Secularism after Western Hegemony

Secular states and the doctrine underpinning them have come under strain elsewhere. Secularism was severely jolted with the establishment in Iran of the first modern theocracy, rejected partly because of the perception that it was a Western idea. By the late 1980s similar Islamic political movements had emerged in Egypt, Sudan, Algeria, Tunisia, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Chad, Senegal, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and even Bangladesh Movements challenging secular states were hardly restricted to Muslim societies. Protestant movements decrying secularism emerged in Kenya, Guatemala, and the Philippines. Protestant fundamentalism became a force in American politics. Singhalese Buddhist nationalists in Sri Lanka, practitioners of religious ultra-orthodoxy in Israel, and diasporic communities in Canada and Britain all began to question the separation of state and religion.

The hegemonic western conceptions of political secularism do not appear to have travelled all that well in other societies. What is surprising is that such conceptions and the secular states they underpin are coming under strain even in Europe, where, until recently, they were believed to be firmly entrenched and secure. Why so? It is true that the substantive secularisation of European societies has brought about the extensive secularisation of European states; regardless of their religious affiliation, citizens have a large basket of civil and political rights unheard of in religion-centred states, past or present. Nevertheless, two problems remain.

First, migration from former colonies and intensified globalisation have thrown together in Western public spaces Christian, Islamic, and pre-Christian faiths such as Hinduism. The cumulative result is unprecedented religious diversity, the weakening of the public monopoly of single religions, and the generation of mutual suspicion, distrust, hostility, and conflict. This is evident in Germany and Britain but was dramatically highlighted by the headscarf issue in France, the Cartoon affair in Denmark and the murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands shortly after the release of his controversial film about Islamic culture.

Second, despite substantial secularisation, in some European states inequities resulting from the formal establishment of the dominant religion have done little to bolster better intercommunity relations or to reduce religious discrimination. With the deepening of religious diversity, the religious biases of European states have become increasingly visible. European states have continued to privilege Christianity in one form or another. They have publicly funded religious schools, maintained clerical salaries and real estate holdings of Christian churches, facilitated the control by churches of cemeteries,

The hegemonic western conceptions of political secularism do not appear to have travelled all that well in other societies

and trained the clergy. In short, there has been no impartiality within the domain of religion, and despite formal “equality” this privileging of Christianity continues to have a farreaching impact on the rest of society (Klausen 2005). Even the widespread belief regarding the existence of a secular European public sphere is based largely on a myth. As a result, the formal or informal establishment of a single religion, even the weaker variety of establishment, continues to be part of the problem.

In these circumstances, as societies become religiously diverse or recognise it in their midst, the world has much to learn from these conceptions of secularism that are emerging from the shadow of the previously hegemonic models. My principal objective here is to draw attention to the point that political theorists do not see the normative potential in the secular practices of these different states because they are obsessed with the normativity of the mainstream, hegemonic model of western secularism. Western states need to improve their understanding of their own secular practices, just as Western secularism needs a better theoretical selfunderstanding. Rather than get stuck on models they developed at a particular time in their history, they would do well to more carefully examine the normative potential in their own political practices.