06 February 2013 was the fourth lecture for this course and for this week, our lecturer taught about religious conflicts, irredentism and separatism, terrorism and non-violent alternative.
There has many perception meaning of religious conflict. One of the meanings is a religious conflict is defined as incompatibility or disagreement arising from differences in faith and belief. Another meaning is religious conflict also can defined as dispute about important political, economic, cultural or territorial issues between two or more religious communities. In addition, the second meaning is more complicated because there includes everything such as political, economic and so on and so forth.
Moreover, there have four types of religious conflict. First, inter religious conflict, which mean the conflict that occurs between two different religious. For example, in Nigeria, the conflict occurs between Christian and Muslim while in Myanmar the conflict occurs between Buddhism and Muslim. Intra religious conflicts are the second type of religious conflict and the conflict happen between the same religion. Syria and Iraq are the country, which these conflicts occur. The other type of religious conflict is ethno religious conflict. Actually, I do not know what ethno religious conflict is but from what our lecturer taught I got the idea what it is.
Ethno religious is the majority of religion that cannot show the small group of other religion. For example, in Japan there have 0.01 per cent Muslim and in Arab most Christian religions than Muslim. The last type is political religious conflict. What can I understand from this type is the conflict occur because of politics and religion. For example, one country, which is the population of the people are Muslim, but there also have Christian and one of the Muslim a volunteer to become president but the Christians are like does not agree. In addition, the conflict in Syria is because of the political and religious.
Besides that, our lecturer move to our next sub topic, which is irredentism and separatism. What is this? This question comes to my mind because I really do not know what is it even it is hard to pronounce the words. Furthermore, irredentism as shows in the slide in class is the word coined in Italy from the phase Italia irredenta (‘unredeemed Italy’). This originally referred to Austro–Hungarian rule over mostly or partly Italian inhabited territories such as Trentino and Trieste during the 19th and an early 20th Century.
Mr Fousil also told that in Africa or most of the country, British designed the map, if I am not mistaken. In addition, irredentism is any position advocating annexation of territories administered by another state on the grounds of common ethnicity. In other word, irredentism is people want to join the majority of people in the particular country. For example, South Pattani, Thailand they tend to join Malay. Besides, separatism is a social system that provides separate facilities for minority groups. Actually, for separatism I am not clear during the lecture.
Most of the students are excited when we learned about the terrorism. Our lecturers ask who is terrorised. Students gave so many answers and one of the answers is Osama. Terrorism is the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.
Besides, the last sub topic is about non-violence alternative. According to Gandhi, he indicated that the real power of non- violence is to create and construct, example constructive program. Moreover, non- violent action does not mean passivity, or taking no action in the face of threat or attack. There can be derived into three main parts, first is non- violence protest and persuasion. Its mean does the protest peacefully without destroying public things.
On the other hand, the problem now is people do against that, which is, they do the protest and disturbance in the particular place, and cause damage to the public things. Second, is non-cooperation is like what our lecturer said do not want to cooperate with someone in another two against other people and the last main part is non- violent intervention.
Before ten or fifteen minute before finish class, our lecturers ask if somebody terrorize you, what your reaction is. Many answers from the students, such as they will fight back, silence is better and much more.
In a conclusion, I learned much new knowledge or information during the lecturer and I was really enjoying in the class at that time. This subject taught about the broad knowledge and it is interesting.
Seminar of current affairs, week 4