Our discussion begins with Rich recalling how he, himself, was led down an academic path of studying violent jihad.  Initially on a STEM path, his experience watching the September 11 terrorist attacks unfold and a chance encounter with a professor at a Harry Potter film moved him in the direction of studying political science and international relations.  He noted that most work on political violence in the Islamic world focuses on lay radicalization, so he turned his attention to what motivated various clerics to radicalize.  Rich lays out the parameters of what constitutes an imam in Sunni Islam, pointing out that there is no central authority to determine membership in a priesthood exactly.  We learn that “imam” means “to be in the front,” which opens up the definition of who speaks for Islam officially to a wide range of individuals.  Rich observes that many people who are not formally trained in theology often present themselves as religious scholars (e.g., Osama bin Laden), sometimes employing the mundane tactic of posing in front of bookshelves to present an intellectual aura.  We also discuss what a fatwa is, correcting some of the misperceptions that Westerners have.  (Rich also reveals what the topic of the most downloaded fatwa is, and the answer may surprise you.)

Following this discussion, we move into a theoretical discussion of why men rebel.  Rich covers the various existing explanations for why Muslims have joined militant movements in recent decades, including ideas that such behavior is inherent in the theology, that it is a response to modernity and secularizing pressure, and the rise of transnational philanthropy.  Rich finds little credence in the theological uniqueness of Islam, though he does note that faith can motivate people to undertake actions that overcome pure self-interest.  In contrast to these pre-existing theories, he advances a claim that builds upon the work of Ted Gurr who argued that rebel leaders are often prompted into their career paths when they face relative deprivation — expectations about where they should be in life do not match with their current circumstances.  Prof. Nielsen then argues that many of the Muslim imams who have turned to advocating for political violence started out with academic ambitions that were frustrated by state action.  He illustrates this with a few examples.  Our conversation then turns to the use of social media in spreading jihadist thought, and whether or not Gurr’s theory of “relative deprivation” (or Nielsen’s notion of “blocked ambition”) is more noticeable now given that the costs of organizing collective action have decreased with telecommunications technology.  Rich points out that sustaining collective action still requires organizational incentives, but it is now more possible for aggrieved individuals to get their message out, be it by Twitter or (a few decades ago) cassette tapes.

We finish the conversation with Prof. Nielsen’s reflections on how political violence can be combatted.  He argues for less involvement of religion in politics, something he doesn’t see as a realistic option in Islamic nations in the near future.  Another option, though, is to not block that intellectual pathways of budding scholars and clerics.  We both note how this is very reflective of our own academic industry.  Rich then finishes with some reflections about what he has learned over the course of his studies in the past two decades, noting how individuals often have post-hoc rationalizations for the actions they undertake, and how he started as a firm rational choice scholar devoted to statistical methodology, but developed an appreciation for social psychology and anthropological methods to research (without abandoning his former theoretical and methodological frameworks).  Recorded: May 3, 2018.

(Note: At one point during the discussion, Tony accidently attributes “relative deprivation theory” to Charles Tilly and more institutional explanations to Ted Gurr, a mistake that should reveal that he wasn’t paying attention in graduate school.)

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Richard Nielsen’s bio at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Deadly Clerics: Blocked Ambition and the Paths to Jihad, by Richard Nielsen.

Why Men Rebel, by Ted Gurr (mentioned in podcast).

The Audacious Aesthetic, by Flagg Miller (mentioned in podcast).

Masters of the Word, by William Bernstein (mentioned in podcast).

RELATED PODCASTS

Ron Hassner on Religion on the Battlefield.

Ron Hassner on Religion in the Military.

Ron Hassner on Sacred Spaces and Holy Conflict.

Sean Everton on Dark Networks.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jason Klocek on Religious Violence and Repression.

Religious Liberty and Violent Religious Extremism.

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Lessons from the Past.

Why have many women in the Middle East resorted to increasingly conservative modes of dress in recent decades?  And what happens after a political regime rapidly collapses leaving society in near total chaos as happened in Iraq in 2003?  Dr. David Patel, a junior research fellow at the Crown Center for Middle East Studies at Brandeis University, answers these questions and accounts for the rise and success of ISIS by using a political-economic approach to religious institutions and behavior.  He links these various topics through the importance of social coordination, signaling, and common knowledge to a society, and explains why Shiites were more successful in limiting violence and providing public goods than Sunnis were in Iraq following the US invasion in 2003.

Our conversation begins with a bit of methodological banter as Tony asks David about the various analytical tools he uses including game theory, geospatial analysis, and ethnography.  These theoretical and empirical techniques are rarely employed in conjunction with one another in the social sciences, and David offers a spirited defense of his multi-disciplinary approach and notes that ethnography has received a bad rap in the field of political science.  We also talk about how these tools came to be applied to the study of religion and politics in the Middle East, and David and Tony share stories about how manuscript reviewers told them to submit their work to sociology journals since what they did “wasn’t political science.”

We then turn to the topic of “veiling” broadly construed.  David quickly corrects Tony’s use of that term noting that “veiling” refers to a covering of the face, but many forms of Islamic conservative attire need not do that, including the use of gloves or simple headscarves (hijabs).  Nonetheless, David has noted an increase in the use of more concealing clothing amongst Muslim women in the past several decades.  He links this phenomenon to the growing interest among all women for more modest and non-Western forms of apparel.  However, when all (or most) women began wearing more conservative attire in the 1970s and ’80s, it created a situation where highly pious women were less able to signal their piety to potential mates in the marriage market.  As such, there was a ramping up of concealing clothing so that the truly pious could differentiate themselves from those with less religious commitment.  He explains this in the context of a societal marriage market and makes a case that social scientists should pay much more attention to this aspect of society.  David further observes that there have been similar trends among men, with the length of beards and style of shoes being important markers for signaling religious adherence.

The discussion shifts gears in a seemingly different direction as we pick up on the topic of Dr. Patel’s current book manuscript on the rebuilding of order in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein.  While appearing unrelated to the aforementioned topic of Islamic dress, the importance of information and coordination tie these two topics together.  David notes how massive looting broke out in Iraq in mere days following the US invasion of Iraq and Hussein’s ouster as president.  Such a chaotic situation is a rather untenable one for most people and the re-creation of social order becomes a necessity.  Quickly after the collapse of the Iraqi state, we see the emergence of Friday mosque sermons as a means of coordinating local priorities, which is unusual as given that Friday sermons are comparatively rare. Shia mosques turned out to be more successful at coordinating such local priorities, facilitating common knowledge, and providing local public goods (e.g., trash pickup and security) as they had a more hierarchical structure under the direction of Ali al-Sistani.

We conclude our interview with David’s thoughts on the rise of ISIS, why it has been successful, and some of the misconceptions both pundits and policymakers have about its organizational structure.  He notes that ISIS’s simple ability to provide public goods and social order in areas where such order is lacking is what can account for its success.  We finish with some of David’s personal “ah ha!” moments in his research, including the importance of local social norms and the realization that religion is not merely instrumental but something people hold to be intrinsically valuable.  Recorded: September 25, 2015.

RELATED LINKS

 David Patel’s bio at Association for Analytic Learning about Islam and Muslim Societies.

Brandeis University’s Crown Center for Middle East Studies.

“ISIS in Iraq: What We Get Wrong and Why 2015 is Not 2007 Redux,” by David Patel.

RELATED PODCASTS

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

Will Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Sean Everton on Dark Networks.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

When it comes to wielding economic power in society, and getting the best interest rates on loans, most people would expect that the wealthy and politically connected would be in a better position than others.  While generally true, Prof. Jared Rubin – an associate professor of economics at Chapman University and associate director of the Institute for Religion, Economics, and Society – points to a very interesting period in Islamic history where this didn’t necessarily hold true.  In fact, it was during the late Ottoman Empire that those in socially-disadvantaged positions were able to secure lower interest rates on loans than the rich and powerful.  The groups paying lower rates on credit included women, the poor, and non-Muslims.

As Jared has been a guest on the show before, we open with a bit of banter about what he has been up to, which includes writing a new book and wrangling over the title of that book.  Our conversation then jumps to a recent project with another RoR guest, Timur Kuran.  Here, these two scholars take a look at how interest rates were set in the late Ottoman Empire (circa 17th and 18th centuries).  Jared spends some time filling us in on what this period in Ottoman history looked like, with a survey of the legal, banking, and commercial system that was in place and how religiously diverse Istanbul and other parts of the empire was.  This discussion also covers how women were able to accumulate wealth during this period of time, an important observation as females were part of the credit market in the Ottoman Empire.  Jared explains the importance of interest in credit markets and how Islamic rules on usury operated.

The next step in our discussion covers how individuals with legal and financial power can often gain favorable access to credit, a result that is not surprising to most folks.  However, we quickly learn that during the period under examination by Profs. Rubin and Kuran, the well-connected often paid higher interest rates than those in a less favorable social position.  Jared points out that titled elites (i.e, the politically well-connected), Muslims, and men paid a premium on their loans relative to those not politically connected, females, and non-Muslims.  He explains how Timur Kuran discovered this empirical oddity while conducting extensive archival research, and how both of them thought it was merely a problem with a small sample size or poor data recording at first.  However, the more they examined the situation, the more it revealed a fascinating puzzle.  Jared explains that because the politically well-connected and Muslims would oftentimes get favorable decisions from the court system when they defaulted, lenders would build in a small premium to manage this increased risk.  Non-elites and non-Muslims (e.g., Christians and Jews) were less likely to receive favorable judgments in default hearings and thus were incentivized to be more careful in paying back their loans.  He also notes that males had an easier time fleeing when it came time to pay back their loans, whereas women had fewer exit opportunities and were thus a lower lending risk.  Our discussion explores the magnitude of these differences as well as the varying types of legitimate and illegitimate default.

The latter portion of our podcast explores why a similar pattern did not arise in Christian Europe as well as some modern extensions of this theory that take us to the land of Brazil and how this affects the ability of the poor to get apartments when renters’ rights are so strong.  While Kuran and Rubin’s work on the Ottoman Empire seems to be a historical oddity, Jared notes that their findings fit nicely into our knowledge about credit risk today and could be useful in explaining financial results in other parts of the world or during other periods of time.  We discuss some of the more surprising things he learned from this study including how going into empirical data with an open mind can often times prompt interesting theoretical questions, and how history is a good teacher.  Recorded: February 17, 2016.

Note: Due to some phone issues, portions of the podcast had to be edited.  We attempted to do this as seamlessly as possible.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Jared Rubin’s personal website and biography at Chapman University.

Rulers, Religion, and Riches: Why the West Got Rich and the Middle East Did Not, by Jared Rubin.

“The Financial Power of the Powerless: Socio-Economic Status and Interest Rates under Weak Rule of Law,” by Timur Kuran and Jared Rubin.

The Institute for Religion, Economics, and Society (IRES) at link to the graduate workshop.

The Association for the Study of Religion, Economics, and Culture (ASREC).

RELATED PODCASTS

Jared Rubin on Christian and Islamic Economic History.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law and Economic Development.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

Murat Iyigun on Monotheism, Conflict, Europe, and the Ottomans (and the Blues).

Clark Lombardi on Sharia Law.

Nile Green on Islam in Bombay and Beyond.

Eileen Kane on the Russian Hajj.

Larry Iannaccone on Sacrifice, Stigma, and the Economics of Religion.

Colleen Haight on Jewish Peddlers in 19th Century America.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics & Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

]]> http://www.researchonreligion.org/historical-topics/jared-rubin-on-religion-credit-risk-in-the-ottoman-empire-encore-presentation/feed 0 http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/peter-henne-on-religion-state-relations-and-counterterrorism http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/peter-henne-on-religion-state-relations-and-counterterrorism#comments Sun, 27 Aug 2017 08:00:57 +0000 http://www.researchonreligion.org/?p=5162 What determines whether or not a foreign government cooperates with US counterterrorism efforts?  Prof. Peter Henne, and assistant professor of political science at the University of Vermont, examines the variation in how different governments in Muslim nations respond to US overtures.   We discuss a bit of Dr. Henne’s background as a terrorism/counterterrorism analyst, why he became interested in the topic, and then dive into the content of his new book Islamic Politics, Muslim States, and Counterterrorism Tensions (out with Cambridge University Press).  He begins by reviewing the general literature in international relations that seeks to explain why nations agree to cooperate with one another.  We review international self-interest (the realism school), domestic political pressures, and then turn to how religion might play into this mix via the theories of “civilization” theorists such as Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington.  While each perspective adds something to our understanding about why nations would yield to pressure from the US to help in quashing terrorist groups, Peter proposes an institutional perspective that takes into account pre-existing religion-state relations within Muslim nations, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the past half century, and the international context.  We review some of the dimensions of US counterterrorism policy and then Prof. Henne lays out his theory of why some states would be more cooperative with the US than other states.  Whether a state is “open” or “closed” politically matters a great deal, as does how governments have structured their relations with Islamic organizations, including militants.  The history of counterterrorism since the early 1990s is the presented and we review some of the larger trends in counterterrorism efforts, noting that Africa has been the least cooperative region with the U.S.   Our attention then turns to three case studies that present different religion-state relations:  Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, and Turkey.  Pakistan, while relatively open politically at times, must wrangle with Islamic activism, support for such activism in the military, and the conflict in Kashmir when weighing its policy options towards the US.  The UAE, by contrast, has exercised greater control over Islamic groups in civil society and although there has been funding of militant groups through charitable channels, the interest and ability to manage these groups more effectively have made the Emirates a more consistent partner with the US.  Finally, we examine Turkey that has had a history of overt secularism, favored by the military leaders, but which has also seen an uptick in religious activism within civil society and amongst political parties.  This has led to Turkey as having one of the most complex and nuanced positions towards US counterterrorism efforts, including the surprise decision by the government not to participate in the US invasion of Iraq in the early 21st century.  We close with some speculation by Prof. Henne where US relations with Muslim nations are heading in the near future, as well as what he has learned over the course of his study of this topic.  (It should be noted that while we were recording this, there was a three-alarm fire on the University of Vermont campus, but Dr. Henne — not in the building that was burning — stayed on for the interview.  How cool is that?)  Recorded: August 3, 2017.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Peter Henne’s bio at the Department of Political Science, University of Vermont.

Islamic Politics, Muslim States, and Counterterrorism Tensions, by Peter Henne.

RELATED PODCASTS

Podcasts on the topic of Islam and Politics.

David Smith on Religion, International Relations, and Foreign Policy.

Lawrence Rubin on Islam and Ideational Balancing.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty, and US Diplomacy.

Jeremy Menchik on Islam, Tolerance, Democracy, and Indonesia.

Denis Dragovic on Religion and State-Building.

Robert George on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (and banjo music).

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

]]> http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/peter-henne-on-religion-state-relations-and-counterterrorism/feed 1 http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/jeremy-menchik-on-islam-tolerance-democracy-indonesia http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/jeremy-menchik-on-islam-tolerance-democracy-indonesia#comments Sun, 23 Apr 2017 08:00:54 +0000 http://www.researchonreligion.org/?p=5002 Indonesia currently represents the largest Muslim-majority democratic country in the world, successfully balancing a plethora of ethnic, religious, and geographic divisions.  Jeremy Menchik, an assistant professor in the Pardee School of Global Studies at Boston University, explains how the Indonesian state is able to promote “Godly nationalism” while promoting tolerance towards religious minorities including Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and even various sects of Islam (e.g., the Ahmadiyah).  Prof. Menchik begins by discussing how he came to study Indonesia, tracing his interests back to his academic family as well as a novel method of choosing dissertation topics — the “PI index.”  We then review the basic geography, demographics, and history of Indonesia, a country comprised of more than 17,000 islands.  Jeremy defines what it means to be a “consolidated democracy” and how this multi-ethnic, geographically-dispersed country fits into that definitional category.  This conversation includes a comparison with European notions of democracy based upon Lockean concepts, and how Muslim versions of democracy differ.  One of the primary differences is that in Indonesia, the state is seen as a force for promoting spirituality as compared to a neutral secularism.  While favoring a religious worldview, though, the state is careful to show tolerance towards non-Muslim minorities.  Communists, we learn, have a bigger uphill battle to have their ideological disposition recognized.  Jeremy further details the three major groupings of Islam — Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah, and Persatuan Islam (Persis) — and how these different organizations vary in terms of their tolerance to other religions and secular political groups.  One of the key factors explaining the variation is the exposure of different geographical groupings of Muslims to Christian missionaries in the past century.  The discussion includes how Hindus — known for polytheism — are blended into a regime of tolerance.  We finish the discussion with Jeremy’s thoughts on what the rest of the world can learn from Indonesia, along with his appreciation for the role of intellectual humility in the academic profession.  Recorded: April 21, 2017.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Jeremy Menchik’s bio at the Pardee School of Global Studies (Boston University).

Prof. Jeremy Menchik’s personal website and Twitter feed.

Islam and Democracy in Indonesia: Tolerance without Liberalism, by Jeremy Menchik.

RELATED PODCASTS

Dan Philpott on Democracy & Religious Resurgence.

Chris Soper on the Challenge of Religious Pluralism.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Clark Lombardi on Sharia Law.

Nile Green on Islam in Bombay and Beyond.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Timothy Shah on the Case for Religious Liberty.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Lawrence Rubin on Islam and Ideational Balancing.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Lawrence Rubin’s bio at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs,  Georgia Tech.

Islam in the Balance: Ideational Threats in Arab Politics, by Lawrence Rubin.

Terrorist Rehabilitation and Counter-Radicalisation: New Approaches to Counter-Terrorism, edited by Lawrence Rubin and Jolene Anne Jerrard.

“Why the Islamic State Won’t Become a Normal State,” by Lawrence Rubin (over at WaPo Monkey Cage).

RELATED PODCASTS

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Nile Green on Islam in Bombay and Beyond.

Clark Lombardi on Sharia Law.

David Patel on Religion and Social Order in Iraq.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

In a region that appears to be in great flux, Turkey stands out as one of the more stable societies in the region.  Nonetheless, significant changes have taken place recently in a country that straddles both Europe and the Islamic Middle East.  Prof. Ani Sarkissian, an associate professor of political science at Michigan State University and core faculty member of the Muslim Studies Program and the Center for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies at MSU, returns to our show to discuss these interesting changes and put them in historical context.

We begin our discussion by travelling back in time to the days of the Ottoman Empire, and its rule over a multi-ethnic conglomeration.  Prof. Sarkissian begins with some of the reforms that the Ottoman caliphate attempted to undertake in the 19th century and then details the collapse of the empire and the rise of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1923. Turkey’s post-Ottoman regime shared many traits in common with other modernizing countries at the time, including a desire to push secularism as official state policy.  Ani lays out a number of the reforms pursued by the Kemalist regime as they set the stage for how the state and civil society will interact over the course of the 20th century.

Following the death of Kemal Atatürk in 1938, we follow the course of Turkey’s autocratic political history including a series of military coups and efforts of civil society to organize.  Dr. Sarkissian notes that several political parties in opposition to military rule began to form in the 1950s, provoking the 1960 coup.  This is followed once again by stirrings amongst the population in the 1960s with the creation of several Islamist parties, led by Necmettin Erbakan.  These parties were outlawed, yet they began to set an imprint on Turkey’s civil society. We discuss how a “religious reawakening” was occurring throughout the region at this time and how political regimes that previously rested their legitimacy on secular nationalism began to adopt religious overtones to their rule.  This was also true of Turkey, wherein the regime attempted to forge a Turkish-Islamist synthesis beginning in the 1970s.

A similar dance between the autocratic rule of the military and civil society occurred throughout the next two decades, eventually leading to a number of laws that liberalized the rules under which civic associations could form and operate.  This was not a full-scale liberalization, though, and the 1997 “Postmodern Coup” placed important limits on the nature of non-governmental organizations and political parties.  The most important of these rules for our purposes in this interview was the prohibition on groups that had overtly religious or ethnic identities.  This occurs at a time when the former Islamist movement and Welfare Party spearheaded by Erbakan splits into two movements, one being a traditional Islamist group (Felicity Party) and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) that took a less Islamist overtone, yet was still associated with civic groups that were interested in religious issues.

Ani documents her research on how civil society has had to operate under these restrictions.  The reforms that were meant to open up Turkey’s civil society ironically result in many independent religious groups being captured by the AKP party.  Prof. Sarkissian notes that this is not how civil society is supposed to act as a check upon governmental authority in a flourishing democracy.  We discuss the rise of the Gülen movement and its break with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government.  We also cover the recent protests that have erupted in the country, why they have fizzled out, and what Erdoğan’s recent decision (as of July 1 when this podcast was recorded) to run for president means for Turkish democracy.

We finish our conversation with some speculation about Turkey’s role in the Middle East, with particular attention to the recent assertion of Kurdish autonomy in Iraq and ongoing conflict in Syria.  While attempts by Prime Minister Erdoğan to assert his leadership in the Muslim world has not been all that successful, Turkey still remains a key player.  Ani ends with some optimistic notes about Turkish civil society and the future.  Recorded: July 1, 2014.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Ani Sarkissian’s bio at the Michigan State University’s Department of Political Science.

The Variety of Religious Repression: Why Governments Restrict Religion, by Ani Sarkissian.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Religion in the Post-Soviet World.

Religious Freedom and Social Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement.

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Dan Philpott on Religious Resurgence & Democratization.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Is the Islamic notion of “the umma” — i.e., the general community of Muslims — consistent with the modern concept of the nation-state and territorial sovereignty?  We discuss this issue with Prof. Matthew Derrick, an assistant professor of geography at Humboldt State University, and author of “Containing the Umma?: Islam and the Territorial Question” that recently appeared in the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion (see link below).  Reacting to scholars such as Berenard Lewis, Samuel Huntington, and other scholars associated with the “cultural turn in geography,” Prof. Derrick argues that territory remains an important defining concept in how people organize their life even among religious believers who belong to a transnational faith.  Our discussion starts out with a short detour to Tatarstan where Matthew has conducted extensive fieldwork and he lays out what is unusual about that area within Russia.  He also corrects Tony on his misunderstanding of tartar sauce.  We then move on to a definition of “the umma,” an essential theological concept within Islam that represents the community of all believers.  This raises the question of whether a transnational faith can be squared with the territorial state that dominates our world system.  Matthew takes us on a tour of the issue of territorialism and how it evolved, with the Peace of Westphalia marking an important milestone in how we conceive of nation states in the modern world.  Tony presses Matthew on his more ideational notion of statehood that revolves around issues of sovereignty (e.g., cuius regio eius religio) as composed to a more political economic approach to defining territory based upon the ability to tax a population.  This discussion takes us askance of the religious question for awhile, but it is very important in understanding how modern scholars view the compatability or incompatability of Islam with modern territorial states.  Matthew reviews the thinking of Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis who do not see Islam as being compatible with our modern state system and then shares his critiques of these two scholars bringing us to a discussion of how European imperialism carved borders into the Islamic world.  We investigate the rise of pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism, including the attempts by thinkers such as Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani and Sayyid Qutb to craft a general Islamic identity.  Examples of how these attempts have fared are examined including work by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Pashtun movement within Pakistan, the nationalism that seems apparent in the Arab Spring and how Iran has supported Armenia in its conflict with Azerbaijan.  We close by revisiting the area of Tatarstan that has appeared to be able to manage well its regional territory within Russia despite its ethnic and religious pluralism.  Recorded: January 25, 2013.

RELATED LINKS

Matthew Derrick at Humboldt State University’s Geography Department.

“Containing the Umma? Islam and the Territorial Question,” by Matthew Derrick in the Interndisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion (free with registation).

RELATED PODCASTS

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democracy.

RELATED LINKS

Clark Lombardi’s bio at the University of Washington School of Law.

Clark Lombardi’s Social Science Research Network (SSRN) page.

State Law as Islamic Law in Modern Egypt, by Clark Lombardi.

Religion and Human Security, edited by James Wellman and Clark Lombardi.

Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Law, by Clark Lombardi.

RELATED PODCASTS

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law and Economic Development.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jared Rubin on Religion and Credit Risk in the Ottoman Empire.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

]]> http://www.researchonreligion.org/religion-politics/clark-lombardi-on-sharia-law/feed 0 http://www.researchonreligion.org/historical-topics/nile-green-on-islam-in-bombay-and-beyond http://www.researchonreligion.org/historical-topics/nile-green-on-islam-in-bombay-and-beyond#comments Sun, 07 Aug 2016 08:00:58 +0000 http://www.researchonreligion.org/?p=4618 Our 300th unique episode!  Help us celebrate by sharing our podcast with a friend or colleague.

Traditional sociological notions of religion argued that modernization would lead to more “rational” and standardized forms of spiritual faith.  Dr. Nile Green, professor of history at the University of California – Los Angeles, examines this thesis in the context of Islam in 19th century India and surrounding regions.  We discuss his award-winning book Bombay Islam: The Religious Economy of the West Indian Ocean, 1840-1915, and extend the discussion to his other work on other areas of the globe and more contemporary eras.  We begin with a discussion of how he came upon the study of this topic, and he regales us with stories of his wandering youth and his enchantment with the Middle East and South Asia.  We also discuss how Nile stumbled upon an interesting diary of some Muslims in 19th century Britain, which provides great lessons for budding academics.  Turning to the main topic at hand, Prof. Green details the changes taking place in India during the 19th century, with Bombay becoming an important industrial and commercial center.  With 100,000+ Muslims in that city around mid-century (or about 20% of the population), we find a wide range of Muslim practices being celebrated.  While earlier scholars of religion, such as Max Weber, would have predicted a more liberal and reformist version of Islam to take hold as industrialization and urbanization progressed, we actually find that traditional (or “customary”) forms of Islamic worship are also flourishing at this time.  Using a “religious economies” approach that focuses on both the supply and demand side of religious practice, Nile argues that the British colonialists’ laissez faire approach to regulating religious groups and the demonstration effect of Christian missionaries led to dynamic change in the Islamic marketplace, with more preachers taking a proselytizing approach that incorporated literature printed in the vernacular.  Combined with the natural ethnic and cultural diversity of a city as cosmopolitan as Bombay, the result was an amazing array of religious diversity.  He then takes this analysis further, both geographically and temporally, to show how Islam spread throughout the Asian region (all the way to Japan) and into the United States.  We close with some reflections on what Nile has learned in his studies after all these years and he provides some reflections on the contemporary state of religious violence in the world.  Recorded: July 28, 2016.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Nile Green’s bio at UCLA’s Department of History.

Bombay Islam: The Religious Economy of the West Indian Ocean, 1840-1915, by Nile Green.

The Love of Strangers: What Six Muslim Students Learned in Jane Austen’s London, by Nile Green.

Terrains of Exchange: Religious Economies of Global Islam, by Nile Green.

Indian Sufism since the Seventeenth Century, by Nile Green.

Making Space: Sufis and Settlers in Early Modern India, by Nile Green.

RealClearReligion, a great news aggregator for all things religious.

Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Eileen Kane on the Russian Hajj.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

Murat Iyigun on Monotheism, Conflict, Europe, the Ottomans, and the Blues.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism.

]]> http://www.researchonreligion.org/historical-topics/nile-green-on-islam-in-bombay-and-beyond/feed 0