A Multidimensional Analysis of Religious Extremism

Abstract

Even though religious extremism is currently a hotly debated topic, it is often reduced to a unidimensional construct that is linked to religious violence. We argue that the contemporary use of the term “extreme” fails to capture the different interpretations, beliefs, and attitudes defining extreme religious identity. To address this issue, we unpack the meaning of the term “extreme” in religious contexts and answer the call by scholars to provide a more comprehensive framework that incorporates the many different dimensions that constitute religion. We develop a model of religious extremism in theological, ritual, social, and political dimensions of religion based on the variety of Islamic groups in Indonesia. Going beyond an analysis that equates Muslim extremism with violence, we argue that Muslims (or indeed any religious group) may be extreme in some dimensions but moderate in others, e.g., extreme in ritual and moderate in political. Interpreting extremism relative to these four dimensions provides new insights when examining the global issue of religious extremism and helps to better predict how religious extremism is expressed. More generally, our framework helps to develop an understanding of radicalism that goes beyond a focus on violence.

“Terreiro politics” against religious racism and “christofascist” politics

“…Any religious group can be extreme in some dimensions and moderate in others, of course. To understand these conflicts we must analyze their dynamics in different dimensions, namely both the theological-ritual (which characterizes ways of dealing with religious representations and experiences), and the political/social (Wibisono, Louis, Jetten 2019). It is this latter axis of analysis that interests us in the present article, for it reveals how an agenda that affects (directly or indirectly) intergroup relations (both religious and non-) is constructed.…”

Addressing the political dynamics of radicalization leading to religious extremism in Bangladesh

“…Much of what we perceive as religious extremism today is shaped by the global event of 9/11 attack and the ensuing narratives that were formed and predominated within the mainstream discourses of religious extremism (Cainkar, 2009, as cited in Wibisono, Louis & Jetten, 2019). While it is undeniable that there are indeed imperceptible effects of global political events on issues such as religious extremism, there is also the risk of simplifying something as complex as radicalization and religious extremism when it is consistently associated with just one big global event.…”

“…Mainstream discourses on religious extremism are overridden by the international security narrative that have consistently identified isolated incidents of religious extremism as a part of Post-Soviet Muslim radicalization process; this has been the case even though evidence suggests that much of the incidents of religious extremism, particularly in Central Asia have been 'localized and inhibited by secularization as much as it is driven by radicalization' (Heathershaw & Montgomery, 2014). But the tendency of elucidating religious extremism to a unidimensional construct is not just reductionist, it also fails to encompass the theological, social and political aspects of religious extremism distinctly across the context of different countries (Wibisono, Louis & Jetten, 2019). Which is why in addition to taking into account the global political drivers, it is imperative to contextualize religious extremism with the local and regional political genealogy, conflict and risk factors that facilitate the process of religious extremism.…”

Role of Islamic Teachers in Combating Students’ Radicalism

“…The seeds of radicalism may be in the form of mindsets and attitudes. Although radical seeds may come from various interests and / or ideologies, what is more striking one is based on religion [2], especially Islam. Muzayyin Ahyar (2015) [5] captures that the phenomenon of religious radicalism is not entirely a symptom of religious ideology, but also as a socio-political symptom.…”