Laicus is a Latin word that means “of the people”, meaning common people and not of the clergy. This is where the French term laïcité comes from. The term “secularism” describes the principle of separating religion from the state and the political realm. It was meant to prevent governments from imposing religious beliefs and to protect citizens’ right to practice or not practice a faith. Different societies have reinterpreted secularism according to their histories, ideologies and most importantly, their societal and political needs. There are six countries which would allow exploring the different implementations more clearly and answer the question: Where does secularism end and oppression begin?
Strict But Systematic
The French approach is known as laïcité, a very strict separation that is institutionalised by the 1905 Law on the Separation of Church and State. French secularism is completely in favour of religion remaining private. The state doesn’t finance any religion, and religious symbols in schools are banned. France seems to be in a neutral position against all religions. This stance may seem ideal, but it also has its critics that claim that it is unfairly targeting certain religious groups by implementing rules such as banning headscarves. It’s argued that the policies target a specific religion, under the name of universalism.
The Search for a Balance Between Secularism and Social Diversity
Turkey’s secularism (or laiklik) was founded by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in the early 20th century during the early Republican period. Since the Ottoman Empire had a political system in which Islam played a central role in state authority, the aim was to break from it and modernise the country. Since the 2000s, religion has reemerged in public life, but still, the language of secularism is present. It’s reinterpreted to justify both religious freedom and political control. Turkey’s system shows how secularism can become a political symbol, either used in a strict way or just to appeal to the nation, depending on who holds power.
Authoritarian
China is officially an atheist state. Religion is strictly a personal matter. The Chinese Communist Party recognises five religions (Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism) and they all have to operate under state-controlled associations. This can be explained as state dominance over belief. Some religious groups face strong oppression, such as underground Christian churches or the Uyghur Muslim community. China’s system directly eliminates religion’s autonomy rather than separating it from politics.
Theocratic State
Iran’s case is the polar opposite. Their constitution specifies the official state religion as Islam, and religion defines the state. With the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the state officially accepted Twelver Shia Islam as the official religion; political power and clerical authority have been combined since then. Religion is enforced with laws, regulations and even moral policing. From dress codes to education to public behaviour—most areas of life are regulated. Apostasy, the abandonment of a religious belief, and proselytisation, converting to a new religion, are illegal and incur severe punishments. The absence of secularism here means religion guides legislation. Individual freedoms are limited in the name of religious orthodoxy.
Religious Monarchy
Saudi Arabia is similar to Iran as a theocratic state but has a different cultural and historical background. The legal and political system is based on Wahhabi Sunni Islam, and the monarchy enforces Islamic law (sharia) as the foundation of governance. As in Iran, religious authorities influence education, media, and public life. Women faced strict restrictions on their freedom of movement, employment, and public conduct for many years. Just recently, some reforms lessened these prohibitions. The completely religious side of public life remains, as non-Muslims cannot publicly practice their religion, and conversion from Islam is forbidden, which shows complete adherence to the religion of the state and nothing else. There is no secularism and very little individual freedom, freedom of belief, or pluralism.
Half-Secular
The First Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits government-established religion and protects free exercise at the same time. It seems like the constitution is purely secular, yet religion has notable, real-life influence, as seen in the abortion ban, the religion in public schools debate, and presidential oaths. The American interpretation of secularism is to protect individual freedom. The government doesn’t fund any specific religion, but religious institutions have the right to operate freely. Religion is not erased, but there’s an effort to ensure voluntary participation.
Secularism means a state system that is free from religion to ensure neutrality and, in my opinion, justice, because I believe justice should never be based on a religion. Also, secularism means freedom to believe, to doubt, or to reject. As examples show, the ideal has been twisted, politicised, and redefined.
So, where does secularism end and oppression begin? It depends on whether the state uses its neutrality to protect diversity or enforce conformity. True secularism should be the absence of religion in public life and the presence of choice in people’s personal lives.
Written by Öykü Karakaya, Edited by Carina Jagersberger
Photo Credit: Stephen Walker (uploaded August 11, 2023) on Unsplash.
