Deprovincialization: Its Importance for Plural Societies

This paper focuses on processes and consequences of intergroup interactions in plural societies, focusing primarily on majority-minority mutuality in acculturation orientations. We examine commonalities and differences among conceptualizations and models addressing issues of mutuality. Our review includes the mutual acculturation model ( Berry, 1997 ), the Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM – Bourhis et al., 1997 ), the Concordance Model of Acculturation (CMA – Piontkowski et al., 2002 ); the Relative Acculturation Extended Model (RAEM – Navas et al., 2005 ), and the work on acculturation discrepancies conducted by Horenczyk (1996 , 2000 ). We also describe a trend toward convergence of acculturation research and the socio-psychological study of intergroup relations addressing issues of mutuality in attitudes, perceptions, and expectations. Our review has the potential to enrich the conceptual and methodological toolbox needed for understanding and investigating acculturation in complex modern societies, where majorities and minorities, immigrants and nationals, are engaged in continuous mutual contact and interaction, affecting each other’s acculturative choices and acculturative expectations.

Download Full-text

Pesantren dan Pluralisme: Upaya Modernisasi Pendidikan Pesantren Menuju Masyarakat Madani

INSANIA Jurnal Pemikiran Alternatif Kependidikan ◽

10.24090/insania.v13i2.297 ◽

1970 ◽

Vol 13 (2) ◽

pp. 243-270

Author(s):

Muhammad Muntahibun Nafis

Keyword(s):

Religious Education ◽

Indigenous Institutions ◽

Great Hope ◽

Plural Societies ◽

Civilized Society ◽

Developing Society

Pesantren is one of the indigenous institutions of religious education in Indonesia that still exists until recently. Therefore, its role in constructing and developing society as its essential duties is always questioned. However, at least, its sustainable indicates that it fits to fulfill and dialogue with the dynamics society. In other words, it can be regarded as an institution that does not only successfully anticipate, receipt and adopt social developments but also integrates them within its essential tradition and values. This paper just focuses on how pesantren develops its values and tradition to respect plurality. As a result, pesantren has some philosophies and practices supporting in realizing multicultural and plural societies. In this sense, we still have great hope to pesantren roles in developing civilized society

Download Full-text

Religious Courts and Rights in Plural Societies: Interlegal Gaps and the Need for Complex Concurrency

Law & Ethics of Human Rights ◽

10.1515/lehr-2021-2027 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 259-285

Author(s):

Jaclyn L. Neo

Keyword(s):

Religious Diversity ◽

Legal Pluralism ◽

Group Rights ◽

Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽

Hierarchical Relationship ◽

Religious Accommodation ◽

The Status ◽

Plural Societies ◽

The Relationship ◽

Religious Courts

Abstract The administration or recognition of religious courts is a form of religious accommodation present in many constitutional states today commonly analysed in legal pluralism terms. This article contributes to the further analysis of the relationship between legal pluralism and rights in religiously diverse societies by examining the status of state religious courts and their interaction with state non-religious (secular) courts. In particular, I examine what Cover calls “jurisdictional redundancies” between the courts and conceptualize the allocation of power between religious and non-religious courts as a potentially productive site of interlegality. In doing so, I support concurrent jurisdictional allocations, arguing that exclusive jurisdiction could result in what I call an interlegal gap, whereby instead of inter-penetration of norms and production of reconciliatory principles, there is a justice gap whereby litigants may find themselves unable to obtain appropriate legal recourse including when neither court is willing to assume jurisdiction over the matter. This requires us to see the relationship between religious courts and non-religious courts through the more mundane but more practical lens of jurisdictional overlaps and competition, rather than through the more abstract framing of normative or even civilizational clashes. Accordingly, I argue that concurrent jurisdiction and interlegality have greater potential to strike a balance between individual and group rights and could be more protective of religious diversity. In other words, I argue for a closer, rather than a more separate, relationship between religious and non-religious courts, while denying that a hierarchical relationship where religious courts are subordinated to non-religious courts is the only way to protect rights.

Download Full-text