loading

Religious Freedom and Security: The Positive-Sum Argument 

Share:

Posted By
Dr. Dennis R. Hoover
Posted On
01/14/2025

Religious Freedom and Security: The Positive-Sum Argument
By Dennis R. Hoover 

The ongoing threat of religiously-inspired terrorism and religiously motivated conflict around the world has unfortunately led many policymakers to make simplistic, zero-sum assumptions about the relationship between religion and security. The conventional thinking goes something like this: If religion is the source of the security problem, then repressing religion will help solve that security problem.  

But this logic has it precisely backward. In the long run, repressing religion in the name of “security” only makes security risks worse. Moreover, a social and legal environment of equal freedom of religion and belief (FoRB) for all supports a positive-sum dynamic, yielding sustainable security. 

As Chris Seiple and I have argued elsewhere, the inter-relationship between FoRB and security is characterized by two contrasting cycles or “feedback loops”—a negative cycle and a positive cycle

In the negative cycle, restrictions on FoRB lead to social tensions and conflict, which in turn lead to even tighter restrictions on religion, which in turn exacerbate the social tensions even furtherand so on, in a negative feedback loop. Three key, underlying dynamics drive this negative cycle.  

First, repressing religion can exacerbate conflict between religious groups. Strict control or repression of religion tends to segregate the population, which can increase tension between religious groups and lead to inter-religious violence. Under religious repression, an opaque, rumor-based atmosphere emerges that poisons society, undermining interpersonal and community relationships. Where there is no trust, faith communities build rigid walls around themselves, hunker down in a defensive stance, and become more prone to conflict. 

Second, government repression and discrimination that is intended to weaken and pacify a religious group often completely backfires—that is, the group grows stronger and becomes radicalized against the state. Over time, victimized religious minorities become so embittered and aggrieved that they are driven to militancy. They sacralize the conflict and their victimhood and sometimes turn to extreme means of resistance, such as terrorism. Repression can breed apocalyptic speculation and a cult of blood and martyrdom among the persecuted. Complicating this radicalization dynamic still further is the fact that some members of a persecuted group will flee the country and then proceed to support violent resistance from a position of diaspora. 

Third, a dimension of the security dynamic that is too often overlooked is that government favoritism of the majority faith is part of the problem, too. Favoritism contributes to some members of the majority faith becoming radicalized and violent. Sometimes, their violence is directed at religious minorities, but other times, it is directed at the state itself, even though the state is already favoring the majority faith. Why? Because once the radicalization dynamic sets in, the state can never be “pure” enough. No matter what the state does to appease religious radicals, there will always be puritanical critics calling for more. In the academic literature, this is referred to as religious outbidding—in other words, radicals can always “outbid” the state in a theocratic competition. Government favoritism breeds feelings of entitlement, habits of scapegoating minorities, and an environment of impunity that emboldens radicals to commit acts of vigilante violence. In fact, scholars of terrorism have documented empirically how government favoritism of a majority faith is a predictor of “majoritarian terrorism,” meaning terrorism carried out by members of the majority faith.  

That’s the bad news. The good news is that there is also a positive cycle between FoRB and sustainable security. Three key dynamics underlie this positive cycle. 

First, when a state protects FoRB it can foster feelings of gratitude and loyalty to the state among the populace. This is because religious identities and values are not trivial matters. For people of faith, religion is not a mere aesthetic preference or consumer choice. The individual’s religious conscience is basic to human nature. As Kevin J. Hasson has observed, “A state that accommodates the religious aspirations of its citizenry promotes stability and security for a very simple reason: such a state accurately recognizes who its citizens are.” 

Second, a sustainable religious freedom environment fosters trust, mutual understanding, and collaboration between different religious communities. When all religious groups feel free to live out their beliefs and traditions and that their presence in society is not merely tolerated in a tentative or grudging way but genuinely respected, they will feel confident in embracing covenantal pluralism.1 They will be more likely to develop cross-cultural religious literacy and lines of communication and collaboration with other religious groups. Multi-faith networks of trust and solidarity also build resiliency in society in times of crisis. Instead of pointing fingers and spreading conspiracy theories when a crisis hits, religious groups rally to each other’s aid and defense. 

Finally, a sustainable religious freedom environment yields many practical benefits to civil society and the economy. In an environment of freedom and fairness for all, religious groups feel empowered and liberated to contribute to their societies in innumerable ways. Research shows that, under the right conditions, religion positively influences volunteerism, charitable giving, education, social services, civic leadership skills, and economic productivity and growth.  

In short, when it comes to sustainable security, there is a positive case for FoRB—that is, FoRB is in the enlightened self-interest of religion, society, and state alike.  

 

About the Author:

Dennis R. Hoover (D.Phil. Politics, University of Oxford) is a Senior Fellow at Love Your Neighbor Community (LYNC). He is also Editor in Chief of The Review of Faith & International Affairs and a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement (IGE). His recent books include Exploring Religious Diversity and Covenantal Pluralism in Asia, Volumes I and II (2023), and The Routledge Handbook of Religious Literacy, Pluralism, and Global Engagement (2022), co-edited with Chris Seiple.

Watch Dennis explain the "Grand Bargain" of Religious Freedom and Religious Responsibility on LYNC INTERVIEW

1 Covenantal Pluralism is a philosophical, practical, and positive engagement frame with three enabling conditions: freedom of religion/belief, character development, and engagement. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15570274.2020.1835029

Join in on the conversation