The Struggle Against Religious Fanaticism

For the prospects of a lasting, peaceful society on a global scale, violent religious fanaticism can be likened to an infection. The infection will take root anywhere it finds conditions suitable, and if ignored it will grow and spread.

In the modern era, religious fanaticism has taken root in much of world. In many places governments have created an environment where the infection of fanaticism can prosper. A country run by a dictatorial regime with no separation of church and state is like a flesh wound to this infection. Once religious fanaticism appears, it can use the church-controlled government to gain power while it simultaneously uses the poor and disenfranchised left behind to populate it's ranks as foot-soldiers. (Ironically, fanatical dictators, can actually gain power by managing their countries poorly. The more poor and the more destitute the population, the more likely they are to turn to the comfort of religion for support.) Like an infection, the religious fanaticism grows on itself, spawning more fanaticism everywhere conditions are favorable. Similarly, religious fanaticism can not be ignored. If left alone it will fester and eventually it will become deadly.

The Bush administration has attempted to deal with this infection in the most brutal manner possible. The administration has acted like a Neanderthal, stabbing at its own wounds in a futile attempt to cut away the infection. Every military offensive, every jab with a dull and rusty knife, only improves the conditions for fanaticism to spread. A country torn by war, grasps for something safe, something normal, something that they can believe in. A country torn by war finds religion. And in the power vacuum left by war, it is the most ruthless and manipulative of the population that rise to power. The Bush administration has found the perfect recipe for the creation of fanaticism. In the wake of the administrations attempts the only things that will remain undamaged are the fanatical dictatorships with waves of the poor and hopeless to follow their every decree.

So, where does that leave us? All we know is that violence is not the solution. War is too blunt of a tool for such a delicate problem. We must search for a new approach.

At the center of this new approach must be the identification and empowerment of the peaceful populations in countries where fanaticism has taken root. If supported and enlarged, these peaceful populations will act as a counterbalance to fanatical powers. We must acknowledge that religious fanaticism is not a natural nor universal state. External influences have lead some to fanaticism, but in no society do these fanatics make up the entire population. In fact, the populations of any given country are infected by fanaticism to a greater or lesser extent. The main concern must be ensuring that the peaceful populations are large enough to outweigh, both politically and socially, the fanatics.

In the Western World religious fanatics have become less influential, but to say that fanaticism does not exist is simply untrue. Fanaticism will always exist. But in a healthy society, the natural aversion to violence and the almost universal desire for peace will keep this infection from spreading. Economic prosperity, high levels of education and the honest belief in the separation of church and state, has kept the level of fanaticism in the west, for the most part, under control. There are occasions of violence, but the youth of the US are not lining up to bomb abortion clinics.

So, the solution is not to eliminate fanaticism entirely, for this is unrealistic even in today's most enlightened societies. The solution is to marginalize the fanatics and to eliminate the poverty and social unrest from which they draw their numbers. To return to the analogy, we must ensure that a society's immune system is strong enough to combat and contain the infection of fanaticism when it appears.

Where fanaticism has not yet taken root we must attempt to improve social and economic conditions so it never can. In the case of the Middle East, where fanaticism is already a serious problem, we must use social and economic policy rather than military might to change the state of things. Whenever and wherever possible we must support the specific commerce and trade that has the potential to help the general population. At the same time we must avoid the commerce and trade that puts power and money into the pockets of the fanatics. We must provide support, political and economic, for education, freedom of the press, and abatement of poverty. We must find those in the population who agree with the ideals of peace and freedom, and provide for them as much political backing as possible.

The western world is in conflict with the idea of religious fanaticism, not with a single people nor a specific country. We are in conflict with the idea that violence towards the western world is some sort of religious imperative. We must combat this idea in the minds of the populations that are likely to use the idea against us. We must discredit the idea and provide the alternative of peaceful interaction and mutual benefit. We must convince the populations that no conflict is necessary.

Our influence will obviously be limited and the process will be a slow one. But this is the only process that will eventually and finally wrest power from the fanatics. If we are able to subtly change the political conditions where fanaticism breeds, we may be able to stop its spread for good.