Re-politicising the Interfaith: Diaspora Muslim Youth, Religious Authority, and the Remaking Ofjewish–Muslim Encounter After October 7
This article argues that the events following October 7, 2023, have catalyzed a generational rupture in Western diaspora interfaith relations, where digitally networked Muslim youth are re-politicizing Jewish–Muslim encounters by reframing solidarity with Palestine as a devotional commitment that challenges institutional consensus models and demands a pluralism grounded in contestation rather than the suppression of political disagreement.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
For decades, in many Western cities, the relationship between Jewish and Muslim communities has been managed by a specific group of leaders: senior religious figures, heads of large community organizations, and professional dialogue coordinators. These leaders built a model of interaction based on civility and shared history. They focused on what the two faiths had in common, often describing them as "Abrahamic" religions—meaning they all trace their spiritual lineage back to the same ancient patriarch. In this model, difficult political arguments, especially those concerning the conflict between Israel and Palestine, were set aside. The goal was to keep the peace by avoiding topics that might cause disagreement. This approach worked well for a long time, creating a stable environment where neighbors could meet, share meals, and sign joint statements without getting into heated debates about geopolitics.
However, this stable arrangement has recently faced a severe test. A new generation of young Muslims, growing up in Western countries, is challenging the old rules. They are not necessarily rejecting their Jewish neighbors, but they are refusing to pretend that political conflicts do not exist. For these young people, standing in solidarity with oppressed people, particularly in Palestine, is not just a political opinion; it is a core part of their religious duty. This shift is happening because the way religious authority works has changed. In the past, only trained scholars and official leaders could speak for the community. Today, young people find guidance and build their beliefs through digital networks, social media, and peer groups, often bypassing the traditional institutions entirely. This article explores how this generational change is rewriting the rules of interfaith life, moving from a model of polite agreement to one that accepts deep political disagreement as a normal part of living together.
The paper argues that the events following October 7, 2023, acted as a catalyst that accelerated a split that was already forming. For two generations, the "interfaith" world was the domain of an elite group of clerics and professionals who believed that keeping politics out of religious conversation was the only way to maintain harmony. The author suggests that this model is breaking down. The young people involved in this shift are not simply ignoring the old leaders; they are effectively replacing them as the voices that matter. Because these young Muslims build their religious identity through horizontal networks online rather than through top-down church or mosque hierarchies, they do not feel bound by the old agreements to stay silent on political issues. When the war in Gaza began, the old model of "let's just focus on our shared heritage" failed to capture the reality of what these young people were feeling. Instead of stepping back, they stepped forward, insisting that true friendship between faiths must include an honest conversation about justice and suffering.
The research brings together three different areas of study to explain this phenomenon. First, it looks at how religious authority has fragmented. In the past, a scholar's word was final because of their training and lineage. Now, with the internet and social media, anyone with a microphone can offer religious guidance, and young people are choosing to listen to influencers and activists who speak directly to their experiences. Second, the paper examines the sociology of Muslim youth in the West. Studies show that these young people are not becoming less religious as they grow older; rather, they are reshaping their faith to fit their lives as citizens in secular societies. Their piety is active and engaged, often blending religious values with political activism. Third, the author reviews the theory of interreligious dialogue, noting that the idea of "Abrahamic" unity is a modern invention that often smooths over deep differences to make people feel comfortable. The paper suggests that this comfort is no longer enough.
The central finding is that interfaith identity is no longer something handed down from institutions; it is being built from the bottom up by young people who are willing to argue about politics while still trying to be neighbors. The author describes this as a "re-politicization" of interfaith identity. This does not mean the relationship is ending; it means it is changing. The old way tried to hide political conflict to keep the peace. The new way insists that you cannot have an honest relationship if you ignore the political realities that shape your neighbors' lives. For these young Muslims, solidarity with the oppressed is a religious obligation, and refusing to acknowledge that obligation feels like a betrayal of their faith.
The paper also considers what kind of social system can handle this new reality. It looks at different theories about how diverse groups can live together. One popular idea is "covenantal pluralism," which suggests that people can make a promise to respect each other's rights and be good neighbors, even if they disagree deeply. While this sounds promising, the author argues that even this model might struggle if it still tries to rise above political conflict. The new generation seems to be demanding a different kind of pluralism—one that can survive deep disagreement without trying to fix it or pretend it away. They are showing that a community can stay together not by agreeing on everything, but by learning how to live with the tension of not agreeing.
Ultimately, the article suggests that the future of Jewish-Muslim relations in the West depends on whether society can accept this new, messier form of interaction. The old leaders who managed the dialogue are losing their power to define the relationship because the people they represent are finding their own voices elsewhere. The gap between the polite, scripted events organized by institutions and the raw, political, and networked reality of young people's lives is widening. The paper does not claim to know if this new path will lead to a stronger, more honest friendship or if it will lead to a total breakdown. What it does show is that the old assumption—that we can ignore politics to keep the peace—is no longer tenable. The relationship is being remade, and it is being remade by a generation that refuses to separate their faith from their fight for justice.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.