Chapter 3. Karl Marx, Marxists, and Marxians: Religion, Oppression, and Revolution

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Is this a case of structural violence that involves the powerful few taking advantage of some disadvantaged others? Is religion being used to mask these dynamics or placate the disadvantaged? Are the disadvantaged being told that their situation reflects the divine will, or being promised future compensation or reward (such as in the afterlife) in exchange for enduring present suffering?
  • Who is gaining advantage over whom? How, specifically, does religion help the oppressor or the oppressed?
  • Is this a case of overt physical violence that arises out of power imbalances and structural violence? That is, do the kinds of structural imbalances that Marx emphasizes help spark resistance, rebellion, and confrontation? Does religion contribute to the underlying structural imbalances? Does religion contribute to the resistance to such imbalances (in ways Marx might not have anticipated)?
  • Is this a case, like that of liberation theology or the ideas of Sayyd Qutb, in which a Marxist critique of religion and of socio-economic oppression is mixed with a view of certain religious commitments as part of the solution, rather than simply attacking religion in general?
  • Is this a case of secular violence targeting religious communities, institutions, or individuals for some claimed higher cause of justice? Is a Marxist critique, or something like it, being used to justify violence against religious people?

Chapter 4. Émile Durkheim: Religion as Social Grouping and Social Grappling

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Is religion a key component of group identity in this case? Does religion help provide differing identities for groups that are in conflict with one another?
  • Can we discern specific ways that religion helps generate a sense of in-group/out-

group identity and ways that religion helps define and maintain the boundary
between groups in this case?

  • Are rituals that involve periodic assembly of group members a factor? Does

the group participate in shared acts of worship or other religious gatherings? Do these gatherings reinforce group identity? Do they seem to correspond with instances of violence, or the escalation of violence? Is the violence itself ritualized?

  • Do the beliefs and doctrines of the groups in this case reinforce violence, such as by demonizing the out-group? Or do the religious beliefs of the groups in question promote peace, yet the groups are nonetheless fighting?
  • Are groups competing over access to resources, material or symbolic? If so, are the groups arrayed according to differing religious identity?
  • Does religion overlap significantly with politics in this case? Are the two, religion and politics, working in tandem to generate violence? Is it perhaps difficult to determine where religious concerns end and political ones begin?

Chapter 5. Victor Turner: Liminal States, Social Stability, and Social Upheaval

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Does the violence happen in the context of a practice of liminality, such as a religious ritual that involves breaking out of prevailing social structure and experiencing communitas?
    • Does the practice function to “blow off steam,” temporarily relieving the pressures of social constraint?
    • Does the practice provide a means of transitioning some members of the society from one social stage or role to another (as a classic rite of passage)?
    • Does the practice serve to shore up the social status quo, and if so, does it thereby contribute to structural violence?
  • Is the violence built into the practice and “scripted”? Are participants subject to some form(s) of violence as an integral part of the ritual?
    • Do participants direct the violence at themselves, or is it directed at them by others, such as the leadership of the ritual?
    • Do participants direct violence at one another, as with “commoners” throwing dirt on aristocrats, as in one example from above?
  • Is the violence directed from members of socio-economically lower strata toward members of higher ones? If so, is this licensed by the special context of a liminal practice?
    • Is the violence gendered, in that men and women participate or experience it differently?
  • Does the violence originate in the practice of liminality but then extend beyond  it, breaking free of the prescribed boundaries meant to control the practice?
    • If so, how far does the violence extend? Does it result in a major upheaval or revolution?
  • Does the liminal practice involve many people for a short duration (like a religious holiday), or few people for a long duration? Or is there some other arrangement along these lines?

Chapter 6. Max Weber on Asceticism: Breaking the World to Save It

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Do we see a pessimistic view of the world and self?
  • Does the group emphasize the sinful, wicked, wayward, and weak qualities of humanity?
  • Is the violence in the case in question justified as a means of fixing or disciplining a broken and wayward world?
  • Does the group tell stories, myths, or accounts of historical events that emphasize ideas of order and the overcoming of chaos? Is the order of the world seen as precarious?
  • Does the group withdraw from the world and focus on rule-governed behavior and endorse violence—perhaps including self-directed violence—to enforce such behavior (along the lines of Weber’s WRA)?
  • Even if the group does not withdraw from the world: if the violence in question is self-directed violence, is it understood as a way to discipline the unruly and force compliance with the will of God? Is it understood as punishment or penance for wrongdoings or innate wickedness?
  • Is God seen as highly transcendent—distant and likely to communicate with people only on rare occasions?
  • Does the group rely on a scripture by which God’s will is known, a text that is considered closed and complete? Does that text contain a set of rules or laws governing human behavior?
  • Does the group sanction violence in order to make sure members of the group comply with the group’s laws and norms?
    • Does the group sanction violence to try to force outsiders to recognize and comply with the group’s laws and norms?
  • Does the group embrace the idea that it is under threat, persecuted, or the victim of injustice? Is violence justified as a means of correcting these threats or injustices?
  • Does the group embrace ideas of a coming apocalypse? If so, is the coming disruption seen as a way of correcting past injustices, punishing the wicked, and paving the way for a better future for the righteous? Does the group see itself as being given license to engage in violence to pave the way for, or participate in, such apocalyptic events?
  • Is this a case of “holy war”? Is it a war to try to bring about compliance with the will of God/gods, perhaps by killing those who reject the teachings of the group?

Chapter 7. Modernization, Secularization, and their Discontents

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Do the groups involved in the case of RV explicitly state concerns about secularization or other aspects of modernization? For example, do they target “secular humanism” as an object of resistance, vitriol, and perhaps violence?
  • Do the groups involved in the case of RV explicitly state concerns about component elements of modernization and secularization, such as legal restrictions on public expression of religion (e.g., prayer in schools)?
  • Do the groups involved in the case of RV express concern for some form of general decline, such as “moral decay,” that they claim is intensifying over time?
  • Do the groups involved in the case of RV express concern over perceived threats to traditional family structures and/or traditional gender roles?
  • Do the groups involved in the case of RV use the language of needing to “defend” their beliefs, practices, worldview, or way of life from new threats? Do these threats involve what we have described as modernization and secularization?
  • Is there evidence, explicit or implicit, that the groups involved in the case of RV have experienced disruptions, dislocations, displacements, and/or social fragmentation?
  • Are the targets of the RV manifestations—especially symbolically potent manifestations—of a modern or modernizing world? Examples could include elements of a secular state, private groups of individuals that endorse or embody secular values, or material expressions of modernity/secularity (e.g., “modern art,” buildings associated with LGBTQ activism)?

Chapter 8. Church-Sect-Cult: Social Formation and Patterns of Violence

Questions to ask about real-world cases of RV in light of this chapter

  • Regarding the group or groups involved in the case, are they structured as churches, denominations, sects, or cults? Look at the specific characteristics of each type and see if they apply.
    • Look for ways a group may mix features of more than one type. What might the specific mix of such a group tell us about its propensity to violence?
  • If a group involved in RV is a church-level group:
    • Does it participate in any structural violence prevalent in the society, such as patriarchy, racism, socio-economic injustice, and the like?
    • Is it closely aligned with the state?
    • Does the group exhibit aspects of religious nationalism?
    • Do church members tend to participate in the military? 
    • Does the group participate in society-wide confrontations with outside groups?
    • Does it engage in war, “holy war,” or a “clash of civilizations”?
    • Is the RV a case of the church-level group seeking to eliminate competition?
    • Does the violence include efforts to limit or eradicate heterodoxy or emergent sectarian protest?
  • If a group involved in RV is a sect:
    • What is the nature of its grievance or protest against the church-level group? What does it reject in the church, and what does it seek to establish or accomplish instead?
    • Is the violence in question part of this grievance or protest? Is it targeted at the church?
    • Is the group’s violence meant to help “purify” the church or push it to return to its supposed roots?
    • Is the violence related to a crisis of leadership, as when the charismatic leader dies or is discredited, or must otherwise be replaced?
  • If a group involved in RV is a cult:
    • Is the violence directed at outsiders or those within the group?
    • If the violence is directed at outsiders, is the group reacting to perceived interference or attack from the outsiders?
    • Is the violence related to the loss or threat of loss of the charismatic leader(s)?
    • Is the violence related to apocalyptic beliefs or expectations of some grand final transformation, such as being taken up into heaven?
    • Is the violence suicidal? If so, is it related to apocalyptic expectations or the loss of the charismatic leader(s)?