Losing our religion: sources of solidarity in pluralist settings Timothy Stacey Goldsmith’s College, University of London For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of Goldsmiths, University of London is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 99, 686 words. 2 Acknowledgements It is safe to say I could never have expected writing acknowledgements to be an emotional process. But when treated as a vocation, a PhD, especially an ethnographic one such as this, can change a person: In my case, not only my academic discipline and methods, but also, and more importantly, my faith. I would like to begin by thanking John Milbank, not only for introducing me to the work of Alisdair MacIntyre, of himself, and of Charles Taylor, but also for pointing me in the direction of people in London that could support a transition from this philosophical and theological inspiration to research engaged with lived realities. Special thanks go to the supervisor I finally found, Adam Dinham. Not only had he been on a very similar academic journey to me, but he also had the imagination and generosity to see how a very theoretically minded, and empirically naive young scholar, might over time find his feet in research engaged with lived realities. I fought many an emotional and intellectual battle with Adam, sometimes face to face with him, at others in my own head. The struggle between holding onto my philosophical and theological inspiration, and becoming engaged with lived realities, was long, draining and arduous. I also want to thank Adam for taking me under his wing, having faith in me, and giving me opportunities other students may only dream of. Finally, I am happy to call Adam a mentor and a friend. As Jim Beckford recently said, we can never repay our debts in academia, but can only hope to pay those debts 3 forwards. Adam has left me in great debt, and lucky is the person in the future that receives even half of these payments. I want to thank all of my participants for the generosity and love with which they gave me their time. With their help, I became a part of their world, came to understand the difference between empirically grounded belief, and holding faith with ideas. I arrived on the other side of my research with a vigour for exploring my own faith. My fellow student, Panagiotis Pentaris is responsible for awakening me to the importance of being efficient with work, organising conferences, networking and developing collaborations. Without Notis, not only would I not have the many experiences and contacts I now have, but I would not even have known the appropriate forms to hand in and sign for the submission of this thesis. To Fernande Pool, a young anthropologist at LSE, I owe academic and spiritual inspiration. She not only introduced me to some of the key figures that form the basis for my conclusions, but also made me feel alive, fulfilled and purposive when I was lost, and challenged me when I was too assured. In the short time between meeting at a conference in Switzerland and today, sharing a few beers in quiet spaces in Goldsmiths' surrounding pubs, Fernande very quickly became my best friend and intellectual soul mate. I do not want to imagine a future without her. 4 The biggest thanks of all go to Fay Richards. Fay supported me unconditionally, with love and affection throughout. She praised me for every milestone and achievement, assured and comforted me when I was burnt out, and picked me up again when I was ready. Fay acted as the adult in our relationship, understanding and accepting that being with an academic too often means taking on the intellect of an arrogant middle aged intellectual but the life skills of an emotionally and developmentally stunted teenager. Without Fay, I would not have had the space for the dedication I hope is found herein. 5 Abstract For the last thirty years a quiet revolution has been taking place in political theory. Starting in theology and philosophy, and making its way through history and sociology to politics, policy and practice, this disparate movement has slowly adopted the title of post-liberalism. Although difficult to encapsulate in a single argument, the central idea of post-liberalism is that political theory has, over the course of the last four centuries, slowly but surely become dominated by liberalism, neglecting ideas of the good in favour of an abstract respect for plurality. This theory has apparently infiltrated politics, policy and practice, leaving these unable to inspire feelings of solidarity or collective action. The aim of this thesis is to explore these ideas both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, it places post-liberal ideas into dialogue with anthropologies and sociologies of religion, of the state, and of capitalism, with special attention to research engaged with how these categories influence ideas of the good. Empirically, it undertakes a multiple case-study ethnography of civic action groups working in London. The cases are chosen on the basis of their representing key policy paradigms for social solidarity in the post-war era: Christian, secular, multi-faith and post-secular. The thesis concludes by offering an alternative framework, in which religion sits as a subset, for developing shared ideas of the good deliberatively and inclusively, so as to not only respect but thrive on plurality. 6 Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 2: POST-LIBERALISM ........................................................................... 23 RELIGION LOST: FROM IDEAS OF THE GOOD TO SOCIAL CONTRACTS .................................... 28 WHICH TRANSCENDENCE? WHO DECIDES? ..................................................................................... 39 RELIGION REGAINED: POST-LIBERAL TRANSCENDENCE .............................................................. 48 POST-LIBERAL POLITICS, POLICY AND PRACTICE ............................................................................ 51 CHAPTER 3: RELIGION LOST? IDEOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE OR DEMOCRATISATION OF SELF-UNDERSTANDING? ........ 68 THE IDEOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE ................................................ 68 THE IMPORTANCE OF IDEAS .................................................................................................................... 76 DIFFERENT KINDS OF IDEAS .................................................................................................................... 89 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 93 CHAPTER 4: STATISM ............................................................................................. 94 THE RISE OF LEVIATHAN AND THE FALL OF HUMANITY .................................................................. 94 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATE .......................................................................................................... 97 DIFFERENT STATES .................................................................................................................................. 102 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 105 CHAPTER 5: CAPITALISM .................................................................................... 106 THE RISE OF CAPITALISM ....................................................................................................................... 107 WHAT’S WRONG WITH CAPITALISM? ................................................................................................. 112 DIFFERENT CAPITALISMS ....................................................................................................................... 117 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 118 CHAPTER 6: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 120 THEOLOGY THROUGH LIVED REALITIES: ONTOLOGY AND EPISTEMOLOGY ........................ 121 ETHNOGRAPHICAL POLITICAL THEOLOGY: RESEARCH STRATEGY AND DESIGN .............. 125 HANGING ROUND: ACCESS, ROLE, EXPLORATORY SAMPLING ................................................ 142 LISTENING TO OTHERS’ STORIES: THE PRACTICE OF RESEARCH .......................................... 152 ANALYSING DATA ...................................................................................................................................... 156 ETHICS .......................................................................................................................................................... 158 METHODS ....................................................................................................................................................