Are Religious Minorities More Militant than other Ethnic Minorities?
Are Religious Minorities More Militant than other Ethnic Minorities?
复制标题
宗教少数群体比其他少数民族更激进吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Fox
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Fox
自伊朗革命以来，特别是自黄金战争结束以来，宗教已经与好战联系在一起。许多人认为不同宗教群体之间的冲突更为激烈。同样，卷入冲突的宗教团体被认为更好战。助长这种看法的种族冲突包括巴以冲突，车臣、苏丹、塞浦路斯、印度和印度尼西亚的种族叛乱，以及黎巴嫩、阿富汗和前南斯拉夫的内战。原教旨主义运动，特别是伊斯兰运动，也助长了这种看法。本文使用来自少数民族风险数据集（MAR）的数据，以及独立收集的数据，以确定这种看法是否正确的种族冲突。也就是说，这篇文章问：民族宗教少数群体真的比其他少数民族更好战吗？这个问题分为两部分：第一，宗教差异本身是否足以使一个种族宗教少数群体更加好战？第二，具有宗教色彩的冲突是否会助长少数民族的好战性？这两个问题突出了宗教如何可能影响冲突的一个重要区别。所涉群体是否属于不同的宗教本身可能就足够了;或者冲突可能必须涉及宗教问题。文献中有支持这两种论点的趋势，尽管本研究的结果仅支持后者。本研究的目的不是建立一个宗教对战斗性影响的完整模型，而是找到这两个问题的答案：建立和测试一个模型超出了一篇文章所能完成的范围。(1)此外，以前没有研究使用相同的控制，比较这两个潜在的宗教影响冲突的影响。因此，这项研究可以澄清宗教对冲突的影响的一个基本和重要的方面：什么类型和水平的宗教参与是必要的影响，冲突？本研究的实证部分侧重于MAR数据所描述的种族冲突。因此，种族冲突意味着政治上活跃的少数民族与另一个民族控制的国家政府之间的政治紧张关系，或多个民族之间为控制国家而进行的政治竞争。虽然这种冲突往往是暴力的，但情况并非总是如此，冲突可能发生在政治竞技场内。本研究实证部分用于衡量战斗力的变量是一个民族的积极叛乱。(2)然而，本研究的理论部分借鉴了更广泛的文献，其中大部分并不侧重于种族冲突。因此，冲突和战斗性的概念在理论部分得到了更广泛的处理，以便连贯地讨论与本研究相关的各种文献。宗教差异还是不同的宗教信仰？在大多数情况下，关于宗教与冲突的文献并不直接涉及少数民族与多数群体不同的宗教是否足以导致战斗性的增加-也就是说，另一方面，宗教问题在冲突中的存在是否是必要的。然而，文献确实间接地解决了这个问题。有两种趋势：一种认为，信仰不同的宗教就足够了;另一种认为，冲突必须有某种特别的宗教因素。也许那些暗示不同宗教信仰足以导致战斗性增加的人中最突出的是亨廷顿。(3)他的“文明冲突”理论认为，在后冷战时代，大多数冲突将发生在他称之为文明的主要文化群体之间。在实践中，这些文明主要是沿着宗教路线定义的。在他的八种文明中，除了一种之外，其他所有文明都在定义中具体提到了宗教。…
Since the Iranian Revolution and especially since the end of the Gold War, religion has come to be associated with militancy. Conflicts between groups of different religions are perceived by many as more intense. Similarly, religious groups involved in conflict are perceived as more militant. Ethnic conflicts that have fueled this perception include the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the ethnic rebellions in Chechnya, Sudan, Cyprus, India, and Indonesia and the civil wars in Lebanon, Afghanistan, and the former Yugoslavia. Fundamentalist movements, especially Islamic movements, have also contributed to this perception. This article uses data from the Minorities at Risk dataset (MAR), as well as data collected independently, to ascertain whether this perception is correct for ethnic conflicts. That is, the article asks: are ethnoreligious minorities really more militant than other ethnic minorities? The question is broken into two parts: First, are religious differences alone enough to make an ethnoreligious minority more militant? Second, does the fact that a conflict has religious overtones contribute to the militancy of an ethnic minority? These two questions highlight an important distinction in how religion can potentially influence a conflict. Whether the groups involved belong to different religions may, by itself, be enough; or it may be necessary that the conflict involve religious issues. There are trends within the literature that support both of these arguments, though only the latter is supported by the results of this study. Rather than develop a full model of the influence of religion on militancy, the goal of this study is to find an answer to those two questions: To develop and test a model is beyond what could be accomplished in an article. (1) Furthermore, no previous study using the same controls, compares the impact of these two potential religious influences on conflict. Thus, this study can clarify a basic and important aspect of the influence of religion on conflict: What type and level of religious involvement is necessary to influence that conflict? The empirical portion of this study focuses on ethnic conflict as depicted by the MAR data. Thus, ethnic conflict means political tensions between a politically active ethnic minority and a state government controlled by another ethnic group or political competition between multiple ethnic groups for control of a state. While such conflict is often violent, this is not always the case, and conflicts can take place within the political arena. The variable used for militancy in the empirical portion of this study is active rebellion by an ethnic group. (2) However, the theoretical portion of this study draws on a much broader literature, much of which does not focus on ethnic conflict. Consequently, the concepts of conflict and militancy are treated more broadly in the theoretical section in order to discuss the diverse literature relevant to this study coherently. Religious Differences or Different Religions? For the most part, the literature on religion and conflict does not directly address whether an ethnic minority's being of a different religion than the majority group is enough to cause increased militancy--that is, whether, on the other hand, the presence of religious issues in the conflict is necessary. However, the literature does indirectly address this question. There are two trends: one posits that being of different religions is enough; the other posits that the conflict must have some particularly religious element. Perhaps the most prominent of those who imply that being of different religions is enough to cause increased militancy is Huntington. (3) His "clash of civilizations" theory posits that, in the post--Cold War era, most conflict will be between major cultural groupings that he calls civilizations. In practice, these civilizations are defined mostly along religious lines. Of his eight civilizations, all but one include specific mention of religion in their definitions. …