Fundamentalism
251
society. Groups such as the Amish in the USA and the Haredim, the ultra- orthodox Jews of Israel, undoubtedly believe that religion dictates social, economic and political principles, but they are generally more concerned with their own observation of these principles than with the comprehensive regeneration of society. The second response is ‘active’ fundamentalism, which takes the route of opposition and combat, and which alone should be considered an ideology, on the grounds that only it adopts an overtly political stance. However, the notion of politics it embraces is a distinctly conventional one. In marked contrast to feminists, who have also challenged the public/private divide, religious fundamentalists view politics in terms of government policy and state action. Far from regarding politics as inherently corrupt, they usually look to seize, or at least exert influence over, the modern state, seeing it as an instrument of moral regeneration. Critics of fundamentalism nevertheless argue that it is precisely this determination to remove the distinction between religion and politics that invests in fundamentalism a tendency towards totalitarianism (see p. 159). A state founded on religious principles is, almost by definition, unencumbered by constraints that arise out of the public/private divide. However, the degree to which particular fundamentalisms have succumbed to this totalitarian impulse varies greatly. Essential truths Fundamentalism is a style of thought in which certain principles are recognized as essential ‘truths’ that have unchallengeable and overriding authority, regardless of their content. Substantive fundamentalisms therefore have little or nothing in common, except that their supporters tend to evince an earnestness or fervour born out of doctrinal certainty. Fundamentalism can therefore be seen as the opposite of relativism . By this standard, certain political ideologies, notably fascism and communism, can be placed nearer the fundamentalist end of the fundamentalism–relativism spectrum, while liberalism in
particular, disposed as it is towards scepticism by its commitment to reason and toleration, can be placed near the relativist end (see Figure 12.1). All ideologies, however, contain elements of fundamentalism. In the sense that fundamentalism implies keeping faith with original or ‘classical’ ideas, it is also possible to classify some traditions within an ideology as fundamentalist and others not. In this respect, fundamentalismis the opposite of revisionism. Classical Marxism, which aimed to abolish and replace capitalism, has thus been seen as a form of fundamentalist socialism, while social democracy is portrayed as revisionist socialism by virtue of having modified its opposition to private property, the market, material incentives and so on. In the case of religious fundamentalism, the ‘fundamentals’ have usually, but not always, been derived from the content of sacred texts, supported by the assertion of their literal truth. Indeed, scriptural literalism was
Orthodoxy: Strict adherence to an established or traditional view, usually enjoying ‘official’ sanction or support. Relativism: A belief that moral or factual statements can only be judged in relation to their contexts, because there are no objective or ‘absolute’ standards. Scriptural literalism: A belief in the literal truth of sacred texts, which, as the revealed word of God, have unquestionable authority.
Fundamentalism
Relativism
Postmodernism Liberalism
Conservatism Fascism Religious
fundamentalism
Figure 12.1 Relativism–fundamentalism spectrum
Powered by FlippingBook