Impact of Religion, Faith, or the Dominant Ethical System on Politics - Essay Example

Impact of Religion, Faith, or the Dominant Ethical System on Politics The Philippines is composed of 7,100 islands and rocks above sea level and is one of the largest islands in the world. (Leuterio, 202) It is situated on the eastern rim of the Asiatic Mediterranean, Pacific and Indian Oceans, and between Australia and Asian mainland. In an article published by the U.S. Library of Congress, Dolan averred that “religion holds a central place in the life of most Filipinos, including Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Protestants, and animists. It is central not as an abstract belief system, but rather as a host of experiences, rituals, ceremonies, and adjurations that provide continuity in life, cohesion in the community, and moral purpose for existence.” (1) Statistics of the breakdown in religious affiliations of the faithful in the Philippines reveal that “the main religious group in the Philippines is Roman Catholics who account for 83% of the population. Other religions include Protestant 9%, Muslim 5%, Buddhist and other 3%.” (NationMaster, 1) In view of the predominance of Roman Catholics in the Philippines, the majority’s religious beliefs have a strong effect on the view towards politics and the existing governmental structure. The long history of colonization from Spain brought great changes in the political, economic and cultural life of the Filipinos. Christianity was introduced to replace the old religion based on spirit worship and a centralized government was established over the ruins of the barangays. (Leuterio, 223) Dolan proffered that “with the advent of United States control, the Catholic Church relinquished its great estates. Church and state officially were separated, although the church, counting more than 80 percent of the population as members, continued to have influence when it wanted to exert it.” (Dolan, Church-State Relations, 1) Further, Dolan clearly distinguished Catholics falling into three groups: “conservatives who were suspicious of social action and held that Christian love could best be expressed through existing structures; moderates, probably the largest group, in favor of social action but inclined to cooperate with government programs; and progressives, who did not trust the government programs, were critical both of Philippine business and of American influence, and felt that drastic change was needed. Progressives were especially disturbed at atrocities accompanying the use of vigilantes. They denied that they were communists, but some of their leaders supported communist fronts, and a few priests actually joined armed guerrilla bands. There appeared to be more progressives among religious-order priests than among diocesan priests.” (Dolan, Church and State, 1) The period of dictatorship during the helm of Ferdinand E. Marcos’ 20-year presidency necessitated the People Power Revolution in 1986. Members of the clergy “reverted to a less visible (but no less influential) role than in the declining years of Marcos's rule, when its relative invulnerability to harassment spurred priests and nuns to become political activists. Most church leaders criticized human rights abuses by military units or vigilantes, but they supported constitutional government.” (Dolan, Government, 1) The impact of religion on politics is eminent and profound. The values and beliefs of the Catholic faith are deeply ingrained in majority of the Filipinos that political views and affiliations depend largely on religious leaders’ sentiments and suggestions on government structure and reforms. This is validated by Dolan’s report that emphasized “the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines issued a pastoral letter urging people to vote yes in the 1987 constitutional plebiscite. In March 1987, Sin announced that he was bowing out of politics, but two months later he broadcast his support for ten Aquino-backed candidates for the Senate and recommended that voters shun candidates of the left. In 1990 Sin defined his attitude toward the government as one of "critical solidarity."” (Dolan, Church-State Relations, 1) Works Cited Dolan, Roland E. (ed.) Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1991. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. < http://countrystudies.us/philippines/> Leuterio, Florida C. Asian History and Civilization. St. Augustine Publications, Inc. 2002. Print. NationMaster.com. Religion Statistics. 2008. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. < http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/rel_rel-religion-religions&date=2008> Part 2: What is Islamism? Are their many types of Islamism? Islamism is a term recently coined in the 1970s to refer to “the rise of movements and ideologies drawing on Islamic referents – terms, symbols and events taken from the Islamic tradition – in order to articulate a distinctly political agenda.” (Denoeux, 61) According to Global Oneness (1), Islamism refers to “refers to a set of political ideologies derived from various religious views of Muslim fundamentalists, which hold that Islam is not only a religion, but also a political system that should govern the legal, economic and social imperatives of the state.” In addition, Mneimneh (1) defines Islamism as “a spectrum of political propositions rooted in particular readings of the Islamic intellectual heritage. Its followers are called “Islamists,” and they account for only a minority of Muslims.” Concurrently, Mneimneh gave a clear discourse on categorizing Islamism depending on functionality as against a formal method; functionality being “concerned with its impact” and formal based of “self-definitions”. (Mneimneh, 1) Accordingly, “A functional classification of Islamism thus would divide it into four categories: (1) violent radical Islamism (Al Qaeda is the principal example); (2) violent Islamism with a non-radical discourse (rooting the violence in the right of resisting occupation (Hamas and Hezbollah are prominent examples); (3) radical Islamism with a nonviolent basic position (Salafism being its primary expression in the Sunni realm); and (4) Islamism that espouses nonviolent, non-radical views (the local organizations of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East and the Jama‘at in South Asia are representative of such Islamism). Despite intra-Islamist debates and feuds, migration among these categories is common. A more formal analytical view of Islamism would cover the overlapping formulations of Jihadism, Salafism, and Takfirism within it.” (Mneimneh, 1) Works Cited Denoeux, Guilain. The Forgotten Swamp: Navigating Political Islam. Middle East Policy. Vol. IX. No. 2. June 2002. Print. Global Oneness. Islamism. N.d. Web. 07 Jan. 2009. Mneimneh, Hassan. Islam, Islamism, and the Need for Clarity in Terminology. American Enterprise Institute. 1 Oct. 2009. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. Describe the United States relationship with the Muslim world from its origins until today. What are the driving factors in this relationship? An essay by Hossain (par. 6) revealed that the U.S. – Muslim relationship began in the 1960s from a small population migrating from the Middle East and Asia. Initially, “non-Muslims were very welcoming towards the new Muslims and accepted their culture and way of life. Muslims had also added more diversity and culture to the American society and lived successfully in their new lives. Mosques and Islamic schools were opened, and Islam began to be an integral part of American life. However events like Jimmy Carter’s failure with Iran in 1979 and September 11th, 2001 have portrayed Islam negatively. Many non-Muslims began to wonder if Islam was truly a religion of peace.” (Hossain, par. 6) According to Jeff Siddiqui, a local Islamic activist, “Muslims were identified as enemies in history because of their different religious belief and success in civilization and trade. He also informed that since then, Muslims have been usually considered as top suspects for terrorism in the western world. An example of this would be the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, 1995. Before investigators discovered that Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were responsible for the attack, it was initially believed that the attack was organized by a group of Muslim terrorists. This information was displayed on several national television networks. Eventually, it was proven that the terrorist group was not involved with the bombings.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 267) Thus, the strained US – Muslim relationship was due to an interplay of the following factors: (1) “a generic, widespread inability of Arab societies to deal with the past 200 years” (Karabell & Cox, par. 108); (2) “Arab societies have failed to deal with population explosion and the increased needs and aspirations of their people” (Karabell & Cox, par. 109 ); (3) “lack of any compelling vision as to who they are and their purpose in life” (Karabell & Cox, par. 110); (4) the Islamic fundamentalists articulation to take arms and utilize the global markets to acquire weapons; and (5) the Arab nations’ monotheism contributes to their inability to accept defeat (Karabell & Cox, par. 111); and (6) the participation of the U.S. in the Israel – Palestinian war (Joffe, 1) Works Cited Hossain, Semonti. Islam behind the Stereotypes. 25 Jul. 2005. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. < http://www.religioustolerance.org/hossain_01.htm> Joffe, Joseph. A World Without Israel. Foreign Policy. Jan./Feb. 2005. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. Karabell, Zachary and Cox, Mary-Lea. The United States and the Muslim World Today. 13 Apr. 2005. Web. 07 Jan. 2010. < http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/5157.html> "Oklahoma City Bombing." Encyclopedia Britannica. 2003 edition. Print. Part 3: Generate one critical question about the topics discussed in the attached sources. Since religion plays a critical role in a government’s political structure, would any government be better off including religious leaders in their government structure to ensure that policies are consistent with a country’s political agenda? Explain. Read More