Cecelia Lynch

Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization

Alternatives 23 (1998), 149-173 Social Movements and the Problem of Globalization Cecelia Lynch* There is a developing understanding among some “progressive” con- temporary social movement groups that economic globalization poses the primary obstacle to the fulfillment of their goals. This un- derstanding is well placed and overdue. Yet any effective response to globalization is predicated upon the ability of social movements to articulate a meaningful normative, or discursive, challenge. The par- ticular form of contemporary social movements’ inherited interna- tionalist focus, along with both activists’ and theorists’ past rejection of issues and politics deemed too class-based, has resulted in what we might call the discursive demobilization of movements on questions of economic praxis. This article thus seeks to open dialogue about the ability of what currently constitutes the normative challenge to globalization on the part of contemporary movements to reverse this discursive demobilization. “Globalization,” a phenomenon that succeeds the concepts of “modernization” and “interdependence,” now constitutes the touch- stone of any discussion of the contemporary world political economy. At the same time, there is heightened interest in the role of social movements in processes of change in world politics, and conse- quently in what is termed by some “transnational” or “global” civil so- ciety.1 As Stephen Gill points out, economic globalization affects so- ciety, on the group, national, and transnational levels: “[T]here are connections between the processes of economic globalization, and the way the outlook, expectations, and social choices of individuals and groups are being reshaped and reconfigured”? Although globalization is much discussed, disparaged, or touted, de- pending on the audience, disagreement remains concerning whether it is highly or marginally significant, new or old, and a phenomenon of *Dept. of Political Science, Northwestern University, Scott Hall, 601 University Place, Evanston, Ill., 60208-1006 149

A neo-Weberian approach to religion in international politics

Current approaches for understanding and analyzing religion in international politics insufficiently incorporate the role of ethics in the practices of religious actors. Primordialist approaches essentialize religion, instrumental approaches consider it to be an epiphenomenon, and cosmopolitan approaches a priori downgrade alternative ethical constructs as insufficiently universalist. An approach to religion that begins with a constitutive understanding of religious belief and economic, social, and political practice as outlined in Weber’s Sociology of Religion , is more helpful. However, because Weber’s method insufficiently addresses ethical intentionality, the ‘neo-Weberian’ approach I advance here incorporates the concepts of ‘common good’ and ‘popular casuistry’ into socio-historical contextualization. This approach provides a way to understand and theorize how religious adherents connect religious guidelines to moral action that avoids the essentialization of religion which is often characteristic of other perspectives.

Dogma, Praxis, and Religious Perspectives on Multiculturalism

The first of these quotes is from a scholarly treatise on the prob- lem of alterity and violence in allegedly ethnic politics in the Balkans. It points to the imposition of religious identity from the outside—not by religious fundamentalists but rather by those (in this case, some Serbian leaders) for whom fixed notions of alterity rationalize conflict, as well as by others (the Western press and diplomatic corps, the UN) who attempt to mediate and “resolve” violence. The second quote is a Western journalist’s account of an Islamic school in Pakistan. It demonstrates the distrust of Islamic “fundamentalism” (itself a controversial label) prevalent in Western media and government circles, and also expresses the author’s Orientalist determination to understand the school’s teachings on his terms rather than their own.4 The third quote forms part of a fictional narrative about the neocolonialist clash of power and religion in the Congo. It also highlights the arrogance that accompanied much Christian missionary activity in Africa, even in the second half of the twentieth century. Each of these quotes, however, also indicates, in different ways, the degree to which our debates about religion in world politics reflect Enlightenment assumptions. That is to say, each associates religion with danger, dogma, or rigid conceptions of otherness.

Emancipation or Accommodation? Faith and Justice in a Globalized Africa

Abstract This article interrogates the meaning of ‘justice’ for religious actors in Africa, comparing the post-independence period to the contemporary one. The treatment and meaning of justice by these actors today differs in important ways from ideas about justice during previous generations’ struggles for freedom. This is because (a) the promise of independence entailed a proactive, emancipatory and pan-African overhaul of oppressive and inegalitarian practices; while justice talk today occurs in a neoliberal context of more reactive and sometimes accommodationist measures to redress problems of violence and poverty; and (b) African leaders and religious thinkers themselves defined the meaning and components of justice in the past, while today much of the discourse around justice emanates from issues identified by transnational nongovernmental organizations and agencies. A neo-Weberian approach helps distill significant characteristics of the complex faith-justice-globalization relationship in these different periods, as well as their imbrication into religiously-plural and syncretic religious contexts.

Local and Global Influences on Islamic NGOs in Kenya

Islamic NGOs are critical to the nexus of humanitarianism and peacebuilding in many parts of the world, even in societies with a non-Muslim majority. An important example is provided by Kenya. However, Islamic groups in most of the Global North and much of the Global South also operate in a context shaped by global trends, especially the discourse of suspicion perpetuated by the global ‘war on terror’. In Kenya, this discourse has both constrained and provided opportunities for Islamic NGOs. To understand the resulting constraints and opportunities, the relationship between Islamic organisations and Christian, interfaith and transnational groups needs to be taken into account. This article employs insights from constructivist international relations to analyse: 1) how the goals and programmes of Kenyan Islamic groups are affected by the ‘war on terror’, and 2) the resulting obstacles and opportunities for peacebuilding, development and interfaith dialogue.