Rise in Social Hostilities Involving Religion Around the World

The Pew Research Center has been tracking and measuring the regulation of religion around the world for almost two decades now, and earlier this month they released their latest update.

The headline is that from 2022 to 2023 there was a sizeable increase in social hostilities involving religion around the world (notice that there is a lag in the release of their data, which is why they are reporting on 2023). The full pdf report is here, but you can read the detailed summary here.

The report shows updates to their two indices: the Social Hostilities Index and the Government Restrictions Index. According to the former, the number of countries that were classified as having a "High" or "Very High" level of social hostilities increased from 45 (out of 198 countries) in 2022 to 55 in 2023. The median classification did not change, which means that the increase in hostility happened in countries that already have been having higher-than-average levels of social hostility.

You do not need to read the full report, but definitely read the entire detailed summary linked above. This will give you a brief but good introduction to the kinds of hostilities and regulations that religious people around the world face. Then, after reading the detailed summary, you can check out the full report if you are interested.

By the time you are done reading, you should:

• Understand the difference between the Social Hostilities Index (SHI) and the Government Restrictions Indices (GRI).
• Know the trends in both indices since 2007.
• Know of the types of regulation and hostilities that have been experienced in several countries.

Later in the course you will learn much more about how religious practice is hindered around the world.

Religious Minorities in Iran

The death of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, following the attacks by the U.S. and Israel has created profound uncertainty for the country's religious minorities. It also provides us in this class with a real-world case study in how government regulation shapes religious markets and the survival of minority religious groups.

Iran maintains a highly regulated religious market. Unlike the United States, where low barriers to entry allow diverse religious groups to compete freely, Iran maintains an official state religion with extreme government favoritism. The theocratic regime doesn't just prefer Shia Islam; it actively suppresses religious competitors through systematic persecution, property confiscation, and exclusion from education and employment.

This RNS article reveals the stark reality of this regulation and its effects on religious minorities. One of those groups are the followers of the Baha'i religion. Bahaʼis are systematically excluded from higher education and have their businesses shuttered, and crackdowns have intensified following the Israel-Iran conflict. These actions create a large barrier to entry for Baha'is because legal and social obstacles prevent religious entrepreneurs from starting new groups or minority religions from operating freely.

Yet, somehow, religious minorities can find ways to survive in such hostile regulatory environments. The article notes that Iran's religious minorities, particularly the 300,000 Bahaʼís, continue to exist despite decades of systematic oppression. This persistence relies in part on their ability to produce the club goods that comprise part of their religious communities. This includes the shared benefits of belonging—spiritual support, social networks, cultural identity—that create strong incentives for members to maintain their affiliation even when the costs are extremely high.

At the same time, economic theory also predicts that the intense regulation suppresses religious pluralism, and if the official state church fails to meet religious consumers' needs, then religious vitality can also decline. Indeed, the article notes growing secularization among Iran's Muslim majority, with surveys showing over 45% of respondents identifying as having no faith by 2020. This suggests that excessive religious regulation can backfire, reducing not just minority religions but overall religiosity in society.

As Iran faces this leadership transition, the fate of its religious minorities will depend largely on whether the new regime maintains the current highly regulated religious market or allows greater religious competition. For students of this class, Iran's situation demonstrates how government policies don't just shape political outcomes; they fundamentally determine whether diverse religious communities can survive and thrive.

(This article was written with the help of the Econ 17 ClassChat Chatbot.)

Minnesota High School Students and Religious Colleges

 The U.S. is well known for having a long tradition of religious freedom. However, religious freedom is a constantly negotiated concept. To see an example of this, consider the following that just happened in the state of Minnesota, which you can read about here.

High school students sometimes take college courses for credit, and in some states in the U.S., the state will reimburse the college for the cost of the high school student taking the class. This is a way for the state to encourage students to take college courses.

In 2023, a statute was passed in the state of Minnesota so that if a religious college required a student to submit a “faith statement,” then that college could no longer participate in this program. The argument for the statute was that the faith statement is a way for a college to unfairly discriminate against (non-religious) students who will not agree to abide by the values of the religious school. This statute shifted the incentives for high-school students in Minnesota, increasing the incentive to go to non-religious colleges by effectively removing the option to attend the religious colleges. Some parents sued the state, arguing that this statute violated their religious freedom, and a state judge ruled in these parents' favor last Friday, thus striking down the statute for now (the case will be appealed).

There are always some subtle legal matters in cases like this, and the key one here is the question of whether the law poses a burden on the free exercise of religion. The free exercise of religion is a constitutionally protected right in the U.S., and constitutional law has developed such that a law is only allowed to limit some form of religious activity if it does not impose too high a burden on the religious person and that the law applies generally so that it is not specifically targeting the religious person. The judge ruled in this case that the law did not meet these standards.

This development is a great example of how religious liberty is not always a clear-cut concept. Just what is allowed as religious behavior and what is not must be continually worked out by different individuals and organizations, often with a big role played by the legal system. This case also illustrates how individual incentives depend on the "rules of the game," because the statute influenced the behavior of high school students.

2024 USCIRF Annual Report

Just last week, the USCIRF released its 2024 Annual Report (full report in pdf here). You will learn more about the USCIRF later in the course when we study religious regulation, but for now you can get a sense of the significance of the report by reading the press release here.

The significance of the report is really in which countries are named as "Countries of Particular Concern" (CPCs), which are the countries that have the most severe religious freedom violations. This year there are 17 countries that were given the CPC designation. The list nearly identical to last year's list except one country has been removed and a different one added.

Download and browse the report. Pick out a country or two and read about the religious freedom violations in those countries to get a sense of how religion is being regulated in those countries. Appendix 2 has some tables and charts that also summarize some of the findings of the report.

Religion, Free Speech, and Hate Speech

When does saying something negative about a religious group constitute hate speech?

Well, you first have to define hate speech, and this is not as easy as you might think. The basic idea is that hate speech has two parts:

1. It is language that targets an individual or group based on an inherent characteristic (religion, gender, race, etc.).
2. It has some sort of aggression or even potential for harm or violence.

Part 1 seems obvious, but 2 is more difficult to pin down because it is not always clear if and when statements are harmful. Should saying something negative about a religious group constitute hate speech just because it is negative? Can't any sort of negative speech have the potential to promote aggression or violence even unintentionally? Note that there is actually no legal definition of hate speech under U.S. law, however it can be a criminal act to use speech or other expressions to incite criminal activity or threaten violence against a person or group.

This background helps us to contextualize the findings from a recent Pew Research Center survey about religious discrimination in the U.S. Americans report that there has been an increase in discrimination against both Muslims and Jews since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.

Check out the page, and especially examine the charts. There is a lot there, but you can focus on just the first findings reported which relate to the possibility of hate speech. The connection to hate speech is that there have been accusations of hate speech against supporters of both sides of the war.

Notice that there is not a perfect consensus among Americans about what types of speech should be allowed, but of course a consensus is hard to expect. There are, on the other, opinions that a majority of Americans hold.

First, 73% of American's say that speech that calls for violence against Muslims or against Jews should not be allowed. That is, a large majority of Americans believe that calls for violence should not be protected as free speech.

Second, there is a lower but still majority amount of support (about 60% give or take) for allowing speech that opposes Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state or that opposes a Palestinian state. This type of speech is more difficult to assess for Americans because it is negative and could be viewed as implying support for violence against Israel or Palestinians but does not necessarily have to be interpreted as implying support for violence.

Nonetheless, the survey results reveal that most Americans see a big difference between saying something that could be construed as potentially conflictual in nature (most Americans believe this should be allowed) and saying something that is explicitly violent (even more Americans believe this shouldn't be allowed).

This distinction can also help us understand the reasoning and intent behind religious hate crime laws that are meant to protect religious minorities. As we will discuss later in the quarter, the enactment of these laws can help to protect members of religious minorities from violence and therefore help to maintain or increase the religious diversity within a country.

USCIRF Religious Freedom Designations and the 2022 Annual Report

Last week the USCIRF issued a press statement about its designated Countries of Particular Concern.  The following twelve countries were given this designation:

• Burma
• China
• Cuba
• Eritrea
• Iran
• Nicaragua
• North Korea
• Pakistan
• Russia
• Saudi Arabia
• Tajikistan
• Turkmenistan

Check out the 2022 Annual Report (pdf) for information about religious freedom in these and other countries.  This report was published back in April 2022.

COVID-19 Restrictions on Religion Around the World

The Pew Research Center just published two days ago a report titled "How COVID-19 Restrictions Affected Religious Groups Around the World in 2020."  Read the entire summary page here, and if you want to learn more then check out the full report here (pdf).

Several main findings are reported.  For example, 23% of all countries had some sort of penalties for violation of COVID-19 restrictions on religious gathering, 27% of all countries had religious groups that spoke out against the COVID-19 restrictions, and religious groups in many countries were blamed for helping to spread COVID-19.  In other words, there were both government restrictions and social hostilities towards religious groups during the pandemic.  There were also many cases religious groups working with government officials to slow down the spread of COVID-19.

When the pandemic first started and restrictions on religious practice were being instituted here in the U.S., I wrote several posts that tracked the ongoing developments and debates.  So if you want to learn more about these developments, you can see the posts here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

USCIRF Report on State-favored Religions

Last week the USCIRF (which you will learn about on Homework 7) issued a report on state-favored religions.  Here's the press release, and here is the entire report (pdf).

Some of the key points include:

• 73% of the 78 countries that have an official or favored religion, also have policies or laws that led to repression or discrimination.
• Religious minorities and women are among the mostly likely victims of this repression and discrimination.

The report is only 8 pages, so read the entire report.  Ask yourself the following questions as you read:

• Of the 78 countries with an official or favored religion, in how many is Islam the favored religion?  What about Christianity?  What other religions may be favored?
• In what parts of the world are countries with favored religions located?  Where are the ones that have discriminatory laws and policies?  Where are the ones that do not have discriminatory policies?
• Do you see any patterns?
• What types of repression and discrimination occur?
• What is the connection between having a favored religion and having discriminatory laws and policies?
• Are non-religious persons also victims?  Why or why not?

Burkinis in the Public Swimming Pool

In June of this year, an administrative court in France upheld a ruling that women are not allowed to wear burkini swimwear in public swimming pools in the city of Grenoble.  The burkini is a head-to-ankle swimsuit that covers the woman's entire body except for her face.  Responding to vocal locals, city leaders had previously determined the burkinis would be allowed, but then a higher-ranking government official (the prefect) stopped this decision.  The administrative court upheld the prefect's decision that burkinis not be allowed.

See this article.  The primary direct effect of this ruling is that many Muslim women will no longer be swimming in the pool because they would only swim there if they could wear burkinis.

Some other French cities do allow burkinis in their public pools, so it might seem strange to not allow them in Grenoble's pools.  The court's reasoning behind not allowing them in Grenoble is not that burkinis should be prohibited in general but rather that the Grenoble city leaders whose decision -- later overturned -- to allow women to wear burkinis in public pools made their decision based in part of religious reasons, which violates a principle of separation of church and state.  Those cities that allow burkinis in public pools made their decisions to allow burkinis as part of general loosening of swimwear restrictions and not specifically to satisfy a particular religious demand.

The article does not make any prediction about what will happen next, however the ruling does seem to leave open a path for burkinis to be allowed in Grenoble in the future.  The key is for the burkini proponents to advocate for a more general loosening of swimwear restrictions rather than a specific burkini privilege.  Whatever happens, this case demonstrates the intricate interplay between religious persons and government officials that leads to the religious rules and regulations that we observe in the real world.

To Be a Jehovah's Witness in Russia

This article in the Associated Press provides a glimpse into what life is like for Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia.  Consider the following questions as you read this article:

• How have Jehovah's Witnesses been treated in Russia?
• What justification has the Russian government given for this type of treatment?
• What is distinctive about Jehovah's Witnesses teachings?
• In what other countries have Jehovah's Witnesses experienced persecution?
• How do many Jehovah's Witnesses respond to the persecution?

The Russia-Ukraine War and Religious Minorities

The title of this article in Religion & Politics asks an important question about the Russia-Ukraine war:  What does the Russian Invasion Mean for Religious Minorities in Ukraine?

Read the article to find out.  Here are some key questions for you to ask yourself as you read the article:

• What religious minorities currently exist in Ukraine?
• What types of challenges have religious minorities recently faced in Ukraine?
• What does the experience of religious minorities in Russia tell us about what the experience of religious minorities in Ukraine might be in regions of Ukraine that are taken over by Russia?
• Does the experience of what has happened in Crimea since Russia invaded in 2014 provide any clues?

These questions matter far beyond the scope of this class.  As the author states near the end of the article, "The protection of the rights of religious minorities is often the litmus test for democracy."  There is research to support this claim -- indeed the case of what has happened in Russia during the last two decades is itself evidence that religious protections are among the first to disappear when on a path that diverges from democracy.

The Russia-Ukraine War and Religion

Religion remains a significant part of national identity in many European countries, and this is true for both Russia and Ukraine.  Both have historical ties to the Eastern Orthodox Church, yet there have also been divisions.  Since the end of Soviet rule in 1991, religion and the official status of religious groups in both Russia and Ukraine have undergone significant changes and not without disagreement.

Three Orthodox churches have played the most significant roles in Ukraine, one of which has strong ties to Moscow.  As recently as 2018, there was a unification of the three into a single Orthodox Church of Ukraine -- although some of those with ties to Moscow did not join the unification.  This development was supported by many Orthodox leaders worldwide and gained official support by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in 2019.  However, it was criticized by Russian political leaders and leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church who want Ukrainian Orthodox Christians to exist under the direction of Orthodox religious leaders in Moscow.

Read this article about religion in Russia-Ukraine war from the Religion News Service, and think about the following questions.  What key religious developments have occurred in Ukraine?  What is the significance of religious developments in Ukraine?  What role has religion played in the war?

A Trade-off Between Friendliness and Security

A recent RNS article discusses a trade-off that several synagogues find themselves facing, i.e., that between offering synagogue services that are open to strangers and services that ensure the safety for congregants.  This comes after a newcomer was welcomed into a synagogue in Texas and took several hostages at gunpoint.  The hostages eventually escaped, and the newcomer was killed.

Leaders of other synagogues who are fearing similar attacks have stepped up security at their services, but this has come at a cost of reducing friendliness.  It is a trade-off that many synagogues are willingly taking.  Doors are locked during services, guards are hired, cameras installed, and more, including turning away newcomers if the clergy do not know they were coming.

Religious groups must always make trade-offs in carrying out their religious mission, but this is not one that we normally think of.  It is a trade-off that a religious group -- usually a new religious movement or a religious minority -- must consider when it finds itself faced with threats of violence.

Pew Study Finds Global Hostilities Decline but Religious Restrictions Remain High

This is the finding reported in the latest Pew Research Center report on religious freedom.  See the main web page here and the complete report pdf here.

The Economics of the Taliban

Tony Gill, a political scientist at the University of Washington and long-time promoter and practitioner of the economic approach to religion, recently published this article in the Wall Street Journal (the article is gated).  In it he explains how economics can be used to understand the surprising success of the Taliban.  This is timely piece about a difficult to understand topic.

USCIRF 2021 Annual Report

The USCIRF just released its 2021 Annual Report.  The page with all annual reports is here.  You can download the pdf of the 2021 Annual Report here.

The following countries were recommended to be designated as Countries of Particular Concern:  Burma, China, Eritrea, India, Iran, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Vietnam.  This list is exactly the same as last year's list.

Blasphemy Laws Around the World

Yesterday the USCIRF released a report on blasphemy laws around the world.  Read the summary of the report here.  The summary page also has a nice map showing how the countries with blasphemy laws are distributed around the world.  For those who are interested, you can read the full pdf report here.

The summary page lists several key findings.  A few of them are:

• 84 countries currently have blasphemy laws.
• From 2014-2018 there were 732 reported blasphemy cases, and 674 of them were considered criminal blasphemy.
• Most of the cases are in the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions, with over 80% of the state-enforced cases were in just ten countries.  Pakistan had the most (over 175), but others in order starting with the most cases were Iran, Russia, India, Egypt, Indonesia, Yemen, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.
• Over half of the accused were Muslims (56%), and the other accused came from various groups, including Christians (25%), Atheists (7%), Baha'is (7%), and Hindus (3%).

Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses Around the World

The United States Commission on Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which is an organization created by the U.S. government in 1998 to monitor religious freedom around the world, just released a short report on the rise of state persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses around the world.  Access the 8-page report here.

As you read this report, consider the following questions.  In which countries are Jehovah's Witnesses targeted?  What is it about the Jehovah's Witnesses that makes them targets of persecution?  What type of persecution do Jehovah's Witnesses suffer?

This blog post is written just a day after a related post about the Pew Research Center's work that shows religious restrictions continue to rise around the world.  This USCIRF report provides a closer look at how one particular religious group's experience forms a part of the larger trend.

Religious Restrictions Around the World in 2018

 According to new results published earlier today by the Pew Research Center, religious restrictions increased around the world from 2017 to 2018.  Read the entire main page for the published report.   If you are interested, you can browse the full report here.

The main finding is that the median level of restrictions increased around the world from 2017 to 2018.  This continues a steady increase in restrictions around the world since 2007, which is the first year that the Pew Research Center began tracking.  They use a Government Restrictions Index (GRI) that rates each country on a 10-point scale.

The largest increases in restrictions from 2017-2018 occurred in Asia and the Pacific, while the region with the highest overall average restrictions continues to be the Middle East and North Africa.  In fact, in many countries in the Middle East and Africa, there were incidents in which force was used by the government against religious groups.

As you read the main page, consider the following questions:  What kinds of restrictions are experienced?  Which countries have the highest restrictions?  Are restrictions more common with certain types of government regimes than with others?

And if  you are really interested, guess whether you think the USA has "very high," "high," "moderate," or "low" GRI, and check out where they classify USA in Appendix A.  Are you surprised?

Pope Francis, Same-sex Civil Unions, and Tension

The world has been abuzz this week with news that Pope Francis, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, has revealed his support for same-sex civil unions in a soon-to-be-released documentary (on another topic).  The excitement is because this support for same-sex civil unions stands in contrast to Roman Catholic Church's long-standing official opposition to same-sex marriages.

This blog post here written by a Jesuit Priest at the Religion News Service does a good job of clarifying what we should take away from this news.  One is that this position is not new for the pope himself.  It's a position that he has personally held for years.  Another is that the opinion expressed is about "civil unions" not "marriages," a distinction that is important for a church that remains opposed to same-sex marriages.  There is also a figure in the blog post showing just how divergent views about homosexuality are around the world.  I want you to consider that figure.

Later this quarter we will learn of the concept of "tension" for religious groups.  Tension refers to how that religious group relates to its surrounding social and cultural environment.  Higher tension means that the group is relatively distinct and separated in its beliefs and practices from the rest of society.

However, society changes, and there is perhaps nothing that has changed so rapidly during your lifetime in many parts of the world than views about same-sex relationships.  American society has overall become much accepting of same-sex relationships (including legally-recognized marriages) in the last couple decades.  But that is not true everyone in the world, as that figures shows.

As society changes, a religious group's tension can go up or down depending on how much its beliefs, teachings, and practices change.  A group that does not undergo significant change can find itself in higher tension when society has changed, such as is the case in the U.S. with the Roman Catholic Church on this issue.  The Roman Catholic Church has seen its tension increase as Americans' views on this topic have shifted.

Will Pope Francis's admission lead to a decrease in tension for Roman Catholics in the U.S.?  And how will the tension change in other areas of the world where acceptance of homosexuality remains weak?