The western concept of secularism has been for some time in deep and perhaps permanent crisis. Elaborated in the context of secularisation of society, the concept is simply unable to deal with the pervasiveness of religious belief on the one hand, and new cultural histories and new social geographies on the other. If secularism, Chandhoke suggests, has to endure as a constitutive principle of democracy, the concept has to come to terms with the ubiquity of religious beliefs, and with religion in the public sphere. Gandhian philosophy may well help us to mitigate the seriousness of the crisis. Central to Gandhian philosophy of secularism as a companion concept of toleration, and secularism as ‘equality of all religions’, is the notion of an epistemological deficit. Persons have the moral capacity to know the truth, but not the entire truth. Therefore no group can claim superiority over another on the ground that its truth is the ultimate truth, and that other truths are false or travesties of the real thing. This realisation leads slowly but surely towards respect for plurality of beliefs and toleration. This constitutes the core of political secularism in India. The antecedent concept of political secularism is thus equality.
Chandhoke, Neera 1999. Beyond Secularism: The Rights of Religious Minorities. New Delhi, Oxford University Press
Kapur, Ratna and Brenda Crossman 1999. Secularism’s Last Sigh? New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
Jacobsohn, Gary Jeffrey 2003. The Wheel of Law: India’s Secularism in Comparative Constitutional Context. New Delhi, Oxford University Press
Tejani, Shabnum 2008. Indian Secularism: A Social and Intellectual History 1890-1950. Indiana University Press
Is secularisation a necessary precondition for the political doctrine of secularism?
Do you agree with the proposition that secularism is a constitutive aspect of democracy?
Why, in your estimation, is secularism in crisis in Europe?
Secularism and Toleration are companion concepts. Discuss.
Submitted by Neera Chandhoke
3 thoughts on “Transnationalism”
As a recent recipient of the graduate school certificate in African studies at ASU, my final drew from or focused in part on the settler narrative movement of the antebellum era. Despite the discovery of over 100 burials from this era that came to light recently, it was all treated in a quite troubing manner. Settler Colonial mentality was pervasive. It is clear, the slave labor narrative must be preserved at all cost. Local professional organizations and offices were disrespected and ignored as if the descended community did not exist. People wear the continuance of mixed relationships from this history and it is only now that they are finding their voice and their heritage in some cases. Global social theory is spot on.
I’m interested in colonialism,settler colonialism and decolonisation as it speaks to the original ownership of the land/country[?].
I was interested to read ‘the tendency among some scholars of settler colonialism to treat settlement as inevitable, simultaneously relieving settler societies and states of the burden of reconciling with indigenous peoples, and placing the burden of accommodating settler sovereignty onto those same indigenous peoples'[above]
I have been tentatively searching for references to the morality/legality of colonialisation,which could possibly have huge ramifications,and they are scarce.
Interesting. Could you please add Maria Lugones’s work in the further reading section please? She not only engaged with Quijano’s concept but revised it significantly to demonstrate the coloniality of gender. Thank you.