| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
060042
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2004.
|
| Description |
xi, 283p.
|
| Standard Number |
0674015398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 049380 | 305.8/BRU 049380 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
120355
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Language and religion are arguably the two most socially and politically consequential domains of cultural difference in the modern world. Yet there have been very few efforts to compare the two in any sustained way. I begin by aligning language and religion, provisionally, with ethnicity and nationhood, and by sketching five ways in which language and religion are both similar to and similarly intertwined with ethnicity and nationhood. I then identify a series of key differences between language and religion and draw out their implications for the political accommodation of cultural heterogeneity. I show that religious pluralism tends to be more intergenerationally robust and more deeply institutionalised than linguistic pluralism in western liberal democracies, and I argue that religious pluralism entails deeper and more divisive forms of diversity. The upshot is that religion has tended to displace language as the cutting edge of contestation over the political accommodation of cultural difference - a striking reversal of the longer-term historical process through which language had previously displaced religion as the primary focus of contention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
111487
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Building on recent literature, this article discusses four ways of studying the relationship between religion and nationalism. The first is to treat religion and nationalism, along with ethnicity and race, as analogous phenomena. The second is to specify ways in which religion helps explain things about nationalism - its origin, its power or its distinctive character in particular cases. The third is to treat religion as part of nationalism, and to specify modes of interpenetration and intertwining. The fourth is to posit a distinctively religious form of nationalism. The article concludes by reconsidering the much-criticised understanding of nationalism as a distinctively secular phenomenon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|