The politics of religion and ethnic vlolence is basically the politics of secularism and secularlsation Critically analyse the statement
In today’s world, religion and ethnicity play
powerful roles in shaping the identity of individuals and communities. However,
when these identities are politicised, they can lead to conflict, violence, and
deep social divisions. Some scholars argue that such politics of religion and
ethnic violence are actually rooted in the politics of secularism and secularisation.
This statement raises important questions: Is secularism truly neutral? Does
secularisation increase or reduce religious conflict? This article critically
analyses the connection between secularism and the rise of religious and ethnic
violence, using real-world examples and logical reasoning.
Understanding the Key Concepts
1. What is Religion-Based and Ethnic Politics?
Religion-based
politics involves using religion to gain political power or influence government
policies. Ethnic politics refers to when ethnic identity becomes the main basis
for political mobilisation, often leading to discrimination or exclusion of
others.
2. What is Secularism?
Secularism is a
principle that separates religion from the affairs of the state. A secular
state does not favour any religion and treats all religions equally. In India,
secularism is based on “equal respect for all religions” rather than the
complete absence of religion from public life.
3. What is Secularisation?
Secularisation
is a social process where religion loses its influence over different spheres
of life, such as politics, education, and law. It is believed that as societies
modernise, religion becomes a private matter rather than a public one.
The Relationship Between Secularism and Religion-Based Violence
At first
glance, secularism and secularisation seem to be the solution to religious and
ethnic violence. However, the situation is more complex.
1. Secularism as a Political Tool
In many
countries, secularism itself has become politicised. Political parties may
claim to be secular but actually use religious and ethnic identities for
vote-bank politics. This is especially true in diverse countries like India,
where different communities can be mobilised for electoral gain.
Example:
India’s Secularism vs Communal Politics
India claims to
be a secular state, but its politics often reflect deep religious divides.
Political parties are accused of favouring certain religious groups either for
votes or to marginalise others. For instance, the 2002 Gujarat riots or the
anti-Sikh riots of 1984 are examples where religion and politics clashed
violently. Critics argue that the failure to uphold secular values in practice
contributes to such violence.
2. The Idea of “Pseudo-Secularism”
This term is
often used in Indian political debates. Some argue that so-called secular
parties actually practice “pseudo-secularism” — they appease minority religions
for votes while ignoring the majority or vice versa. This imbalance leads to
resentment, mistrust, and sometimes violence between communities.
Secularisation and Its Unintended
Consequences
Secularisation,
meant to reduce the influence of religion, can also backfire in some societies.
1. Loss of Religious Identity
In deeply
religious societies, attempts to push religion out of public life can make
people feel that their identity is under attack. This often leads to a
defensive and more aggressive form of religion. Religious leaders may gain more
influence by accusing the state of being anti-religion.
Example:
Middle East and North Africa
In countries
like Egypt or Iran, attempts by governments to secularise society led to
backlash and the rise of political Islam. Instead of reducing religion’s role,
it actually radicalised it.
2. Modernisation and Cultural Insecurity
Secularisation
often goes hand in hand with modernisation. As societies change rapidly, many
communities feel that their traditional beliefs are being threatened. In
response, they may turn to more conservative or extreme religious leaders who
promise to “restore” their identity and culture.
Is Secularism Always the Solution?
While
secularism is designed to promote peace, its success depends on how it is
applied.
1. Western Model vs Indian Model of Secularism
·
Western Model (e.g., France): Religion is completely separated from the state. The
government does not support any religion. However, this model has led to
problems like the banning of hijabs in schools, which many Muslims feel is
discriminatory.
·
Indian Model:
India follows the principle of “sarva dharma sambhava” (equal respect for all
religions). But the challenge arises when the state either fails to act
neutrally or gets involved in religious matters to maintain harmony.
2. Failure to Implement True Secularism
The real issue
lies in the failure to practice true secularism. When governments pretend to be
secular but act with bias, it creates distrust. Minorities may feel excluded,
and the majority may feel ignored — both conditions are dangerous and can lead
to violence.
Ethnic Violence and the Politics of
Identity
Ethnic
conflicts are often about political power, not just cultural or linguistic
differences.
1. Ethnic Politics as a Response to Marginalisation
When certain
ethnic groups feel excluded from political and economic benefits, they often
form their own political movements. If their demands are ignored, it can lead
to violence.
Example:
Sri Lanka’s Civil War
The long
conflict between the Sinhalese majority and Tamil minority in Sri Lanka was
partly due to the marginalisation of Tamils. Though not a religious conflict in
the strict sense, it shows how identity-based politics can spiral into ethnic
violence.
2. Role of Political Leaders
Often, ethnic
and religious violence is not spontaneous. It is incited by leaders who benefit
from dividing people. These leaders use the language of religion or ethnicity
to rally supporters and create fear.
Critically Linking Secularism with
Violence
Now let us
return to the main statement — is the politics of religion and ethnic violence
basically the politics of secularism and secularisation?
1. Yes, To an Extent:
·
The failure or misuse of secularism gives rise to identity politics.
·
Secularisation,
when imposed without sensitivity to local traditions, leads to religious
backlash.
·
Political secularism,
when used as a slogan rather than a genuine practice, creates a vacuum where
religious and ethnic identities become tools of manipulation.
2. But Not Entirely:
·
Religious and
ethnic violence is not caused by
secularism itself but by bad politics.
·
In many cases, economic inequality,
poor governance, and corruption
are the real causes.
·
Even in religious
states, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, internal conflicts and oppression
continue, showing that lack of secularism is not a guarantee of peace either.
Way Forward: Making Secularism Work for
Peace
1. Equal Treatment, Not Appeasement
True secularism
should ensure that no community feels either favoured or ignored. Policies
should be based on justice and equality, not religious or ethnic
considerations.
2. Educating Citizens
Citizens must
understand that religion is a personal matter. Schools and media should promote
values of tolerance, diversity, and critical thinking.
3. Strengthening Institutions
Police, courts,
and election commissions must be independent and neutral. When people trust
institutions, they are less likely to fall for divisive politics.
4. Responsible Leadership
Political
leaders must rise above vote-bank politics. They must speak against hate speech
and support unity. The cost of silence during violence is paid by society as a
whole.
The connection between religion, ethnic
violence, and secularism is deeply complex. While secularism and secularisation
aim to create peaceful, fair societies, their misuse or poor implementation can
lead to the opposite. Religion and ethnicity are sensitive aspects of human
identity. When used wisely, secularism can ensure that all communities feel
respected and protected. But when turned into a political game, it fuels
division and violence. Therefore, to prevent religious and ethnic conflicts,
what we need is not just secularism in name, but secularism in spirit — one
that is fair, balanced, and genuinely inclusive.
.jpg)
0 Comments