Titus Hjelm

Religion, Discourse and Power: A Contribution towards a Critical Sociology of Religion:

This article discusses critical discourse analysis CDA) as a framework for a critical agenda in the sociology of religion. CDA uniquely brings together discursive and critical (broadly Marxist) approaches to religion, both of which have been underrepresented in current mainstream scholarship. The article argues that a CDA perspective has a lot to offer to the sociology of religion both by sensitizing scholars to the significance of discourse in creating hegemonic understandings of religion and religions in everyday social interaction dominated by the media; and by offering a framework through which to analyse the discursive construction, reproduction and transformation of inequality in the field of religion. The article discusses the concept of discourse and its different meanings, examines what being ‘critical’ means in the context of discourse analysis and constructs a framework for doing practical CDA. Finally, CDA is discussed as a foundation for a critical sociology of religion.

Empowering discourse: discourse analysis as method and practice in the sociology classroom

Collaborative learning and critical pedagogy are widely recognized as ‘empowering’ pedagogies for higher education. Yet, the practical implementation of both has a mixed record. The question, then, is: How could collaborative and critical pedagogies be empowered themselves? This paper makes a primarily theoretical case for discourse analysis (DA) as a form of classroom practice that provides a structured framework for collaborative and critical pedagogies in higher education, with a special reference to sociology classroom practice. I develop a tripartite scheme for building a framework for sociological imagination that is, first, sensitive to the discursive aspects of social reality (learning about DA). Second, I illustrate the use of DA as pedagogical tool and classroom practice (learning with DA). Third, I discuss how discourse analytical ideas can be used in evaluating classroom interaction and how these reflexive insights can be used to enhance student empowerment (learning through DA).

Introduction: Islam and Muslims in European News Media

If there is one thing scholars of religion currently seem to agree about, it is that the demise of religion predicted by the secularization thesis has not happened—or at least has not happened on a scale previously thought. Although there are very good social scientific reasons to treat this ‘return of religion’ with caution,1 what is undoubtedly true is that no matter what people individually believe, ‘God is back’2 in public discourse—and Islam is at the heart of this global resurgence. As has been noted by many observers, 11 September, 2001 and the consequent “war on terror” marked a watershed in the new awareness of Islam and Muslims as a global presence.3 During the following decade, terrorist attacks in Madrid and London, intensified migration and different understandings of religious pluralism and multiculturalism have brought Islam under scrutiny in Europe. Anti-immigration has become a winning ticket for parties across the continent and the discourse on ‘civil war in Europe’, allegedly to be fought between ‘indigenous’ Europeans and Muslims, is spreading across the Internet.4 Anders Behring Brejvik’s terror spree in Norway in July 2011 was a horrid manifestation of that discourse.

The “secularization” and ethnicization of migration discourse: the Ingrian Finnish Right to Return in Finnish politics

ABSTRACT Finland’s Right to Return policy for Ingrian Finns (1990–2010) presented Russian and Estonian citizens who qualified as having Finnish ancestry the legal means to resettle in Finland. The policy was initially driven by Finnish President Mauno Koivisto, who spoke publicly of his belief that the Ingrian Finnish minority in Russia was Finnish because it was Lutheran rather than Orthodox. However, Finnish politicians increasingly abandoned the view of a common Lutheran identity between Ingrian Finns and Finland, and shifted the discussion to language, ancestry and historical memory, which were used to both endorse and disendorse Ingrian Finns’ Finnishness. We argue that the disappearance of religion from the Right to Return discourse was a strategic – if not necessarily conscious – choice that emphasized the more primordial aspects of Finnish identity (and the Ingrian Finns’ lack of those), which in turn enabled stricter restrictions and, ultimately, the discontinuation of the policy.

Finlandisation or media logic? The Estonian–Russian border incident of 2014 in Finnish, Estonian and British press

This article examines the construction of the Estonian–Russian border incident of 2014, where an Estonian security officer ended captured by Russian authorities, in Finnish, Estonian and British press. It asks (a) How did the press construct the event and the actors in the reporting of the Kohver case in Finnish, Estonian and British press? What happened? Who did what? Who was responsible? What is the outcome of these constructions? Are there differences in national reporting? (b) Can ‘Finlandisation’ explain the discursive choices in the press constructions? By Finlandisation we refer to a hypothesis about the effects that the proximity of a major power in the context of international tension has on media discourse and culture more broadly. We argue that although the discourse of the Kohver case in Finnish, Estonian and British press could be subsumed under the term ‘Finlandisation’ in the case of the first two countries, a more fruitful approach would be to consider the discursive differences in the framework of the ‘domestication’ of news. This implies that explaining the tone of the news discourse is as much a matter of media logic as it is of underlying and/or implicit ideology.

American Possessions: Fighting Demons in the Contemporary United States, by Sean McCloud, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 192 pp., ISBN 9780190205355, US

against French Catholicism possessed a (cryptic) seditious and imperialistic quality’ (p. 16); that ‘Calvin believed himself to be right and possibly infallible in matters of doctrine’ (p. 101); that Calvin had worked out ‘a plan to win France for the gospel which included the possibility of armed conflict’ (p. 103). Adverbs also carry out a good deal of work in this monograph, as when we are told that ‘Calvin’s reforming ministry [is] at once aggressive, revolutionary, and arguably seditious’ (pp. 81–82). These cautionary phrases bespeak Balserak’s honesty and care as an historian, but they do suggest the vulnerabilities in his position. Some learned readers will come away from this study thinking that it downplays the element of systematic ambiguity in Calvin’s lecturing stance in dealing with the prophets. The motifs and motives advanced by Balserak are available as deductions from the comments, but only for listeners and readers who want to find them. And Calvin accommodates both the hotheads and the spiritual warriors – though not of course, as Balserak would accurately object, the Nicodemites, for whom Calvin had no use whatever. The book under review gives us a Calvin perhaps more a 20thand a 21st-century prophet than a 16th-century one. The precise calibration of Calvin’s position on political resistance will always remain difficult. Balserak has contributed valuably to that discussion. One of the wisest comments on the subject remains that of Max Engammare (1998): ‘en évoquant à plusieurs reprises un droit de résistance active contre les tyrans, Calvin annonce les monarchomaques; il n’en est pas un bien sûr, mais je ne suis pas loin de penser qu’il aurait été des leurs après 1572’ (Engammare 1998, 225; the concluding sentence of Engammare’s contribution to Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte). Had Calvin lived to know of the Bartholomew Day massacre, the ambiguities in his call for uprising would indeed have diminished, even evaporated. In that sense, it may be said, he is very much a mid16th-century figure.

29.95 (hardcover)

Sociology of Religion for Generations X and Y, by Adam Possamai, Equinox: London, 2009, 225 pp. ISBN 978-1-84553-303-8, US

Sociology of Religion for Generations X and Y, by Adam Possamai, Equinox: London, 2009, 225 pp. ISBN 978-1-84553-303-8, US

95.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-1-84553-304-5 (paperback), US

95.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-1-84553-304-5 (paperback), US

27.95 If the publ...

27.95

confident, able). Third, the empirical data are rooted in Scandinavian examples. The chapters are organized thematically and cover the expected ground. They all do this to a high level, and each chapter is engaged and engaging. Each chapter has appropriate illustrations, inset boxes focusing on key sociologists, inset boxes on key debates and each ends with a few points encouraging students to think for themselves. There is no doubt that students will gain a lot from the collection and, indeed, be provided with a firm foundation from which to develop their own sociological imaginations. It would be invidious to single out particular chapters for praise given the expressly corporate and collective nature of this project. Suffice to say that while every chapter is commendable, at least three ought to be regarded as signal achievements of synthesis, clarity and engagement. The only significant criticism I can level at the collection is perhaps really a matter of taste. Too many of the illustrations are of the most banal sort provided by free-access libraries. Given the possibilities of digital technology (and indeed the likelihood that each of the authors has a digital camera) it would have been far more interesting and appropriate for the authors to have generated their own original illustrative material. Perhaps this offers a niche for students using the book to be encouraged to engage in exercises in visual sociology (using their own cameras, cell phones and so on). In all, however, the book reflects a confidence and enthusiasm which is woefully lacking from so many of the contemporary British and American introductions to sociology. Introduction to Sociology: Scandinavian Sensibilities will enhance the quality of sociological work in Scandinavia. It is an encouragement to students to think for themselves about their world and, moreover, it is likely to be used by faculty as a handbook of key debates in Scandinavian sociology. But I am not Scandinavian. I teach and live in the United Kingdom, so what does this book say to me as an outsider but as someone located in one of the historic centres of sociological writing? Well, I admire this as a textbook, but I take something else from the collection. What strikes me is the sheer confidence and sense of excitement that runs through each chapter. This is a book written by Scandinavians for Scandinavians, but I think it is also an early sign of a realignment in Anglophone sociological work. Quite simply, I take from this volume the lesson that Scandinavia has the people, potential and confidence to become a major force in the discipline and, quite probably, the most interesting source of Anglophone sociology. As someone enduring in the neo-liberal hell of the modern English university system, I am, to be perfectly honest, full of admiration – and more than a little fear! If the promise of this volume is realized, Scandinavian sociology is and deserves to be the future.