Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification

Various kinds of criminals often use religious and political discourse to justify their actions, while both sides of the conflict always find supporters among the population involved. Jews are a unique society with the oldest roots in the world, very closely associated with the most widespread religions in the world. A nationality with a particular political discourse was formed based on this religiosity. The uniqueness of the Jews often led to the emergence of nationalistic sentiments, like the position of Yoel Lerner, who justified the destruction of other temples and even the murder of Yitzhak Rabin by Yigal Amir (Juergensmeyer 44) with biblical roots. Such authenticity is destructive, although it contradicts many biblical principles that underlie it. There is a big task behind crimes, and much attention is paid to symbols, not meanings (Juergensmeyer 45). In the opinion of Lerner and Amir, political discourse must give way to a spiritual mission (Juergensmeyer 46). The justification of crimes must always be built on contrast and require the point of view of a more destructive impact on the victim’s part.

The clash of political and religious discourses leads to such crimes. Yitzhak Rabin, after his death, Lerner attributed betrayal and betrayal of the Israeli people, although the politician called for peace in every possible way (Juergensmeyer 48). Another example given by Juergensmeyer shows the crime of Baruch Goldstein, who shot the Muslims in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron (50). The clash on religious grounds that grew into political grounds only led to the incitement of the conflict, where terrorist groups were already involved. The main problem of these events is that the conflict, which flared up due to acts of violence that continued historically, tried to settle with the same violence the supporters of the religious point of view. At the same time, the Bible is perceived not as a bearer of the moral values ​​of human behavior, with all the commandments and tolerance, but as evidence of the former power of the Jews over the Arabs, whereas the Koran is the same evidence. Higher goals are leveled by the struggle for territory and religious actions that reach the state level and are not always regulated in the direction of peace.

However, political decisions towards peace also rarely found agreement among the population. The conclusion of peace in a conflict always involves a compromise: either sovereignty or the extradition of a particular territory to one of the belligerents. Against the backdrop of compromises, there are always those who disagree, both for obvious reasons for eviction from a specific region and religious supporters of the issue. Not infrequently, these two forces find agreement in opposition to the current policy, as was the case with the Palestinian question (Juergensmeyer 53). Rabbi Kahane justifies the crimes against the Arabs by saying that they are in the historic land of the Jews and can humiliate them (Juergensmeyer 55). All Jewish actions, including crimes, must be based on service aimed at the coming of the Messiah: in this way, even bloody wars can be justified (Juergensmeyer 56). At the same time, such aggression is often explained by a completely legitimate reason, dictated by God, that God takes responsibility for these actions.

There is always another extreme in response to a radical point of view. Muslims saw the development of the situation in their way, and the murder of Kahane only confirms this trend. The progressive thinking of politicians still does not have much power, able to even stand on the same level as the religious discourse that reigns in this region. The world requires a compromise, but even minimal agreements lead to the activation of radical ultra-right groups, which, through their criminal activities, again ignite the conflict, discarding progress on this issue. As long as the sacred texts are interpreted as evidence of the justification of violence against dissenters and as long as they have such power, peace will also be far from both in the political field and, even more so, in the religious one.

Work Cited

Juergensmeyer, Mark. “Terror in the Mind of God.” Terror in the Mind of God, Fourth Edition. University of California Press, 2017.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

StudyCorgi. (2023, May 18). Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification. https://studycorgi.com/religious-and-political-discourse-in-violence-justification/

Work Cited

"Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification." StudyCorgi, 18 May 2023, studycorgi.com/religious-and-political-discourse-in-violence-justification/.

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

References

StudyCorgi. (2023) 'Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification'. 18 May.

1. StudyCorgi. "Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification." May 18, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/religious-and-political-discourse-in-violence-justification/.


Bibliography


StudyCorgi. "Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification." May 18, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/religious-and-political-discourse-in-violence-justification/.

References

StudyCorgi. 2023. "Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification." May 18, 2023. https://studycorgi.com/religious-and-political-discourse-in-violence-justification/.

This paper, “Religious and Political Discourse in Violence Justification”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal. Please use the “Donate your paper” form to submit an essay.