Research On Religion » Middle East

Richard Nielsen on Deadly Clerics

tonygill — Sun, 06 May 2018 08:00:54 +0000

Political rebellion and violence in the Middle East has recently been associated with religious belief and rhetoric, often spurred on by the writings and recordings of Muslim clerics. What motivates imams to advocate such tactics? Prof. Richard Nielsen, an associate professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, answers this question with reference to previous theories of revolution and an examination of the career paths of imams who advocate violent jihad. His findings reveal fascinating insights into what prompts individuals down the path of violence and suggests possible solutions to mitigating terrorism.

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.)

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.

Kenneth Vaughan on Consociationalism, Religion, and Lebanon (and more)

tonygill — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 09:00:40 +0000

Can a country comprised of Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Druze, and Maronite Christians hold itself together politically and avoid conflict? Lebanon, a country with this confessional mixture, has had its problems with religious conflict in the past but has seemed to maintain a reasonably stable polity (relative to other countries in the region) via the institutional design of political consociationalism. Kenneth Vaughan, a Ph.D. candidate in sociology at Baylor University, explains how this balanced political arrangement is viewed by the different groups in society and what potential stresses it may be facing given important demographic shifts in the population. We begin with an overview of the religious landscape of Lebanon, with Mr. Vaughan noting that it is roughly a three-way split between Sunni, Shia, and Maronites, with Druze making up about 10% of the remainder. The exact breakdown is difficult to know as the Lebanese census prohibits questions on religious affiliation, which not surprisingly would be a highly contentious bit of data given that government offices are divided according to this breakdown.

The division of political positions across demographic (and in this case, religious) groups is known to political sociologists as “consociationalism,” a term coined by political scientist Arend Lijphart. Ken reviews some of the basic research conducted on consociationalism, including work demonstrating that it seems to be an effective form of governance in divided societies such as the Netherlands (namely in the work of Lijphart), but that it hasn’t worked as well in other societies, particularly in places such as India (as noted in the writings of Steven Wilkinson). Ken notes that consociationalism has the potential to create “essentializing identity groups” that become locked-in to the reward structure of the government. Given that Lebanon has been crafted as a consociational system since the National Pact of 1943 and reinforced in the Taif Agreement following a civil war in the mid-1970s, Mr. Vaughan set out to test how different groups view this institutional arrangement, particularly under the realization that demographic trends have been shifting over the past several decades with more Maronites leaving the country and Shiites tending to gain in relative proportion (based upon other research conducted). He finds that Shia Muslims tend to be more trusting of governmental institutions and believe Lebanon to be relatively democratic. Maronites, on the other hand, view Lebanese governing institutions as less trustworthy, democratic, and free. Sunni Muslims were located somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. Ken covers his research design using the Arab Barometer survey and the various factors that he controlled for as well, such as age, education, and income.

Following our discussion of Lebanon, we talk about Ken’s current research on religious tolerance and persecution in post-Soviet republics, a study that is in its initial stages. He notes that Muslim republics have tended to have lower levels of religious regulation than nations that are predominately Orthodox Christian, and also sees elements of nationalism being intertwined with religious politics. We close out with some of Ken’s other experiences with religion in other non-Western societies, most notably his time teaching English in China. He tells us about the struggles of various Christian worshipers and house churches, including a variety of illustrative stories about individuals such as the (recently deceased) Samuel Lamb. Ken ends our interview with some interesting reflections on how unique the religious landscape is in the United States relative to the rest of the world and why understanding religion in an international and comparative perspective is important. Recorded: February 19, 2018.

Acts of Faith, by Rodney Stark and Roger Finke (mentioned in podcast).

The Plot to Kill God, by Paul Froese (mentioned in podcast).

RELATED PODCASTS

Jeremy Menchick on Islam, Tolerance, and Democracy in Indonesia.

Chris Soper on the Challenge of Religious Pluralism.

Jason Klocek on Religious Conflict and Repression.

Lawrence Rubin on Islam and Ideational Balancing.

David Patel on Religion and Social Order in Iraq.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Denis Dragovic on Religion and State-Building.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Ani Sarkissian on Religious Liberty in the Post-Soviet World.

Bradley Murg on Orthodoxy in the Post-Soviet World.

Karrie Koesel on House Churches in China.

Karrie Koesel on Religion and Politics in China.

Jared Rubin on Religion & Credit Risk in the Ottoman Empire (Encore Presentation)

tonygill — Sun, 05 Nov 2017 09:00:55 +0000

In celebration of the release of Prof. Rubin’s new book, Rulers, Religion, and Riches: Why the West Got Rich and the Middle East Did Not, we offer up this oldie but goldie from our archives. We expect to be hearing more from Jared in the coming months, so stay tuned!

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.

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.

Peter Henne on Religion-State Relations and Counterterrorism

tonygill — Sun, 27 Aug 2017 08:00:57 +0000

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.

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.

Lawrence Rubin on Islam and Ideational Balancing

tonygill — Sun, 11 Dec 2016 09:00:38 +0000

Can the ideas proposed by one nation-state threaten another nation-state? If so, how do the threatened nations respond? We probe these questions with respect to Islam and the two Islamic political revolutions in Iran (1979) and Sudan (1989) with Prof. Lawrence Rubin, an associate professor of political science in Georgia Tech’s Sam Nunn School of International Affairs. Prof. Rubin reminisces about how he came to study the role of ideas in foreign policy, and then reviews the two dominant schools of thought in international relations theory — realism and constructivism. The former perspective focuses on material resources and tangible threats made by various nations in the world order, whereas the latter brings the issue of ideas, ideologies, and (increasingly) theologies into the mix. We explore the idea of “soft power,” and how religious ideas can become potentially threatening to the domestic security of a regime, and what governments can do in response. To illustrate how this has played out in the Middle East over the past four decades, we use the cases of political revolutions in Iran and Sudan and how Saudi Arabia and Egypt responded. Larry explains that despite a noticeable decline the military prowess of Iran following its revolution (and subsequent war with Iraq), the Islamic Republic of Iran presents a new ideational threat to the hegemony of Saudi Arabia, not only on sectarian grounds (Shia versus Sunni), but also on Iran’s ability to inspire religious-based social movements that could undermine the ruling government. This was also of concern to Egypt, which had a more secular-based government but which had been seeking alliances with domestic religious actors throughout the 1970s and ’80s. Prof. Rubin provides a few examples of how Egypt and Saudi Arabia sought to “ideationally counter-balance” this international threat. We also bring up the similar challenge posed by the Sudanese Revolution of 1979, another example of a state that didn’t necessarily pose a significant military threat, but still had the potential of upsetting domestic politics in Egypt and Saudi Arabia with the spread of a radical theological message. We finish off our podcast with some of Larry’s thoughts on the threat of ISIS to the region and what he has learned over time by taking the role of ideas seriously in the field of international relations. Recorded: December 7, 2016.

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.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics & Religious Civil Society in Turkey (Encore Presentation)

tonygill — Wed, 07 Dec 2016 23:49:39 +0000

Program Note: We are still on break due to a heavy travel schedule and other professional obligations. We do have some new episodes on the way, so stay tuned and tell your friends and family to check us out!

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.

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.

Clark Lombardi on Sharia Law

tonygill — Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:00:08 +0000

What is sharia law? How can sharia law be accommodated into formal constitutions? These questions and more are the topic of discussion with Prof. Clark Lombardi, the Law Foundation Professor of Law at the University of Washington. Prof. Lombardi explains what sharia law is and how it compares with Western variants such as common law and canon law. We dig into the historical development of sharia law and how, given the decentralized nature of Islam, that there were numerous interpretations. Dealing with this diversity meant relying upon a number of scholar-jurists (fuqaha), who had organized themselves into guild-like organizations and schools, and having respect for different opinions when agreement could not be reached. We examine how the rise of a more bureaucratized state affected the use of sharia in society, covering some of the developments in the Ottoman Empire and then the changes occurring in the post-Ottoman and post-colonial era. With secular states coming to the rise in the post-WWII period, and then faltering in the 1970s, we begin to see the rise of more Islamist influence in government and a demand for “sharia guarantee clauses” (SGCs) written into formal constitutions, wherein secular rulers are obligated to follow the guidance of sharia. More than merely a “bill of rights,” these SGCs were implemented to ensure government officials did not make law that would force Muslims to sin, and also served as a check to get these same rulers to act on behalf of the welfare of the community. We discuss how such SGCs have been implemented in a number of countries. Clark lays out three general methods: 1) political constitutionalism wherein the passage of sharia law falls largely in the hands of executives and parliaments; 2) legal constitutionalism giving courts the ability to review the adherence of legislative and executive actions to sharia law; and 3) hybrid systems that combine a bit of both. Clark illustrates these systems by referring to various countries with special concentration in the recent Egyptian constitution. We finish off with some of Prof. Lombardi’s ruminations on events in Turkey and how his study of sharia has affected his understanding of the legal system in the United States. Recorded: August 11, 2016.

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.

Jared Rubin on Religion & Credit Risk in the Ottoman Empire

tonygill — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 09:00:09 +0000

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.

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

The Institute for Religion, Economics, and Society (IRES) at Chapman University.

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

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

Graduate Student Workshops on the Economics of Religion at 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).

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

tonygill — Sun, 26 Jul 2015 08:00:56 +0000

Are monotheisms better at establishing sociopolitical stability than civilizations with polytheistic religions? And to what extent do monotheistic civilizations influence the socio-economic development of one another? In particular, did the Ottoman Empire change the course of European history via its military advances into southeast Europe at a key moment in time? Prof. Murat Iyigun, the Stanford Calderwood Endowed Chair in Economics at the University of Colorado, answers these questions and discusses other interesting historical findings that he published in his new book, War, Peace, & Prosperity in the Name of God. And if that isn’t enough, Murat — an accomplished blues guitarist — treats us to an original “arabesque blues” tune at the end of our interview. Up your knowledge of history with our discussion, and then get down and funky with Prof. Iyigun’s musical stylings!

Our conversation begins, as usual, with a bit of background about our guest. Prof. Iyigun explains what cliometrics — one of his academic specialties — is and also how he became interested in the study of religion and economics. He notes that the events of September 11, combined with new advances in institutional economics, prompted him to look into the role that informal cultural institutions play in history. He also gives credit to his mentor — Herschel Grossman — at Brown University for inspiring him to look beyond the typical empirical fare of economics.

We then jump into Murat’s new book and he lays out the three central questions that he seeks to answer: 1) Why and how did monotheism spread so rapidly and become swiftly intertwined with political authority?; 2) What has been the role of religion and ideology in conflict historically?; and 3) What were the lasting sociopolitical and economic effects of religiously-motivated conflicts? As for the first question, we walk through Murat’s empirical study showing that, ceteris paribus, monotheistic civilizations tend to last longer than polytheistic ones and generally have greater territorial reach (a proxy for governing effectiveness). Tony probes some of the methodological difficulties in measuring these phenomenon and Murat provides convincing answers as to why his study does show a significant effect for monotheism. He then reviews some of the reasons why monotheisms might be better for obtaining sociopolitical stability, including the ability of ecclesiastics to provide credibility to rulers and lower the discount rate of individuals thus allowing for longer-term policies.

Turning to one particular monotheistic civilization — the Ottoman Caliphate — Dr. Iyigun provides some background information about how the Ottomans were able to rise to power and conquer a vast territory, extending across North Africa, into the Arabian peninsula, and eastward towards central Asia. He discusses the “Gaza ideology,” which promotes the basis for an offensive military strategy allowing for conquest, which then becomes its own engine of growth, allowing for a further extension of rule. The height of Ottoman rule from the mid-15th to the 17th centuries also has an important impact on Europe. With the Ottomans pushing into the Balkans and close to the gates of Vienna, Europeans had to reduce their own territorial infighting in order to address this external existential threat. Murat notes that while the Roman Church’s monopoly had come under challenge prior to the Protestant Reformation (e.g., the Hussites and Lollards), the definitive Protestant break fostered by Martin Luther was catalyzed by the Ottoman threat. While acknowledging the role of the printing press and other explanations for Protestant success, Prof. Iyigun argues that military advances by the Ottomans forced Europeans to temper their own intra-faith hostilities and conflict, which in turn gave Christian dissenters a chance to take hold and expand on the continent. His empirical work on the frequency and duration of intra-European conflict compared against Ottoman advances, along with qualitative evidence in the documents of Prince Ferdinand and others, shows this hypothesis to be rather convincing.

We move next to a set of miscellaneous (albeit important) questions about how this may have impacted the different economic development trajectories of the two regions — Europe and the Middle East. Tony asks whether the threat of Europe, particularly in the form of The Crusades, might have played a similar galvanizing role in Ottoman economic development. Interestingly, it does not and Murat explains what happens when the dominant power in the region faces such threats. He notes three phases — denial that a threat exists, a conservative revival to “restore historic greatness” leading to a reliance on old institutions not suited for a new reality, and then finally emulation of the institutions of the rising power. We also talk about another interesting facet of his book — the role of harem politics. While most of his book is macro-historical, he does devote time to looking into the micro-foundations of military decisions in the Ottoman Caliphate and develops a fascinating thesis. Here he argues that the nature of dynastic succession relied upon births that were from captured concubines and slave women, often from Christian lands (sometimes as far away as France). He tests whether the heritage of the mothers of various sultans played a role in determining where military campaigns would take place. Interestingly, valide sultans (queen mothers) who came from Christian regions (although who also converted to Islam), had an influence in tamping down military incursions into Europe. While only a side chapter in Murat’s book, this may be one of the most interesting and surprising findings of his study (at least to Tony, who notes that “Moms matter” in history).

Prof. Iyigun finishes off with some broad lessons he learned from his decade-long study of this topic. He notes that institutional, particularly informal (cultural) institutional, context is very important for structuring political and economic histories. He also notes that while economic competition in a globalizing world is often viewed positively, cultural/ideological competition should be viewed the same way. Finally, he learned that in a globalizing world, religion may become a more important focal point for bringing people together than nationalisms, a thesis advanced earlier by Samuel Huntington but which Murat intends to explore further in a more rigorous fashion. And last, but not least, Murat talks about his love of the blues and how he came to play in the band Barrel of Blues, and then treats us to his own composition — Muqarnas. Enjoy! Recorded: July 8, 2015.

War, Peace, & Prosperity in the Name of God: The Ottoman Role in Europe’s Socioeconomic Evolution, by Murat Iyigun.

Barrel of Blues (great tunes can be found here).

RELATED PODCASTS

Jared Rubin on Christian and Islamic Economic History.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law & Economic Development.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

Mark Koyama on the Economics of Jewish Expulsions.

Rodney Stark on the Crusades.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy

tonygill — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:00:34 +0000

Can Islamic nations craft functioning democracies? While a cursory glance at the Arab Middle East would suggest the difficulty with such a task, Dr. Paul Kubicek, professor of political science at Oakland University, discusses his comparative research that shows a number of tentative successes with democracy in the Muslim world. We discuss Turkey and a number of other countries that receive little attention in the popular media such as Senegal, Mali, Tunisia, and Bangladesh. While many of these countries have experienced democracy in the past decade or so, and some of them (e.g., Bangladesh) still face significant challenges, Prof. Kubicek’s research shows that Islam and democracy are not necessarily incompatible.

As per usual, Tony asks Paul about his background with particular attention to how someone who studied post-communist nations in eastern Europe would end up taking a job in Istanbul at Koc University, especially since he had never visited that nation prior to his job interview and did not know Turkish. We chat a bit about his time there and his reflections on being a “stranger in a strange land.” It was his three year stint as a professor at Koc that created the seeds of interest that eventually became the basis of his book Political Islam and Democracy in the Muslim World.

We then take care of a few definitional issues talking about what democracy is and where nations in the Muslim world — stretching from Morocco to Malaysia — fit in comparative perspective. Paul notes that on empirical scores of democracy (mainly from the Polity data set), Muslim countries score significantly lower (i.e., less democratic) than the non-Muslim world. He reviews a number of reasons other scholars have advanced for this “democratic deficit,” including theories about poverty’s relationship to democracy, the “resource curse,” and some political culture factors, as well as hypotheses linking Islam’s incompatibility with democratic governance. We then talk a bit about the variation within Islam — not a monolithic religion by any means — and briefly explore the topic of political Islam.

The last half of our interview surveys a number of countries that have had some success with democratization. We start with Turkey, the country that was Paul’s home for three years. He reviews the history of that nation and notes how religion was removed from political consideration during and following Kemal Ataturk’s rule. Paul then talks about the democratization process and how it has opened up to individuals who want a more public space to express their religion and the rise of the Justice & Development Party (AKP). While there has been a few steps backwards in terms of free speech and other civil liberties, Paul does not attribute this to Islam per se, but rather just the natural desire of governments to want more power. We also discuss the pull that Europe has had on the political landscape of Turkey, and Paul notes that while Europe did exert some influence towards democratization in the 1990s, this influence has faded in the past decade.

We then move on to a number of lesser-known countries, starting with Senegal — a west African nation that has shown considerable success with democratic governance. Again, Paul reviews the history of this country (a former French colony) and explains how the “national brand” of Islam, which is Sufi-based, assisted (or at least did not inhibit) the process of democratization. Paul points out that a great deal of toleration for other religions exists in this country and a number of the first presidents were, in fact, non-Muslims. We then travel a bit to the northeast to look at Mali. Of all the countries examined in his book, Mali would appear to be the least conducive to democracy given its low GDP per capita and high rates of illiteracy. Nonetheless, beginning in 1992, the country moved in a democratic direction with competitive elections. A brief military coup in 2012 prompted by separatist unrest in the north was short-lived as the generals handed back power to civilians. Bangladesh is then offered up as a case where things have not progressed as well and Paul explains how “creeping Islamization” from Pakistan has caused backtracking on a variety of civil liberties.

We finish off the interview with some discussion of the Arab Spring, a movement starting back in 2011 that offered hope for political liberalization in North Africa and the Middle East, but which has not been as successful in that area as was hoped. Paul points out that Tunisia, the point of origin for the Arab Spring, is doing well with respect to democratic liberalization but other countries have floundered, including Egypt. Paul offers up some final thoughts on the political future of the region. Recorded: July 2, 2015.

Political Islam and Democracy in the Muslim World, by Paul Kubicek.

From Solidarity to Infirmity: Organized Labor in Post-Communist States, by Paul Kubicek.

Unbroken Ties: The State, Interest Associations, and Corporatism in Post-Soviet Ukraine, by Paul Kubicek.

The European Union and Democratization, edited by Paul Kubicek.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

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

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Alessandra González on Islamic Feminism.