Literature Review Identity & Valence In order to provide the foundation for asking and then answering my question I began with looking at some older works that pave the way for further discussion and research on my topic. William James writing his famous work, “The Varieties of Religious Experience” touched upon several topics germane to the question of religion and identity that helped alongside a couple of other foundational thinkers that I will discuss briefly in more detail here shortly. The first thing James brought up that is of interest in framing this question is found in his eighth lecture entitled, “The Divided Self and the Process of Unification,” where he brings up the idea that a certain amount of people who suffer from a discordant level of heterogeneity that essentially drives them to attempt to reconcile the discordant parts of their life into some kind of unified understanding of self. This relates to identity because it is not restricted to the religious experience but details the way in which many people try to handle the reality of what I would term multiple and sometimes conflicting identifications. Practically, this relates to a later lecture that James does on Philosophy where in a roundabout way he makes the point that where religion (and more fundamentally identity itself) begins in an emotional understanding It then creates the intellectual framework around the emotion that gives it all a concrete expression. In his concluding lecture he brings up this idea that I believe is true in both religion and politics which is that for most people scientific objects (or in our field something like policy preferences) are abstractions with only individualized experiences being recognized as concrete. I want to bring in James to lay the groundwork for greater understanding that on a visceral level religion, or religious identity, makes for the formation of powerful in groups. Durkheim talks about the soul of religion as society’s conception of itself, a kind of “totem” if you will. In his work, “The Elementary Forms of Religious Life” Emile Durkheim advances the idea that a society’s religious practice arises out of a sense of what that society is or stands for. In primitive religions this can mean something like animism or a totemic religion where anthropomorphic traits are assigned to things like a serpent (“cunning” or “wise”) that illustrate what a society values or associates with itself. James and Durkheim are fundamental to my research here because James demonstrates on an individual level how the need to construct coherent identities leads one to take steps towards a unified self or at least one with tolerable levels of dissonance while Durkheim points us to the societal level truth that the construction of ingroups based around the idea of religion actually begins in our understanding that religion is a constituent building block of national or tribal identity. Obviously, in mankind’s history this began with religion but as we have advanced as a species we continue in many ways to anthropomorphize “totems” in the world to serve as stand-ins for how we conceive of ourselves and associated in-groups. For politics this can mean that party identification can serve as a proxy identifier for your “tribe” which can lead to the kind of polarization that you see in America, or in France’s case where an actual effort has been made to create a definitional idea of what it means to be French the totem becomes much more explicit. This leads me to the last and most recent foundational thinker I want to bring into my discussion of the literature and that is the work of Henri Tajfel and his concept of the minimal group paradigm from the early 1970’s. If we are to understand the significance of asking questions about divergent views on issues that relate to strongly to political identity like religion we need to understand that the bar for competing group identities and the resultant behavior associated with such is so low as to boggle the mind. If politics increasingly feels like zero-sum, and in the cases of both France and America good governance seems to be taking a back seat to increasing partisan divide we could do worse than looking back at Tajfel’s research that essentially shows that the minimal conditions necessary for discrimination can and do occur over the most arbitrary of distinctions. How much more important is it to understand issues that relate to the very core of human existence and the interaction of core identities like it within the body politic as well as in relation to the larger international community? Tajfel saw that even minimal group identities can lead people to favor one group over another even at the expense of overall gains for the group you are part of, which is to say we would rather have the other team “lose” most of the time than to create situations where everyone “wins.” The Sociology of Religion The Role of Political Religion in the Modern Developed State France Most of what I am going to discuss about France has to do with its long history, particularly its complicated history of the intertwining of religious and political power such that it explains to a degree the antipathy of the modern French state towards any sort of public role for religion in government and politics generally. From there I will discuss how the Enlightenment and the revolutionary era of France produced a nationalistic conception of France that marginalized any need for a constituent idea like religion to serve as a stand in for the emerging French society’s understanding of itself. The First Estate gave way to the Salons, and from there the French Republic moved towards rationalism and secularism over a past filled with examples of corruption and cooperation by religious elites throughout its history. From the lessons history I’ll move to more contemporary challenges that French Secularism is facing in the form of difficulties presented by multiculturalism and specifically the challenge of integrating rising numbers of Muslim immigrants into France’s continued nationalistic program. The challenge is particularly difficult for France because of its policy of secularism which for many of the Muslim immigrants coming in feels at once both entirely alien as well as punitive. In the chapter An Assessment of French Policy Responses from the book, “Integrating Islam: Political and Religious Challenges in Contemporary France” they point out that French policy aimed at building an explicitly French character through the subordination of other identities into the private sphere poses very real difficulty in integrating first and second-generation immigrants. In the book Secularism, Assimilation and the Crisis of Multiculturalism: French Modernist Legacies they make another good point on the subject that Laïcité ends up reinforcing different religious identities through this sort of marginalization effort that relegates the issue entirely to a private matter. Rather than absorbing these new religions and cultures into the idea of what it means to be French it highlights them as being “other.” I’ll end up the section on France by talking a bit about the larger European discussion through the lens of France specifically. Sarkozy declared that multiculturalism had failed, but Chris Allen writes in “New Multicultural Identities in Europe: Religion and Ethnicity in Secular Societies” that no one wants to talk about the subtext behind statements like that get at the core of the problem which is that for many in Europe the blame would seem to fall on Muslim minorities who are not assimilating enough for many native Europeans to feel comfortable. This goes back to Tajfel’s research which showed that when in group identities are threatened the response runs the risk of escalation into more and deeper displays of division and conflict. Having described the historical background and the current difficulties relating to France’s attitude towards religion I’ll tie it together by summarizing where France came from to where it is now on the issue of religion in in public life before transitioning to a comparison with the United States. The United States of America Similar to how I began the French section the American section will go over the history of America beginning with the contrast between many of its founding colonists coming over in order to experience the freedom to practice their religion without state interference to the founding father who arose from the same enlightenment discussed in the France section. Similar beginnings on the face, but different in that France had religious elites that were on the wrong side of revolutionary forces while America had non-religious elites on the right side of revolution and no obvious ties between repressive church and state (unless you count the witch trial days of Massachusetts and Rhode Island). From there we’ll examine America as an immigrant nation whose success was largely attributable to an ability to integrate various Christian sects into the religious fabric of the country. Although the fledgling nation was founded on principles of separation of Church and State same as France the US was able to allow for religious perspectives to rise to the surface enough that they were never marginalized thus allowing the various forms of religion (or at least the various Christian sects) to amalgamate into an almost civic religion which melded “Judeo-Christian” values with civil society such that America was able to cultivate a quasireligious identity into its national mythology. This was helped because many of America’s most pivotal points involved religion of religious conflict that drove historical events. From the Second Great Awakening which resulted in many new denominations coming to exist many of whom reflected a specific American character distinct from previous denominations that had arisen in the old world. The groundswell of grassroots religious movements like the great awakening ensured that the idea of religious identity was never far from the mind of the public. The abolition movement to end slavery in America also is worth noting because it had its roots on both sides in certain religious interpretations cementing religious identity again at the center of political and historical events in America. This division of religious identity would continue on through the Jim Crow years and on into the Civil Rights era and arguably even to this day where the political cleavages seem to fall along the lines of social justice, traditionally a subject close to various religious traditions. Even in more recent history the question of religious identity has been completely wrapped up in political affiliation with one party explicitly courting and claiming to represent evangelical Christianity as an explicit part of its party platform. This hasn’t just happened as a cynical electoral ploy by politicians as many prominent religious figures from the late 70’s on began to push for a greater role in the American political system which led the formation of groups like Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority and The Rainbow/PUSH coalition that arose from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Martin Luther King Jr. The modern electoral landscape of the United States is one in which religion is openly discussed and seen as important to 89% of American voters according to a PRRI/Brookings Survey from 2016. At this point we’ll turn to talking a bit about Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone and the decline of social capital in America and how this has directly led into the increasingly reactionary nature of religion in America that is undermining democratic norms and good governance in America with the religious identity of many Americans starting to override their belief in a unifying civic “religion” that had previously done so much to knit the various disparate identities of Americans together into the larger identity of American. Finally, I’ll end by delivering a series of different perspectives from the sources I listed in my preliminary readings section of my proposal. This section will include “Red State Religion” and specifically it’s seventh chapter where it delves into how the Religious Right has evolved into an institutional political movement even as it has retained the trappings of religion. I’ll include some comments on “Faith and the Public Square” from Jim Towey who makes the case that America has always had an active role for faith in the public square. In fact I will probably sprinkle the entire section on America with references to E.J. Dionne, Jean Bethke Elshtain, and Kayla M Drogosz’s book “One Electorate under God?: A Dialogue on Religion and American Politics” which features a bunch of different sections written by various authors relevant to the discussion of the political dimensions of religion in America. The other book featuring a collection of sections I will draw from is “Religion and Democracy in the United States: Danger or Opportunity?” that looks at both potential outcomes of America’s peculiar mix of religion and a democratic political system. After seven pages I hope this is enough of a review of the sort of literature I’ll be looking at, although I am sure I didn’t do this exactly right. The last source I’ll mention here is Fukuyama’s famous article “The End of History?” from which I’ll talk about how the ideology of liberal democracy has started to give ground to the more visceral elements of identity which chip away at the fabric of society generally, but more specifically have proven to be toxic to democracy. I’ll bring this up in the context that divergent attitudes on religion and politics in France and America each show that these identity related issues can’t be boiled down to ideology as my reading of Fukuyama suggests, or the cultural and religious approach of Sam Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations. The problem of political identity is multifaceted and worthy of much greater attention than I am going to write about in my paper. I’ll try to keep my scope narrow in discussing America and France, but in making the comparison I hope to tie it into larger questions that I could pick up and write about in the future. Hope this works as I am anxious to get started writing about this topic. – Justin Walters Preliminary Readings In tackling this topic, I want to use a mixture of the typical academic resources found through resources like JSTOR and a selection of texts from my own collection that I believe have bearing on the topic in question. With that said I want to break down my approach to the question into four parts and provide a few preliminary citations for each section. The first section I want to explore is religious identity and for that some of the works I think I would like to use are as follows: James, William, 1842-1910. (1902). The varieties of religious experience : a study in human nature : being the Gifford Lectures on natural religion delivered at Edinburgh in 1901-1902. New York ; London :Longmans, Green, GUTMANN, A. (2003). Identity in Democracy. PRINCETON; OXFORD: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7s35j Durkheim, Émile, 1858-1917. (1915). The elementary forms of the religious life, a study in religious sociology. London : New York :G. Allen & Unwin; Macmillan, HECK, P. (2009). Common Ground: Islam, Christianity, and Religious Pluralism. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2tt3v2 For my second section I want to look at Secularism in France. My preliminary look at the topic has turned up the following possible sources: Laurence, J., & Vaisse, J. (2006). Integrating Islam: Political and Religious Challenges in Contemporary France. Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctt6wpftj Jansen, Y. (2013). Secularism, Assimilation and the Crisis of Multiculturalism: French Modernist Legacies. Amsterdam University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt6wp7qd Hurd, E. (2008). The Politics of Secularism in International Relations. Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7s5nn Toğuşlu, E., Leman, J., & Sezgin, İ (Eds.). (2014). New Multicultural Identities in Europe: Religion and Ethnicity in Secular Societies. Leuven (Belgium): Leuven University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qdzxj Third section will deal with the case of America, and the co-option of religion by politically motivated actors. My initial selections for this section are as follows: Chapp, C. (2012). Religious Rhetoric and American Politics: The Endurance of Civil Religion in Electoral Campaigns. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.cttq43fr Preston, A., Schulman, B., & Zelizer, J. (Eds.). (2015). Faithful Republic: Religion and Politics in Modern America. University of Pennsylvania Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13x1phf Wuthnow, R. (2012). Red State Religion: Faith and Politics in America's Heartland. Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7rjr5 Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY, US: Touchstone Books/Simon & Schuster. Dionne, E., Elshtain, J., & Drogosz, K. (Eds.). (2004). One Electorate under God?: A Dialogue on Religion and American Politics. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctt1gpcczk Wolfe, A., & Katznelson, I. (Eds.). (2010). Religion and Democracy in the United States: Danger or Opportunity? Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t4ht My final section of works I would like to include involve trying to extrapolate broader lessons from my research that might be applicable towards the political development of emerging democracies, particularly ones with large numbers of religiously inclined citizens. I need to find more sources for this but here are a few that I feel might have some bearing or are promising enough for me to look at further. Dunn, C. (Ed.). (2009). The Future of Religion in American Politics. University Press of Kentucky. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jcnpd Thiemann, R. F. (1996). Religion in Public Life : A Dilemma for Democracy. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
