Yes, this is exactly what could have happened in my own back yard if Sweden hadn't been the secularized, modern society that it is.
Or been under the threat of being colonized since its sovereignty had long been undermined by the instalation of what was percieved as a corrupt puppet government. This is oversimplifying of course , I can't claim to know a whole lot about the Middle East, but I'm sure the revolution didn't happen only because of religion. It happened because of a general unrest in the populace that was engendered by the political situation. People will do horrible things when they're afraid and desperate about the status quo.
So religion was used to back up a nationalist project. Through Islam, the reactionaries could posit a stark contrast between "indigineous traditions" (more often than not, a distorted version of them to make 'em extra national and clean out differences within, hello fascism) versus foreign (Western) traditions that they thought threatened them. Place a charismatic leader on top and its a heady combo. Think about it. Where have we seen this before?
In that, it's nothing new. Nationalist movements have always posited their own "indigenous traditions" against what is felt as the encroachment of outside culture and religion is always fertile ground in this. Think of the Japanese with Shinto and the Emperor-directly-descended-from-the-Goddess in WWII or how Indian nationalist movements went back to classical Hindu myths and heroes or how Chinese nationalists employed Confucian symbols. These I know a bit more about and obviously they are different, but the structure of nationalism is pretty similar around the world.
In one sense modernity has everything to do with it because it definitely marked who was to live in fear and who was not (as much as "modernity" is directly complicit with imperialism). Most of us don't live with that fear, so I think we fail to recognize its power. But it's there and it's an important tool when you want to excersize control over a population.
And the links between nationalist projects and gender have been discussed. It just turns into a big ol' mess as women too are placed within the nation-building project.
Me and TJ have views at the opposite ends of the spectrum, but I agree with her that it's about power. Not just Christianity, but whenever religion gets coopted as part of nation-building, it's more about what it
represents to a specific collective not what it
is to an individual.
At this scale, it's always about power.
alcyone
