Save Planet Earth For Kids
Plant Trees, Throw Seed Balls

Set your Location Set Location

Please Select Your Location

  • Home |
  • All Religion

Religion

We believe in a secular India. When we see political leaders appealing to one religious group to the detriment of another, or when we see religious authorities claim to speak for “all” people, we often wonder if a thriving democracy might not require the elimination of religion from public life entirely. Even in the most secular of democracies, however, a more careful reckoning of religion’s public role can bring to light not only potential anti-democratic factors but potential pro-democratic forces. Our work on the International Panel for Social Progress has led us to conclude that religion is neither inherently pro-democracy nor inherently anti-democracy. Finding ways to live together more freely and responsibly requires a careful look at the specific religions and specific societies in question. More importantly, it also requires attention to ground-level religious action and religious organisations and not just to theologies and authorities.

Enlightenment legacies

One can point to anti-democratic examples in many religious traditions. In addition to non-democratic regimes supported by monotheistic world religions, there are autocratic examples that range from Hindu nationalism in India to Buddhist repression of Muslim minorities in Myanmar. Indeed links between religions and anti-democratic regimes have – at least since the Enlightenment – prompted some thinkers to believe that all religions inculcate intolerance toward alternative views of the world and instil in their followers norms of obedience and deference to authority that are incompatible with democracy and individual liberty. Keeping all religion carefully separate from public life was, it seemed, the best way forward. The French instituted their system of “laicité”, and other countries have followed suit.

The dangers of generalisation

Not all democratic countries, of course, insist on an entirely secular public sphere, so other political theorists have speculated about whether particular religious traditions may be more or less friendly to democratic participation. In different times and places the very same religious tradition has been hailed as inherently a seedbed for democracy and as a danger to it. For instance, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote that Catholics “constitute the most republican and the most democratic class of citizens which exists in the United States.” The reason for this, he argued, was Catholicism’s emphasis on equality. More than a century later, sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset came to the opposite conclusion. Lipset argued that democracy requires a political belief system that accommodates competition among ideas, while the Catholic church claims that it alone has the truth.

© 2019 Bookfromfarmer.com. All rights reserved | Design by Angel Star Enterprises.