Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1994847
Ryan Williams
ABSTRACT The liberal political project has come under scrutiny for its unfulfilled promises of freedom and equality for those at the margins of society. This contribution approaches the critical analysis of state-citizen relations through inquiring into how liberal secular governance enables, limits, and reshapes moral and ethical potentialities. It draws on a study of Muslim men under probation supervision in East London and their relationships with their empathetic probation officers to show how the state can direct Muslim-citizen subjects in virtuous and restorative ways but also in ways that mark ‘injury’, directing subjectivities towards cooperation with exclusionary state practices. Taking an intersectional approach and through attention to pain, this contribution argues that the state is intimately invested in subject formation, but its effects are uneven and polarised according to its own sovereignty and governing logics. The uneven subjectivities reflect the ‘precarity’ of governing Muslims at the margins directed towards inclusion and exclusion, assisting and controlling, care and punishment.
{"title":"State of injury: liberal multiculturalism and the Muslim subject after prison","authors":"Ryan Williams","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1994847","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1994847","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The liberal political project has come under scrutiny for its unfulfilled promises of freedom and equality for those at the margins of society. This contribution approaches the critical analysis of state-citizen relations through inquiring into how liberal secular governance enables, limits, and reshapes moral and ethical potentialities. It draws on a study of Muslim men under probation supervision in East London and their relationships with their empathetic probation officers to show how the state can direct Muslim-citizen subjects in virtuous and restorative ways but also in ways that mark ‘injury’, directing subjectivities towards cooperation with exclusionary state practices. Taking an intersectional approach and through attention to pain, this contribution argues that the state is intimately invested in subject formation, but its effects are uneven and polarised according to its own sovereignty and governing logics. The uneven subjectivities reflect the ‘precarity’ of governing Muslims at the margins directed towards inclusion and exclusion, assisting and controlling, care and punishment.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"17 1","pages":"350 - 367"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85640471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177
Vasilios N. Makrides
another, and thus in turn produce and reproduce the particular ways religious diversity circulates in public discourse? The text contends with a number of ‘linguistic dilemmas’ – successfully on some points, less so on others, and on yet others one might say ‘the jury is still out’. The perennial problem of consistency and accuracy in the uses of ‘ity’, ‘ism’, and ‘isation’, which dogs the field of sociology of religion generally, is one point of vulnerability in this text. One example is in the use of the term ‘religious diversity’, endowed by Burchardt with a normativity because of the ways it ‘is turning into an increasingly prominent tool in order to render populations legible for governmental and administrative purposes’ (3); it may or may not be overly pedantic to suggest that good old-fashioned ‘pluralism’ and ‘anti-pluralism’ could serve the purpose equally well without contributing to the prevalent conceptual confusion between diversity and pluralism. Another example may be found in the uses of ‘secular’, ‘secularism’, ‘secularity’, and ‘secularisation’. Perhaps more substantially though, one might question the overall limitation of the book’s focus, as indicated in its subtitle, on the ‘secular West’. Besides not offering a definition of the ‘secular West’, Burchardt also does not entirely do justice to his previous work on ‘multiple secularities’ in thus limiting the scope to the ‘secular West’: many contestations of religion akin to those he describes in his second chapter, and to those he elaborates further through examples of urban administration and debates around head and face coverings (chapters 3 and 4), as well as iterations of heritage religion (chapter 5) may be found in not-so-post-secular contexts, across the globe. The extent to which migration-driven diversity is a necessary catalyst for all the above may also be questioned in a globalised world in which societies may be torn by passionate debates over issues not (yet, or possibly ever) directly relevant to them, in an empirical sense at least. Burchardt’s Regulating Difference is an excellent resource for students and scholars of religious diversity, of the relationship between religion and national identity, and of secularism and secularity. It is path-breaking, insightful, and a delight to read, and the field of religious diversity studies will be enriched if many do indeed read it.
{"title":"Orthodox churches and politics in Southeastern Europe: nationalism, conservativism, and intolerance","authors":"Vasilios N. Makrides","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177","url":null,"abstract":"another, and thus in turn produce and reproduce the particular ways religious diversity circulates in public discourse? The text contends with a number of ‘linguistic dilemmas’ – successfully on some points, less so on others, and on yet others one might say ‘the jury is still out’. The perennial problem of consistency and accuracy in the uses of ‘ity’, ‘ism’, and ‘isation’, which dogs the field of sociology of religion generally, is one point of vulnerability in this text. One example is in the use of the term ‘religious diversity’, endowed by Burchardt with a normativity because of the ways it ‘is turning into an increasingly prominent tool in order to render populations legible for governmental and administrative purposes’ (3); it may or may not be overly pedantic to suggest that good old-fashioned ‘pluralism’ and ‘anti-pluralism’ could serve the purpose equally well without contributing to the prevalent conceptual confusion between diversity and pluralism. Another example may be found in the uses of ‘secular’, ‘secularism’, ‘secularity’, and ‘secularisation’. Perhaps more substantially though, one might question the overall limitation of the book’s focus, as indicated in its subtitle, on the ‘secular West’. Besides not offering a definition of the ‘secular West’, Burchardt also does not entirely do justice to his previous work on ‘multiple secularities’ in thus limiting the scope to the ‘secular West’: many contestations of religion akin to those he describes in his second chapter, and to those he elaborates further through examples of urban administration and debates around head and face coverings (chapters 3 and 4), as well as iterations of heritage religion (chapter 5) may be found in not-so-post-secular contexts, across the globe. The extent to which migration-driven diversity is a necessary catalyst for all the above may also be questioned in a globalised world in which societies may be torn by passionate debates over issues not (yet, or possibly ever) directly relevant to them, in an empirical sense at least. Burchardt’s Regulating Difference is an excellent resource for students and scholars of religious diversity, of the relationship between religion and national identity, and of secularism and secularity. It is path-breaking, insightful, and a delight to read, and the field of religious diversity studies will be enriched if many do indeed read it.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"423 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76944010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1994846
M. Benussi
ABSTRACT Through the Weber-inspired metaphor of the ‘golden cage’, this contribution discusses the dual process by which both Islamic heritage and secularity are produced in Russia’s Muslim-majority Tatarstan Republic: on the one hand (‘gold’), Islam is given visibility/legitimacy as an element of Russia’s civilisational makeup; on the other (‘cage’), the region’s Islamic past is shaped by the state while ‘excessive’ manifestations of piety are marginalised. The contribution focuses on actors and dynamics at two heritage sites in post-Soviet Tatarstan – Kazan’s kremlin and Qol Şärif mosque, and Şaxri Bolğar. The ‘golden caging’ of Islam, encapsulated in these two intensely cherished heritage projects, resonates with a significant number of Tatars who, owing in part to the republic’s history of governmentalisation and populist mobilisation, embrace (or accept) a ‘secular’ model of ethnic, moral, and civic personhood.
{"title":"The golden cage: heritage, (ethnic) Muslimness, and the place of Islam in post-Soviet Tatarstan","authors":"M. Benussi","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1994846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1994846","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Through the Weber-inspired metaphor of the ‘golden cage’, this contribution discusses the dual process by which both Islamic heritage and secularity are produced in Russia’s Muslim-majority Tatarstan Republic: on the one hand (‘gold’), Islam is given visibility/legitimacy as an element of Russia’s civilisational makeup; on the other (‘cage’), the region’s Islamic past is shaped by the state while ‘excessive’ manifestations of piety are marginalised. The contribution focuses on actors and dynamics at two heritage sites in post-Soviet Tatarstan – Kazan’s kremlin and Qol Şärif mosque, and Şaxri Bolğar. The ‘golden caging’ of Islam, encapsulated in these two intensely cherished heritage projects, resonates with a significant number of Tatars who, owing in part to the republic’s history of governmentalisation and populist mobilisation, embrace (or accept) a ‘secular’ model of ethnic, moral, and civic personhood.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"55 1","pages":"314 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75340653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1994791
G. Trantas
{"title":"Democratization in Christian Orthodox Europe: comparing Greece, Serbia and Russia","authors":"G. Trantas","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1994791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1994791","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"26 1","pages":"426 - 427"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77412330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1989908
Effie Fokas
{"title":"Regulating difference: religious diversity and nationhood in the secular West","authors":"Effie Fokas","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1989908","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1989908","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"4 1","pages":"422 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89369384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1999124
Amin El-Yousfi
ABSTRACT The French state’s laïcité is characterised by a paradox of neutrality: the state claims neutrality while constantly intervening in the religious field, including in the definition of religion in relationship to categories like culture. How do Muslims navigate this paradoxical secular governmentality in relation to the legal and social representation of mosques’ activities as either religious or cultural? Muslims have been able to register new mosques in France either as ‘cultural’ (based on the 1901 law of associations) or ‘religious’ (based on the 1905 law of separation) associations. However, in recent years (particularly after the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks) state representatives have pushed local mosque leaders to adopt the ‘religious’ status. This contribution not only discusses the secular nature of the cultural/religious dichotomy and its role in the process of establishing mosques in France since the 1926 creation of the Grand Mosque of Paris, but also analyses how Muslim pieties centred around God’s witnessing (shāhidiyya) and the holism (jamʿiya) of Islam encounter and operate through a central component of the French secular governmentality of mosques, the cultural/religious distinction.
{"title":"Muslims and mosques in France: navigating the ‘cultural/religious’ dichotomy through God’s witnessing and the holism of Islam","authors":"Amin El-Yousfi","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1999124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1999124","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The French state’s laïcité is characterised by a paradox of neutrality: the state claims neutrality while constantly intervening in the religious field, including in the definition of religion in relationship to categories like culture. How do Muslims navigate this paradoxical secular governmentality in relation to the legal and social representation of mosques’ activities as either religious or cultural? Muslims have been able to register new mosques in France either as ‘cultural’ (based on the 1901 law of associations) or ‘religious’ (based on the 1905 law of separation) associations. However, in recent years (particularly after the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks) state representatives have pushed local mosque leaders to adopt the ‘religious’ status. This contribution not only discusses the secular nature of the cultural/religious dichotomy and its role in the process of establishing mosques in France since the 1926 creation of the Grand Mosque of Paris, but also analyses how Muslim pieties centred around God’s witnessing (shāhidiyya) and the holism (jamʿiya) of Islam encounter and operate through a central component of the French secular governmentality of mosques, the cultural/religious distinction.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"3091 1","pages":"297 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86554247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1996179
Ida Hartmann
ABSTRACT Based on long-term fieldwork among members of the formerly influential Sunni Muslim Hizmet community in Istanbul in 2015, this contribution traces the ‘un/veiling trajectory’ of a woman called Lale, referring to her shifting engagement with the headscarf over a period of almost three decades. Rather than exemplifying a fragmented religiosity, these shifts are understood as articulations of Lale’s aspiration to align her Islamic commitment with the secular boundary for public religiosity, which is defined – and frequently redefined – by the Turkish state. Drawing on the notion of ‘pious citizenship’, Lale’s un/veiling trajectory constitutes the ethnographic ground for unravelling how, in Turkey, the secular boundary for public religiosity has reshaped Islamic ethical practice in three different ways: through state-imposed restrictions, as citizenly self-discipline, and by animating contestation between different religious Muslim groups. The contribution thus argues that Lale’s shifting engagement with the headscarf articulates a mode of Islamic commitment that is intimately, yet uneasily, intertwined with secular discourses, aesthetics, and sensitivities. In so doing, it brings forth an interplay between Islam and secularism that is much more intricate than the image of a binary opposition allows.
{"title":"Lale’s un/veiling trajectory: shifting contours of pious citizenship in contemporary Turkey","authors":"Ida Hartmann","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1996179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1996179","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Based on long-term fieldwork among members of the formerly influential Sunni Muslim Hizmet community in Istanbul in 2015, this contribution traces the ‘un/veiling trajectory’ of a woman called Lale, referring to her shifting engagement with the headscarf over a period of almost three decades. Rather than exemplifying a fragmented religiosity, these shifts are understood as articulations of Lale’s aspiration to align her Islamic commitment with the secular boundary for public religiosity, which is defined – and frequently redefined – by the Turkish state. Drawing on the notion of ‘pious citizenship’, Lale’s un/veiling trajectory constitutes the ethnographic ground for unravelling how, in Turkey, the secular boundary for public religiosity has reshaped Islamic ethical practice in three different ways: through state-imposed restrictions, as citizenly self-discipline, and by animating contestation between different religious Muslim groups. The contribution thus argues that Lale’s shifting engagement with the headscarf articulates a mode of Islamic commitment that is intimately, yet uneasily, intertwined with secular discourses, aesthetics, and sensitivities. In so doing, it brings forth an interplay between Islam and secularism that is much more intricate than the image of a binary opposition allows.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"23 1","pages":"386 - 401"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77064109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1995275
Emanuelle Degli Esposti
ABSTRACT In contemporary Europe, where the hegemony of modern secular governance remains largely uncontested, how do minority religious communities – especially Muslims – negotiate the tension between religious duty and forms of secularised civic belonging? This contribution takes Twelver Shi’a Muslim activism in Europe as a starting place to interrogate the encounter between Islamic and secular values. In particular, I examine the emergence of what I call the discourse of ‘Shi’a rights’, through which Shi’a Muslims are seeking to gain minority recognition within the European context. Combining elements of Shi’a Islamic ethics with the language of secular humanitarianism, the discourse of ‘Shi’a rights’ is emancipatory and outward-facing while simultaneously being exclusionary and particularistic in the way it promotes specific understandings of what it means to be ‘Shi’a’. Crucially, I argue that this ambivalent nature of ‘Shi’a rights’ is a product of the encounter with secular liberal governance, especially the secular ideal of religious equality. Rather than representing a natural division between religion and society, contemporary secularism cultivates particular ethical attachments that ultimately serve to problematise the status of religious minorities. A focus on ‘Shi’a rights’ in Europe thus serves to illuminate the fractures and fissures that contemporary secular discourse seeks to hide.
{"title":"Finding a ‘Shi’a voice’ in Europe: minority representation and the unsettling of secular humanitarianism in the discourse of ‘Shi’a rights’","authors":"Emanuelle Degli Esposti","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1995275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1995275","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In contemporary Europe, where the hegemony of modern secular governance remains largely uncontested, how do minority religious communities – especially Muslims – negotiate the tension between religious duty and forms of secularised civic belonging? This contribution takes Twelver Shi’a Muslim activism in Europe as a starting place to interrogate the encounter between Islamic and secular values. In particular, I examine the emergence of what I call the discourse of ‘Shi’a rights’, through which Shi’a Muslims are seeking to gain minority recognition within the European context. Combining elements of Shi’a Islamic ethics with the language of secular humanitarianism, the discourse of ‘Shi’a rights’ is emancipatory and outward-facing while simultaneously being exclusionary and particularistic in the way it promotes specific understandings of what it means to be ‘Shi’a’. Crucially, I argue that this ambivalent nature of ‘Shi’a rights’ is a product of the encounter with secular liberal governance, especially the secular ideal of religious equality. Rather than representing a natural division between religion and society, contemporary secularism cultivates particular ethical attachments that ultimately serve to problematise the status of religious minorities. A focus on ‘Shi’a rights’ in Europe thus serves to illuminate the fractures and fissures that contemporary secular discourse seeks to hide.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"4 1","pages":"402 - 417"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76728425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.2000261
Zubair Ahmad, Amin El-Yousfi
ABSTRACT In recent years, scholarship on Islam in Europe has highlighted the many attempts to govern Muslims and Islam. Concerned with discussions about secularism, security, integration, or national sentiments more generally, Muslims and Islam have become a target of governmental power. However, the effects of such governmental discourses, practices, or strategies are rarely analysed. In filling this lacuna, we turn to the scholarship on Muslim ethical self-making and specifically ask how configurations of a liberal-secular paradigm govern Muslim subjects in Europe. Focusing upon the nexus of governmentality and the (re-)making of an ethical self, we make visible the ways Islamic ethical and moral commitments are contested, negotiated, or even restructured through the liberal-secular powers of the modern state, its institutions, and its agents in different European contexts.
{"title":"Muslim ethical self-making and secular governmentality in Europe: an introduction","authors":"Zubair Ahmad, Amin El-Yousfi","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.2000261","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.2000261","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recent years, scholarship on Islam in Europe has highlighted the many attempts to govern Muslims and Islam. Concerned with discussions about secularism, security, integration, or national sentiments more generally, Muslims and Islam have become a target of governmental power. However, the effects of such governmental discourses, practices, or strategies are rarely analysed. In filling this lacuna, we turn to the scholarship on Muslim ethical self-making and specifically ask how configurations of a liberal-secular paradigm govern Muslim subjects in Europe. Focusing upon the nexus of governmentality and the (re-)making of an ethical self, we make visible the ways Islamic ethical and moral commitments are contested, negotiated, or even restructured through the liberal-secular powers of the modern state, its institutions, and its agents in different European contexts.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"58 1","pages":"289 - 296"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80167679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-05DOI: 10.1080/09637494.2021.1971038
Fernande W. Pool
ABSTRACT The religiosity of people migrating into secular European countries has posed many questions for policymakers and scholars alike, particularly where it concerns Islam. Rather than opposing migrants’ religious identities with secular values, this article examines shifts and tensions between the ‘multiple secularities’ of Muslim women and integration policy alike, through an ethnography of wellbeing. Set in the Netherlands, it demonstrates that Muslim women of Pakistani background embrace a secularity characterised by respect and religious liberty but that despite a ‘modernisation’ of values, their religion remains the source of their secularity. Dutch integration policy, however, has shifted from a secularity accommodating religious diversity to one characterised by individual liberty (placed in opposition to religion), and, increasingly, towards the progress of a culturally homogeneous nation. By thus failing to recognise religious sources and alternative social dimensions of human wellbeing, Dutch policy risks undermining secular values generally and alienating Dutch Muslims specifically.
{"title":"Respect, freedom, citizenship: Muslim women’s secularities and perspectives on wellbeing","authors":"Fernande W. Pool","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1971038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1971038","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The religiosity of people migrating into secular European countries has posed many questions for policymakers and scholars alike, particularly where it concerns Islam. Rather than opposing migrants’ religious identities with secular values, this article examines shifts and tensions between the ‘multiple secularities’ of Muslim women and integration policy alike, through an ethnography of wellbeing. Set in the Netherlands, it demonstrates that Muslim women of Pakistani background embrace a secularity characterised by respect and religious liberty but that despite a ‘modernisation’ of values, their religion remains the source of their secularity. Dutch integration policy, however, has shifted from a secularity accommodating religious diversity to one characterised by individual liberty (placed in opposition to religion), and, increasingly, towards the progress of a culturally homogeneous nation. By thus failing to recognise religious sources and alternative social dimensions of human wellbeing, Dutch policy risks undermining secular values generally and alienating Dutch Muslims specifically.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"12 1","pages":"40 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86071083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：