JOHN WOLFFE OPINION Religious literacy
Greater religious understanding is vital to produce effective, long-term responses to radicalisation. By Professor John Wolffe
C
ONCERN ABOUT HOME-GROWN violent radicalisation linked to Daesh (the so-called ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria) is understandably high on the agenda
of politicians and the security services. While immediate countermeasures – such as gathering intelligence of plots and questioning individuals when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting them – are obviously crucial, longer term strategies need to be more nuanced and wide-ranging. In particular, recent discussions drawing on the research of academics linked to the Partnership for Conflict Crime and Security research has highlighted the dangers of relying on a simplistic definition of ‘religious extremism’ as a basis for identifying potential violent radicals. Academics themselves are not always comfortable defining or analysing religion. Their unease in this respect is shared by non-specialist journalists, who are liable either to ignore religious factors or to stereotype them, and by secular politicians who, in Alastair Campbell’s words, ‘don’t do God’. But quite independently of personal belief or non-belief, it is vitally important to promote greater understanding of religion in such quarters, for the following reasons. First, there is a need for leadership in addressing the widespread popular perception that religion is ‘the problem’, leading to divisive Islamophobia in Britain, as well as to attacks on Christians elsewhere. Religion can be a useful emotional and rhetorical tool for those whose underlying motivations are actually political or territorial. It may be helpful here to ponder the analogy with Northern Ireland in the later 20th century where although republican and loyalist paramilitaries were respectively nominal Roman Catholics and nominal Protestants, and some of their rhetoric had religious resonances, there is general acceptance that their underlying motivation was political rather than religious. Second, it is important to appreciate that much
perceived ‘religious extremism’ endangers no-one except, arguably, the individuals who identify with it. Indeed some can be ‘extreme’ in opposing rather than advocating violence. Those who follow rigorous Islamic practice and some forms of Christian and Jewish fundamentalism may seem at odds with wider social mores, but provided they do not seek aggressively to impose their values on others, they should be tolerated in a free society without fear of being regarded as potential terrorists. To do otherwise risks reinforcing alienation and becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Third, it needs to be better understood that Islam – like all major religious traditions – has enormous internal diversity. Such awareness is important in underlining the unrepresentativeness of violent radicals; at the same time it highlights the need for caution in identifying spokespeople who may in fact be representative only of very limited constituencies.
“ Islam – like all major
religious traditions – has enormous internal diversity
Finally, there needs to be a long-term commitment to enhancing religious literacy across society, and especially in the education system. The Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 imposes a statutory duty on schools and universities to identify those at risk of being drawn into terrorism, which they will not be equipped to do equitably without the tools to inform sometimes quite subtle judgements about individuals. In particular, definitions of ‘non- violent extremism’ are highly problematic and require a considerable degree of interpretation and contextualisation. Moreover young people who lack an informed understanding of their own and other religious traditions are highly vulnerable to those who propagate distorted and confrontational interpretations. For several centuries after the Reformation, the
”
Protestant states of northern Europe and North America perceived themselves to be threatened by violence inspired by Roman Catholicism, despite the continuing presence of peaceful Catholic minorities in their midst. Like contemporary fears of Daesh and its sympathisers these suspicions had some basis in reality, but in retrospect appear grossly exaggerated. Attitudes were slow to change, but the ultimate solution lay much more in acceptance than in suppression. While the comparison is not, of course, an exact one, it does highlight the importance of taking the long view, promoting positive steps to enhance inter- communal and religious understanding, and evaluating short-term measures to ensure that they will not eventually be counterproductive. n
i
John Wolffe is Professor of Religious History at The Open University and an RCUK Global Uncertainties Leadership Fellow. His Religion and Security report, co-authored with Gavin Moorhead, is downloadable from
www.open.ac.uk/arts/research/religion- martyrdom-global-uncertainties
SUMMER 2015 SOCIETY NOW 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36