2020年自由信徒:俄勒冈州的反疫苗行动主义和政治自由主义

IF 1.3 0 RELIGION Religion State & Society Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/09637494.2023.2176113
Dominic Armour Martin
{"title":"2020年自由信徒:俄勒冈州的反疫苗行动主义和政治自由主义","authors":"Dominic Armour Martin","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2023.2176113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This contribution examines recent developments in the activism of a Russian religious minority community in the United States. After fleeing persecution in Russia to Manchuria, Turkey, and Brazil, since the 1960s 10,000 Old Believers have settled in the Williamette Valley, Oregon. The contribution describes how and why this paradigmatically ‘closed’ religious group, which has eschewed active political engagement for centuries, made a sudden and effective entry into Oregon politics in 2019–20. Initial political mobilisation was provoked by Oregon State Legislature’s attempt to pass a law to eliminate exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds for children’s vaccinations. Following the theorising of Rawls, I argue that the Old Believers formed with other Americans opposed to mandatory vaccinations an ‘overlapping consensus’ of political liberalism. Their exclusive reliance on political arguments grounded in the secular American tradition of liberal rights and freedoms conflicts with the influential thesis of ‘public religion’, articulated prominently by Casanova and Habermas, who highlight the spiritual and theological character of interventions by religious groups into modern politics. Notwithstanding the secular tenor of their political intervention, I argue that it constitutes a form of ‘religious activism’ motivated by the pursuit of values at the heart of their centuries-old religious project.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"619 1","pages":"102 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Freedom Believers 2020: anti-vaccine activism and political liberalism in Oregon\",\"authors\":\"Dominic Armour Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09637494.2023.2176113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This contribution examines recent developments in the activism of a Russian religious minority community in the United States. After fleeing persecution in Russia to Manchuria, Turkey, and Brazil, since the 1960s 10,000 Old Believers have settled in the Williamette Valley, Oregon. The contribution describes how and why this paradigmatically ‘closed’ religious group, which has eschewed active political engagement for centuries, made a sudden and effective entry into Oregon politics in 2019–20. Initial political mobilisation was provoked by Oregon State Legislature’s attempt to pass a law to eliminate exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds for children’s vaccinations. Following the theorising of Rawls, I argue that the Old Believers formed with other Americans opposed to mandatory vaccinations an ‘overlapping consensus’ of political liberalism. Their exclusive reliance on political arguments grounded in the secular American tradition of liberal rights and freedoms conflicts with the influential thesis of ‘public religion’, articulated prominently by Casanova and Habermas, who highlight the spiritual and theological character of interventions by religious groups into modern politics. Notwithstanding the secular tenor of their political intervention, I argue that it constitutes a form of ‘religious activism’ motivated by the pursuit of values at the heart of their centuries-old religious project.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religion State & Society\",\"volume\":\"619 1\",\"pages\":\"102 - 122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religion State & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2023.2176113\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion State & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2023.2176113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章考察了在美国的俄罗斯宗教少数群体的激进主义的最新发展。自20世纪60年代以来,一万名老信徒逃离俄罗斯的迫害,来到满洲、土耳其和巴西,定居在俄勒冈州的威廉特山谷。这篇文章描述了这个几个世纪以来一直回避积极政治参与的典型“封闭”宗教团体是如何以及为什么在2019 - 2020年突然有效地进入俄勒冈州政治的。最初的政治动员是由俄勒冈州立法机构试图通过一项法律,以消除基于宗教或哲学理由的儿童疫苗豁免引起的。根据罗尔斯的理论,我认为旧信徒与其他反对强制接种疫苗的美国人形成了政治自由主义的“重叠共识”。他们完全依赖以美国世俗自由权利和自由传统为基础的政治论点,这与卡萨诺瓦和哈贝马斯所阐述的“公共宗教”这一有影响力的论点相冲突,卡萨诺瓦和哈贝马斯强调了宗教团体干预现代政治的精神和神学特征。尽管他们的政治干预是世俗的,但我认为这构成了一种“宗教激进主义”的形式,其动机是追求他们几个世纪以来宗教项目的核心价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Freedom Believers 2020: anti-vaccine activism and political liberalism in Oregon
ABSTRACT This contribution examines recent developments in the activism of a Russian religious minority community in the United States. After fleeing persecution in Russia to Manchuria, Turkey, and Brazil, since the 1960s 10,000 Old Believers have settled in the Williamette Valley, Oregon. The contribution describes how and why this paradigmatically ‘closed’ religious group, which has eschewed active political engagement for centuries, made a sudden and effective entry into Oregon politics in 2019–20. Initial political mobilisation was provoked by Oregon State Legislature’s attempt to pass a law to eliminate exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds for children’s vaccinations. Following the theorising of Rawls, I argue that the Old Believers formed with other Americans opposed to mandatory vaccinations an ‘overlapping consensus’ of political liberalism. Their exclusive reliance on political arguments grounded in the secular American tradition of liberal rights and freedoms conflicts with the influential thesis of ‘public religion’, articulated prominently by Casanova and Habermas, who highlight the spiritual and theological character of interventions by religious groups into modern politics. Notwithstanding the secular tenor of their political intervention, I argue that it constitutes a form of ‘religious activism’ motivated by the pursuit of values at the heart of their centuries-old religious project.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Religion, State & Society has a long-established reputation as the leading English-language academic publication focusing on communist and formerly communist countries throughout the world, and the legacy of the encounter between religion and communism. To augment this brief Religion, State & Society has now expanded its coverage to include religious developments in countries which have not experienced communist rule, and to treat wider themes in a more systematic way. The journal encourages a comparative approach where appropriate, with the aim of revealing similarities and differences in the historical and current experience of countries, regions and religions, in stability or in transition.
期刊最新文献
Confessional culture, religiosity, and traditionalism: tracing the influence of religion on public attitudes towards European integration Conflict and coexistence among minorities within minority religions: a case study of Tablighi Jama’at in Japan Editors’ introduction Rage and carnage in the name of God: religious violence in Nigeria Religion and minority in Japanese contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1