Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:37:53.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Passive and Assertive Secularism: Historical Conditions, Ideological Struggles, and State Policies toward Religion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Ahmet T. Kuru
Ahmet T. Kuru
Affiliation:
San Diego State University, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Why do secular states pursue substantially different policies toward religion? The United States, France, and Turkey are secular states that lack any official religion and have legal systems free from religious control. The French and Turkish states have banned students' headscarves in public schools, whereas the U.S. has allowed students to wear religious symbols and attire. Using the method of process tracing, the author argues that state policies toward religion are the result of ideological struggles. In France and Turkey the dominant ideology is “assertive secularism,” which aims to exclude religion from the public sphere, while in the U.S., it is “passive secularism,” which tolerates public visibility of religion. Whether assertive or passive secularism became dominant in a particular case was the result of the particular historical conditions during the secular state-building period, especially the presence or absence of an ancien regime based on a marriage of monarchy and hegemonic religion.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 59 , Issue 4 , July 2007 , pp. 568 - 594
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 “Release of the 2003 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom,” December 18,2003, http://www.state.gOv/s/d/rm/27404pf.htm (accessed April 24,2004).

2 Many scholars emphasize two other dimensions while defining a secular state: (1) separation of church/mosque and state and (2) religious freedom. See Smith, D. E., “India as a Secular State,” in Bhargava, Rajeev, ed., Secularism and Its Critics (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999), esp. 178–83Google Scholar. A complete separation is, in fact, neither constitutionally declared in many secular states nor a practical issue. Religious freedom, by contrast, is both constitutionally declared and practical; yet, it is neither necessary nor sufficient to be secular for a state to provide religious freedom.

3 By religion, I imply a set of beliefs and practices that refer to supernatural beings, generally God. In this definition, neither atheism nor an ideology like Marxism is a religion.

4 Monsma, Stephen V. and Soper, J. Christopher, The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Five Democracies (Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 1997)Google Scholar; Haarscher, Guy, La laïcité (Paris: PUF, 2004)Google Scholar; Berkes, Niyazi, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (1964; New York: Routledge, 1998)Google Scholar.

5 Lee V. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992); Santa Fe v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000).

6 See Charles Taylor, “Modes of Secularism,” in Bhargava (fn. 2); McClay, Wilfred M., “Two Concepts of Secularism,” in Heclo, Hugh and McClay, Wilfred M., eds., Religion Returns to the Public Square: Faith and Policy in America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

7 For comprehensive doctrines, see Rawls, John, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

8 Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1998)Google Scholar; Gellner, Ernest, Nations and Nationalism (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Taylor, Charles, Modern Social Imaginaries (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

9 Inglehart, Ronald, Modernization and Postntodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Countries (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

10 Bruce, Steve, God Is Dead: Secularization in the West (Maiden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2002)Google Scholar; Norris, Pippa and Inglehart, Ronald, Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

11 Norris and Inglehart (fn. 10), 8, also 208–10.

12 Robert J. Barro and Rachel M. McCleary, “Which Countries Have State Religions?” http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/barro/papers/state%religion%2001–05.pdf, i, 17 (accessed April 1,2005).

13 Varisco, Daniel, Islam Obscured: The Rhetoric of Anthropological Representation (New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2005)Google Scholar; Stepan, Alfred, “The World's Religious Systems and Democracy: Crafting the ‘Twin Tolerations,”‘ in Arguing Comparative Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 213–54.Google Scholar

14 Gellner, Ernest, Muslim Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 1Google Scholar.

15 Lewis, Bernard, “The Roots of Muslim Rage,” Atlantic Monthly (September 1990)Google Scholar; idem, What Went Wrong? The Clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East (New York: Perennial, 2003)Google Scholar; Huntington, Samuel P., The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996)Google Scholar.

16 Lewis, Bernard, “Secularism in the Middle East” (Chaim Weizmann Lecture, Rehovot, Israel, 1991), 10–12, 26Google Scholar.

17 Lewis, Bernard, The Political Language of Islam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 2–3.Google Scholar

18 Luke 20:25, quoted by Lewis (fn. 16), 15.

19 Huntington (fn. 15), 70.

20 Lapidus, Ira M., “The Separation of State and Religion in the Development of Early Islamic Society,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 6 (October 1975)Google Scholar.

21 Tad Stahnke and Robert C. Blitt, The Religion-State Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: A Comparative Textual Analysis of the Constitutions of Predominantly Muslim Countries, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, March 2005, http://www.uscirf.gov/countrics/ global/comparative_constitutions/03082005/Study0305.pdf, 2 (accessed April 1,2005).

22 Debray, Regis, Contretemps: Eloges des idéaux perdus (Paris: Gallimard, 1992), 23Google Scholar; Madeley, John T. S., “A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Church-State Relations in Europe,” West European Politics 26 (January 2003)Google Scholar.

23 Casanova, Jose, “Civil Society and Religion: Retrospective Reflections on Catholicism and Prospective Reflections on Islam,” Social Research 68 (Winter 2001)Google Scholar.

24 Gill, Anthony, The Political Origins of Religious Liberty (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007)Google Scholar. See also Kalyvas, Stathis N., The Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1996), 3Google Scholar.

25 Ahmad, Mumtaz, “Islamic Fundamentalism: The Jamaat-i-Islami and the Tablighi Jamaat,” in Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, eds., Fundamentalisms Observed (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 505Google Scholar.

26 Olson, Mancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

27 Gill (fn. 24).

28 See Karl-Dieter, Opp, “Contending Conceptions of the Theory of Rational Action,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 11 (April 1999)Google Scholar.

29 I deliberately use the term ideology, rather than culture. Culture is practical and habitual, which makes it inconsistent and fuzzy. Ideology is, by contrast, a set of ideas that is generally related to a consistent Utopia, which make it easier to categorize. Ideologies are “formal, explicit, and relatively consistent” and “articulated by political elites,” whereas cultures are “informal, implicit, and relatively inconsistent” and “held by people within a given institutional setting.” Hanson, Stephen E., “Review Article: From Culture to Ideology in Comparative Politics,” Comparative Politics 35 (April 2003), 356CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Weber, Max, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1946)Google Scholar.

31 Mill, John Stuart, A System of Logic (New York: Longmans, 1961)Google Scholar.

32 Lieberson, Stanley, “Small N's and Big Conclusions,” in Charles Ragin and Howard Becker, eds., What Is a Case? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992)Google ScholarPubMed.

33 Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; George, Alexander L. and Bennett, Andrew, Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005), 205Google Scholar.

34 Due to the page limitation, I am neglecting the differences among conservatives, such as those between the accommodationists and the Christian Right. I analyze it in detail in my forthcoming book, “Dynamics of Secularism: State Policies toward Religion in the United States, France, and Turkey.”

35 Wald, Kenneth D., Religion and Politics in the United States (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003), 85–87Google Scholar; Kobylka, Joseph F., “The Mysterious Case of Establishment Clause Litigation: How Organized Litigants Foiled Legal Change,” in Epstein, Lee, ed., Contemplating Courts (Washington, D.C.: cq Press, 1995), 96,102–3Google Scholar.

36 Segers, Mary C. and Jelen, Ted G., A Wall of Separation? Debating the Public Role of Religion (Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998)Google Scholar; Monsma, Stephen V., Positive Neutrality: Letting Religious Freedom Ring (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995)Google Scholar; Gunn, T. Jeremy, “Religious Freedom and Laïcité: A Comparison of the United States and France,” Brigham Young University Law Review 24 (Summer 2004)Google Scholar.

37 Author interviews with American academics and social activists, Washington, D.C., Seattle, and Salt Lake City, May 2005-March 2006.

38 Author interviews with French academics and social activists, Paris and Auxerre, October- December 2004.

39 Again, because of the word limitation, I am neglecting the alliance between the assertive secularists and anti-immigrant Islamophobics with regard to their support for a ban on headscarves. For a detailed analysis of this alliance, see Ahmet T. Kuru, “Secularism, State Policies, and Muslims in Europe: Analyzing French Exceptionalism,” Comparative Politics (forthcoming).

40 The French Council of State's opinion in the Headscarf Case, November 27, 1989, no. 346,893. Some scholars translate the term “laïcité” as “secularity.” Instead, I prefer the term “secularism,” which is most commonly used in the literature on state-religion relations in English (for example, by American and Indian scholars).

41 Haut conseil à l'intégration, L'Islam dans la République (Paris: La documentation française, 2001), 66Google Scholar.

42 Debré, Jean-Louis, La laïcité à l'école: Un principe républicain à réaffirmer: Rapport de la mission d'information de l'Assemblée nationale (Paris: Odile Jacob, 2004), 179Google Scholar.

43 Seksig, Alain, Kessel, Patrick, and Roirant, Jean-Marc, “Ni Plurielle ni de combat: La laïcité,” Hommes & Migrations, no. 1218 (March-April 1999)Google Scholar; Zuber, Valentine, “La Commission Stasi et les paradoxes de la laïcité française,” in Baubérot, Jean, ed., ha Laïcité à l'épreuve: Religions et libertés dans le monde (N.p.: Universalis, 2004)Google Scholar; Fetzer, Joel S. and Soper, J. Christopher, Muslims and the State in Britain, France, and Germany (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 73–85Google Scholar.

44 Author interviews with Turkish politicians, academics, and social activists, Ankara and Istanbul, July-September 2004.

45 Kuru, Ahmet T., “Globalization and Diversification of Islamic Movements: Three Turkish Cases,” Political Science Quarterly 120 (Summer 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Devlet ve Din Ilişkileri, Farkli Modeller, Konseptler ve Tecrübeler (Ankara: Konrad Adenauer Vakfi, 2003)Google Scholar; Kuru, Ahmet T., “Reinterpretation of Secularism in Turkey: The Case of the Justice and Development Party,” in Yavuz, M. Hakan, ed., The Emergence of a New Turkey: Islam, Democracy, and the AK Parti (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Yavuz, M. Hakan, Islamic Political Identity in Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

47 Göle, Nilüfer, The Forbidden Modern: Civilization and Veiling (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

48 Çarkoğlu, Ali and Toprak, Binnaz, Değişen Türkiyede Din, Toplum ve Siyaset (Istanbul: TESEV, 2006), 66Google Scholar. According to the survey of Milliyet and A&G in 2003, this ratio was 64 percent. Milliyet, May 27, 2003.

49 “Les Français et la prière,” Le Pèlerin Magazine, April 13,2001Google Scholar; Çarkoğlu, Ali and Toprak, Binnaz, Türkiyede Din, Toplum ve Siyaset (Istanbul: TESEV, 2000), 41, 45Google Scholar.

50 Rawls (fn. 7).

51 de Tocqueville, Alexis, Democracy in America, trans. George Lawrence (1835; Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1969), 297Google Scholar. See also de Tocqueville, Alexis, L'ancien régime et la révolution (1858; Paris: GF-Flammarion, 1988)Google Scholar.

52 Manuel, Paul Christopher, “Religion and Politics in Iberia: Clericalism, Anticlericalism, and Democratization in Portugal and Spain,” in Jelen, Ted Gerard and Wilcox, Clyde, eds., Religion and Politics in Comparative Perspective: The One, the Few, and the Many (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 74Google Scholar.

53 Ibid., 76.

54 Berman, Harold J., “Religious Rights in Russia at a Time of Tumultuous Transition: A Historical Theory,” in van der Vyver, Johan D. and Witte, John Jr., eds., Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective: Legal Perspectives (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996), 287Google Scholar.

55 Ibid., 289.

56 “[C]ritical junctures are moments of relative structural indeterminism when willful actors shape outcomes in a more voluntary fashion than normal circumstances permit.... Before a critical juncture, a broad range of outcomes is possible; after a critical juncture, enduring institutions and structures are created, and the range of possible outcomes is narrowed considerably.” Mahoney, James, The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001), 7Google Scholar.

57 Pierson, Paul, “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Poktics,” American Political Science Review 94 (June 2000)Google Scholar; idem, “Not Just What, but When: Timing and Sequence in Political Processes,” Studies in Comparative Political Development 14 (Spring 2000)Google Scholar; Scott E. Page, “The Types and Causes of Path Dependence,” http://www.bramson.net/academ/public/Page-path%20De pendence.pdf (accessed September 1,2005).

58 Thelen, Kathleen, “Timing and Temporality in the Analysis of Institutional Evolution and Change,” Studies in Comparative Political Development 14 (Spring 2000)Google Scholar.

59 Mahoney, James, “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology,” Theory and Society 29 (August 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Hartz, Louis, The Liberal Tradition in America (1955; San Diego: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1991)Google Scholar.

61 Esbeck, Carl H., “Dissent and Disestablishment: The Church-State Settlement in the Early American Republic,” BYU Law Review 30 (2004), 1415,1457Google Scholar.

62 Ibid., 1414.

63 Bellah, Robert, “Civil Religion in America,” Daedalus 134 (Fall 2005), 50CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 McConnell, Michael W., “The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion,” Harvard Law Review 103 (May 1990), 1421–30Google Scholar; Boyle, Kevin and Sheen, Juliet, eds., Freedom of Religion and Belief: A World Report (New York: Routledge, 1997), 154–55Google Scholar.

65 Feldman, Noah, “The Intellectual Origins of the Establishment Clause,” New York University Law Review 77 (May 2002)Google Scholar.

66 According to Rousseau, Catholicism “is so apparently bad that it is a waste of time to enjoy demonstrating its badness.” Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, Du contrat social (Paris: G. F. Flammarion, 2001), 174Google Scholar.

67 Quoted by Ozouf, Mona, L'Ecole, l'Eglise et la République, 1871–1914 (Paris: Editions Cana, 1982), 50Google Scholar.

68 Baubérot, Jean, Histoire de la laïcité en France (Paris: PUF, 2004)Google Scholar.

69 Ozouf(fn. 67), 233–34.

70 Larkin, Maurice, Church and State after the Dreyfus Affair: The Separation Issue in France (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1973)Google Scholar; Kalyvas (fn. 24).

71 Guerlac, Othon, “The Separation of Church and State in France,” Political Science Quarterly 23 (June 1908)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 Okumus, Ejder, Türkiye'nin Laikleşme Serüveninde Tanzimat (Istanbul: Insan Yayinlan, 1999)Google Scholar; Karpat, Kemal, The Politization of Islam: Reconcstructing Identity, State, Faith, and Community in the Late Ottoman State (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

73 Translated and quoted by Lewis, Bernard, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (London: Oxford University Press, 1968), 236Google Scholar.

74 Hanioğlu, M. Şukrü, “Garbcilar: Their Attitudes toward Religion and Their Impact on the Official Ideology of the Turkish Republic,” Studia Islamica 86 (1997)Google Scholar; Mardin, Şerif, Religion and Social Change in Modern Turkey: The Case of Bediüzzaman Said Nursi (New York: State University of New York Press, 1989)Google Scholar.

75 Bozdogan, Sibel and Kasaba, Reşat, eds., Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

76 Smith, Christian, ed., The Secular Revolution: Power, Interests, and Conflict in the Secularization of American Public Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Hamburger, Philip, Separation of Church and State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

77 Casanova, Jose, Public Religions in the Modern World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 135–209Google Scholar.

78 Baubérot, Jean, Laïcité 1905–2005, entre passion et raison (Paris: Seuil, 2004)Google Scholar; Pena-Ruiz, Henri, Qu'est-ce que la laïcité? (N.p.: Folio, 2003)Google Scholar; Bowen, John R., Why the French Don't Like Headscarves: Islam, the State, and Public Space (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.

79 Turam, Berna, Between Islam and the State: The Politics of Engagement (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Yavuz, M. Hakan and Esposito, John L., eds., Turkish Islam and the Secular State: The Gulen Movement (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

80 Burdy, Jean-Paul and Marcou, Jean, “Laïcité/Laiklik: Introduction,” Cahiers d'études sur la Méditerranée orientale et le monde turco-iranien, no. 19 (1995), 29Google Scholar; Baubérot, Jean, “D'une comparaison: Laïcité française, laïcité turque,” in Rigoni, Isabelle, ed., Turquie, les milk visages: Politique, religion, femmes, immigration (Paris: Editions Syllepse, 2000)Google Scholar.

81 Davis, Derek H., “Reacting to France's Ban: Headscarves and other Religious Attire in American Public Schools,” Journal of Church and State 46 (March 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

82 For fragmentation of state actors, see Migdal, Joel S., State in Society: Studying How State and Societies Transform and Constitute One Another (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

83 Bhargava (fn. 2); Jacobsohn, Gary Jeffrey, The Wheel of Law: India's Secularism in Comparative Constitutional Context (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Blancarte, Roberto, “Un regard latino-améncain sur la laïcité,” in Bauberot, Jean and Wieviorka, Michel, eds., Les Entretiens d'Auxerre: De la séparation des Églises et de l'État à l'avenir de la laïcité (N.p.: L'aube, 2005)Google Scholar.

84 Debré (fn. 42), 19.

85 Çarkoğlu andToprak (fn. 48), 75.

86 Webb, Edward, “Kemalism in More Than One Country? Religious Jacobinism in the Early Turkish Republic, the French Third Republic, and the Republics of Tunisia and Syria” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2007)Google Scholar; al-Ghannouchi, Rachid, “Secularism in the Arab Maghreb,” in Esposito, John L. and Tamimi, Azzam, eds., Islam and Secularism in the Middle East (New York: New York University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Keddie, Nikki R., “Secularism and the State: Towards Clarity and Global Comparison,” New Left Review (November-December 1997), 25–30Google Scholar.