Mojtaba Yavar
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: The interpretation of the political sphere in Pahlavi’s age, based on the nostalgia paradigm, is the scope and purpose of this paper. Nostalgia, as the fundamental situation of human mental life, can affect the political area by its own ideas, concepts and operation. In this paper, ...
Read More
Abstract Purpose: The interpretation of the political sphere in Pahlavi’s age, based on the nostalgia paradigm, is the scope and purpose of this paper. Nostalgia, as the fundamental situation of human mental life, can affect the political area by its own ideas, concepts and operation. In this paper, focusing on the period of Pahlavi, We intend to show that legitimacy, which is one of the basic concepts related to the politics, had taken the nostalgic nature. Nostalgia paradigm, consciously and unconsciously, had become one of the established and dominant discourses in Pahlavi’s age. Nostalgia was the point of connection of culture and politics. Nostalgia paradigm was so pervasive that even the formation of theoretical ideas and thoughts of competing sides could be achieved and fulfilled in the same paradigm. The generality of Nostalgia not only included the official, governmental and nationalist discourse, but also the rival Islamist discourses (And some other discourses). Nostalgia paradigm in politics gained credibility and legitimacy for one (government side) and worked in order to delegitimize the existing political system for other (competing discourses). Design/Methodology/Approach: Combining the historical data with the adopted explanatory approach (interpretative-phenomenological approach), this article provides an analysis of the contemporary history of Iran. This combination seeks the means of nostalgia paradigm and uses Jacques Lacan’s psychological theory of the triple order (imaginary, symbolic and real order). Also, it explains the phenomena such as meaning, legitimacy and anti-legitimacy, identity and identification, self and other, and finally, presence and absence. Findings: The problem of this paper is to analyze the relationship between nostalgia and political credibility (legitimation) and finding the answer to these questions: how nostalgia is political? Or, what the appearance of nostalgic acts at the political level and in the realm of politics means? There is a familiar and well-known response to these questions: legitimacy. But, the specific findings of this paper can be formulated as follows: Nostalgia is one of the most dominant paradigms of the intellectual, cultural, political and social life of Iranians in the 20th century; it can be claimed that the political realm became the playing field of various nostalgias. In short, nostalgia was the source of access to legitimacy and also delegitimizing. Originality/Value: (a) Using a theoretical and methodological approach to review politics and political culture in the Pahlavi period. (b) Exploring the nostalgia as the dominant paradigm in the cultural, social and political space. (c) Exploring the political dimension of nostalgia in that period. (d) Exploring the dual Operation of nostalgic paradigm in the course of Iranian history and politics in the 20th century (not only in the discourse of ancient-oriented nationalism, but also in Islamic nationalism).
Shoja Ahmadvand; Mojtaba Yavar
Abstract
Abstract The progressive changes in nineteenth century led Iranian governance to the distribution of absolute political power. It meaningfully was a minimal cession of the traditional authority of the king institution and its power that could be accomplished either conscientiously and non- conscientiously. ...
Read More
Abstract The progressive changes in nineteenth century led Iranian governance to the distribution of absolute political power. It meaningfully was a minimal cession of the traditional authority of the king institution and its power that could be accomplished either conscientiously and non- conscientiously. This article has been based on this assumption: seeking for and pursuing improvement of the undesirable conditions, and generally, looking for "progression", need to accompaniment of two agent, both the political system (government) and scientific (intellectual) efforts. Basing on that assumption, in this article, we are going to show and demonstrate the government's roles and practices, to achieve the "progression". Undoubtedly, we can’t pursuit our goal with a mere glance on, and a superficial research about the nineteenth century evolutions. In another hand, no government likes to divide its unification and has no tendency to reduce its traditional capacities. Any changing, and any movement to modern "progressing", especially at the first stages, can’t be a continuous and permanent process without the government's supports and interferences. But, whereas in the primitive stage to modernization, the old administrative system (bureaucracy) is one of the original and elementary obstacles, every prosecution to modernization of the society and state is depended on the proportional changes in the government by itself. Problematically, in traditional Iranian state, the King was the "Zhellollah" (the God's shadow); it means that, the King had the topmost place in the hierarchical pyramid of power; in fact, the Kingdom as a traditional, legal and accepted institution in Iran was the comprehensive and fully qualified status of power. Thus, wherever this powerful institution is the most important bearer for modern "progress", its unified, centered and integrated authority has been effected by the uncharitable and serious element of modernity. We are looking to confirm and verify this claim in this article. To access such goal, we need an approach which can be explanatory; so, we need the Genealogy method of Michel Foucault. Genealogy approach can nicely and deliberately explain the coalition of the government's unconscious operation and conscious function in studious unit. We will show that such combination has been done within a complete coalition of awareness and non- awareness. It was full of awareness, because the general will of the government was going to accept emblems of western-modern changing, to adapt and perform it in the traditional society of Iran. So the government attempts to do it by itself. But it was higher than traditional King’s efforts and capacities. The government made decision to distribute and cession parts of its power just for ongoing social changing. The non-conscientious or undesired conclusion of power dispersion in the politics area was the genesis of a will to establish a constitutional government. In fact, the extensive portion of this matter was not only the consequence of intellectual or thinking pioneers efforts but also was a production of the government progressive actions.
