What exactly do we mean by fundamentalism, and when is it meaningful to use the term? Research by fundamentalism scholar Nora Kindermann shows that it is both contested and loaded. She argues that scholars and other professionals should use it critically and carefully to avoid prejudice and stigmatisation.
What does fundamentalism mean, and whom do we call fundamentalist? The media often report on Islamic fundamentalism, such as Hamas or the Taliban. But the label is also applied to Hindu nationalists, Jewish settlers, or evangelical Trump supporters. More recently, non-religious usages have appeared as well, such as ‘vegan fundamentalism’ and ‘eco-fundamentalism’. Kindermann: “This shows that the term is used broadly and is often loaded and usually applied to groups regarded as suspect or objectionable. But who decides that, and on the basis of which features?”
The origins of the term
The term arose more than a century ago in the United States, where an evangelical group of Protestant Christians proudly called themselves ‘fundamentalists’. It soon became a pejorative and acquired a negative connotation in public debate, which also influenced its academic use. “It became a controversial concept.”
Controversial
Since the 1970s, researchers have debated whether ‘fundamentalism’ is a useful concept or merely a negative label with a largely Western meaning. That period saw a religious revival in various places: the Muslim Brotherhood rose in Egypt, televangelists were popular in the United States, and in Iran the Ayatollah came to power. “As a result, fundamentalism no longer referred only to Christian movements and theology but became a much broader umbrella term applied to diverse movements.”
Consequences
“In that period, the academic discourse on Christian fundamentalism became more moderate and fundamentalism was not necessarily seen as something negative. By contrast, the usage of ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ carried various negative assumptions: irrational, militant, dogmatic and sectarian. The result is that fundamentalists are seen as ‘the other’. To this day these ideas persist in public debate. This has negative consequences for research, because it increases the risk of bias, distorts our understanding of these groups and fosters further stigmatisation.”
Should we use the term at all?
If scholars or other professionals wish to use the term, Kindermann argues, they must be highly critical about how they use it. To that end she developed a reflective framework and the Fundamentalism Matrix, which can help to employ the term clearly and responsibly. “Be reflective, cautious and self-aware when you speak and write about fundamentalism. My research shows that this is essential.”
On Wednesday 1 October, Nora Kindermann defended her PhD thesis.