RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM CULTURAL DEFENCE

FUNDAMENTALISM

Giddens identifies 5 characteristics of Fundamentalists

Seek to return to traditional basics Believe their view is the only true view of the

world Justify their views by reference to sacred texts and

dogma (narrow minded beliefs) Avoid contact with people who hold other views Rely on guardians of religion to interpret sacred

texts and lay down rules which determines their lifestyle.

FUNDAMENTALISM

Giddens notes this term is new and sees its growth as a product of and reaction to globalisation which undermines traditional social norms.

The attraction of it (the rigid dogmatic beliefs) is the certainty that it promises in our uncertain world of risk and choice.

He contrasts Fundamentalism to ‘Cosmopolitanism’ which is:

Tolerant of all views Open to new ideas and modifies beliefs

in the light of new information Rational in its arguments It places emphasis on personal

meaning and self improvement.Giddens calls this ‘reflexive thinking’

RESPONSES TO POST-MODERNITY

However, Functionalists use modern methods to express their beliefs despite the fact they detest modernity.

Bauman sees Fundamentalism as a response to living in post-modernity which brought about the erosion of certainty.

RESPONSES TO POST-MODERNITY

Castells distinguishes between two responses:

Resistant Identity a defensive reaction of those who feel threatened and retreat into Fundamentalism

Project Identity the response of those who are forward-looking and engage with social movements (e.g. Feminism and environmentalism)

CRITICISMS...

Beckford makes some criticisms... They distinguish too sharply between Fundamentalism

and Cosmopolitanism and ignore ‘hybrid’ movements They are ‘fixated on Fundamentalism’ and so ignore

other developments Giddens ignores important differences between types

of Fundamentalism Giddens description of Functionalism as a defensive

reaction ignores the fact that reinventing tradition is a modern, ‘reflexive’ activity

Haynes says we shouldn’t focus on the idea that Islamic Fundamentalism is a reaction against globalisation

MONOTHESISM AND FUNDAMENTALISMBruce sees the main cause of Fundamentalism as the

perception of religious traditionalists that today’s globalising world threatens their beliefs and life style.

But, he regards Fundamentalism as being confined to monotheistic religions. Polytheistic religions lack a single, authoritative text which represents God’s will, so there is scope for different interpretations.

Bruce says different fundamentalism movements may have different origins...

In the West In the Third World

IN THE WEST

Fundamentalism is most often a reaction to a change taking place within society. Its aim is to reassert ‘true religion’ and restore it to the public role where it can shape the laws and morals of wider society.

An example is the New Christian Right.

IN THE THIRD WORLD

Fundamentalism is a reaction to changes being thrust upon a society from outside. It is triggered by modernisation and globalisation in which ‘Western’ values are imposed by foreign capitalism or by local elites supported by the West. Here, Fundamentalism involves resistance to the state’s attempts to sideline it and confine it to the private sphere.

An example is the Islamic revolution in Iran

CULTURAL DEFENCE

Bruce sees one function of religion as a cultural defence where religion serves to unite community against an external threat.

He identifies two examples: Poland Iran

POLAND

From 1945-1989, Poland was under threat and communist rule by the Soviet Union. The Catholic Church was suppressed but for many Poles it continued to embody Polish identity. It lent its active support to the Solidarity Free Trade Union movement (1980s) that did much to bring about the fall of communism.

IRAN

Western capitalist powers and oil companies have influence in Iran including the overthrow of a democratic government in the 1950s to install a pro-Western regime headed by the Shah of Iran. During the 60/70s, his successor embarked on a policy of modernisation and Westernisation. This widened the gap between rich and poor while protest was ruthlessly suppressed. Change was imposed rapidly and from above, often causing suffering. Under these conditions, Islam became the focus for resistance to Shah’s regime. Led by clerics, the 1979 revolution brought about the creation of the Islamic Republic in which clerics held state power and could impose Islamic Sharia law on the country. But, Haynes argues the Iranian revolution was not the typical of politics in the Middle East in that it was led by the Mullahs (religious leaders). In other countries, the religious leadership was tied to the local elite who are tied to Western Imperialism. As such, local religious leaders are opposed by local Fundamentalists who regard them as enemies of Islam.