentpoliticalfreedomsandcivilrightsaroundtheworldconcludedthattheIslamicworldremainsmostresistanttothespreadofdemocracy.10

ItisinthiscontextthatHuntingtonassertedthattheWest'sproblemisnotIslamicfundamentalismbutIslam.Huntington'svisionofIslam'sfutureallowsvirtuallynoroomforstrugglingdemocraticforcestoprevailinsomekeyIslamiccountries.Indeed,democraticfailureisalmostoverdeterminedinhisworldofauthoritariankinculturesandunstoppableculturalwars.Howshouldempiricaldemocratictheoristsrespond?

Weshouldfirstbeginwithsomeneglectedfacts.Thetwostandardrankingsofdemocraciesintheworld,TedGurr'sPolityandthatofFreedomHouse,regularlyclassifyabout400millionMuslimswholiveinMuslim-majoritycountriessuchasIndonesia,Turkey,Senegal,Albania,Mali,and,since2009,Bangladeshaslivinginelectorallycompetitivesystems.

Toexplainthis,wemightbeginwithmyhypothesisthatallgreatreligiouscivilizationsaremultivocal.AlthoughIslamicfundamentalistsareattemptingtoappropriatepoliticalIslam,therearealsoothervoicesintheQur'an,inscholarlyinterpretationsoftheQur'an,andamongsomemajorcontemporaryIslamicpoliticalleaders.Forexample,Sura(verse)256oftheQur'anstates:ThereshallbenocompulsioninReligion.ThisinjunctionprovidesastrongQur'anicbaseforreligioustolerance.11Letuslookattheworld'smostpopulousMuslimcountry,Indonesia.

Inanyattemptatdemocratictransition,leadershipandorganizationareextremelyimportant.ThetwolargestandmostinfluentialIslamicorganizationsatthestartofthedemocratictransitioninIndonesia,NahdatulUlama(NU)andMuhammadiyah,bothwithmorethan25millionmembers,wereledbyAbdurrahmanWahidandAmienRais,respectively,bothleadersinthestruggleagainstthemilitaryregimeofSuharto.AmienRaisplayedakeyroleinhelpingtokeepthestudentprotestsmobilized,relativelypeaceful,andfocusedondemocraticdemands.AfterSuharto'sfall,heconsideredleadinganexistingIslamicpoliticalgroupingbutinsteadcreatedanewpoliticalparty,thePAN,thatwasnotexplicitlyIslamistandincludednon-Muslimsinitsleadership.

AbdurrahmanWahid(laterpresidentofIndonesia)alsocreatedanewpoliticalparty,thePKB,andthroughoutthe1999electoralcampaign,hearguedagainstanIslamicstateandinfavorofreligiouspluralism.Wahidoftenoperatedininformalallianceswiththemostelectorallypowerfulpoliticalleader,MegawatiSukarnoputri,andhersecularnationalistparty,thePDI,whichincludessecular(p.64) Muslims,Christians,andmanynon-Muslimminorities.InIndonesia,Muslimidentitiesareoftenmoderate,syncretic,andpluralist.MuslimwomeninIndonesiahavesignificantlymorepersonalandcareerfreedomthanthoseintheMiddleEast.Inthiscontext,therewasatleastsomespacefor


Page 11 of 21


aleaderlikeWahiddespitehisweaknessasanadministratortoattempttofosteratransitiontodemocracybyconstantlyarguingthattolerancewasoneofthebestpartsofIndonesia'sreligioustradition.Freeelectionshavesincebeenheld.Giventhehighqualityofthefreeelectionsthatwereheldin2004and2009inIndonesia,manyscholarsarenowbeginningtothinkthatIndonesiaisaconsolidateddemocracy.12

LetusnowturntoBangladesh.The1996electioninBangladeshsatisfiedallofDahl'seightinstitutionalguarantees.Voterturnout,at73percent(withwomenaround76percent),was13percenthigherthaninanygeneralelectioninthenation'shistory.Interestingly,thefundamentalistIslamicParty(JI)trailedfarbehindthreeotherparties,winningonlythreeseats.TheJIseemstohavepolledworstamongwomen.Afteratwo-yearmilitarycaretakergovernment,ageneralelectionwasheldonDecember29,2008.Theseelectionswererelativelyorderly,hadbetterthanan80percentturnout,andwereclassifiedasfreeandfairbyelectionobserverteams.TheJIwononlytwoofthe300seats.13

ThusHuntington'simplicationthatelectionsinpredominantlyIslamiccountrieswillleadtofundamentalistmajoritieswhowillusetheirelectoralfreedomtoenddemocracygetsnosupportfromouranalysisofelectoralandpoliticalbehaviorintwooftheworld'smostpopulousIslamicmajoritycountries,IndonesiaandBangladesh,aswellasbycountriessuchasTurkey,Senegal,Mali,andAlbania.14

OrthodoxChristianity:NotaStrongAllybutaStrongObstacle?WhatcanwesayaboutOrthodoxChristianityanddemocracy?AsanempiricaldemocraticanalystwhohasfollowedresistancemovementstonondemocraticruleincommunistEurope,IbelieveonehastoacknowledgethatRomanCatholicismandProtestantismplayedamorepowerfulroleinrecentcivilsocietyresistancemovementsthandidOrthodoxy.Why?Andwhatdoesthismean,andnotmean,fordemocracyincountrieswhereOrthodoxyistheweightiestreligion?Themajorexplanationforthisvariancecannotlieinthecorereligiousdoctrineoforthodoxy,perse,becausefortheirfirstmillennium,RomanCatholicismandOrthodoxChristianitysharedthesametheologicaldoctrines.ThesubsequentOrthodoxRomanCatholicdivisionwasfundamentallyaboutpapalauthorityandpapalinfallibility,notaboutotherdoctrinaldisputes.ThecriticaldifferencesconcerningrecentpatternsofstateresistanceinOrthodoxyandRomanCatholicismliemoreintheirdifferingorganizationalforms,andinwhichpartsoftheircommonmultivocaltraditionhavebeengiventhemostemphasis,thanindoctrineitself.

Letuslookcomparativelyatthequestionofcivilsocietyresistance.RomanCatholicism,asatransnational,hierarchicalorganization,canpotentiallyprovide(p.65) materialanddoctrinalsupporttoalocalCatholicchurchtohelpitresiststateoppression.15TotheextentthattheCatholicChurchmightresistthestate,itcouldbeconsideredsupportforamorerobustandautonomouscivilsociety.Empirically,intheresistancestageofdemocratization,LinzandIanalyzeinarecentbookhowtheCatholicChurchplayedasupportiveroleinPoland,Lithuania,Chile,Brazil,and,inthelastyearsofFranco,Spain.Protestantism,withitsemphasisonindividualconscienceanditsinternationalnetworks,canalsoplayaroleinsupportingcivilsociety'soppositiontoarepressivestate,asinEast


Page 12 of 21


GermanyandinEstonia.Inthe1970sand1980s,Protestantism,andevenmoresopostVaticanIICatholicism,chosetogiveimportantweighttothepropheticmissionthatcallsforindividualstospeakoutagainstworldlyinjustice,nomatterwhattheconsequences.

Concerningcivilsocietyandresistancetothestate,OrthodoxChristianityisoften(notalways)organizationallyandideologicallyinarelativelyweakpositionbecauseofwhatMaxWebercalleditscaesaropapiststructure,inwhichthechurchisanational,asopposedtoatransnational,organization.Incaesaropapistchurches,thenationalstateoftenplaysamajorroleinthenationalchurch'sfinancesandappointments.Suchanationalchurchisnotreallyarelativelyautonomouspartofcivilsocietybecausethereisahighdegree,inWeber'swords,ofsubordinationofpriestlytosecularpower.16Indeed,underStalin,theroleofsecularpowerintheUSSRoftenmeantthedefactoparticipationoftheKGBinthehighestreligiouscounselsofOrthodoxy.

AsMaxWeberandothershaveemphasized,Orthodoxyplacesmorestressonliturgythanonactionandprivilegesquietismasaresponsetotheworld.17Inthestructuralcontextofcaesaropapismandtheliturgicalcontextofquietism,thepropheticresponsetoinjustice,whiledoctrinallyavailableinOrthodoxy'smultivocaltradition,isseldomvoiced.18

Havingacknowledgedallofthis,IdonotbelievethatOrthodoxChristianityisaninherentlyantidemocraticforce.Thatistosay,iftheleadersofthestateandpoliticalsocietyarecommittedtodemocracyandfollowdemocraticpractices,thecaesaropapiststructuresandthequietistcultureshouldleadtoloyalsupportofdemocracybytheOrthodoxChristianchurch,asinGreecesince1975.Bulgariawillbeaninterestingcountrytowatchinthisrespect.However,iftheleadersofthestateandpoliticalsocietyareantidemocratic,thedemocraticoppositionincivilsocietywillnotnormallyreceivesubstantialoreffectivesupportfromanationalOrthodoxchurch.

LetmeillustratethesepointsbydiscussingtheGreekcase.Greece,andtheGreekpartofdividedCyprus,aretheonlyOrthodox-majoritycountriesthat,forthelastfiveconsecutiveyears,havemetallthecriteriaforademocracydiscussedearlierinthisessay.Greece,from1967to1974,wasunderauthoritarianmilitaryrule.WhatwastheroleoftheOrthodoxChurchvis--visthemilitarydictatorshipandthedemocratictransition?Threepointsareworthhighlighting.First,thereweretwomilitaryjuntas,oneestablishedin1967andoneestablishedinNovember1973.Withinmonthsofthestartofbothjuntas,thejuntashadmanagedtoarrangetheappointmentofanewarchbishoptoheadtheGreekOrthodoxChurch.19ThiswouldhavebeenimpossibleinPoland.Second,nopastornewscholarlyworkon(p.66) the196775GreekdictatorshipaccordsanysignificantformalorinformalroletoOrthodoxChurchresistancetothedictatorship.20Third,oncedemocracywasinstitutedin1974,exceptforeffortstopreservesomeminorchurchprerogatives,theOrthodoxChurchdidnothingsignificanttooppose,resist,orstalltheeventualconsolidationofdemocracyandhasbeenbroadlysupportiveofthedemocraticgovernment.Indeed,theGreekOrthodoxChurchhasbeenmuchlesscriticalofleft-wingdemocraticgovernmentsinGreecethanthePolishCatholicChurchhasbeenofleft-wingdemocraticgovernmentsinPoland.


Page 13 of 21


Greecehasanestablishedchurch.Butaswehaveseen,sodoIceland,Denmark,Finland,Norway,England,anduntil2000,Sweden.Fromthiscomparativeinstitutionalperspectiveoflong-standingdemocracies,thedemocratictaskinGreeceafter1974didnotrequirethedisestablishmentofthechurch,buttheeliminationofanynondemocraticdomainsofchurchpowerthatrestricteddemocraticpolitics.TheGreekdemocratshavedonethis,andtheGreekOrthodoxchurchhasacceptedthis.Note,notonlydoesdemocracynotrequireadisestablishedchurchbutalsodemocracyrequires,consistentwithourthoughtsaboutanunfetteredcivilsociety,andtherightofbelieverstoexpressthemselvesindividuallyandcollectivelyinpoliticalsociety,thatnoconstraintsareputontherightsofOrthodoxmemberstoarguetheircaseinthepublicarena.Greekdemocracieshaverespectedthisareaoflegitimateautonomyofreligion.Therehavebeensomechangesbothwithinstate-societyrelationsandwithintheOrthodoxChurchthathavemadethetwintolerationseasiertosustaininthepost-1975world.Theconstitutioncraftedin1975andratifiedinareferendumissomewhatclearerthanthepreviousGreekconstitutionsaboutdemocraticallyappropriateareasforstateactionvis--visreligionandfortheestablishedchurch'sactionvis--visotherreligionsandtheelectedgovernment.21Also,withintheOrthodoxChurch,thereisgrowingsentimentthatthechurchwouldbereligiouslymorerobust,andmoreabletoplayanindependentroleincivilsociety,ifitwerelessdependentonthestate.22

ThemostimportantchangeintheroleofthechurchinGreekpoliticsisthatfrom1946to1949,Greeceexperiencedacivilwar,andthechurchoptedforananticommunistexclusionarystateformuchofthe194674period,notcaringwhetherthisstaterespecteddemocraticprocedures.23Militarily,theGreekCivilWarendedin1949;politically,theGreekCivilWarendedwiththecreationofademocraticgovernmentin1974;culturally,theGreekCivilWarendedwiththe1989coalitionbetweenthecommunistsandtheconservativeNewDemocracyparty.Withtheculturalendofthecivilwar,thepoliticalsalienceoftherecognizedGreekOrthodoxChurchdiminishedevenmore,andthetwintolerationsbecamemoresociallyembeddedintheGreekpolisandinchurch-staterelations.

UnfinishedBusinessAlltheworld'smajorreligionstodayareinvolvedinstrugglesoverthetwintolerations.InthefirsttwodecadesoftheirindependenceafterWorldWarII,Indiaand(p.67)Israelwereunderthepoliticalandideologicalhegemonyofsecularpoliticalleadersandparties.Bythe1990s,however,bothofthesesecularpoliticaltraditionswerechallengedbyoppositionmovementsthatdrewsomeoftheirsupportfromforcesseekingtoredrawtheboundariesofthetwintolerationstoaccommodatemorefundamentalistandlesstolerantvisionsofthepolity.

InIsrael,thestatewasoriginallyanationaliststatefortheJewishpeople,buttherearegrowingdemandsforittobeareligiousaswellasanationaliststate.24TherearealsodemandstomakecitizenshipfortheArabminoritylessinclusiveandeventoamendtheLawofReturntogiveOrthodoxrabbistheauthoritytodeterminewhomthestateofIsraelrecognizesasaJew.25


Page 14 of 21


InIndia,theHinduneofundamentalistparty,theBJP,andtheirassociatedshocktroopsin(un)civilsociety,suchastheRSS,formedthegovernmentwithnumerousregionalpartiesafterthe1998and1999generalelections.ThemilitantfactionsoftheRSSwanttoeventuallyutilizethemajoritystatusofHindustomakeIndiaastatethatwouldprivilegeHinduvaluesastheyinterpretthem.

AmajorforceagainsttheBJPandtheRSSistheGandhian-NehruvianstrandofHinduismthatinsiststhatnotonlyHinduismbutalsoIndiaaremultivocalandthatthedeepestvaluesofHinduismmustrespect,andevennurture,theideaofIndianotasanation-stateofHindus,butasadiverse,tolerant,civilizationalstate.GandhiandNehruknewthatsinceIndiawasdefactomulticultural,multireligious,andmulticommunity,nation-statebuildinganddemocracybuildingwereconflictinglogics.

India,intheyear2000,wasseventeentimespoorerthananydemocracyintheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment.ThesupportfordemocracyinIndiaundersuchdifficultconditionscannotbeunderstoodwithoutanappreciationofthetremendouspowerthatGandhidevelopedbyusingsometraditionalHindureligiousvaluesandstylesofaction,suchassatyagraha,inhispeacefulstrugglesforindependence,fordemocracy,forantiuntouchability,andforrespectforMuslims.ForGandhi,satyagrahameanttruthforce,aformofnonviolentresistancethatseeksthevindicationoftruthnotbyinflictionofsufferingontheopponentbutononeself.26ForGandhi,satyagrahawasameanstoawakenthebestintheopponent.Gandhi'sgoalsweretogeneratewidespreadrecognitionofthejusticeofthecause.27

IfIndia,withits600millionnon-Hindispeakers,withitstwenty-twoofficiallanguages(fourteenofwhicharespokenbyatleast10millionpeople),andwithitsminoritypopulationofabout140millionMuslims,istoremainademocracy,theBJPandRSSvoicesofIndiaasaHinduandHindination-statemustbemetbyaneverstrongerGandhianvoiceofIndiaasamultireligious,civilizationalhometoabillionpeople.28Inboththe2004and2009elections,theBJPlostcontrolofthecentralgovernment,partlyasareactionagainstsomeofitssupportforHindufundamentalistpoliciesinthemassacreinGujarat.

AmorecompletestudyofthethemesraisedbythisbriefessaywouldnotonlydiscussreligionsIhaveomittedbutalsoanalyze,inmuchgreaterdetailthanIhavedone,thestrangecareeroftheemergenceofthetwintolerationsintheWest.(p.68) Theestablishmentofstate-sponsoredchurchesinScandinaviaandBritain,whileinitiallyaformofpoliticalcontrolofthechurch,eventuallylednotonlytothetwintolerationsbutalsointhelongruntothesociologicallyspontaneoussecularizationofthevastpartofitscitizens.Why?

LiberalscholarsmightalsowanttoreexaminehowilliberalmanyoftheliberalanticlericalmovementswereinFranceandSpainattimes.Whatwasthepoliticaleffectofthisliberalismfromabove?InSpainintheearly1930s,didliberalandsocialistanticlericalismjustifytearingdownwallsseparatingcivilcemeteriesfromJewishcemeteries?Ifthe1905FrenchliberalmodelofexpropriatingJesuitpropertyhadbeenfollowedintheUnited


Page 15 of 21


States,GeorgetownUniversityandmanyotherJesuituniversitieswouldhavebeenexpropriated.Wouldthishavecontributedtothestrengtheningofaliberal,oranantiliberal,discourseintheUnitedStates?

Finally,eventheWesternworld'smostsolidconstructionofawallseparatingchurchandstate,theU.S.Constitution'sFirstAmendment,whichstatesthatCongressshallmakenolawrespectinganestablishmentofreligion,orprohibitingthefreeexercisethereof,ismisunderstoodbymanycontemporaryU.S.citizens.Theamendmentdidnotprohibitthethirteenoriginalstatesfromhavingtheirownestablishedreligions.TheFirstAmendmentonlyprohibitedCongressfromestablishingoneofficialreligionfortheUnitedStatesasawhole.Infact,ontheeveoftherevolution,onlythreeofthethirteencoloniesRhodeIsland,Pennsylvania,andDelawarehadnoprovisionforanestablishedchurch.Evenaftertherevolution,theSouthCarolinaconstitutionof1778establishedtheChristianProtestantReligion.FourNewEnglandstatescontinuedforsometimewithstate-subsidized,largelyCongregational,churches.29TheeventualpoliticalconstructionoftheWest'sstrongestseparationofchurchandstate,combinedwiththesocialemergenceofoneoftheWest'smostchurchgoingandrecentlymostfundamentalistpopulations,isanotherofthecrookedpathsoftolerationandintolerationthatneedsmorestudyandreflection.

NotesThisessayoriginallyappearedintheJournalofDemocracy(11:4,October2000)andisreprintedherebypermissionoftheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

AnnotatedBibliography

Bibliographyreferences:

Bhargava,Rajeev,articleinthisbook.

ReadforapowerfulargumentabouttheoriginalityandutilityofIndia'sbrandofdemocraticsecularism.

Casanova,Jos,PublicReligionsintheModernWorld.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1994.

Thisisthepioneeringbookonthesecularismdebate,especiallyonpublicreligions.Hisarticleinthisbooklooksatthreefundamentalthingsthathavechangedaboutpublicreligionsinthemodernworldsincehewrotehisclassicfifteenyearsago.Allthreeofthesechangeshaveimplicationsforthetwintolerations.

Knkler,MirjamandAlfredStepan,eds.,DemocratizationandIslaminIndonesia.(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2012).Forthelasteightyears,IndonesiahasbeenwidelyevaluatedtobethehighestqualitydemocracyofanyofthetencountriesinASEAN,theAssociationofSoutheastAsianNations.ThisvolumecontainsanalysesofhowthiscameaboutandespeciallyhowwithinIndonesia'stwomajorIslamicorganizations,withover70millionmembers,democracyhadbecometheconsensualdoctrineeven


Page 16 of 21


beforethedemocratictransition.

Kuru,AhmetT.,SecularismandStatePoliciestowardReligions:TheUnitedStates,France,andTurkey.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2009.

Kuru,AhmetTandAlfredStepan,eds.,Democracy,IslamandSecularisminTurkey.(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2012).ThisbookreviewsthepoliticalhistoryofTurkey,fromtheOttomanEmpiretoAtatrk'saggressivesecularism,totheappearanceandevolution,since2001,ofaIslamist-inspiredparty(AKP)thathascontributedtoTurkey'semergenceasamajorregionalpowerintheMiddleEast,apossiblemodelmoderatedemocraticIslamismofthesortthatoneofthecontributors,StathisKalyvas,compareswithChristiandemocracyinanearlierera.

Thisisanexcellentbookonthreedifferentversionsofseparatistsecularism.

Norris,Pippa,andRonaldInglehart,SacredandSecular:ReligionandPoliticsWorldWide.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2004.

ReadthisfornumeroustablesrelatedtoreligionanddepictingattitudesthroughouttheworldbasedontheUniversityofMichigan'sWorldValueSurveys.

Philpott,Daniel,ExplainingthePoliticalAmbivalenceofReligion.AmericanPoliticalScienceReview101:3(August2007),505525.

Seethisarticleforamajorattempttolookhistoricallyandcomparativelyatwhatisinvolvedinconflictsoverreligionthatendininclusiveandtolerantdemocraciesandthosethatdonot.

Stepan,Alfred,ArguingComparativePolitics.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2001,213254.

ThistextcontainsthemuchlongerversionofStepan'sarticleinthisbook.ThisTwinTolerationsarticleispartofhislong-termworkonthefundamentalchoicesinvolvedincreatingandsustainingmoderndemocracies.Hisrelatedarticlesonkeyproblemsofdemocracysuchaspathsofdemocratictransition,civilsociety,politicalsociety,parliamentaryversuspresidentialframeworks,varietiesoffederalism,thetasksofdemocraticoppositionanddemocraticconsolidation,anddemocraticcontrolofthesecurityapparatusarealsoavailableinArguingComparativePolitics.

Stepan,Alfred,RitualsofRespect:SufisandSecularistsinSenegalinComparativePerspective,ComparativePolitics,forthcoming2012.Senegalesesocietyhas,overthelasttwocenturies,crafted,betweenSufisandFrench-stylelaicitesecularists,aseriesofmutuallyreinforcingritualsofrespect,whichfirsthelpedfacilitateaccommodationamonggroupsinpotentialconflict,thenfacilitatedtoleration,andeventually,respectanddemocracy.

Stepan,Alfred,TheMultipleSecularismsofModernDemocraciesandAutocracies,in


Page 17 of 21


RethinkingSecularism,ed.CraigCalhoun,MarkJuergensmeyer,andJonathanVanAntwerpen.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2011,114144.

Inbothofthese,StepanbuildsonBhargava'sargumentsforthecasesofSenegalandIndonesia.

Stepan,Alfred,withGraemeRobertson,AnArabmorethanaMuslimDemocracyGap.JournalofDemocracy14:3(July2003),3044.

OneofthemajorpuzzlesaboutMuslimsanddemocracyisthatonpurelysocioeconomicgrounds,somenon-Arab,Muslim-majoritycountries(Indonesia,Bangladesh,Senegal,Mali,Turkey,Albania)areamongtheworld'sgreatestelectoraloverachievers(asisthecountrywiththesecondlargestMuslimpopulation,India),whereasArabMuslim-majoritycountries,asaset,aretheworld'sgreatestelectoralunderachievers.ForaforumthathastwoarticlescriticizingStepan/Robertson,andtheirresponse,seeJournalofDemocracy15:4(October2004),126146.

Walzer,Michael,OnToleration.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,1999.

Readthisforashortandaccessibleoverviewoftolerationbyaleadingpoliticaltheorist.

Notes:(1.)Amuchlongerversionofthisessaywith106footnotesandextensivediscussionsofdemocraciesincountrieswithConfucianandOrthodoxChristiantraditionsisavailableinAlfredStepan,ArguingComparativePolitics(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2001),213253.

(2.)SamuelP.Huntington,TheClashofCivilizationsandtheRemakingofWorldOrder(NewYork:SimonandSchuster,1996),70.

(3.)Quotationscomefromibid.,70,217,238,28,and158,respectively.

(4.)SeeRobertA.Dahl,Polyarchy:ParticipationandOpposition(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,1971),13.

(5.)SeeJuanJ.LinzandAlfredStepan,ProblemsofDemocraticTransitionandConsolidation:SouthernEurope,SouthAmericaandPost-CommunistEurope(Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1996),chapter1.

(6.)JohnRawls,PoliticalLiberalism(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1993),151.

(7.)ForMaxWeber'sdiscussionofcaesaropapism,seeMaxWeber,EconomyandSociety,ed.GuentherRothandClausWittich(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1978),11591163.

(8.)MaxWeber,TheProtestantEthicandtheSpiritofCapitalism,trans.TalcottParsons(NewYork:CharlesScribner'sSons,1958).Weber,however,iscarefulnottocommit


Page 18 of 21


thisfallacyhimself.

(9.)SeeJohnRawls,PoliticalLiberalism;andBruceA.Ackerman,SocialJusticeintheLiberalState(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,1980).

(10.)AdrianKaratnycky,The1998FreedomHouseSurvey:TheDeclineofIlliberalDemocracy,JournalofDemocracy10(January1999),121.

(11.)Forexamplesofthesevoices,seetheexpandedversionofthisessay,TheWorld'sReligiousSystemsandDemocracy:CraftingtheTwinTolerations,inAlfredStepan,ArguingComparativePolitics,213254,especially234236.

(12.)SeeDemocratizationandIslaminIndonesia,eds.,MirjamKnklerandAlfredStepan,(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2012).

(13.)SeeYasmeenMurshedandNazimKamranChoudhury,Bangladesh'sSecondChance,JournalofDemocracy8:1(January1997),7082.FortheDecember2008generalelections,seeWikipedia.

(14.)Foralmost40years,therehavebeennodemocraciesinArabmajoritycountries.Inmyjudgment,thiswillchangein2012inTunisia.SincetheArabSpring,IhavecarriedoutresearchinEgyptandinTunisiaonthepossibilityofdemocratictransitionsinbothcountries.InseveralOpEdspublishedbyProjectSyndicate,IgivereasonswhydemocratizationisfurtheralonginTunisia.Ifsuccessful,thiswouldmarktheendofArabexceptionalism.SeeaforthcomingarticlebymeintheJournalofDemocracy.

(15.)TheresistanceoftheCatholicChurchinPolandhas,ofcourse,beenamplydocumented,butevenunderStalin,inLithuania,priests,andoftenvirtuallytheirentireparishes,wouldrepeatedlysignindividualprotestsagainststatepolicies.SeethefascinatingdocumentationinW.StanleyVardys,TheCatholicChurch:DissentandNationalityinSovietLithuania(Boulder,CO:EastEuropeanQuarterly,distributedbyColumbiaUniversityPress,1978).JaneEllis,inherreviewoftheroleofreligionsinthefifteenSovietrepublics,writes:ThestronglyCatholicareaofLithuaniawasvirtuallytheonlychurchintheUSSRwherebishops,clergyandfaithfulhadremainedatone,sotherewaslittleneedforrecriminationovercompromises.SeeherTheRussianOrthodoxChurch:TriumphalismandDefensiveness(Houndmills,England:Macmillan,1996),3.

(16.)ForMaxWeber'sdiscussionofcaesaropapism,seehisEconomyandSociety,2vols.,ed.GuntherRothandClausWittich(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1978),2:11591163;quoteisfrom2:1161.

(17.)Weberdiscussestwocontrastingideal-typesofroutestowardreligioussalvation.Oneroutetowardsalvationhecallsworldrejecting.Insucharoute,concentrationupontheactualpursuitofsalvationmayentailformalwithdrawalfromtheworld.Onewithsuchanattitudemayregardanyparticipationintheseaffairsasanacceptanceoftheworld,leadingtoalienationfromGod.Theotherroutehecallsinnerworldly.Inthis


Page 19 of 21


route,theconcentrationofhumanbehavioronactivitiesleadingtosalvationmayrequireparticipationwithintheworld(ormoreprecisely:withintheinstitutionsoftheworldbutinoppositiontothem).Inthiscasetheworldispresentedtothereligiousvirtuosoashisresponsibility.Hemayhavetheobligationtotransformtheworld.Ibid.,1:542.ForWeber,theRussianOrthodoxmonastictraditionsinclinedmoretowardtheworld-rejectingroute.MassiverepressionbytotalitarianatheisticstatesundertheinfluenceofStalinalsocontributed,nodoubt,totheselectionofquietisminmuchofOrthodoxEuropeinrecenthistory.Withlessstaterepressionandalsoprobablylessstatefinancialsupport,IexpectsomewhatlessquietisminOrthodoxy'sfuture.

(18.)Orthodoxy,ofcourse,isnotcompletelyunivocalintermsofactions.Empirically,theOrthodoxtraditionallowsforindividualprotestsbyreligiousleadersandtheirfollowers.TheOldBelieversinCzaristRussiawereasourceofsomedissent.

(19.)Fordetails,seeCharlesA.Frazee,TheOrthodoxChurchofGreece:TheLastFifteenYears,inHellenicPerspectives:EssaysintheHistoryofGreece,ed.JohnT.A.Koumoulides(Lanham,MD:UniversityPressofAmerica,1980),145180.

(20.)InDecember1997,IparticipatedinaninternationalconferenceinAthensthatanalyzedthedictatorshipthirtyyearsafteritsinauguration.NoscholarItalkedtosaidthatnewevidenceofchurchresistancehasappeared.OndemocratizationandtraditionalculturalvaluessuchasthequietismofOrthodoxy,seeNikiforosDiamandouros,CulturalDualismandPoliticalChangeinPost-AuthoritarianGreece,InstitutoJuanMarch,Madrid,WorkingPaper1994/50,esp.pp.1012andtheexhaustivefootnote14onpp.5859.

(21.)SeeA.Baskedis,BetweenPartnershipandSeparation:RelationsbetweenChurchandStateinGreeceundertheConstitutionofJune9,1975,EcumenicalReview29:1(1977),5261.

(22.)Foraspiritedanalysisofhoworthodoxyis,contraHuntington,consistentwithdemocracyandcapableofpoliticallysignificantinternalchange,seeElizabethH.Prodromov,Paradigms,Power,andIdentity:RediscoveringOrthodoxyandRegionalizingEurope,EuropeanJournalofPoliticalResearch30(September1996),125154.

(23.)ForahistoricalanalysisoftheroleoftheGreekmilitarythatcontainsinterestinginsightsaboutchurch-militaryrelations,seeThanosVeremis,TheMilitaryinGreekPolitics:FromIndependencetoDemocracy(London:Hurst,1997).

(24.)CharlesS.Liebman,DirectoroftheArgovCenterfortheStudyoftheJewishPeopleatBar-IlanUniversity,asserts:IsraeliJudaism[has]undergoneatransformationthatmakesitappearless,ratherthanmore,compatiblewiththepreconditionforastabledemocraticsociety.Oneofthereasonshecitesforthischangewasthegrowingroleinthe1980sand1990sofneofundamentalistreligiouspartiesinthemakingorbreakingofminoritygovernments,eitherLabororLikud.Giventhiscontext,Liebmanarguesthere


Page 20 of 21


wasagrowingdeferenceofthenon-religiouspopulationtothereligiouselitesdefinitionofJudaism,theJewishtraditionandtheJewishreligion.HearguesthishasimplicationsfortheinclusivenessofIsraelidemocracybecauseonthebasisofvirtuallyalltheIsraelipublicopinionsurveyshehasstudied,evenifhecontrolsforeducationandethnicity:ThereligiousJewismorelikelytoharborprejudiceandlesslikelytorespectthepoliticalrightsofArabs[thanthenonreligiousJews].SeeCharlesS.Liebman,ReligionandDemocracyinIsraelinIsraeliDemocracyunderStress,ed.EhudSprinzakandLarryDiamond(Boulder,CO:LynneRienner,1993),273292;quotesarefrom277278and291.Inthesamevolume,alsoseetheintroductionbytheeditors,120,andthearticlebyYaronEzrahi,DemocraticPoliticsandCultureinModernIsrael:RecentTrends,255272.

(25.)Liebman,ibid.,284285.

(26.)SeeSuzanneHoeberRudolph,TheNewCourage:AnEssayonGandhi'sPsychology,WorldPolitics(October1963),98117;quoteisfrom114.

(27.)ForGandhi'smobilizationofsatyagrahaandotherreligioussymbolsformoderndemocraticpurposes,seeLloydI.RudolphandSusanneHoeberRudolph,TheModernityofTradition:PoliticalDevelopmentinIndia(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1967).ForGandhi'soverallphilosophyofconflict,seeJoanBordurant,TheConquestofViolence:Gandhi'sPhilosophyofConflict(Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress,1958).

(28.)ForacriticalanalysisoftheBJPandtheRSS,seeTapanBosuetal.,KhakiShortsandSaffronFlags:ACritiqueoftheHinduRight(NewDelhi:OrientLongman,1993).ForadiscussionofthenewcrisisofIndiansecularisminthepost-NehruvianworldandtheriseofHindufundamentalismthatcontributedtothe1992demolitionoftheBabriMosque,seeStanleyJ.Tambiah,TheCrisisofSecularisminIndia,andAmartyaSen,SecularismandItsDiscontents,bothinthepreviouslycitedRajeevBhargava,SecularismandItsCritics(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2005),418453,454485.

(29.)ForthehistoryoftheestablishmentofchurchesinAmericaandfordebatesovertheFirstAmendment,seeA.J.Reichley,ReligioninAmericanPublicLife(Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitution,1985),53167.


Page 21 of 21


Date post:	12-Oct-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	giulio-stefanica
View:	30 times
Download:	0 times

Religion Democracy and the Twin Tolerations

Documents