Research On Religion » Alfred Stepan

Anselm Rink on Missionaries and Political Authority

tonygill — Sun, 04 Mar 2018 09:00:22 +0000

Missionaries can often convert people to another faith, but do their efforts have other effects? Prof. Anselm Rink, a junior professor of political economy at the University of Konstanz (Germany), joins us to discuss an interesting survey and field experiment conducted in Peru to understand the effects missionizing may have on citizen attitudes towards political authority. We begin the conversation with a bit of Prof. Rink’s background and how he ended up studying Protestants in the Peruvian highlands, and he notes that it was part-and-parcel of his Peace Corps experience in Ecuador. We then dive into his study by defining what “political authority” is. Anselm notes that definitions vary quite a bit, but he focuses his attention on two dimensions borrowed from Max Weber — obedience and persuasion. He covers some of the different perspectives on how social scientists have understood these concepts, including a brief mention of the famous Milgram study.

Prof. Rink then lays out his theoretical expectations on why missionaries should have any impact on the dimensions of political authority. As far as obedience goes, it is possible that there are theological reasons a missionary (or other religious leader) would enhance acceptance of authority in that followers are asked to adopt an authority figure. There is also the possibility that there is a habitual mechanism that enforces obedience through generalized rituals. With respect to persuasion, Anselm notes that exposure to new religious ideas could create an intellectual substitution effect wherein people see things differently, or be affected by cognitive dissonance wherein messages from a religious authority may undermine a political message. Prof. Rink then lays out the religious landscape of Peru, pointing out the growth of Protestantism of the Pentecostal and indigenous varieties. When Tony asks whether messages from Catholic priests would have an effect on the dimensions of political authority, Anselm responds that this is possible but he focused his research efforts on Protestant missionaries because they tend to have a more “otherworldly” dimension to their spiritual message and that his theoretical expectations would be that the effects of new religious messages would be more pronounced with stricter denominations.

The conversation then gets scientific as we go over Prof. Rink’s research design, talking about the 16 villages that he chose and how this helped to enhance his field experiment design. Within these villages, there were Adventists, Maranatha Christians, Peruana (indigenous), and churches that had mixed elements of some or all of these. We go through the qualitative interviews he conducted with missionaries and the surveys he administered to local citizens that included an experiment about giving up coins based upon the roll of dice. His findings from this work were rather interesting. It turns out that while Protestant missionaries tended to make their followers more obedient, they actually were less susceptible to persuasion. As such, the effects of missionaries run in somewhat contradictory directions.

We finish off the interview with a discussion of his work on religious radicalization in Kenya with his co-author Kunaal Sharma. Instead of focusing on macro-political and economic explanations (such as economic crisis) for conversion to radical religious movements (both Christian and Muslim), they have been investigating the micro-level foundations for why individuals in a community setting would sign up with radicalized groups. Anselm’s work in both Latin America, Africa, and Europe allows Tony to prompt him about his reflections on his own research. Anselm noted that the similarities among humans in different contexts should be seen as important and has some further views on altruistic behavior. Recorded: February 19, 2018.

Please note: Due to an international Skype connection, the audio of Prof. Rink is a bit compressed and muted. Nonetheless, the intellectual content is superb.

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.