Discussion: “Host Country Conditions and the Religious Adaptation of Muslim Refugees” by Naman Rawat

EPSA 2025

Violeta Haas

May 22, 2025

Overview

  1. Two papers?
  2. Spill out Mechanisms
  3. Visible practice vs. private belief
  4. Smaller points

1. Two papers?


Integrating “push” and “pull” forces:

  • Do German friendships buffer the religiosity-boosting effect of hate crime?
  • Does local hostility slow the secularising effect of friendships?

2. Spill out Mechanisms


Identity-Threat → In-Group Religious Identification

  • Hate crime communicates devaluation of a salient group marker
    • to restore self-esteem and meaning, individuals focus on that very marker.

Religious Coping and Meaning-Making

  • faith as a ``resource’’’ employed under threat
    • victimization elevates anxiety, loss and uncertainty.
    • rituals, and prayer provide interpretations, emotional regulation, and perceived divine control.

2. Spill out Mechanisms


Social-Support Substitution

  • Hate crimes stress ties with host-society members
    • increased in-group orientation and exposure to faith based institutions

Collective Resistance

  • visible hostility can trigger organised responses often organized by faith-based institutions
    • strengthens normative pressure to display religiosity publicly

3. Visible practice vs. private belief


  • practices (highly visible), but not beliefs are linked with increased perceived discrimination (Bender et al. 2022)
    • negative effect of hate crimes on praying
    • positive effect of hate crimes on importance
  • Any low-visibility cost symbolic practices (diatary restrictions)?

4. Smaller points


  • Can you subset for attacks on insitutions (mosques) with ARVIG dataset? closer to true exposure.