Introduction: religiously oriented parties and democratization

Abstract

The role of religion in politics is still understudied as a consequence of the so-called “secularization paradigm”, which has been hegemonic in twentieth-century social sciences. Particularly, the role of religiosity within political parties has often been neglected for two reasons. First, there is a widespread normative prejudice about the role of religions in democratic and democratizing systems, where they are perceived to be illiberal and potentially anti-democratic actors. Second, there is the methodological difficulty of defining them with precision. This introduction to the special issue proposes the concept of the “religiously oriented party”. This is a party whose policies are openly based on a specific interpretation of religious precepts, but it can also be a formally secular one with relevant sections of its manifesto dedicated to religious values, explicitly appealing to religious constituencies, and/or a party including significant religious factions. With this definition in mind, the introduction explores the relationship between religiously oriented parties and democratization. Finally, the introduction presents the articles included in the special issue.

Keywords:

• religion
• democratization
• political parties
• secularization
• introduction

Acknowledgements

The authors are extremely grateful to all of the contributors for their work on the special issue and for their patience in dealing with our numerous requests. We are also deeply grateful to Jeff Haynes and Aurel Croissant for their invaluable input.

Notes

Swatos and Christiano, “Introduction – Secularization Theory”; Aldridge, Religion in the Contemporary World; Stark, “Secularization, R.I.P.”

See for example: Haynes, Routledge Handbook of Religion and Politics; Fox, Religion, Politics, Society, and the State; Anderson, Religion, Democracy and Democratization; Anckar, Religion and Democracy; Fox and Sandler, Bringing Religion Into International Relations; Haynes, An Introduction; Haynes, Religion in Global Politics; Haynes, Religion, Politics and International Relations; Lee, Religion and Politics.

Lawrence, Defenders of God, 8.

Rosenblum, “Religious Parties,” 42.

Gunther and Diamond, “Species of Political Parties”; Rosenblum, “Religious Parties”; Mohseni and Wilcox, “Religion and Political Parties.”

Mohseni and Wilcox, “Religion and Political Parties.”

Yavuz, Secularism and Muslim Democracy, 7.

Rosenblum, “Religious Parties”; Kalyvas, The Rise.

Mohseni and Wilcox, “Religion and Political Parties”; Yavuz, Islamic Political Identity in Turkey.

Rosenblum, “Religious Parties.”

Ibid.; Kalyvas, The Rise.

Galli, I partiti politici italiani; Yavuz, Islamic Political Identity in Turkey.

Madeley, “To What Extent.”

Krouwel, “Party Models,” 258.

An issue discussed, among others, by Rosenblum, “Religious Parties”; Kalyvas, The Rise; Kalyvas, “Commitment Problems”; Yavuz, Secularism and Muslim Democracy; Mohseni and Wilcox, “Religion and Political Parties.”

Philpott, Shah, and Toft, “From Faith to Freedom”; Künkler and Leininger, “The Multi-Faceted Role.”

Ozzano, “The Many Faces of the Political God.”

Tepe, “The Perils of Polarization and Religious Parties.”

Brocker and Kunkler, “Religious Parties.”

Cavatorta and Merone, “Moderation through Exclusion?”

Jaffrelot, “Refining the Moderation Thesis.”

Giorgi, “Ahab and the White Whale.”

Luna, Monestier, and Rosenblatt, “Religious Parties in Chile.”

O'Malley and Walsh, “Religion and Democratization in Northern Ireland.”