Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the view that the growth of religious fundamentalism is a reaction to globalisation.

However, Beckford in 2003, criticised Giddens and Bauman, on the grounds that they lump all types of fundamentalist groups together, as combating the modern features that come with globalisation such as choice, freedom and risk, as he argues this isn’t the case. Not all fundamentalist groups are reacting to globalisation. He also argues that Giddens fails to acknowledge hybrid movements of fundamentalist and cosmopolitan groups. Jeff Haynes in 1998 argued that we shouldn’t focus on ideas that suggest fundamentalism is a reaction to globalisation, because it’s not always the same, for example conflict in the Middle east is due to the failure of the local elites to fulfil promises of raising living standards which then fuels the drive towards fundamentalism.

Like Giddens, Steve Bruce argued that fundamentalism is a reaction to globalisation, because it threatens traditional practices and lifestyles, and once they feel threatened they develop strict doctrines for others to live by. However, Bruce confines fundamentalism to monotheistic religions where there is one God and therefore one authoritative viewpoint, and when this authority is threatened by new age beliefs and lifestyles, fundamentalism develops, whereas it is highly unlikely that it will develop from polytheistic religions because there are various numbers of God’s meaning there is not one authoritative viewpoint and therefore many interpretations can be developed, and he uses the example of Hinduism as it is described as a collection of religions. Bruce argues that there are two types of situations where fundamentalism can originate; changes within society, and external changes to a society. The changes within society takes place largely in the West, for example the New Christian Right came about to combat the new ideas of privatising religion and other issues such as gender diversity and sexuality whereas the external influences, mainly refers to eastern societies who feel like they are being imposed upon by western beliefs and ideologies, to which fundamentalists retaliate against the western influenced regime.

Huntington argued that since the fall of communism, conflicts between different civilisations, as he calls them, intensifies between each other, and argues that political differences have since become less of a problem between nations as a source of identity, and people use religion as a source of their identity. This, he argues, creates a position of ‘us and them’, meaning the west vs the rest as it is put, and this creates fear due to military monopoly, and how religion influences behaviours of the nation and individual movements. He argued that political problems are easier to solve than religious ones because religious beliefs are rooted in culture and history. However, Jackson, sees Huntington’s work as an example of orientalism, which is a western ideology that groups all eastern societies, and people, especially Muslims, as dangerous and fanatical, which justifies human rights abuses by the west. Therefore, Jackson aligns himself with sociologists such as Bruce, who argues that the fundamentalism comes from external influences from the west, as opposed to changes within that society which is a form of cultural defence, against the warring west, and therefore as a result of globalisation as these two different civilisations grow and become more connected.

Overall, the evidence suggests that fundamentalism is a result of globalisation, but origins differ and has different functions within each movement, and as the west prospers, there is more conflict between the west and the east.