Religious Freedom as a Political Technology

Abstract

The principles of freedom of conscience and of non-discrimination on religious and national grounds, forming the basis of international declarations and constitutions of most states of the world, have become a great historical achievement of mankind. However, at a certain stage, the freedom of conscience became a political tool. This was caused by the desire of Western governments, mainly the United States, to create their own democracy canon that could be introduced into other societies and states, making them open to American interests. The religious factor has acquired a great political signifi cance both in regional and global confl icts, and in the struggle between neoliberal anti-traditionalism and identism, which protects the right of nations, cultures and conservative religions to preserve their identity, instead of transforming along with the pattern of left-liberal elites, LGBT communities, feminists and environmentalists. Neoliberalism, or anti-traditionalism, eagerly brands any declaration of civilizational identity as “xenophobia” and “fascism”. Religion has become one of the main fi elds, where the struggle between identity and anti-traditionalism or “liberal democracy” takes place. The article highlights several areas, where the religious freedom is used as a technology in real politics. The fi rst one is the democratization of legislation in individual countries and the adjustment of its provisions related to the freedom of conscience, the status of religious associations and the regulation of their activity. The second one is the shaping of public opinion and the formation of public interest organizations that promote the principles of religious freedom and act in line with the neoliberal understanding of democracy and the norms of political correctness. The third one is interreligious round tables and trainings with the participation of public off icials, religious leaders and public associations, which is something other than just an interreligious dialogue. They “equalize” Muslims, Orthodox Christians, Catholics, and Protestants in the public fi eld. The principles of religious freedom that the society and the state need in the context of Western anti-traditionalism have become their opposite. Pluralism and religious diversity started to be used as the primary target, since they both most closely corresponded to the demands of American liberal democracy and world anti-identity. The current religious freedom turned out to be far from the tolerance of the Peace of Westphalia. Instead of peaceful coexistence, the new concept of the freedom of conscience, on the contrary, often suggests the oppression of dominant churches and traditions.