Zizek on Religious Violence

Slavoj Zizek is much more intelligent than I will ever pretend to be and he has some very insightful words regarding religious violence in today’s world. Zizek, in his book Violence, makes a startling comparison between atheists and religious believers/fundamentalists. The comparison in its essence is an ethical one and violence is at the root of the debate.  Zizek points out that in today’s world it is in fact religious zealots that are forcing their agendas, which are rooted in various kinds of violence, upon unsuspecting individuals in a society. And the godless atheists, who are quite non-violent in their ethical stances, stand upon no absolutist moral ground that demands unquestioning faith and total belief in a unknown deity. Of course, these same atheists are supposedly immoral and even “demonic” in the eyes of the religious. But the topic is violence and not personal belief systems.

Religious agendas are often rooted in hatreds, disagreements, political ideologies, and separation between groups and individuals. This religious reality tears at the fabric of a modern society in that various religious impetus’ will presuppose a type of societal violence. The violence is presupposed in that only one singular religious belief can be correct. Whatever stems out of these religious separations often stirs a violent reaction, i.e. – mentally, physically, subjectively, and objectively.  At the root of all the ‘noble religions’, and their various moral teachings, there are levels of objective and subjective forms of violence that are perpetrated by every believer, no matter their level of dedication. Religious believers will fight, argue, die, and perhaps even kill for their cause in the name of their love for an unknown God.

Here are Zizek’s own words and some quotes to clarify:

“One cannot be religious in general. One can only believe in some god(s) to the detriment of others.” (132)

“mass killings are more and more legitimated in religious terms, while pacifism is predominantly atheist. It is the very belief in a higher divine goal which allows us to instrumentalise individuals, while atheism admits no such goal and thus refuses all forms of sacred sacrificing.” (135)

“In the absence of any ethical standards external to your belief in and love for God, the danger is always lurking that you will use your love of God as the legitimisation of the most horrible deeds.” (137).

“the lesson of today’s terrorism is that if there is a God, then everything, even blowing up hundreds of innocent bystanders, is permitted to those who claim to act directly on the behalf of God, as the instruments of his will, since clearly a direct link to God justifies (all) violation of any ‘merely human’ constraints and considerations.” (136).

“atheists strive to formulate the message of joy which comes not from escaping reality, but from accepting it and creatively finding one’s place in it……. the humble awareness that we are not masters of the universe, but just parts of a much larger whole exposed to contingent twists of fate, with a readiness to accept the heavy burden of responsibility for what we make of our lives. With the threat of unpredictable catastrophe looming from all sides, isn’t this an attitude needed more than ever in our own times?” (138)

Zizek lays out his argument: religious belief of all kinds (since their outset) have promoted some sort of societal violence including mass separations and ignorance among groups of peoples – history has bore strong evidence to this truth.  Religious-based violence in our globalized world is spreading quickly – terrorism and counter-terrorism in the name of God and land is the greatest evidence of this.

Every diverse kind of believer is justified in manifesting their violent acts due to the “fact” that their love for God is righteous and is correct – everyone else is wrong and deserves some punishment. In a strange twist of reality it appears evident that atheists are the true keepers of ethical tenets and even religious morality (in some sense), as they do not promote mass violence in the name of an unknown God. Atheists are at a kind of calm ,or peace, with their existence in the universe as they are not constantly seeking to please a non-existing God in the hopes of achieving some gratification for doing “God’s will.”  Atheists are also generally not striving to destroy free thought, nor are they attempting to eradicate groups of people who happen to disagree with their moral, ethical, or even theological stance.  In truth, as Zizek states, most atheists are proponents of non-violence in today’s world  – whereas religious believers are not afraid to resort to mass violence if it aids in their goals and in their faith.

To sum up Zizek’s point: atheists act like true believers due to their desire not to promote religious hatreds and death in the name of any deity rather atheists seek a type of peace and they promote practical solutions regarding the most pressing human problems. Whereas religious believers act like godless and immoral instruments of objective and subjective violence and they are not afraid to impress upon others their beliefs and their “truths” as instruments of the unknown God.  Ironic isn’t’ it?

Reference:

Zizek, Slavoj. 2008. Violence. Picador: New York.