Exploring the Nexus of Islam, Democracy, and Peaceful Collective Action

• In Event: Capturing Causal Complexity: Islam/ism and Democracy

Abstract

This study addresses the underexplored question of the extent to which Islam, as a body of faith, promotes or hinders open and peaceful contestation and collective mobilization against political elites. This research is part of a broader book project and aims to explain the complex divergence in Islamic perspectives on collective political action.

The role of Islamic discourse in mass mobilizations is multifaceted, as demonstrated through a discursive analysis of its utilization by different actors to shape and influence collective action. Authoritarian regimes and their allied non-state actors often employ Islamic discourse to discredit and undermine the legitimacy of collective actions, labeling protesters as extremists (or sometimes terrorists) in an effort to portray their actions as contrary to Islamic principles. Conversely, Islamic discourse has also been employed as a mobilization tool, with religious leaders and organizations playing a central role in organizing and galvanizing support for mass protests.

To study this puzzle further, I introduces a conceptual distinction between two primary forms of contestation in the context of Muslim-majority societies: Passive Contestation of Authority (PCA) and Active Contestation of Authority (ACA). PCA involves individual-level dissatisfaction with political authority that does not translate into collective action, driven by a desire for societal peace and stability. ACA, on the other hand, entails collective dissatisfaction prompting individuals to challenge ruling elites through confrontational protests carrying a high risk of prosecution, arrest, or intimidation.

I situate my analysis within Framing and the Political Process theories of collective action to explore the role of Islam in shaping open contestation and collective mobilization against political elites. Framing theory helps in understanding how Islamic discourse is strategically used by various actors to frame collective actions either as a violation or an embodiment of Islamic principles. This is evident in authoritarian regimes and their allies using Islamic narratives to delegitimize protests by labeling them as extreme, while opposition groups use the same discourse for mobilization and legitimization. Political Process theory, on the other hand, sheds light on the political and social structures that facilitate or hinder such mobilizations.

By examining PCA and ACA forms of contestation, the project aims to shed light on the dynamics and consequences of passive and active challenges to authority within the context of governance and societal change. The analysis utilizes mixed methods, incorporating archival, fieldwork, and survey data from 16 Muslim-majority countries. Specifically focusing on the attitudes of ordinary Muslims in these countries, the study explores the negotiation of tensions between faith and collective action in critiquing or mobilizing against incumbent regimes. This approach aligns with Framing theory in assessing how religious beliefs are framed in relation to political mobilization and with the Political Process theory in understanding the socio-political context influencing these actions.

This paper presents initial findings and insights from this ongoing investigation, offering a more nuanced understanding of religion and political mobilization within larger contentious politics literature.

Authors

• Dilshod Achilov, University of Massachusetts - Dartmouth

• Zhanbolat Khumarkhan, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University