Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
This week tracks religion as public infrastructure, from Indonesian Muslim-group narratives to EU workplace neutrality and Northern Nigerian ethical leadership.
New work asks how faith communities shape democratic loyalty, how institutions police visible religion, and how Islamic ethics frame governance in Northern Nigeria.
Covers 2026-05-25 to 2026-06-01; 5 free papers from 40 selected papers.
Where pulpits, courts, parties, and movements collide, this show follows the research behind the headlines on faith, power, identity, and democracy.
Episode covers 2026-05-25 – 2026-06-01.
Themes: democracy, Indonesia, governance, theology, political psychology, religion, religious moderation, Islam
Methods: qualitative, case-study, literature review, historical analysis, textual analysis, comparative analysis
Premium also covers 10 related news stories, including prri.org — How Americans' Views of the Term Christian Nationalism Are Shaped, texastribune.org — Trump administration sues to seize church land near El Paso, and religionnews.com — Catholic diocese fights Trump administration plan to seize ...
The premium version of this podcast covers all 40 research articles and 10 news stories selected for the episode. Subscribe to the premium podcast.
Generated by paperboy.fm.
Where pulpits, courts, parties, and movements collide, this show follows the research behind the headlines on faith, power, identity, and democracy.
Subscribe for the premium version of this podcast: https://paperboy.fm/podcasts/this-week-in-religion-and-politics/subscribe
Jenny: Have you ever heard a group say, “People like us are losing our country,” and wondered what that does to politics?
Davis: I hear it as a flare, not a footnote, because it can pull private worry into public rules.
Jenny: Right, and I get nervous there, because that phrase can make almost any overreach sound like self-defense.
Davis: It can, but not every identity claim burns the same way; a church picnic and a hardline movement are not the same political fuel.
Jenny: And in Indonesia, feeling tied to hardliner Muslim groups, unlike moderate ones, tracks with more support for religious rule, more intolerance, and more willingness to excuse religious violence... welcome to This Week In Religion and Politics on paperboy.fm.
Jenny: This week we started with seven hundred eighty-four hits, narrowed that to two hundred, and ended with fifty-eight qualified papers. That's up from fifty-seven last week, so basically flat, but the map is still wide: one hundred nine authors across twenty-six countries.
Davis: And the topics make the through-line pretty visible. Democracy, Indonesia, governance, and theology are all near the top, with Indonesia showing up in eight papers and the U.S. in six, so religion is showing up as a public system, not just a private identity.
Jenny: The odd bit is the funnel. Query hits rose from seven hundred twenty-one to seven hundred eighty-four, up sixty-three hits, or about nine percent, while unique authors fell from one hundred twenty-eight to one hundred nine. So we saw more searchable material, but fewer people behind the qualified set, which makes me ask: are a few clusters producing more of the week, or did the search just catch more near-misses?
Davis: The methods point toward a week built on close reading and field context. Thirty of the fifty-eight qualified papers are qualitative, with six case studies, four literature reviews, and four historical analyses. So if you're listening for big survey estimates, this isn't that week; it's more courts, schools, sermons, institutions, and how people explain power in place.
Jenny: The author mix also leans newer. Out of one hundred nine authors, thirty-three are first-time authors, meaning their first-ever paper in the metadata, not just their first time in our feed. Another fifty-two are emerging researchers, and twenty-four are experienced, so almost four in five authors are either first-time or early-career by this classification.
Davis: That matters for how we read the week. The volume barely moved, but the attention widened, and the methods stayed grounded in interpretation. The practical takeaway is that religion-and-politics research this week is less about one giant headline and more about many local cases showing how belief becomes law, trust, identity, and governance.
Jenny: Alright, let's get into the papers, and this first one sets up the whole week: N. G. Sumaktoyo and Jessica Soedirgo have a twenty twenty-six Political Psychology study called When are identity-based groups harmful to democracy?, and they look at Muslim groups in Indonesia to ask when a religious identity becomes a democratic warning sign.
Jenny: Their answer is not, religious groups are automatically bad for democracy. The danger signal is a victimized majority narrative, meaning a story where the majority says it has been pushed out of power by minorities, even when that majority still has huge social and political weight.
Davis: So how did they separate ordinary religious identity from the more dangerous story that the majority is being pushed out?
Jenny: They used a mixed-method design, which just means they paired close interviews with data analysis: first interviewing leaders of moderate and hardliner Muslim groups, then using original panel data from people who identified with those groups. The hardliner leaders used the victimized-majority story more often, even when moderate and hardliner groups sounded similar on issues like blasphemy or heterodoxy, which means beliefs judged outside the accepted religious line.
Jenny: At the individual level, identifying with hardliner groups, but not moderate ones, was tied to higher support for political Islam, higher religious intolerance, and higher support for religious violence. That's strong evidence for Indonesia because the interviews and panel data point the same way, but it doesn't prove the exact pattern travels unchanged to every democracy.
Davis: That feels like the practical rule for this Faith and Democratic Formation thread: don't just look at the group label, look at the story being taught, because a majority that learns to talk like an expelled minority can become very willing to bend democratic rules.
Davis: That expelled-majority story makes this next one feel like the flip side: The Relationship between Islamic Boarding Schools and Islamic Politics looks at pesantren in West Java, Islamic boarding schools, not as mobilizing machines but as places teaching first-time voters how to think democratically.
Davis: Kunkunrat Kunkunrat, Ade Priangani, and Willya Achmad argue that santri, meaning students in these schools, are learning democratic literacy, basically how to vote with knowledge, criticism, and responsibility, through Islamic moral values and maslahatan, the idea of public interest. The sharp finding is that the kiai, the cleric, has normative and ethical influence, but doesn't necessarily determine the students' political preferences.
Jenny: What did they actually observe that separates education from mobilization, because a charismatic kiai telling eighteen-year-olds what counts as the public interest could still steer a bloc vote?
Davis: They use a qualitative case-study design in West Java, so they are reading practices and accounts closely rather than counting every pesantren in Indonesia, and the evidence is students describing moderate, inclusive links between Islamic values and democratic principles instead of simple obedience to one party or candidate. That gives useful depth, but only moderate support, because one regional case can't tell us how all pesantren behave during a national campaign.
Jenny: I like the counterweight to the last paper: in this Faith and Democratic Formation thread, the danger sign wasn't religion in politics by itself, it was the story being taught, and here the story is critical, ethical, and aimed at the public good. For civic educators, that means religious schools can be partners, if the classroom keeps asking students to reason rather than just line up.
Jenny: That line about the story being taught is a good bridge, because this next paper moves from religious schools in West Java to public trust in Northern Nigeria. A. Fahm and Murjanatu Ibrahim call it How Islamic Thought Shapes Socio-Political Dynamics in Northern Nigeria, and they’re asking how people judge leadership when the state is dealing with insecurity, inequality, and mistrust.
Jenny: The plain version is this: people weren’t only talking about roads, jobs, or police capacity. Across fieldwork in Kano, Sokoto, Kaduna, and Borno, they judged governance through Islamic moral language, meaning ideas like trust, truthfulness, restraint, and service became evidence that a leader was serious about repair.
Davis: When people talked about leadership, what counted as evidence of good governance in their own moral language?
Jenny: The authors did fieldwork between July twenty twenty-three and February twenty twenty-four, with fifty semi-structured interviews, which means guided but open conversations, plus five focus groups with religious scholars, community leaders, youth activists, women’s cooperative members, and other stakeholders. People pointed to concepts like zakāt, charitable obligation, waqf, community endowment, and maqāṣid al-sharīʿa, the broader public purposes of Islamic law, but also to everyday conduct like telling the truth and not using office for personal gain. The study is rich and grounded, but four states and a qualitative sample can’t stand in for all of Northern Nigeria.
Davis: That makes the Moral Governance in Practice thread feel very concrete: if a governance program walks into Northern Nigeria with only an institutional checklist, it may miss the language people actually use to decide whether leaders are legitimate. The evidence is careful rather than sweeping, but the practical takeaway is strong enough: trust-building has to speak in local ethical terms, not just policy terms.
Paperboy.fm: This is the free version of the podcast. Subscribe at paperboy.fm to access a dozen different paper review podcasts for five dollars a month.