Hamid Reza Rahmanizade Dehkordi
Abstract
Political decisions usually affect a large number of people but the point is to what extent these decisions are justified and verified, and to what extent, they have gone through the correct decision-making mechanisms. The negative consequences of some of these decisions have been motivating many researchers ...
Read More
Political decisions usually affect a large number of people but the point is to what extent these decisions are justified and verified, and to what extent, they have gone through the correct decision-making mechanisms. The negative consequences of some of these decisions have been motivating many researchers to figure out where the problem comes from. However, the problem is that most of these researchers have seen them in a suspended, abstract, and isolated way. The purpose of this article is, first of all, to provide criteria for evaluating these decisions, and in the next step, to identify the most important challenges of the government's political decision-making. In the third step, it tries to provide examples of these challenges with regard to the provided indicators, and then to show the relationship which they are related to the issue of "accountability" and their ultimate relationship with the gap between the government - the nation, and the weakness of the civil society. The research method in this article is descriptive-analytical and gathering data is based on documents, finally, statistical samples have been used to examine the process of several important political decisions. The specific finding of this article is that political decision-making is a multifaceted and complex phenomenon whose transparency, verification, and justification are closely related to the question of accountability and finally democratic mechanisms, and the existence of strong civil forces and political parties.
Hamidreza Rahmanizadeh Dehkordi; Mohamad Medi Zanjani
Abstract
Purpose: There are various approaches to study the modern state in Iran including the Marxist approach, Patrimonial approach and the Oriental despotism approach. These approaches, however, often consider the modern state as a full-blown despotism and Reza Shah as an "oriental despot" or an autocrat who ...
Read More
Purpose: There are various approaches to study the modern state in Iran including the Marxist approach, Patrimonial approach and the Oriental despotism approach. These approaches, however, often consider the modern state as a full-blown despotism and Reza Shah as an "oriental despot" or an autocrat who imposed his will upon the society. The critics of Reza Shah claim that he was a dictator: He secularized laws, forced women to do away with the veil, and introduced Western-style dress for men. They state that during his time, there was hardly any political life in the form of opposition. The press was muzzled; the parliament rubber-stamped the king’s decisions, and some of his political rivals and confidantes were imprisoned, some eliminated. Religious protests were put down robustly, and Reza Shah was ruthless with tribal rebellions. Indeed, his style was very brusque. This study aims to show how a seemingly absolute and autocrat modern state, Reza Shah’s State, could be limited by a number of factors including the existence of strong social forces such as tribes, the state’s incapability to exert absolute force, and the intervention of foreign powers. In other words, there have been some social and economic contexts influencing the modern state. In this situation, the Shah could be forced to make a decision and take an action different from his own will. To prove this claim, this study gives some evidence from various sources, including foreign state documents, books, memories, diaries of foreign financial advisers such as Dr. Millspaugh, eyewitnesses who registered their observations etc. Design/Methodology/Approach: The structural approach is adapted to justify the modern state. In other words, it is shown that to understand the concrete reality of The Modern State, one should refer to the context (social forces, geographic situation, and intervention of foreign forces) and, moreover, one should refer to the state and its ability/inability to exerting absolute force in its territory. Findings: Our thesis can be summed up by one typical statement: Social, economic, and demographic situations (including social forces and geographically large countries with dispersed population), that is what is called as a context and some characteristics of the Modern State (including state inability to exert absolute force on the country), prevent the state from falling into full-blown despotism. The study has summarized the other approaches and compared them to the approach of the present paper for highlighting the different dimensions of this approach. Originality/Value: It is the researcher’s belief that this study throws a new light to the debates on Reza Shah’s state as the first modern state in Iran. The critics of this state assert that it was a full blown despotic state, and the defenders consider it as a reformer-dictator state that laid the foundation of modern Iran and transformed the chaotic and desperate conditions of the time. This study shows that, in spite of the fact that there were some suppressions, some structural impediments prevented the Shah to act on his own absolute will.
Hamidreza Rahmanizadeh Dehkordi
Abstract
Purpose: The relationship between cyberspace and democracy has been one of the most controversial issues during the last two decades. The main question particularly lies in the fact whether cyberspace can restrict the authoritarian state. The study aims, in the first step, to examine the arguments for ...
Read More
Purpose: The relationship between cyberspace and democracy has been one of the most controversial issues during the last two decades. The main question particularly lies in the fact whether cyberspace can restrict the authoritarian state. The study aims, in the first step, to examine the arguments for and against some basic concepts which are related to the question of the study and those debates including “virtual civil society”, “virtual public sphere”, “state accountability” and “creating some spaces for resistance”. Then, Non-Democratic Sides of Cyberspace were examined and it was revealed that they are not related to cyberspace per se. These features arise from political, social and economic structures; but cyberspace can represent them, at the best. In other words, internet should be looked at as a tool or a medium, not as a goal per se. Design/Methodology/Approach: In this article, the main arguments for and against the democratic sides of cyberspace were examined and some evidence was given for each. Then, it was indicated that all of them are a part of truth. To understand the concrete reality on cyberspace we should refer to context (social, economic structures) which is known as structural approach. Findings: Our thesis can be summed up by one typical statement: "structures and actions determine the political and social system and internet and cyberspace can only act as a catalyst". No evidence could be found to show us that activity in cyberspace can make a great change in political, social relations and structures, on the contrary, there is clear-cut evidence that the state and social, economic institutions, have used this tool in promoting and achieving their goals. Originality/Value: The two different approaches toward cyberspace and its impact on promoting democracy process are not new. Our contribution to this process, in the first step, is to categorize and analyze them based on their reasons and evidence and more importantly, to show that these two approaches are Two sides of the same coin. To understand the democracy process and nature of the state, we should refer to the concrete context including social and economic structures and not to virtual tools.
