Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistance Professor, Department of Political Science, Ferdowsi University

Abstract

Abstract
 
Purpose: Technology of power in political arena changed after Constitutional Revolution. Before this event, governmentality was operating according to despotic system in reality and writing mirror of king in thought for controlling traditional absolute power. Iran in Qajar dynasty experience was under the old method for policy making and ultimately this process resulted in decline. Authoritarian political culture in state and among nation caused failure and thereafter defeat from Russia, losing lands, and increasing protestations of people. At the same time with criticizing traditional political thought, new technology of power became possible. In this paper, I try to analyse method of political thinkers in Iran who drawing world-viewing power mechanisms for transition and reforming authoritarian system. For this aim, I choosed two important and influential pioneer in constitution revolution: Mohammad Ali Foroughi Zoka-ol-Molk and Mirza Mohammad Hussein Na`ini that could design new shape of governmentality in contemporary political history of Iran. For content analysis that are indicators of mechanism of technology power and element of constitutional gornmentality, I refer to the case study text book Constitutional Etiquette Foroughi and Tanbyh-ol-omah va Tanzyh-ol-melah Naini.
 
Method and theory: Methodology of this research for qualitative analysis of propositions of these two texts is phenomenology. This qualitative method has helped me to close to my subject and focus interpretive understanding toward two thinkers from the comparative perspective old and new power technology. The theoretical framework is governmentality. Governmentality means that thinking about power or technology of power that state applies to subjection and controls citizen. In every age and all state we can see different governmentality. Three types include: authoritarian traditional, mechanic modern and information postmodern. In the traditional governmentality court of king was important resource for policy and politics is personal affair. Epistemological knowledge is abstract to advice characteristic leadership. There is huge gap between objective and subjective or between means and goals of politics. The result of this process is isolation and failure political thought. In the modern and mechanic governmentality, we see the relation between subject and object of politics. Consequence of this event founded bureaucratic state for regular resource, currents and processes of politics .All forms of governmentality used production, distribution and increases power for applying and limiting the art of government. In this theory, politic is art, act and technic for regularization, formulation, institutionalization human behavior.
 
Finding: for proving the hypothesis of the transition from authoritarian state to mechanistic one, I refer to two main and influential political text from Foroughi and Naini. Form and structure of state in Iran affected the type of constitutional governmentality in the end of Qajar dynasty. Foroughi with technical, exact and detail writing about law and policymaking in state constitution introduced modern formula of state into Iranians and familiarized mind of elite Iranians with mechanical state. Naini, writing about coexistent mutualism between mechanistic state and new narrative of Islam politic, tried to stimulate big clergy Shiite to think of new mechanical state.

Keywords

منابع
اجلالی، پرویز (1391)، نظریه‌های برنامه‌ریزی، دیدگاه سنتی و جدید، تهران: آگه.
اردستانی، علی (1388)، ساختار و ماهیت روش‌شناسی در علم سیاست، تهران: قومس.
بشیریه، حسین (1378)، سیری در نظریه‌های جدید در علوم سیاسی، تهران: موسسه نشر علوم نوین.
جابری، محمد عابد (1387)، ما و میراث فلسفی‌مان، تهران: ثالث.
جابری، محمد عابد (1391)، خوانشی نوین از فلسفۀ مغرب و اندلس، ترجمه سید مهدی آل مهدی، تهران: ثالث.
حقدار، علی اصغر (1383)، مجلس اول و نهادهای مشروطیت، تهران: مهرنامگ.
حقدار، علی اصغر (1384)، محمد علی فروغی و ساختار نوین مدنی، تهران: کویر.
رستم وندی، تقی (1388)، اندیشۀ ایرانشهری در عصر اسلامی، تهران: امیرکبیر.
شکوری، ابوالفضل (1377)، فقه سیاسی در اسلام، قم: دفتر تبلیغات حوزه علمیه قم.
عارف، نصر محمد (1386)، منابع و آثار سیاسی اسلامی، ترجمه مهران اسماعیلی، تهران: نی.
عدل، منصورالسلطنه (1388)، حقوق اساسی یا اصول مشروطیت، به اهتمام علی اصغر حقدار، تهران: چشمه.
فروغی، محمد علی (1389)، سیاست نامه، تصحیح ایرج افشار، تهران: کتاب روشن.
قاسم زاده، قاسم (1390)، حقوق اساسی، تهران: جنگل.
قاضی، ابوالفضل (1383)، حقوق اساسی و نهادهای سیاسی، تهران: نشر میزان.
لاک، جان (1387)، رساله‌ای دربارۀ حکومت، ترجمه حمید عضدانلو، تهران: نی.
میل، جان استوارت (1389)، حکومت انتخابی، ترجمه علی رامین، تهران: نی.
نائینی، علامه میرزا حسین (1387) تنبیه‌الامه و تنزیه‌المله، تصحیح روح‌اله حسینیان، تهران: مرکز اسناد انقلاب اسلامی.
هایدگر، مارتین (1389)، هستی و زمان، ترجمه عبدالکریم رشیدیان، تهران: نی.
Althusser, Louis (2006), Politics and History, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Hegel and Marx, Translated from the French by Ben Brewster, Pdf version by malst@abv.bg
Dean, Mitchell (1999), Governmentality, Power and Rule in Modern Society, sage publication, London.
Drummond, John (2000), Political Community, In The Book: Phenomenology Of The Political, Edited By Kevin Thompson, Lester Embree, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hamilton, Keith and Richard, Langhorne (2011), The Practice of Diplomacy, its Evolution, Theory and Administration, London: Routledge.
Husserl, Edmund (1992), the Idea Of Phenomenology, Translated By Lee Hardy, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kim, Sung Ho (2004), Max Weber’s Politics of Civil Society, London: Cambridge University Press.
Montesquieu (1970), The Spirit of the Laws, Series Editors: Raymond Geuss and Quentin Skinner, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought.
O’Flynn, Ian (2006), Deliberative Democracy and Divided Societies, Great Britain: Edinburgh University Press.
Peter, Micheal (2004), Neoliberal Governmentality, Foucault On The Birth Of Biopolitics, London, published, www.springer.com
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (2002), The Social Contract and the First and Second Discourses, Edited and With an Introduction by Susan Dunn, New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Sharma, Prem Lata (2002), Modern Methods of Teaching Political Science, India New Deuii: Sarup&Sons.