Textbook Notes (290,000)
CA (170,000)
UOttawa (6,000)
SRS (80)

SRS 2195 Chapter Notes -Arend Lijphart, Alevism, Robert A. Dahl

Religious Studies
Course Code
SRS 2195
Peter Beyer

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 6 pages of the document.
Introduction: The Multiple Secularisms of Modern Democratic and Non-Democratic
By Alfred Stepan
Secularism: The view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted
without the introduction of a religious element. (dictionaryreference.com)
Religions are transnational and we are living in a time of global movement of populations
that are able to stay connected with the sources of their religion as well as being influenced
by it by the media, internet and actual religious leaders from their countries resident in the
“Twin tolerations”: Democracies don’t necessarily need the concept of secularism… but
democratic institutions do need sufficient political space from religion to function. (just as
citizens need to be given sufficient space by democratic institutions to exercise their
Secularism can be and has been an integral part of non-democracies and is therefore not a
sufficient condition of democracy and not necessary for its analysis.
There are multiple types of secularisms that can fulfill the “twin tolerations”
- Eastern Europe has the patterns:
“Multiple secularisms”
“Established religion pattern” (Sweden, Denmark and Norway)
“Positive accommodation” (Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and Germany)
“Respect all, positive cooperation, principled distance” (India, Senegal and Indonesia)
“Separatist secularism”
Is the concept of secularism necessary to analyze democracy?
No, Robert Dahl, Arend Lijphart and Juan L. Linz (1st 3 winners of the nobel prize of
political Science) did not feel the need to include any discussion of secularism in their
definitions of modern democracies.
However Linz and Bowen are aware that democracies need to overcome a variety of
emipical and historical processes often called “secularisation” to facilitate the reduction
of religious prerogatives in polity in order to become democratic.

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Simplistic versions of modernization theory imply that there are at least 4 reinforcing and
compounding dichotomies (paradoxes) related to modernity and religion:
- Traditional vs. modern
- High-religious practicing societies vs. low practice
- Little separation of religion and state vs. democratic regimes
- non-democratic regimes vs. democratic
Separation of religion and the state is not the empirical norm in modern Euro
democracies (stats p. 117)
Separatism: as a model (even in demo variants) can historically be established for dif
purposes and diff results  ex: France and USA: 2 long-standing democracies with
greatest legal separation between rel and state
France: Catholic church part of anti-Republican coakition in 3rd Republic
Laicite created in 1905 being clerically hostile form of freedom of state from rel
USA: 1st Ammendment: clerically
friendly(advocating the power or influence of the clergy in politics,government, etc.: a
clerical party.)
Made to prevent Congress to establish one official rel for USA as a whole, not separate
Complete separatism may produce its wn tensions and inflexibilities in demo
France because of model of Republican interests, it is difficult to manage ethnic
and rel demands of some of its 2nd and 3rd generation muslims citizens (affirmative
action being illegal)—
- Arab sounding names disadvantaged or jobs, don’t know how many of rel (census),
restrictive policies more than any other Western Euro state (ban on headscarf in
primary& secondary schools, bureaucracy barriers against building a mosque, lack of
islamic funding for learning (even though it funds catholic primary schools) (118)
USA: open to rel find it dif t control some of the demands of rapidly growing and pol
assertive fund rel groups from all rel
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version