« Things Found
Main
What is Your Position on Cancer Prevention? »
November 02, 2005
On Fundamentalism
Jean Franklin, writing for the Asheville Citizens Times reports of a conference on fundamentalism held at St. James Episcopal Church in Black Mountain, North Carolina of all places. She quotes Steve Wilkerson as saying,
. . . fear of change is at the core of fundamentalism, which attempts "to return to a world view that has vanished forever, if it ever existed."
On which she elaborates,
Thus, Jews wish to go back 3,000 years to Joshua’s occupation of the Promised Land after exterminating the Canaanites (Joshua 1-12); Muslims, to the 7th century, when the “fundamentals of Islam” were practiced in an exemplary way; and Christians, to the mythic age before the 20th century, when America was a “Christian” nation.
I loved her summary of her own ideas on the subject.
I fully support the rights of all people to believe what they will, to worship as they please. However, the “fundamentalist attitude” abroad in the world today puts us all at great risk. First, we risk losing democracy, because believers in theocracy will work to find ways around its safeguards. They will deny some citizens civil rights, human rights, the right to vote or to register to vote.Second, we risk losing a chance to live in a peaceful world. Groups who choose a God of violence over a God of peace are willing to destroy those who think differently. People who define others as evil and destined for hell, who believe they are chosen by God /Allah /Yahweh, who hate tolerance, who are not interested in peace and justice, make the world more dangerous. Fundamentalist causes in Israel and the United States are backed by the most horrific weapons on earth, while those in the nation of Islam have a horrific weapon of their own in suicide bombing.
For the safety of the world, we must preserve the protective barriers between mosque and state, synagogue and state, church and state.
I have often wondered about the ascendancy of fundamentalism in the last third of last century and the beginning of this one. I had naively believed that the fall of large scale communism would make the world safe for more progressive politics in the "free world." Just the opposite has resulted. What once passed for moderation is now thought of as leftist and our current government is dominated by a political position that in the 60s would have been thought radical by a significant majority of the population. As our official enemies migrated from the communists to the Islamic fundamentalists, the center of our own religious spectrum seemed to move giving increased credence to our own fundamentalists. I wonder if we do not adopt many of the traits of our enemies.
But fundamentalist of all stripes have always been with us. In 1970 Shirley, our two young kids and I had stones thrown at our car in Mea Shearim. In one sense, it was our own fault. We became lost trying to get back to our apartment on Shabbat evening and found ourselves in front of the wrong synagogue. Likewise there were Christian creationists in the US and fundamentalist Muslims in pockets large and small all over the world. Somehow, fundamentalists were marginalized. Most of us treated them as curiosities, even quaint subcultures. Mea Shearim was a tourist attraction except on Shabbat. The small store front fundamentalist churches provided amusement. What happened?
On a worldwide scale, we have failed to keep the marginal among us on the margin. In part, our communication system has benefited fundamentalists. It has allowed some of them to move from small, more or less fragmented, groups to international organizations with well-funded infrastructures. In Iran and Afghanistan they came to political power and installed theocracies. But these things did not happen without the support of large segments of the population.
"Fear of change" may be "at the core of fundamentalism," but the rate of change has likely not increased significantly over the last 50 years and fundamentalists have embraced the most dramatic areas of the change: computers and communications. They use both with skill in advancing their cause. And all the evils they now rail against were there in the 60s and 70s. And while they railed against them then no one listened. No one saw them as even a small part of their political core. Now they are central to the core of otherwise mainstream political parties in the US, Israel and the Muslim world.
Again, what happened? I'd like to have a better understanding of the worldwide rise of religious fundamentalism.
Via The Bible and Interpretation
Posted by DuaneSmith at November 2, 2005 11:20 AM | Read more on Religion |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://WWW.telecomtally.com/cgi-bin/blog/mt-tb.cgi/400
Comments
I've also grappled with the rise of religious extremism. The most reasonable explanation I've found came from Mark Juergensmeyer. I highly suggest his "Terror in the Mind of God".
Posted by: Tree at November 4, 2005 07:47 PM
A juicy bit from Juergensmeyer's "Terror in the Mind of God":
"What they have in common, these movements of cowboy monks, is that they consist of anti-institutional, religo-nationalist, racist, sexist, male-bonding, bomb-throwing young guys. Their marginality in the modern world is experiences as a kind of sexual despair that leads to violent acts of symbolic empowerment. It could almost be seen as poingnant, if it were not so terribly dangerous."
Gripping reading.
Posted by: Tree at November 5, 2005 06:12 AM
I ordered "Terror in the Mind of God" last night. Thanks for the suggestion. I hope Juergensmeyer gives strong supporting evidence for the claim you quoted, in particular the second sentence, which sounds more like pop psychology then history.
Posted by: Duane at November 5, 2005 08:00 AM
Post a comment
Please read Abnormal Interest's Comments Policy.