From the Christchurch mosque shootings to the Sri Lanka Easter church bombings and to Buddhist extremism in Myanmar, religious extremism has posed a perpetual problem. What are its causes, and can anything be done to curb it?
These questions were explored in a panel on religious fundamentalism and international extremism during a Forum on Religion, Extremism and Identity Politics organised by the Institute of Policy Studies at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs on 24 July 2019.
In his opening remarks, Dr Mathew Mathews, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, highlighted the reality that as citizens of a multi-racial, multi-religious nation, Singaporeans are “not immune to extremism”. He warned that a “small group of Singaporeans are susceptible to the allure of extremist or fundamentalist beliefs”, as evidenced by press reports of individuals being radicalised and subsequently detained.
Dr Mathews added: “Religious and racial harmony is something that Singaporeans treasure. As such, a better grasp on the issues … on religious extremism and identity politics, and their impact on Singapore, is crucial.”
Global-is-Asian presents some key findings.
Loss of personal and spiritual identity arising from globalisation
Globalisation has broken down barriers between people, businesses and countries worldwide. While this has brought about a sense of global citizenship in people around the world, globalisation potentially also causes a loss of personal and spiritual identity at the local community level.
People then turn to religion to fill this void, highlighted Professor Mark Juergensmeyer, Distinguished Professor of Sociology and Global Studies, and Founding Director of the Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, at the University of California in the United States.
For example, the ease of mobility and communication across borders may result in the erosion of local community ties. Issues of accountability arise as greater access to knowledge causes individuals to question their faith in their political leaders. Individuals may also feel a loss of security because, as Professor Juergensmeyer puts it, “How can you truly be safe in a world that is constantly shifting and changing?”
This is where traditional religion offers a response to the “growing sense of fear” that individuals experience from globalisation. By providing followers with identities and identifying religious authorities to whom followers are accountable, traditional religion offers security and a “safe haven” that may appeal to individuals who feel adrift in our fast-changing world.
The apparent threat of secularism to religion
At the same time, there is a perception that religion is under attack from secularism: the separation of the state from religion not only limits the introduction of religious ideologies into politics and society, but also poses a direct threat to religion itself.
Such views have given rise to religious fundamentalism, which Professor Jonathan Fox, Yehuda Avner Professor of Religion and Politics at the Bar-Ilan University in Israel, defined as a set of religious beliefs or practices designed to defend religion against secularism and modernity by rejecting both.
According to Professor Fox, fundamentalists believe that secularism introduces “terrible values” that conflict with religion and undermine people’s values. “[To fundamentalists], the world has left its proper course, there is something wrong in the world that needs to be fixed. And who is to blame? Well, the secularist members of other religions and members of their own religions that do not follow that particular viewpoint.”
Fundamentalists prefer to use peaceful and legal political tactics to preserve their religion against the threat of modernity. If these tactics fail however, fundamentalists are not above resorting to violence if they are unwilling to compromise or give up their agendas, plus have the means to engage in violence — which is what we are seeing in the world today.
Exposure to alternative religious narratives — both offline and online
As seen, some people turn to religion as a source of stability in a confusing new environment. Others use religion to justify taking action against perceived evils in the world. But what religious narratives are they adhering to in the process?
Ms Farah Pandith, Adjunct Senior Fellow of the Council of Foreign Relations of the United States, cited the example of Saudi Arabia deploying a “very strategic and extremely successful way of branding what it means to be Muslim”. By decimating ancient mosques and introducing new laws, the state has replaced existing cultural heritages with its own religious ideologies.
Such rewriting of narratives is also occurring online. Thanks to the Internet, millennials and Generation Z youths with religious questions can now bypass their elders and search for answers online “with a swish of their finger”.
Unbeknownst to searchers, the answers that “Sheikh Google” provides may have similarly been planted by parties with their own agendas. But being unfamiliar with the tenets of their religion, the searchers believe what they see — and may even be inspired to act on them.
Pandith added: “Even if their grandfather or their grandmother is saying ‘that's not the way we've been doing this all these years, this is not our culture and our history’, what [searchers] see on their screen is authentic to them.”
Can the issue of religious extremism be resolved?
The most-apparent solution to curbing religious extremism may be to physically engage and destroy religious extremists, as seen from the elimination of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria’s strongholds in Syria. However, the underlying causes of religious extremism, namely the proliferation and adoption of altered religious ideologies, also need to be addressed.
For this purpose, Pandith advocates that governments craft and present alternative narratives to those propagated by extremists. To increase the effectiveness of these narratives, she recommends emulating the practices of businesses, which already employ sophisticated cultural listening and behavioural science strategies to market to consumers.
This approach complements Fox’s recommendation that fundamentalists be granted religious freedom. Fox argues that doing so will render them less able to paint themselves as an oppressed group. This reduces their ability to compete for attention in the free marketplace of ideas, although Fox admits that this solution is “simple in theory, but difficult in practice”.
According to Dr Mathews curbing religious extremism cannot be the sole responsibility of governments. In fact, no one group can deal with religious extremism alone.
“It certainly requires government leadership. When there are religious communities which feel persecuted and marginalised, this can sometimes lead to the growth in support to the extreme elements in these communities. Governments should be aware of these sentiments and find ways to ensure that religious communities are free from persecution and oppression, even if it means sometimes challenging and disciplining segments in society who have a historical hate for a religious community. Governments should also find ways when possible to accommodate religious practice and beliefs, of course as long as accommodation does not result in further segregation between groups,” he said.
Religious organisations themselves have a vital role to play. Moderate views balance the extreme views - they just need to be heard.
“They should keep from playing up the “evils” of any religious group and teach their members to be respectful of others – something hard to do when religious groups are in competition but very important if all religious groups are to exist in a state of peace,“ said Dr Mathews. ”Moderate voices in every religious tradition should also seek to counter religious extremist ideologies from their respective traditions. While it is difficult to engage religious extremists, what is important is to reduce broader support for such positions. This can be done when there are enough moderates who seek to counter the methods that extremists present.“
Regardless of perceived difficulties in adopting any particular solution, perhaps taking some action is better than not taking action at all. “The mess that we’re in today did not start just today. We saw [extremist] movements begin to happen decades ago and everybody looked the other way,” said Pandith.
Expressing her belief that countermeasures should be targeted at the young who have to understand who they are in the world today, Pandith added: “the solutions are available and they are affordable right now.”
If you're interested in reading such content, subscribe here.