Secularist but thorough
Perica's history is incredibly thorough, exposing the multi-layered nature of the conflict. I highly recommend the book, as a well researched, well written, and expertly argued account. My only argument with the book is that its secularist slant results in internal inconsistencies regarding the role of religion in the conflict. On the one hand, Perica exposes the constructed nature of the conflict, describing the myth formation employed by self-interested, power-seeking institutions. He also discusses the lack of proper democratization, and the anti-clerical brutality of the communist regime. However, in the end, he lays the blame solidly on religion, as an inevitably evil influence: Perica states that a multi-ethnic state would never have succeeded there, that true religion must be completely apolitical and antipolitical, that religious peacemaking efforts and interfaith dialogue are ineffective, marginal, and insignificant, and that secularization is both the only solution and the inevitable fate for modernity. Perica's conclusions are hardly surprising, considering the generally shameful role of religious institutions in the region; however, a more consistent analysis --one that takes into account the fundamentalist nature of secularist ideologies and their effects on religion, that treats religion with less reductionism, and that does not vacillate between constructivist and primordialist conclusions to support a secularization thesis-- would improve the work overall.
Trelawney Grenfell-Muir
2007-03-26
