Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Oligopoly Is Not Pluralism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Religious Pluralism

Abstract

There are four basic types of church-state relations: eradication, monopoly, oligopoly, and pluralism. State regulations may ban all religions, protect only one religion, allow for several religions, or treat all religions equally. The existing literature has focused almost exclusively on monopoly and pluralism. However, the most prevalent type in the world today is neither monopoly nor pluralism but oligopoly. This Chapter argues that it is necessary to distinguish between oligopoly and pluralism in order to understand better the changing dynamics of church-state relations in the modern world. It is also necessary to distinguish between pluralism and plurality in theoretical construction. Moreover, these distinctions necessitate a definition of religion, a duty that social scientists of religion can no longer evade.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Eileen Barker in a 2003 article discussed the impacts of the pluralistic society on individuals’ belief, behavior, and belongings.

References

  • Barker, Eileen. 2003. And the wisdom to know the difference? Freedom, control and the sociology of religion. Sociology of Religion 64(3): 285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckford, James A. 2003. Social theory and religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beckford, James A. 2010. Religious pluralism and diversity: Response to Yang and Thériault. Social Compass 57(2): 217–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter. 1967. The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion. Garden City: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter. 1970. A rumor of angels: Modern society and the rediscovery of the supernatural. Garden City: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter (ed.). 1999. The desecularization of the world: Resurgent religion and world politics. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, Peter, Grace Davie, and Effie Fokas. 2008. Religious America, secular Europe? A theme and variations. Hampshire: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, Emile. 2001. The elementary forms of religious life. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grim, Brian J., and Roger Finke. 2006. International religion indexes: Government regulation, government favoritism, and social regulation of religion. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 2(2006): article 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemeyer, Julia Corbett. 2009. Religion in America, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melton, J. Gordon. 2009. Encyclopedia of American religions, 8th ed. Detroit: Gale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, Rodney, and Roger Finke. 2000. Acts of faith: Explaining the human side of religion. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner, R. Stephen. 1993. Work in progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological study of religion in the United States. American Journal of Sociology 98(1993): 1044–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, R. Stephen. 2003. More progress on the new paradigm. In Sacred markets, sacred canopies: Essays on religious markets and religious pluralism, ed. Ted G. Jelen, 1–32. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1963. The sociology of religion. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuthnow, Robert. 2004. Presidential address 2003: The challenge of diversity. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43(2): 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Fenggang. 2010. Oligopoly dynamics: Consequences of religious regulation. Social Compass 57(2): 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Fenggang. 2012. Religion in China: Survival and revival under communist rule. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Fenggang. 2013. A research agenda on religious freedom in China. The Review of Faith and International Affairs 11(2): 6–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center on Religion and Chinese Society, Purdue University, 700 W. State Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Fenggang Yang

Authors
  1. Fenggang Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fenggang Yang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of FISPPA, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Giuseppe Giordan

  2. Department of FISPPA, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Enzo Pace

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yang, F. (2014). Oligopoly Is Not Pluralism. In: Giordan, G., Pace, E. (eds) Religious Pluralism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06623-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation