Religion and Politics in America: The Rise of Christian Evangelists and Their Impact

This book by Muhammad Arif Zakaullah was published and released by Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultations (Beirut-Lebanon) in February 2007. It discusses the dimensions and interactions of both, religion and politics, in the United States of America (USA), and more specifically the strong influential role of Christian Evangelists in determining the US policies. Though the subject was previously explored by several writers, this book is special in analyzing the historical background and the roots of Christian Evangelism, all the way till their present status and power. Remarkably, the author presents "in perfect doses" a blend of ideology and events, past and present (updated till late 2006), all tied up in a well organized concise approach.

Zakaullah produced a highly academic, documented and objective study. Being a Muslim, he managed to present his study from a different perspective, trying to establish a better understanding of the policy-making process in the USA in the Muslim world, and calling for a constructive inter-civilizational dialogue.

The author starts with a look on the current situation between America and the Muslim World, which “has been exploited by extremists in both camps endangering world peace in the first decade of the 21st century.”

Then he justifies the major reasons behind his research:

“The peace loving majorities in both the West and the Muslim world want to know the causes of this problem to resolve it. The hawks in the West have developed a number of approaches (e.g. Islamophobia, clash of civilizations, etc.) to explain this situation to their people and the world at large. These approaches put the entire blame on Muslims and Islam. On the other hand in the Muslim world it is the other way around as all the explanatory models put the entire blame on the west and Israel. This blame game has been going on for quite some time leading to actions by each side that, instead of solving problems, have caused further deteriorated of the situation. This reality calls for a different approach. The Muslim world has to learn to appreciate that in Western societies the bottom line is the public opinion and not the wishes of the President/Prime Minister and his cabinet.”

All through the book, Zakaullah discusses the rise of Christian Evangelists within “this democratic context” and the various challenges they faced and dealt with.

In its first chapter, the book presents the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections as a clear example of the democratic political system in the USA, and that public opinion does play the major part in shaping the US policies. The book then proceeds with a brief historical background of Christianity in America. In there, key teachings of Martin Luther and John Calvin are presented, as well as a brief survey of the various political, economic and social factors that set off many Christians from Europe to the “New World”, during the 15th and 16th century. The early American society thus had a conservative protestant majority. Here again, Zakaullah discusses key social and economic issues that led to another change in the characteristics of the American Society, this time towards “contemporary Christian Fundamentalism” causing conservatives to become a minority.

This “contemporary Christian Fundamentalism” movement was then engaged in intellectual, educational and organizational fronts, in which it relied heavily on media. Nonetheless, it maintained its “non-involvement in politics” policy.

While the early chapters focus on the rise of Christian evangelism (fundamentalism) in the ideological and social context, chapters five and six discuss the circumstances that led them into politics. It was the era that followed Watergate Scandal and the 1976 presidential elections that paved the way for the Christian Fundamentalism (and later Christian Evangelism) towards political power. Jimmy Carter won the 1976 presidential elections with a vast support from evangelists. Though he didn’t stick to his “evangelist agenda”, his victory reflected a great deal of power and influence for Evangelists within the American public.

The latter was noticed and employed by the Republican Party, whose focus used to be primarily on a conservative economic agenda. In Zakaullah’s words, “the Marriage of Economic and Christian Fundamentalisms” took place and led to “A ‘Born Again’ Republican Party” whose major challenge was “winning the coming 1980 presidential elections.”

Here again, Zakaullah genuinely goes through the 1980’s presidential elections campaign to illustrate the rise of Christian Evangelists. “They realized that in order to unite right wingers of all shades and colors, this agenda would have to encompass economics, morality and pro-family issues as well as being anti-homosexual and anti-abortion. The party strategists knew that they already had the expertise, manpower and networks to promote the pro-market economic agenda but they were also aware that they had neither the expertise, the organization, the networks, nor the volunteers to articulate and sell effectively the pro-family evangelical agenda among the voters. The only way they could succeed was to unite all the fundamentalists across all the religions and denominations.”

Reagan did win the 1980’s presidential elections. He was then succeeded by George Bush (sr.). The Republicans realized that “president is not enough because it was the Congress and the bills that make policies” and they even succeeded in having a majority in both houses.

In its last part, the book discusses the rise of “Christian terror in the ideological war” and even some Christian terrorist organizations, the most dangerous of which is the “Army of God” organization. Such movements were justified by the fact that “16 years wait under these presidents (1976-1999) did not deliver the goods the frustrations started running high and many radical fundamentalists lost all hope” according to the book.

The author then goes briefly past issues like Millennialism, G.W. Bush presidency, to discuss more in depth the current views of the Muslim world regarding America and American Politics. The Muslim world perceives the American foreign policies as a result of external factors, pro-Israeli, biased against Muslims, disregarding the power of the American public opinion in shaping these policies. The only internal factor that they might consider, if any, would be the Jewish lobby inside the USA. No serious efforts were made into understanding the dynamics behind this lobby’s influence, that is the actually, the power of American public opinion in policy-making.

The Author then concludes with “The Need for a New Intellectual Culture in The Muslim Academia and Beyond”, what he calls: “A Wakeup Call”:

“The Muslim world has to learn to appreciate that in Western societies the bottom line is the public opinion and not the wishes of the President/Prime Minister and his cabinet. Muslim intellectuals, media and policy makers should be engaged in the exercise of understanding the way Western societies work. They should interact with the Western public opinion in a constructive way. This would in turn result in a genuine, meaningful and effective inter-civilizational dialogue on issues of mutual concern.”

This, according to Zakaullah, “would cause even the long standing divisive issues would have a much more conducive environment for a peaceful and mutually beneficial conflict resolution.”

The author, Muhammad Arif Zakaullah is an Associate Professor at the Department of Economics in the International Islamic University, Malaysia. His ongoing research focus is the contemporary political economy of the United States. He is also the author of: The Cross and the Crescent: The Rise of American Evangelicalism and the Future of Muslims (Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press, 2004). Being only 160 small pages, the book is strongly recommended for those who would like to have an updated “eye bird’s view”, that is yet comprehensive and worthy, of religion and politics in America.

Akbar S. Ahmed’s Toward Islamic Anthropology

Introduction

Dr. Akbar S. Ahmed is a well-trained British social anthropologist. Originally from Pakistan, he received his PhD from one of the universities in United Kingdom. He holds many government positions such as Director General, National Center for Rural Development and Director, Center of Social Sciences and Humanities, University Grants Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan. He is also active in writing articles and books in which many of his works were published in renounce journals. Some of his works are, among others, Muslim Society: Readings in Thought and Structure; Religion and Politics in Muslim Society: Order and Conflict in Pakistan; The Social Structure and Organization of Early Muslim Society and Islamic Tribes and European Administrators: Readings in the Colonial Encounter.

In responding to the call of Islamization of Knowledge, Akbar Ahmed has written a book entitled Toward Islamic Anthropology: Definition, Dogma and Directions. In this book, he has discussed extensively the subject of anthropology from Islamic standpoints. This can be considered as a good exploratory study of Islamic anthropology since Akbar has pointed out several main issues discussed in both, Western and Islamic anthropology. Although his discussion on Western anthropology is largely depending on British social anthropology, still it reflects and gives a basic idea of anthropology and this pave the way to Islamization of anthropology.

Rationale for Islamization
Akbar S. Ahmed has pointed out that the very reason for Islamization of anthropology is the attacks done by the orientalist anthropologists toward Muslim societies and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

The orientalists have neither tired nor surrendered. In a book written by Crone and Cook in 1980 entitled Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World, the authors have attacked the very core of Islam. They argued that the prophethood of Islam belonged to Caliph ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was sent to preach the coming of Hazrat ‘Umar but decided to appropriate the role for himself. Further, they also compare the Prophet’s age as one of violence and barbarism to theirs of gentleness and peace. In refuting such allegation, Akbar Ahmed asserts that although contemporary Western society are presumed to be a civilized nation, nonetheless it is the members of the so-called civilized nation who have made this century alone plunged the entire world into wars that lasted for years at a cost of millions of lives. On the other hand, when Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) reconquered Mecca, he forgave all those who wished to live in peace. A general amnesty was declared and a part from few criminals, no one was killed. The conquest of Mecca involved the death of less than thirty people in combat. Meanwhile, during the Prophet’s entire military career and campaign, only a bout a thousand men, Muslims and non-Muslims, died (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 52). Akbar Ahmed also expresses his disappointment toward the unprofessional approach adopted by the Western orientalist anthropologists. He writes:

Professor Barth spent most of his professional life writing and lecturing about Muslim groups. I am not objecting to his ideas about those groups. He is perfectly entitled to his views. I do object to the arrogance implied by those views. And my objection raises sadness in me rather than indignation. Sadness because my discipline, anthropology, is belittled. It is reduced to parody and weak shadow of orientalism. Edward Said would be roused to say that this is vintage “Orientalism” (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 54).

It is due to the Western orientalist anthropologists’ attacks that have prompted Akbar Ahmed to develop and construct a new kind of anthropology, which is purely based on Islamic paradigms and worldviews. He writes:

When the authors of Hagarism attack Prophet Muhammad and the very foundation of Islam or, less seriously, Western anthropologists equate entire Muslim societies to the mafia, ought Muslims to bury their heads in the sand and pretend they do not hear these voices? Should they simply reject the Western, or non-Muslim, scholarship by banning its entry into their countries? If so, do they build an intellectual iron curtain around their societies? Or ought they to assess, argue, synthesize and then prepare and reply in terms of an “Islamic Anthropology”? The aim of this paper is to illuminate the above questions (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 55).

It would appear that nowadays that anthropology is a creation of the West. This is not so. If anthropology is a science based on extended participant observation of cultures using the data collected for value-neutral and unbiased analysis employing comparative method, then according to Akbar Ahmed, al-Biruni is indeed an anthropologist of the highest contemporary standards. Or perhaps he deserved the title of the “first anthropologist”. Therefore, almost a thousand year before Malinowski[1] and Geertz[2], al-Biruni was establishing the science of anthropology. For that reason, the scientific study of man and society, Islamic anthropology, is not new. Thus, Akbar Ahmed defines Islamic anthropology loosely as the study of Muslim groups by scholars committed to the universalistic principles of Islam – humanity, knowledge, tolerance – relating micro village tribal studies in particular to the larger historical and ideological frames of Islam. Islam is here understood not as theology but sociology (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 56).

Methodology
Akbar Ahmed has outlined some methodologies in constructing Islamic anthropology. He firstly delineates that the worldview of the Muslim anthropologists should be based on al-Quran and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. As he describes that “in the ideal, the Muslim orders his life according to the will of God. In actuality this may not be so. Does he see society as motivated by the desire to perform the will of God or not? If so, the Muslim must strive to bring the actual into accord with the ideal” (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 57). He further suggests that in order to deal with Muslim societies, Muslim anthropologists should utilize a methodological holists framework when analyzing a Muslim social actor. The holists view man as motivated by configurations of economy and society which transcend the individual. This is in line with the Islamic ideal that an individual Muslim belongs in part to his immediate group and in part to the larger ummah. Certain religious injunctions have become the subject of caricature and satire among the Western people. For instance, Muslims are commonly known for their prohibition of eating pork as it is not considered halal or pure. In responding to such issue, Akbar suggests that Muslims have to be eclectic. He contends that through eclecticism, Muslims should choose what Shariati calls as the “right path” (Ali Shariati, 1979: 94). Akbar also disagree with some Muslim and Western anthropologists that there are many Islam[3]. He writes:

There is only one Islam and there can be only one Islam but there are many Muslim societies. We must then not look for numerous “Islams” but we must attempt to place the multitude of Muslim societies within the framework of one universal Islam (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 58).

In the end, Akbar Ahmed has given several recommendations in illuminating his Islamic anthropology. These recommendations are:
1) A simple, lucid sociological account of the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) be prepared by a Muslim. The book should address wide audience, both Muslims and non-Muslims, and neither is too academic nor too obscure.
2) One major standard anthropological text book of high standard should be produced and then translated into major languages of the Muslim world. It should be used at the BA level and include sections on each major cultural zone.
3) Anthropological monographs on each major Islamic region are produced for distribution in the Muslim world. Initially, Morocco for Maghrib, Pakistan for South Asia and Indonesia for Southeast Asia as distinct cultural-geographical types may be selected. These monographs should be simple, lucid with attractive photographs and used in colleges and universities.
4) Visits of Muslim anthropologists within Muslim countries should be arranged and encouraged and joint projects initiated.
5) Long-term studies should be conducted comparing the major social categories which would help us better understand and reach conclusions regarding Muslim society and its immediate contemporary problems.
6) Practical and development-oriented social studies should be framed in order to enable us to better plan for Muslim society in the twentieth century.
7) Ethnographic and anthropological content from the writings of the great Muslim writers is extracted and compiled in a discrete set of volumes. In this exercise classic Islamic scholars will have to assist the anthropologist (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 67).

Assessment
After Akbar Ahmed presented his idea on Islamization of anthropology, some Muslim, as well as non-Muslim, anthropologists have responded to it. They have reviewed and given some evaluations on the work.

Akbar Ahmed starts his book with a chapter on contemporary Anthropology. He defines Anthropology as what the Western anthropologists define it; a systematic study of man. He further argues that Anthropology enables us to understand ourselves through understanding other cultures. However, generally speaking, within the discipline of Anthropology there are two main categories namely social anthropology and cultural anthropology. In this study, however, Akbar Ahmed has confined himself only into social anthropology and neglecting cultural anthropology for the most of time. This is clearly proven when he discusses major theoretical frames in Western Anthropology. According to the author, the main focus of inquiry in Western anthropology, among others, are social structure, kinship and political organization, beliefs, magic and religion, economic and processes of social change. These themes are synonymously associated with social anthropology. By focusing only on social anthropology, the discussion on Western anthropology has lost one dimension since cultural anthropology, undeniably, has a significant place in the contemporary anthropology.

Akbar Ahmed is critical in analyzing major theories in the Western anthropology. Most of Western anthropologists especially social anthropologists i.e. Radcliffe-Brown, assert that a society is something very like an organism. However, it has become clear that this “holistic” approach to understand society cannot be translated into actual research. The author contends that society is not something given in experience; rather it is an intellectual construct or model, built up on the basis of experience. Besides, society is a way of ordering experience, a working and for certain purposes, indispensable hypothesis.

The author also gives considerable consideration when discussing on the orientalist anthropologist. It is due to the orientalist anthropologist’s attacks on the Muslim’s societies and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that have compelled the author to develop Islamic Anthropology. Thus, he defines Islamic anthropology loosely as the study of Muslim groups by scholars committed to the universalistic principles of Islam – humanity, knowledge and tolerance – relating micro village tribal studies in particular to the larger historical and ideological frames of Islam. Islam is here understood not as theology but sociology. Nevertheless, this can be considered as a microscopic definition of Islamic anthropology. Or perhaps this is the best definition for the “Anthropology of Muslim Societies”.

The content part is no different from anthropology of Islam which is applying anthropological methods to the study of Muslim communities. But the unique and loose twist here is that the anthropologist submits to a set of principles that are assumed to be universal but left undefined. The main signifier is a commitment to ‘universalistic principles of Islam’, which the author clearly sees as compatible with humanity, knowledge and tolerance. But from where does Ahmad derive these principles if not from theology, from an interpretation of Quran and Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)? Surely there can be principles of humanity, knowledge and tolerance outside Islamic perspective.

Akbar Ahmed tries to present a model on the development of Muslim societies. However, it is very sad that he begins the model with tribal segmentary Islam, which he claims to be associated with early Islam. It is undeniable that the Arab society before the coming of Islam was characterized with tribalism and tribal communities. However, with the advent of Islam, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was sent to establish a society, which was not based on tribal relationship, rather religion became the basis of the society. It was known as ummah and it transcended tribal loyalties.

Akbar Ahmed’s call for an Islamic anthropology is problematic since from the beginning. He contends that “this study is speculative and concerns a difficult and complex subject. Its task is made more difficult as it defends a metaphysical position, advances an ideological argument and serves a moral cause” (Akbar S. Ahmed, 1986: 13). In spite of this, Daniel Martin Varisco has rejected this idea. He argues:

Anthropology as a scientific discipline, despite all its faults, is in no sense a defense of any particular metaphysical position especially a religion claiming to be the sole legitimate revelation for humanity. If the Muslim anthropologist finds a discrepancy between his belief and the results of anthropological analysis, he must in Ahmed’s scheme side with his belief. To do otherwise is to admit that his faith is subservient to the mundane human quest for knowledge. To think that he can under all circumstances remain a devout Muslim and at the same time pursue an objective and empirical investigation of Muslim society as an anthropologist is naïve, at best (Daniel Martin Varisco, 2005: 132).

Akbar Ahmed tries to adopt al-Faruqi’s approach in Islamizing Anthropology: critical examination of both Western Anthropology and contributions of Muslim anthropologists. He believes that some of the results of modern Anthropology can be benefited in the discussion, while some of the contributions of Muslim anthropologists are not necessarily Islamic. However, it is clear from the book that Akbar Ahmed is less critical in scrutinizing contributions made by the previous Muslim anthropologists.

The failure of Akbar Ahmed to articulate a distinctive Islamic anthropology does not mean that either Islam or anthropology is deficient. The problem stems from combining two different, yet interrelated, approaches to making sense of the world. Different does not mean opposing. Ahmed is right to point out that anthropology helps us understand ourselves by understanding other societies, but he idealizes the discipline by claiming that it realistically fosters appreciation for the oneness of humanity. The awareness of oneness and the ability to better appreciate others need not depend on ethnographic research. As Varisco concluded in his review of Ahmed’s Islamic anthropology:

The anthropologist provides information through study of human cultures but interpretation of the humanitarian or spiritual implications if such observation transcends academic discipline. The anthropologist always operates within a worldview whether that is secular or religious, conservative or liberal. But worldviews are not easily boxed up in real time. There will always be a point, as Evans-Pritchard knew so well, when anthropology gives way to theology even philosophy. Ahmed’s faith-based anthropology leads to a philosophical point of no return (Daniel Martin Varisco, 2005: 134).


[1] A well-known British social anthropologist.
[2] An eminent American cultural anthropologist.
[3] For further discussion on this issue, refer to Eickelman, D.F. 1981. The Middle East: An Anthropological Approach. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc, El-Zein, A.H.M. 1974. The Sacred Meadows: A Structural Analysis of Religious Symbolism in an East African Town. Illinois: Northwestern University Press and El-Zein, A.H.M. 1977. “Beyond Ideology and Theology: The Search for the Anthropology of Islam”. Annual Reviews of Anthropology, 6: 227-254.

The Cross and the Crescent: The Rise of American Evangelism and the Future of Muslims

Religious fundamentalism has assumed global dimensions today, and many conflicts raging in different countries are informed by arguments of right-wing religious groups. A key player in global politics today is the American evangelical Christian lobby, now well-ensconced in the corridors of power in the United States. The American President George Bush is said to be an evangelical Christian, as are many of his advisors, and the evangelicals now play a crucial role in shaping American domestic as well as external policies.

This fascinating book provides a broad picture of the history and politics of American Christian fundamentalism, focusing, in particular, on its implications for Muslim countries. It begins with a general introduction to the beliefs and variety of American Christian fundamentalist groups, tracing their emergence from the early years of the twentieth century. Zakaullah sees this as, in part, a reaction to liberal trends in Christian thought, and to the challenges posed by scientific thinking and the growing secularization of society. It was, in addition, a response to growing waves of immigration from non-Protestant and non-white countries. Late nineteenth and early twentieth century American evangelists also saw themselves as crusading against what they regarded as growing immorality and licentiousness. In the face of these challenges to their faith, they propagated an extremely literalist understanding of the Bible. Their version of Christianity alone was true, they believed, and the world needed to be won over to it to be saved. There was no other path to salvation, they insisted, in true fundamentalist fashion.

Till the 1960s, Zakaullah writes, the evangelists stayed aloof from overt involvement in American politics, seeking to influence public opinion by establishing seminaries, universities, publishing houses, and radio and television stations. However, a chain of events soon forced them to change their tactics. Of particular importance in this regard was a series judgments of the American courts, including those related to de-segregation of schools, proscribing Christian instruction in state-funded schools, and legalizing abortion and gay rights, all of which the evangelists were fiercely opposed to. As defenders of white privilege and American global hegemony, the evangelists fervently supported the American government in its invasion of Vietnam, portraying American imperialism as Christian defence against godless communism. The time had now come, so the evangelists came to believe, to have their own man in the White House.

Zakaullah then goes on to trace the growing links between leading Christian fundamentalist leaders, including such big-wigs as the televangelists Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, and the American political establishment. He shows how they managed to infiltrate into the top corridors of power, despite the constitutional separation of religion and state, and how they have now come to exercise a crucial, if not dominant, influence in decision making in the White House. Zakaullah also discusses, although only in passing, the close nexus between leading evangelists and American capitalists and large media houses today.

The implications of the rise of American Christian fundamentalism are truly frightening, given the influence it commands in key sectors of American officialdom. American Christian fundamentalists, Zakaullah writes, are impelled by a militaristic theology rooted in the millenarian expectations of the Book of Revelations. Jesus, they believe, will soon be returning to the world, and his arrival will be accompanied by a global war between "true" Christians and "unbelievers". In the meantime, "true" Christians are expected to devote themselves to spread Christianity, for all other religions are said to be false or Satanic. Consequently, American evangelists are today fervent missionaries, and are active in promoting their brand of Christianity all over the world, including in many Muslim countries, often using aid as a bait and sometimes following in the footsteps of American soldiers, as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

American evangelists believe that Jesus is shortly to return to earth to establish his kingdom, in the course of which the Jews would gather in Palestine, where Jesus would establish his capital. This explains, Zakaullah tells us, the evangelists? unstinting support to Israel and its brutal suppression of the Palestinians, and their fervent backing of America's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and its 'war on terror'. Zakaullah quotes several leading American evangelists as describing Islam and Muslims in lurid colours and branding it as irredeemably 'anti-Christian'. Not surprisingly, he writes, they have been among the most fierce backers of America's imperialist misadventures that many Muslims, rightly or wrongly, see as directed against them. American imperialism is thus sought to be given a suitable "Christian" sanction, and is presented as working to usher in Jesus' triumphant return to the world. War and bloodshed on an unimaginable scale, not peace and reconciliation, American Christian fundamentalists seem to believe, will herald the eventual establishment of the Kingdom of God, the rule of pious Christians all over the globe.

Zakaullah thus rightly argues that American Christian evangelists pose a grave danger to global security, particularly now since they are closely linked to top American leaders. He, however, reminds his readers that the evangelists, although commanding massive support in America, do not speak for all Americans, or for all Christians for that matter. He appeals for Muslim intellectuals to seek to dialogue with American, including Christian, leaders and activists to promote better understanding between Christians and Muslims so as to avoid the 'clash of civilizations' from turning into a self-fulfilling prophecy. For this, he says, an urgent task is to critique the politics of fundamentalism among both Christians as well as Muslims, and evolve alternate ways of understanding religion and religious identity, rooted in a firm commitment to justice and respect religious pluralism.


Note: The book was written by Muhammad Ariff Zakaullah and published in 2004 by The Other Press.