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.

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism

tonygill — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 08:00:09 +0000

Prof. Eli Berman, professor of economics at UC-San Diego and Research Director of International Security Studies at the University of California’s Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, discusses his new book Radical, Religious, and Violent: The New Economics of Terrorism (MIT Press). Contrary to popular notions that suicide bombers are pyschologically-distressed or economically-disadvantagted individuals, Prof. Berman discusses how radical religious groups are rational in their selection of tactics. Using Laurence Iannaccone’s theory of strict religious clubs, Berman argues that radical religious groups excel at providing social services to their members, while simultaneously filtering out “free riders.” Here we discuss the case of ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel as well as the Amish. We then discuss how successful insurgency operations require that groups limit membership defection, since a defector could easily compromise the secrecy of an entire organization. Adherence to strict religious requirements (e.g., intensive religious training, dietary restrictions, distinct clothing) provides behavioral signals about the loyalty of an individual to a group, making radical religious sects an ideal recruiting ground for rebels. We do not discuss the particular grievances of various terrorist organizations; rather the discussion focuses on the organizational aspects of terrorism and insurgency. Recorded: August 3, 2010.

Research On Religion » Hezbollah

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

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism