A typology of shī ʿī discourses and possibilities of democracy

This article presents a typology of the major religio-political discourses in the Shī ʿī world, namely Shī ʿa orthodoxy, governmental Shī ʿism, and reformist Shī ʿism. We compare the political stance of the former discourse, which has received the least amount of attention in academic circles, with...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs: Ghobadzadeh, Naser (Auteur) ; Akbar, Ali (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: Sage 2023
Dans: Critical research on religion
Année: 2023, Volume: 11, Numéro: 2, Pages: 187-204
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B Iran / Chiisme / Démocratie / Souveraineté populaire / Laïcité
RelBib Classification:AD Sociologie des religions
BJ Islam
KBL Proche-Orient et Afrique du Nord
ZC Politique en général
Sujets non-standardisés:B governmental shīʿism
B Ayatollah Khomeini
B secular democracy
B Iran
B Shī ʿī orthodoxy
B shīʿī reformism
Accès en ligne: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Résumé:This article presents a typology of the major religio-political discourses in the Shī ʿī world, namely Shī ʿa orthodoxy, governmental Shī ʿism, and reformist Shī ʿism. We compare the political stance of the former discourse, which has received the least amount of attention in academic circles, with the other two well-researched discourses. The typology offered in this article will be helpful not only in providing a comprehensive picture of Shī ʿī politico-religious discourses, but also in providing a useful framework for further comparative analyses. We investigate the political theology and history of these discourses, as well as their capacity to accommodate popular sovereignty. We argue that while both orthodox and reformist Shī ʿī discourses embrace popular sovereignty, the linchpin of governmental Shī ʿism is divine sovereignty, which cannot be reconciled with popular sovereignty.
ISSN:2050-3040
Contient:Enthalten in: Critical research on religion
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1177/20503032231174203