Citation

Oommen TK. Sociol. Relig. 1994; 55(4): 455-472.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1994, Association for the Sociology of Religion)

DOI

10.2307/3711982

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

It is argued in this article that religious nationalism and democracy are antithetical in their orientation. There are several reasons for this. First, nationhood based on religion assumes a necessary conterminality between religion and territory. While in the case of proselytizing religions (e.g., Buddhism, Christianity and Islam) such an assumption is patently contradictory, even in the case of nonproselytizing religions (e.g., Hinduism, Judaism) religion-territory linkages are often blurred through conquest, colonization, and migration. Second, once territorialization becomes the domain assumption of a religion, a process of homogenization of the culture of the territory and the consequent hegemonization by the dominant religious collectivity often becomes its necessary ideological tenet. Third, this ideology calls for the praxis of "communalization" of politics and "relativization" of culture, all of which have disastrous consequences for a democratic polity. The argument is pursued with special reference to India.