Abstract This paper explores the paradox of secularism in Chile’s 2022 constitutional proposal, celebrated as the “world’s most progressive” yet decisively rejected in a national referendum. The drafters sought to secularize Chile’s political institutions by curbing the influence of mainstream religions—above all, Catholicism—while simultaneously granting broad recognition and autonomy to Indigenous worldviews, including their spiritual and ritual dimensions. This dual strategy raises the question of whether the constitution merely substituted one religious framework for another under the guise of decolonial justice. To explain this apparent contradiction, the paper distinguishes between two axes of division: a first-order cleavage of oppressors vs. oppressed, which shaped the draft’s core commitments, and a secondary secular vs. religious cleavage, which played a subordinate role. The analysis concludes that Indigenous worldviews were embraced not as religious doctrines but as expressions of historically wronged communities deserving redress, whereas institutional religion was sidelined as a marker of colonial oppression. The paper contributes to debates on constitution-making and secularism in non-European contexts, illustrating how secular projects can entangle with alternative substantive doctrines in pursuit of historical justice.
Bellolio et al. (Thu,) studied this question.