The Working Group on “Religion, Neoliberalism, and Postcoloniality,” whose renewal we are requesting, has been formed through continuous work for over two decades, generating and collectively disseminating knowledge with highly satisfactory results, as shown in our latest report. For this new period, taking into account the changes that have occurred in the Latin American landscape (which we outline below) and the dreams that have not yet been fully realized, this Working Group has set itself the following objectives: thematically, to deepen the approach from a “post/decolonial” perspective; and epistemologically and methodologically, to strengthen communication with different social actors, prioritizing the use of new technologies and virtual networks, as well as close engagement with social networks, in order to achieve greater influence on public policies (both state and social) and transformative impact.

The challenges posed by the context

Latin America, the cradle of Liberation Theology, has now become, after numerous interventions with grave consequences for the lives and dignity of its people, and following a wave of leftist governments, the stage for the rise of conservative sectors seizing state power. These sectors are homophobic, authoritarian, patriarchal, exclusionary, and racist, and are based on neoliberal doctrines, impassioned rhetoric, strategic alliances, and symbolic acts of a religious nature. At the same time, numerous actions and movements find in the use of diverse and dynamic expressions of spirituality and religion the sacredness and strength that calls for respect for life, territories, identities, and the creation of harmonious and supportive lifestyles; in short, for “other” ways of being.

Indeed, to mention just a few examples, in Brazil, the country's polarization and Bolsonaro's election are closely linked to alliances with religious leaders (particularly Pentecostals, but also conservative Catholic, Spiritist, and other religious sectors), to conservative discourses surrounding the "defense of the family," the "fight against corruption," and "non-partisan education," and to street protests that seem to have developed their capacity for mass political mobilization in the large "Marches for Jesus" (Toniol, 2019). In Mexico, while López Obrador articulates leftist discourses with conservative Christian dogmas and MORENA allies itself with the PES, an evangelical party, a strong social movement has emerged around the fight against "gender ideology" and the defense of procreation, property, morality, and education, linking religious sectors of diverse origins (e.g., the National Front for the Family) (De la Torre, 2019*). In Colombia, the peace plebiscite, the election of the hitherto unknown Duque, and the referendum on corruption have been marked by anti-“Castro-Chavista” discourse, fallacies surrounding the “gender ideology” supposedly present in the peace agreement, and the imagined threat against property and morality (Lozano, 2019). In the Peruvian case, evangelical leaders have formed political parties and, together with other religions, including Catholicism, organize mobilizations such as “Don’t Mess With My Children” against sex education and gender equality as part of school education (Barreira, 2017).

But beyond the games in the electoral arena, it is clear that a passionate religious conservative spirit is at work, in which tectonic plates (Lozano) linked to the spirit of conquest, the imposition of a faith, the inquisitorial judgment against “impurity” and idolatry, patriarchal authoritarianism and the denial of “otherness” permeate social relations, from the most intimate and everyday levels to international relations, including the appropriation of states, the regulation of affections, the direction of education, and the objectification and commodification of human beings and nature. 

However, the phenomenon is not exclusively Latin American: the continuity of the “war on terror” that continues to be justified on both sides in terms of a clash of civilizations (Huntington, 2005) or holy wars desired by God or undertaken against the kingdom of evil is mercilessly expressed across the planet in what several have called a war of all states against all people (Holloway & Peláez, 2002) or an endless war of hegemony and world terror (Ceceña & Sader, 2002) that is strongly marked by the so-called “religious fundamentalism” of various faces (Santos B., 2018). This conservative wave cannot be understood in isolation from the processes of hegemonic globalization or, in other words, it constitutes the continuation and strengthening of the processes of neo-colonialism, which can be understood as a reaction against advances in the recognition of minority rights and incentives for intercultural relations that challenge traditional socio-cultural patterns.

Global geopolitics is witnessing the rise of various forms and levels of fascism, manifested in increased social militarization, the expansion of armed, economic, and cultural colonialism, the reaffirmation of patriarchal and racist hegemony, and the growth of transnational imperial capitalism. These processes find significant mechanisms of individual and collective biopower in religion, a two-way street that requires thorough deconstruction by academia and by collective actions with emancipatory aims. This Working Group has decided to address this as one of its key challenges for action over the next three years.   

Similarly, in the Latin American context, there is evidence of the emergence of processes of territorial affirmation and defense and of the generation of alternatives to hegemonic colonial development and its forms of violence, which allow us to ask ourselves if the space for decolonization is opening up? (Escobar, 2014, p. 36).

Indeed, we are faced with a wide variety of collective actions populating the continent in forms of resistance, survival, and alternatives of polychromatic characteristics unimaginable until a few decades ago. These include urban and rural grassroots organizations proposing a paradigm of food relocalization in the face of the ecological and social crisis; Buen Vivir (Good Living) movements adopting lifestyles in harmony and respect with nature based on “other” ontologies and cosmogonies that, while in some cases influencing elections, constitutional changes (Ecuador and Bolivia), or the generation of new jurisprudence recognizing nature as a subject of rights (Colombia), go further in the recognition and affirmation of its own rights; multiple fair trade initiatives; and social movements opposing industrialized mining. Collective actions of women against patriarchal social structures and in favor of gender equality… A long etcetera make up this dynamic that is still not sufficiently visible and understood, in which some see the capacity to transmute neocolonial relations between “things” into relations between people (Armas, 2010), contrasting the pedagogy of cruelty with the pedagogy of connection (Segato, 2018)

Referring to these social dynamics, Zibechi observes that there are truly “other societies” “that construct realities distinct from the hegemonic ones and that encompass all aspects of life.” She identifies several characteristics among them, including a powerful anti-colonial stance that unites various perspectives: anti-capitalist, anti-colonial, and anti-patriarchal (Zibechi, 2018).

It is worth noting that this characterization makes no clear reference to the role of the religious and the spiritual, nor does it acknowledge their plurality and complexity, which precisely reveals a gap in the readings of these decolonial movements. This is despite the fact that these searches for alternative societies are heavily constructed around allusions, rituals, organizations, mandates, and actions related to sacredness and spirituality. This gap has begun to be addressed by several members of our group, such as through the construction of resistance by diverse social actors: indigenous and Afro-descendant groups (Lozano, 2008, Robledo, 1997), socio-environmental groups (Parker Gumucio, 2012), migrants (Robledo, 1997, De la Torre, 2012), and organized civil society groups (Romero, 2012; (Burity, 2015a) (Burity, 2015b), but it requires further integration, analysis, and ongoing monitoring, deepening the decolonial perspective.

In short, there are multiple implicit dimensions when discussing religions in Latin America and the Caribbean; there are different understandings of how to conceive of neoliberalism and its articulation with religious practices and actors; and finally, there is the challenge of perceiving how religious institutions and expressions, as well as social movements, are constructed, resignified, and transformed, and to what extent they manage to challenge long-standing colonial, patriarchal, and capitalist structures and practices, resorting, among other things, to spiritual or religious mechanisms of power. Therefore, the relational triad of religion(s), neoliberalism, and post/decoloniality is posed as a challenge for research, exchange, socialization, and social articulation.

With the aim of giving continuity and depth to the work done so far and of which there is already a large collective production (Zalpa & Offerdal, 2008) (Aurelio Alonso, 2009) (Ameigeiras, 2014) (Giménez Béliveau, 2019) and individual production within CLACSO, this group requests renewal taking into account the growing relevance of its themes in the Latin American social reality (as we stated in the previous section), but also the ambiguous notability that the religious theme has in the literature on post/decoloniality since although it is mentioned in several works (Santos B., 2018) (Escobar, 2018), (Lozano BR, 2017) it does not achieve the necessary focus and depth.

The foundation and theoretical relevance of the challenges posed by the social context, described in the previous point, implies that on the one hand we analyze the evolution of the social sciences on religion in Latin America and the Caribbean, that we see the significance they give to the development and current state of neoliberalism, and that we recognize questions that arise from the decolonial theoretical current and collective actions or “other” societies regarding the topic of religions and spiritualities.

As various investigations by several members of our group have shown (De la Torre & Martín, 2018) (Parker & (Editor), 2012), the analysis of religious phenomena and their relationship with social and political dynamics in the region has undergone significant evolutions in recent decades. This has shifted from the descriptive observation of Catholic hegemony and the neglect of "otherness," which included studies of conflictive relationships between some sectors of believers (Catholics and those of other churches) and the current states or governments (González, 1997), as well as the recognition of the commitment of various churches to human rights, to registering the diversification and reconfiguration due to both the growth of Christian denominations and the deinstitutionalization, religious pluralization, and the emergence of ancestral spiritualities and other identities (gender, ethnic, political). The role of the media in its interaction with religion has also been addressed, “fixing certain signs, symbols, and popular practices in public opinion” (Parker, 2012). These changes have led to discussions of “hybridization of diffuse religiosities under labels such as New Age, or neo-esoteric commodifications” (De la Torre, 2014), and of a “Christian culture that is available and fluid, subject to multiple recompositions and memories” (Mallimaci, 2011). Much of this research has analyzed the interrelationships between religion and politics through questions about secularism, religious freedom (Panotto, 2019), questions that remain relevant in diverse circumstances depending on the country, religious affiliation, social sector, and so on.  

In the face of neoliberalism and the recent socio-political conservatism, several analyses refer to the evolution of perverse confluences between the neoliberal project and the democratic aspirations of society (Dagnino), which in the religious sphere gave rise to “the emergence of entrepreneurial, competitive forms of spirituality that are averse to the syncretic pact constructed by Catholicism” and consequently to a “current assemblage of neoliberalism, political authoritarianism, and moral conservatism” (Burity, 2019). Along the same lines, other research (Parker C., 2002; Mariz, 2006; Comaroff, 2009) allows us to affirm a certain elective affinity between certain religious movements and two major socio-cultural configurations linked to globalization: the economic doctrine of neoliberalism and the logic of cultural production of late capitalism. In the last stage, both in the GT meetings, as well as in publications motivated by it, several works were generated on the topic of religion and neoliberalism with different contributions according to perspectives, countries, specific cases, etc. (See Lozano, Levita, Robledo, Romero and Bustamante in issue 5 of the Latin American Journal of Critical Research and Mallimaci, Giménez, Carbonelli, Parker and Burity in issue 6).

Some colleagues have shown, on the other hand, how these facts are closely linked to each other, beyond neoliberalism, and how patriarchalism, colonialism, racism, extractivism are part of the same dynamic, and therefore the violence experienced both in the intimacy of intrafamily aggressions, as well as in femicides (Segato, 2016) and other forms of massive and systematic victimization to which our peoples have been subjected for centuries, are part of global terror and are an expression of the civilizational catastrophe in which we find ourselves planetaryly (Lozano F., 2019).

From what has been said so far, it is evident that there is an interest in situating the understanding of socio-religious relations within the framework of postcoloniality, understanding that, to paraphrase Bhabha, the meaning of "post" is not in sequentiality (after colonialism) but in a broader significance of the awareness that the epistemological limits of Eurocentric ideas are also enunciative limits in which the spectrum of other dissonant and dissident histories and voices emerges: women, colonized people, minorities, etc. 

Postcolonial reading weaves its intellectual roots in certain thinkers and activists of the early 19th century who grappled with the opposition between civilization and barbarism, although from a contemporary perspective, it is necessary to trace its origins back to the pluralistic knowledge expressed in the voices and actions of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, and women, who reinterpreted the truths and dogmas brought by European modernity. However, this becomes increasingly evident in the pioneering books of Fals Borda. Indigenous Science and Intellectual Colonialism (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed of Freire and the entire body of Liberation Theology. However, it is in the work of Aníbal Quijano (80s and 90s) that one of its syntheses is found in his article Coloniality of power, Eurocentrism and Latin America (Quijano, 2000)where he achieves his most recognized and inspiring version. The last two decades have been very fruitful in this field and are impossible to reference here.  

 According to Santos, interpreting these events implies recognizing that the dominant Western epistemology has been constructed from the needs of capitalist and colonial domination and is based on a profoundly flawed way of thinking. This necessitates an epistemology grounded in the ecology of knowledges and intercultural translation (Santos B. d., 2010). Escobar, in turn, points out the importance of theorizing from relational ontologies and the pluriverse, which involve recognizing the premises that social groups hold regarding what “really” exists. This involves moving beyond the objectivist, individualistic, and mercantilist approach of Western modernity to acknowledge relationality—that is, “that all things in the world are made of entities that do not pre-exist the relationships that constitute them,” for which Buddhism serves as a radical example. This relational ontology implies recognizing how, in many non-Western or non-modern societies, the separation between the individual and the social, between the natural and the supernatural, between the material and the spiritual is unimaginable (Escobar, 2014). Hence the need to “feel-think” in place, in networks, in pluriverses of knowledge constructed not only in the comfort of the so-called academic community but in “walking the word” with communities.

However, the topic of the religious, spiritual, and sacred is only just beginning to be explored or is interpreted solely as part of colonialism, without considering, beyond general allusions, the range of “other” religious practices. This is not so much to “integrate” them into the body of knowledge of the sociology of religions, but rather to recognize their radical otherness and their cultural frameworks. This does not imply dialectical opposition, but rather a porous, diffuse, and dynamic pluriversity. This has profound implications, ranging from epistemology and methodology to the consideration of who the subjects generating knowledge are and their forms and spaces of interaction. This Working Group aims to address the complexity of the challenges implicit here, specifying the following objectives for the next three years:

* To comparatively study the relationship between religion and neoliberalism in Latin America and the Caribbean based on dialogue with critical theoretical perspectives informed by postcolonial and decolonial theories.

* To understand, from a comparative and interdisciplinary analysis, the transformations produced by the recent cultural and political hegemony of neoliberal reason in the Latin American and Caribbean religious field and the theoretical and methodological challenges it presents.

* Analyze the impact of religions and spiritualities (individual and collective actors, institutions, discourses, commodities) in the fields of politics, culture and economics, focusing especially on postcolonial collective actions.