Fundamentalism can be widely defined as the utmost strict obedience towards distinct religious policies and guidelines which is usually understood as a reaction against Modernist Theology. It is also known to be associated with a forceful attack on outside threats to their own religious culture and beliefs. (George M. Marsden. 1980.) Fundamentalism first began as a movement in the United States in the late 19th century, early 20th century. It originally started within American Protestantism as a reaction to theological liberalism and cultural modernism. Soon after it spread to other religions generating quite a large following, including some fallen away Catholics. The term fundamentalism derives a religious affiliation in coherence to a set of very complex beliefs. Fundamentalists argued that many modern theologians had misinterpreted certain doctrines and stressed the infallibility of the bible. They selectively choose what they are against and what they accept in modern culture. What started out as a refined organisation quickly grew and spread throughout the use of media, press and academia. Nowadays there not only exists Protestant Fundamentalists but Islamic Fundamentalists, Buddhist Fundamentalists, Hindu Fundamentalists and many more from various religions and creeds.
To say Religious fundamentalism is always totalitarian may give some false pretenses. The term totalitarianism can be described as a political term in which the state holds complete authority and dictates all aspects of public and private life. Totalitarianism is regulated through the use of forceful political action and propaganda method in organised media. Totalitarianism was first developed in the early 1920s with Italian Fascists. The concept soon spread...
... middle of paper ...
...ndamentalist but yet not all participate in such aggressive manor.
Since the beginning of Christian Fundamentalism there has been many interactions between religion and militancy. A well known activist group was established in America after the civil war called the Ku Klux Klan. They were a protestant led organization who engaged in violent acts such as lynching, murder, arson, cross burning, rape, arson, demolition of property and other horrendous crimes. This was all carried out against African Americans, Muslims, Jews and other ethnic minorities. They were openly Christian terrorist in their philosophy, basing their beliefs on a “religious foundation” in Christianity. (Al Khattar, Aref. M. 2003.) Their burnings and physical abuse that they caused were not only to frighten and warn their enemies but to also show their devotion and overall worship to Jesus Christ.
Fundamentalist and Wesleyans both have smiliar and different views on what the Theology of the scripture should be. In other words they both in some cases agree and disagree on the true nature of God and their opinion concerning Him. For example one of the major contrasting opinions between Fundamentalist and Wesleyans is their understanding of faith. To Wesleyans, "faith is being viewed as a personal relation with God based on trust," (65) but to the Fundamentalist," it is seen as belief in or assent to the true statement or proposition about God." (65) Meaning that Fundamentalist have a need to constantly demonstrate all parts of the Bible in a literal sence, otherwise they will lose the favor of God. To the contary Wesleyans, they believe that the personal relationship with God is more important and through that, they will be able to gloryfy God and find salvation. This however does no...
Square Peg: Why Wesleyans Aren't Fundamentalists, a book edited by Al Truesdale and published by Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, examines two significantly different ways of understanding the nature and role of the Bible that mark different parts of Christ’s church. The first is represented by fundamentalism; the second by Wesleyan theology. The goal of the book is to help persons in Wesleyan denominations clearly understand the differences between Wesleyan theology and fundamentalist theology, and that even though both are of the Christian faith, how the theology between the two are incompatible with one another. “Without becoming divisive or claiming perfection in Christian doctrine, the various denominations hold theological positions that reflect their Christian experience, history and understanding of the Scriptures.” (loc 124 Kindle, Truesdale) Wesleyans believe that the proof of the gospel reside primarily in how a person lives their life and “not in logic and argumentation.” (loc 160 Kindle, Truesdale) They support the policy of that to get a better understanding of their faith, is the result of all fields of human exploration and research, from scientific to historical.
The religious Maximalist approach to religion Lincoln notes, rather than "fundamentalist" a Maximalist believes that religion should permeate all aspects of social , indeed of human existence"(5). Basically what Lincoln is saying that Maximalists believe religion should take precedence in our social order and not be constrained to any singular facet of our social world. Lincoln also uses the term Minimalist which is more or less the opposite of Maximalist. Minimalists, believe that religion should be "restricted to an important set of (chiefly metaphysical) terms, protects its privileges against state intrusion but restricts its activity and influence to its specialized sphere"(5). The Minimalist makes sure that religion stays within its own "sphere" and does not spill over into economical or political order.
Totalitarianism can be defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as the centralized control by an autocratic authority. The leaders of these societies are obsessed with complete control and will take whatever steps are necessary to reach such a goal. In many totalitarian societies, children are separated from their families. This is enforced on the citizens because rulers want them to be loyal to the government. Such living arrangements can be portrayed in Ayn Rand’s novel, Anthem.
Nazism possess the core features of totalitarianism, however has a few differences which distinguishes it. Totalitarianism, by the Friedrich-Brzezinski definition, is when the government establishes complete control over all aspects of the state,maintaining the complete control of laws and over what people can say, think and do. Nazi Germany satisfies most of this criteria, as they had a one party system without political opposition. Moreover, they had a single unchallenged leader, in Hitler, to whom the entire nation conformed to. Furthermore, the party had nearly complete control over the country, controlling what people thought through propaganda and censorship, as well as what people could do through fear and terror. However, there are
Furthermore, a totalitarianism based government is a dictatorship, on in which the dictator is not limited by constitutional laws or further opposition. "Big Brother is watching you" (Orwell 3). Why is Big Brother so concerned with the surveillance of its citizens? In 1984 the journey of one individual, Winston Smith is narrated. His life characterizes the recklessness and deprivation of totalitarian...
The March 11, 2003 edition of USA Today reports on a new approach to religious faith in certain churches: worship based in the values and mores of the American West. “Straight-shooting emphasis on Christianity spurs a growing trend,” reads the headline (Grossman D1). A church named, with no needed irony, “Cross Trails” is reported to baptize new believers “in an 8-foot circular, blue plastic horse trough” (Grossman D1). This is a trail to belief that is stripped-down, back-to-basics, a religious attitude that reflects the lives of the ranchers and farmers it appeals to. Cathy Lynn Grossman writes:
Over the course of the last century, the Islamic Republic of Iran (formerly known as Persia) has seen colonialism, the end of a dynasty, the installation of a government by a foreign power, and just over three decades ago, the popular uprising and a cleric-led revolution. These events preceded what could be considered the world’s first Islamic state, as politics and fundamentalist religion are inextricably linked in contemporary Iran. Looking at Iran from the mid 1940’s until the present day, one can trace the path that led to the rise of fundamental Islam in Iran in three distinct periods. The first is that which began with the rise of secular nationalism and the decline of Islam. In the second, the secular, western-friendly government eventually gave way to the Islamic revival in the form of a government takeover by hard-line clerics and disillusioned, fundamentalist youth; both motivated and led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Rule of Iran by these fundamentalist clerics then led to the formation of the fundamentalist Islamic theocracy that governs present-day Iran. The current government has some democratic appearances, but all real power is in the hands of the supreme leader, an Ayatollah who is chosen by the Assembly of Experts, a group of clerics chosen by the Guardian Council. With the Iranian Revolution, political Islam was born, with the fundamentalists holding the reins of power in Iran to the present day.
When asked about what kind of state he wanted Italy to be he described his ideal state as a place where subordinates are “All within the state, none outside the state, none against the state.” ("Totalitarianism.") This kind of governmental structure and goals of this new state, were to provide the “total representation of the nation and total guidance of national goals.” (Stanley) While dictatorships and tyranny are often associated in the same realm of totalitarianism, the totalitarian system separates itself by its replacement of all other political institutions with new ones. Not to mention that totalitarianism does away with all legal, social, and political traditions and replaces that with whatever the state finds amicable and that which falls in line with what the government wants its people to think, speak, and believe. The one basic feature of a totalitarian state is that the state seeks to control how the population think. (Staudenmaier,) Totalitarianism is characterized by a strong, centralized, all powerful, oppressive government body. It attempts to “control to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression.” ("Totalitarianism.") Totalitarianism is closely associated with other political doctrines that advocate the principle of absolute rule, such as absolutism, authoritarianism, autocracy, despotism,
For a historian, the 20th century and all the historic events that it encompasses represents a utopia with endless sources of inspiration for the analysis of political figures, events and their consequences. Political figures such as Benito Mussolini of Italy, Adolf Hitler of Germany, Mao Zedong of China and Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union are all names we are familiar with due to the time period that they influenced; this time period after the trauma and atrocities of World War I and the Great Depression led to completely new forms of government in Europe and beyond. These “manifestations of political evil”, commonly known as totalitarian states, should not be considered as mere extensions of already existing political systems, but rather as completely new forms of government built upon terror and ideological fiction. Therefore, this was also a time in which political philosophers such as Hannah Arendt, the author of the standard work on totalitarianism, “Origins of Totalitarianism”, could thrive. When looking at totalitarianism as a political philosophy, two initial questions have to be dealt with: what is totalitarianism and what kind of effect it had on countries ruled by totalitarian regimes. The reasons for its occurrence have briefly been mentioned above, although there are much deeper ideological, social and economic reasons including imperialism and anti-Semitism. In order to fully understand it, we must also contrast it to other political systems like authoritarianism and dictatorship, which are similar to a certain extent, but lack crucial elements that are in the core of totalitarian ideology. Out of the many examples of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century, Nazi Germany, Communist China and the Soviet Union stan...
The Reluctant Fundamentalist is a taut and engaging piece of fiction, exploring the growing chasm between the East and the West. Mohsin Hamid has used a rather unique narrative mode- the dramatic monologue –and used it skillfully to weave an account of a young Pakistani’s class aspirations and inner struggle in corporate America. Throughout the novel, Hamid maintains a tense atmosphere, an atmosphere of imminent danger and radical violence. What results from the two devices is an allegorical reconstruction of post-9/11 tensions, and an inflective young man’s infatuation and disenchantment with America.
In modern history, there have been some governments, which have successfully, and others unsuccessfully carried out a totalitarian state. A totalitarian state is one in which a single ideology is existent and addresses all aspects of life and outlines means to attain the final goal, government is ran by a single mass party through which the people are mobilized to muster energy and support. In a totalitarian state, the party leadership maintains monopoly control over the governmental system, which includes the police, military,
Religious Fundamentalism is not a modern phenomenon, although, there has received a rise in the late twentieth century. It occurs differently in different parts of the world but arises in societies that are deeply troubled or going through a crisis (Heywood, 2012, p. 282). The rise in Religious Fundamentalism can be linked to the secularization thesis which implies that victory of reason over religion follows modernization. Also, the moral protest of faiths such as Islam and Christianity can be linked to the rise of Religious Fundamentalism, as they protest the influence of corruption and pretence that infiltrate their beliefs from the spread of secularization (Heywood, 2012, p. 283). Religious Fundamentalists have followed a traditional political thought process yet, have embraced a militant style of activity which often can turn violent (Heywood, 2012, p. 291). To be a fundamentalist is to wholly believe in the doctrine they are preaching or professing and will go to any lengths possible to have these beliefs implemented by their government , even using force or violence ( Garner, Ferdinand and Lawson, 2007, p. 149). All religions have a fundamentalist element, however, there is more of a significant conflict with Islamic fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists. It is wrongly thought fundamentalism is exclusively linked to Islamic fundamentalist such as the jihadi group al-Qaeda nonetheless Christianity is the world's largest religion and is bond to have some fundamentalist component such as the Christian New Right in the Unites States of America (Garner, Ferdinand and Lawson, 2007, p. 150).
..., this paper will talk about the forms and structure of fundamentalism specifically in Christianity and Islam. To begin the inquiry of what fundamentalism is it’s pertinent to understand how it is structured, how it responds to mainstream religions and why it exists. To define fundamentalism, fundamentalism is a reaction, whether it be religious or political, against current societal mainstream dogma or ideology. With this reaction against any set of mainstream ideology politically and religiously, what makes a group fundamentalist are define through these characteristics as Richard T. Antoun of State University of New York at Binghamton. These Antoun defines fundamentalism as, “Fundamentalist movements are defined ideologically, by their opposition to and reaction against the ideology that suits the permissive secular society, the ideology of modernism” (Antoun, 3)
In the academic article No Compulsion in Religion’Q2.256 in medieval and modern interpretation by Dr. Patricia Crone explains about the different interpretation of the famous verse in Surah 2:256 “There is no compulsion in religion.” This article goes on to explain an incredible quantity of research in primary sources written in Arabic and other languages from the early Middle Ages to the current century. These interpretations had great impact in the history of Islam, which helped it changed into what it is today, even though some of the Muslims are still uninformed of the different past clarification this verse went through.