According to the article at http://www.alternet.org/belief/humanity-becoming-increasingly-less-violent-one-exception-religious-violence
|
I'd say situations like that in Syria is one of the driving factors behind this study.
Here is an article about some of it including those who claim to be muslim (but traditional muslims describe as heretics) are fighting in the name of religion but it is more about power. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/04/syrian-wars-got-religion-and-that-aint-good/ That is why, IMO, it is dangerous to state that religion is the sole reason these factions go to battle. They may fight in the name of God as a rationalization but really there are centuries of aggression (social, economic, political) beneath. |
I agree, and so, I think, does the author. The article says "While most of the above examples have basis in disputes over land and political control, it’s religious belief that shapes the terms and the willingness of one party to negotiate with the other. War, by definition, suggests an all-or nothing conflict to determine a dispute against an enemy one believes in hell-bent on our destruction, and therefore cannot be placated via diplomatic means. In other words, war and violence becomes an excuse for not finding compromise. Religion provides the excuse to be violent." So the origin of the dispute is not religion, but because the dispute gets framed in religious terms of us vs. them, it precludes a negotiated settlement and creates the excuse for continued violence. |
I don't see it does state religion as the "sole" reason for continuing strife, so please don't read that into it. |
A such as I dislike religion, if we got rid of it, people would find something else to be insanely passionate and violent about. |
They already do. In the rest if the world it's called football. They have riots over it, but rarely wars. |
right, but at least it wouldn't be God telling them what to do. They couldn't claim Divine inspiration. Finally, humans would have to take responsibility for their own stupid actions. It's a start. |
Good example! and football champions don't try to take over the world -- at least not yet. |
There are already those who rally around some figurehead and fight in his/her name and his/her ideologies. There would be more who step into that vacuum created by removing religion (though I don't see how that is possible) and declare themselves worship-worthy. How many tyrants have claimed to be bigger than any faith and have demanded to be worshipped and heeded as much as any divine figure? |
Curious, as I didn't read the study: to what extent does it try to sort out religion from nationalism? In Israel and some Arab nations the two are conflated; does the study attempt to account for this? |
According to the article:
|
+1 |
I clicked your posted link to read the article, and it’s not there? Was it removed, or is it the wrong link? |
I don’t know. Because of religion, for thousands of years people from all over the world have been fighting over a barren strip of Middle East land that doesn’t even have any oil. |
I found your link.
https://www.salon.com/2014/01/15/were_living_through_the_most_peaceful_era_in_human_history_—%C2%A0with_one_big_exception_partner/ “According to the Pew Research Center, a third (33%) of the 198 countries and territories included in the study had high religious hostilities in 2012, up from 29% in 2011 and 20% as of mid-2007. Notably, religious hostilities increased in every major region of the world except the Americas, with the most dramatic increases felt in areas still reeling from the effects of the 2010-11 political uprisings known as the Arab Spring.“ The world…except the Americas. America is good. |