Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2667:11 [2016/05/16 22:45] – [Key ideas for this week] Ryan Schram (admin)
+++ 2667:11 [2021/06/29 02:27] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ryan.schram@sydney.edu.au
- May 2016
+ May 2017
+Available at http://anthro.rschram.org/2667/11
@@ Line 20: / Line 22: @@
 Keane, Webb. 2009. “Freedom and Blasphemy: On Indonesian Press Bans and Danish Cartoons.” Public Culture 21 (1): 47–76. doi:10.1215/08992363–2008–021.
-## Other readings ##
+### Other readings ###
 Bellah, Robert N. 1967. “Civil Religion in America.” Daedalus 96 (1): 1–21. http://www.robertbellah.com/articles_5.htm.
@@ Line 36: / Line 38: @@
-## Key ideas for this week ##
+## A critique of liberalism ##
+* Western societies tell a story of themselves in which the present social order represents the emancipation of the individual and a recognition of the individual's natural rights.
+* In this story, history moves from traditional institutions which limit people's freedom to a new, rational order in which people can choose their own destiny.
+* According to Marx, a liberal state governs citizens as individuals, and hence denies that they are also necessarily part of actual communities.
+* This ideology disguises the alienation which makes liberal citizenship possible and thus serves the interests of the bourgeoisie.
+* Marx's critique of liberalism is, in that sense, an extension of our critique of Western secularism from last week.
+## Civil religion
+* The question of this week--//Do liberal societies need beliefs?//--can be read as asking whether a liberal society needs to give citizens a substitute for their communal religious identities.
+* Robert Bellah: "Civil religion"
+## Blasphemy
+* The question of this week can also be read as asking something else: f there is a risk of a liberalism becoming a civil religion, is there a way we can imagine a liberal society which is safe for all kinds of religion?
+* Should liberal societies prohibit blasphemy?
+## Why might blasphemy be threatening to society?
 * "Speech acts" according to J. L. Austin.
@@ Line 42: / Line 63: @@
   * locutionary, illocutionary, perlocutionary
 * Fighting words, hate speech, "trigger warnings."
-* Blasphemy, and blasphemy laws.
-* Should blasphemy be illegal? Why or why not?
+## Laws against blasphemy
-* Laws against proselytism around the world (Fox 2015: 193).
-* Semiotic ideology
+  *     Proselytising by all is illegal: Bhutan, Nepal, Greece.
+  *     Proselytising to members of the majority is illegal: Algeria, Morocco, Iraq*
+  *     Proselytising is restricted: Venezuela (indigenous), Oslo (against evangelical Christians).
+  *     Foreign visas denied to missionaries: China, Costa Rica, Kazakhstan, Denmark.
+  *     China only allows proselytising in recognized places of worship.
+  *     Malaysia sets very high restrictions on conversion from Islam.
+(see Fox 2015: 193).
+## Semiotic ideology
   * Like language ideology, or the indexicality of language, register, ritual, and style.
-  * More generally, an implicit cultural 'theory' of how communication works, and the connection between communicator, message and world.
+  * More generally, an implicit cultural 'theory' of how communication works, and the connection between communicator, code, message and world.
+Communicator--Message--Code--World
+## The Danish cartoon controversy and Terry Jones
 * Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartooons controversy, September 2005 to January 2006 (University Post Newsroom 2015).
 * Terry Jones and threatened Qu'ran burning, July to September 2010 (Derby 2010).
@@ Line 53: / Line 92: @@
   * Mahmood: assimilative versus representational ideologies of meaning. Is it that simple?
   * Another case of iconophilia? The [[http://rschram.org/2014/02/10/haus/|Zurenuoc affair]] in Papua New Guinea.
 ## References ##