THE CONCEPT OF FUNDAMENTALISM #1

Anthony Giddens (Sociology, 2001) has defined fundamentalism in sociological perspective: It is belief in returning to the literal meanings of scriptural texts. 

Fundamentalism may arise as a response to modernization and insisting on faith-based answers, and defending tradition by using traditional grounds.

Fundamentalism, thus, has its roots in traditional, historical prejudices and modernity. It looks at postmodernity with enmity. Postmodernity is against authority of traditions and modernity. Before the advent of modernity, there was also fundamentalism But, it was, in the Indian context, interpreted by the colonial and feudal rule. The fundamentalists today mobilize themselves on the rules of rationality and bureaucracy. This has given rise to new strength in them. There is relationship between fundamentalism and postmodernity. The postmodernity has cried aloud against grand narratives. The universalizing theories tried to establish the authoritarian generalizations on the society. This was rejected The postmodernity also rejected modernity in the west. In India, however, it did not happen. Here, in our situation, modernity was dominated by high-castes, elites and affluent groups. The authority of these groups continued to survive. And, they exercised their influence and authority. Fundamentalism attacks postmodernity as it is against authoritarian domination.

Despite the claims of postmodernists that there is weakening of grand narratives, the facts are otherwise. Fundamentalism is a grand narrative. It has its various dimensions. There is religious fundamentalism, market fundamentalism, political fundamentalism, and development fundamentalism. Fundamentalism takes the shape of terrorism. In most of the cases, fundamentals are also terrorists.

Postmodernists deny authoritarian dominance; contrariwise the fundamentalists and terrorists show all faith in commitment to authority. The postmodernists are skeptic everything. The fundamentalists do not argue, they are committed to faith. Stuart Sim (Postmodernism, 2005) says, Institutional authority is once again accepted unquestionably, obliged blindly, and allowed to direct the individual’s life in the name of a larger cause. Faith, rather than reason or skepticism, becomes the basis of the cultural process (emphasis added). In its more extreme form – as with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan – Islamic fundamentalism is effectively a return to a pre-modern society, where almost all the modern world is rejected (with the significant exception of its weaponry).

Fundamentalism is a movement of the authoritarian-minded people. It gives them safety and security in an individual believer. The postmodernity does not have any such assurance. Admittedly, both fundamentalism and postmodernity are cultural movements. But it is clear, there is a larger market for traditional system of beliefs. In India, traditions and cultural practices have a great role for the origin and growth of fundamentalism. 

The ethnic formations make coalition with fundamentalism and as a consequence of it the social order gets polluted. The social pollution gets severe when it links itself with politics. In fact, fundamentalism in India is politicized and has weakened our democracy too.

Posted in: Fundamentalism,Modernity,Postmodernity