Comparative Approaches to Religion and Violence Unit

Religious Studies Research: Haunted by the Spectre of Violence?

In response to this year's Presidential theme, CARV seeks to foment a generative dialogue about how the "work of our hands" as religion scholars is descended from, complicit with, or otherwise being appropriated to amplify any form of violence:

• CARV invites proposals that bring together scholars, policymakers, and professionals—including journalists—whose work demonstrates how historical legacies of violence; the fear of violence; active campaigns of violence; and/or the desire to use scholarship as a vehicle to either incite or resist violent actors has effectively "haunted" the field of religious studies. The purpose of this panel is to nurture a dialogue that assists religion scholars in reckoning with the ways in which their work knowingly or unknowingly contributes to discursive iterations of myriad species of violence (physical, psychological, sexual, cultural, socio-political, emotional, environmental, bureaucratic, spiritual, etc.). Our hope is to explore questions like: how should religion scholars respond when the knowledge they produce is being harnessed by bad-faith actors for malicious ends? Is fear of violence ever an appropriate reason to withhold knowledge from policymakers or refuse to further pursue a particular research agenda? How do the oppressive structures that uphold racist, sexist, classist, colonialist, and imperialist powers poison religion scholars' ability to freely pursue and publish their work—or even to accurately perceive, comprehend, question, or model the phenomenological realities they seek to study? Likewise, how are these structures being replicated (perhaps unintentionally) in and by the ideas of otherwise well-meaning academics? How can scholars of religion work intentionally to discontinue entrenched patterns of violence; disengage from violent epistemologies, research methods, and/or social systems; and ultimately become allies of peace? What responsibilities do scholars have to "speak up" publicly for victims of religious violence, especially if they themselves are from communities which regularly endure discrimination and violation (e.g., people of color, LGBTQIA+ individuals, the undocumented, women, the precariously employed, etc.). What, if anything, is the American higher education industry doing to empower diverse scholars to research religious violence—and protect them from angry members of the public should the need arise? Conversely, how are corporate and donor influences engaging in bureaucratic violence to silence such research before it comes to fruition (when it is considered "controversial") or to disingenuously capitalize on it (when it is considered "trendy" or "likely to attract funding")? In short, if religious studies research is haunted by the spectre of violence, then what positive steps can researchers take to exorcize this dark ghoul and ultimately guard against its corrupting return? Our unit's focus is international and interdisciplinary, and we particularly welcome research that works from the margins to disrupt traditional systems of authority and ways of learning, knowing, and being in the world. We also encourage retrospective or historical case studies pertinent to the topic at hand.

Retheorizing Religious Sacrifice

Over the last two years, CARV has invested considerable time and effort in refining and, where necessary, reformulating academic theories of religious violence. At the 2023 meeting, it hopes to continue that work specifically as it concerns religious sacrifice. To this end, CARV seeks proposals that unpack the polysemic concept of "sacrifice" and use diverse methodological approaches to address the diversity of religious thought and practice surrounding it. Questions we hope to discuss include but are not limited to:

• Does "religion" require "sacrifice"? If so, how and why must the codependence between these phenomena be theorized? 
• If we accept that violence occurs along a diverse spectrum of manifestation (physical, emotional, sexual, spiritual, cultural, bureaucratic, etc.), must we also accept that "sacrifice" occurs along an inherently violent spectrum too? In other words, is it possible to have a completely peaceful act of religious sacrifice?
• What is the difference between "blood sacrifice" and "modern sacrifice"? How can the interconnections and slippages between these divergent notions of sacrifice be properly theorized?
• What limits does the concept of sacrifice impose upon those scholars who employ it to analyze religious phenomena? Are there ways that scholars could reframe the paradigm of sacrifice to better address the conceptual blind spots they incur while working with it?
• How and why do certain religious expressions target specific groups (e.g., the enslaved, the unhoused, the mentally ill, people of color, injured veterans, women, children, the undocumented, lower-caste individuals, the LGBTQIA+ community, the impoverished, non-human animals, etc.) and particular contexts (e.g., the global south, vulnerable ecosystems, sacred waterways, etc.) for "sacrifice"? Why are these modern sacrifices considered justified in, by, and for religions that otherwise emphasize their peacefulness; profess to value life; and claim to have moved past the idea of human sacrifice? In other words, how is religion used to render these acts of sacrificial violence morally licit or even obligatory for members of particular faiths? How is religion used to obscure the true extent of human sacrifice that is actually occurring?
• How and why are supposedly "secular" laws and policies weaponized to fulfill religious voters' desire for certain bodies to be sacrificed (e.g., women's bodies are sacrificed as a result of anti-abortion laws; trans people's bodies are sacrificed as a result of anti-trans-healthcare laws; the earth's "body" and the bodies of countless non-human animals are sacrificed as a result of anti-environmental deregulation and pro-corporate-profit policies)? Is the sacrifice of these bodies occurring in response to religious narratives that promise material or spiritual reward(s) in exchange for, or as a reward for, this violence? 
• How are ideas of religious martyrdom and spiritual self-sacrifice weaponized in the modern world? For instance, it is currently en vogue for far-right commentators to portray religious individuals deplatformed by social media giants (often for spreading dangerous conspiracy theories, engaging in hate speech, issuing violent threats towards others, etc.) as "martyrs." Are such "digital martyrdom narratives" callbacks to the much-hallowed accounts of religious martyrdom preserved in religions like Christianity and Islam? In what ways, if any, should this phenomenon extend the scholarly concept of religious martyrdom? (Can you really be "culturally cancelled" into martyrdom?)
• Given recent advances in the scientific understanding of secondary traumatic stress, are those who witness or otherwise deal with the longterm impact of violence against others engaged in acts of sacred self-sacrifice? More broadly, when and why do such witnesses invoke religion to describe and add meaning to their traumatic recollections?
• How are cultures of unjust religious sacrifice fomented and protected by religious cultures that encourage shunning, learned ignorance, denialism, disavowal, and discrediting of victims in the face of prophetic calls for restorative and transformative justice?
• Is there a meaningful way to retrieve and/or develop the concept of redemptive religious sacrifice? Would doing so allow scholars to more accurately analyze or better describe any contemporary conflicts?

Proposals related to the retheorization of religious sacrifice may be featured in a joint session cosponsored with the Society of Biblical Literature.

Religion and Cold Civil Wars

It is becoming popular to describe bitter, intractable divisions between domestic political factions as "slow civil wars" and/or "cold civil wars."  But while the heuristic appeal of these terms is obvious, they remain undertheorized, particularly when they are applied to conflicts involving religion. With this in mind, CARV invites proposals that analyze and interpret the role of spirituality in "cold" or "slow" civil wars (CARV employs these terms interchangeably here). Papers may address questions including but not limited to:

• How do existing theories of civil warfare intersect with existing theories of religious violence? Are there constructive examples of integration between these two bodies of theoretical framing?
• Does religion play a catalytic function in slow civil wars? Are periodic eruptions of religious or parareligious violence necessary in cold civil wars to create and/or reshape the spectrum of political possibilities available to populations riven by intractable policy conflicts? If so, then to what extent can non-violent religious resistance be considered an effective tool in slow civil conflicts?
• Great powers often try to distract and unify domestic populations locked in cold civil wars by engaging in hot proxy wars elsewhere. Recent examples of this include the involvement of Russia and the United States in Ukraine; Saudi Arabia and Iran in Yemen; and Russia, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, and Iran in Syria (among many others). But how, specifically, are the leaders of such states invoking religious or parareligious language to "sell" foreign proxy wars to their internally divided citizens or subjects? Simultaneously, how are these leaders wielding religion as a "wedge issue" to "otherize" vulnerable innocents abroad, and to exacerbate inter- and intra-religious divisions between their domestic populace and those foreign people(s) targeted in their proxy wars? 
• How have reactions to the January 6th Capitol riot, as well as the subsequent revelations generated by the January 6th Committee, influenced the course of rightwing religious rage? Has the combined failure of the Capitol Riot, Pizzagate, the original QAnon "prophecies," the cryptocurrency meltdown, etc., produced any phenomena which parallel the Millerite movement's Great Disappointment and the subsequent birth of Seventh-day Adventism? If so, how is that shaping the US' cold civil war? 
• How are conservative women around the world using populist interpretations of traditional religious texts, rituals, discourses, and practices to justify their participation in cold civil wars, particularly when they rise to positions of authority historically held by men? 
• To what extent has religion created political cultures that are ripe for slow civil wars by actively encouraging and/or passively inuring the population to ongoing crises of violence, e.g., police brutality, "forever wars," mass incarceration, global ecocide, systemic racial discrimination, etc.?
• How is religion shaping artistic responses to cold civil wars throughout the world?