مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923Narrative in Hannah Arendt’s Political Thought«روایت» در اندیشۀ مدنی هانا آرنت122faمحدثهتیموریدانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2384-2998عباس منوچهریاستاد گروه علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0324-3687202523Narrative in Hannah Arendt’s Political Thought   Mohadeseh Teymori <a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Abbas Manouchehri<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a>   In recent decades, the concept of “narrative” has emerged as a significant topic in the philosophy of history, coinciding with developments in linguistics and narrative theory. This article examines storytelling in Hannah Arendt’s thought as a normative approach and an “existential capacity” an approach that facilitates the understanding of the world, human action, and political life. Given the status of phenomenology in Arendt’s mode of thinking, the present study adopts a phenomenological approach and utilizes an intertextual method to analyze her work in relation to relevant intellectual traditions, particularly the views of Aristotle. The research findings indicate that narrative in Arendt’s thought has a fundamental link with the emergence of human “who-ness,” the durability of action, the formation of a common world, and the realization of the good life. From this perspective, storytelling is considered a fundamental component of Arendt’s civic thought and a horizon for understanding politics and human relations.   Keywords: Narrative, Hannah Arendt, Civic Thought, Action, Good Life.   Introduction and Problem Statement: Narrative as the Realm of Meaning In the contemporary philosophical tradition, the concept of “narrative” has often been reduced to fields such as literary theory or linguistics. However, within Hannah Arendt’s intellectual system, storytelling transcends a mere descriptive tool and transforms into a normative category and an “existential capacity.” The central problem is that in the modern world, due to the erosion of human bonds and the dominance of instrumental rationality, the public realm has fallen into decline. Arendt contends that human action, despite its grandeur and liberating quality, requires a mechanism to rescue it from the “dust of oblivion” due to its inherently “mortal” and transient nature. This article is based on the premise that storytelling is a response to this crisis of the “mortality of action.” Arendt presents narrative not as a mental representation of reality, but as a “world-building mechanism” and a means of “bestowing meaning upon events.” Therefore, when an action occurs in the public realm, it is only through narrative that the identity of the actor is revealed and recorded in collective memory. Indeed, in Arendt’s view, storytelling is anotelian concept of phronesis (practical wisdom). Phronesis is the rational virtue that allows humans to judge correctly in the variable conditions and “plurality” of the public realm. The article argues that narrative in Arendt’s system complements phronesis. If phronesis tells us how to act in the moment of action, narrative allows us, after the action has occurred, to extract its meaning for the “other.” This intertextual link shows that Arendt is attempting to reconstruct a “political ontology” in which storytelling is a way to overcome the deadlock of meaninglessness in the modern world. Indeed, by relying on intertextuality, we not only interpret Arendt’s ideas but also demonstrate how the Aristotelian tradition, when confronted with Arendt’s concerns about “plurality,” transforms into a new language for understanding civic politics. This framework allows us to conceptualize narrative as a “civic virtue” that does not obscure human differences but makes them a necessary condition for coexistence.   <ol style="text-align: left;" start="3"> <li> Main Body: Existential and Political Functions of Narrative</li> </ol> Continuing the analysis, we must focus on how Arendt shifts narrative from the domain of “literature” to the realm of praxis.   <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li>a) Narrative as an Agent of “Immortality” against the Decline of Action: Action in Arendt’s thought is spontaneous and unpredictable; as soon as an action occurs, it disappears in the passage of time. According to Arendt, humans turn to narrative because they want to leave a “trace” of themselves in the world. Narrative is the “story of action.” When human action takes the form of a narrative, it escapes the dominance of time and becomes “immortal.” Without narrative, heroes and actors of the public realm do not remain in the memory of history, and our common world gradually becomes emptied of memories and meaning. Therefore, storytelling is a “moral commitment” a commitment not to let noble human acts be buried in the darkness of oblivion.</li> </ol>   <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li>b) Linking Narrative with “Phronesis” and “Plurality”: Arendtian storytelling is not a monologue, but a dialogue formed amidst a plurality of voices. Here, the concept of “plurality” plays a fundamental role. Arendt believes that the world is only “real” when it is seen and narrated by different individuals from different angles. The storyteller is someone who, using phronesis (practical wisdom), can turn the scattered details of daily life into a “meaningful whole.” This function of narrative has a direct link to the public realm, for to build a “common world,” we need to hear and understand each other’s stories. Narrative here is a vessel for the emergence of my “who-ness” before the “other.” When I narrate the story of my life or my action, I move away from the “abstract I” and become a “citizen” in a web of human relationships.</li> </ol>   <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li>c) Confronting Anomalies and Reconstructing the Public Realm: In analyzing the research findings, it is observed that storytelling has a liberating function against the “illusions” arising from ideologies or dominant official narratives. When the narratives of power are produced to control minds, Arendt proposes “civic storytelling” a narrative based on the “truth of the event” and lived experience. This type of narrative brings citizens out of isolation and connects them to one another. In this paradigm, storytelling means “being among others.” Unlike the Habermasian approach that emphasizes “rational dialogue,” Arendt emphasizes “story-like narration,” because human life fundamentally has a narrative structure, and we experience life in the form of beginnings, middles, and ends.</li> </ol>   Conclusion Finally, the article concludes with the argument that storytelling in Arendt’s thought is not a decorative activity, but an “existential necessity” for the continuation of political life. If we understand politics as opening a space for the appearance of freedom, storytelling is the light that makes this appearance visible. The main implications of this research are: The Transition from Technocratic Politics to Narrative Politics: In today’s world, where technology casts a shadow over human relationships, reviving the tradition of storytelling can help restore a “sense of meaning” to the public realm. Narrative as a Connecting Agent: Arendtian storytelling, by accepting plurality, creates a platform for the “coexistence of differences” instead of attempting to homogenize them. The Ethics of Narrative: Arendt teaches us that narrating is a responsibility we all share. Anyone who hears and retells another’s story is engaged in preserving the fabric of the common world. In the end, this article demonstrates that storytelling in Hannah Arendt’s thought is a way to “live in the world without surrendering to nihilism.” This capacity gives citizens the power to reread the past and shape a future where “freedom” is not just a slogan, but a continuous experience in the public realm.   References Ahmadi, B. (2003) Sakhtar va ta’vil-e matn [Structure and interpretation of text] (6th ed.). Markaz. [in Persian] Abensour, M. (2023) Democracy alayhe dolat [Democracy against the state] (F. Habibi & A. Karami, Trans.; 3rd ed.). Ghoghnos. [in Persian] Arendt, H. (1968) What is freedom? In Between past and future (p. 153). Viking Compass Books. Arendt, H. (2005) The promise of politics (J. Kohn, Ed.). Schocken. Arendt, H. (2017) Insanha dar asr-e zolmat [Men in dark times] (M. Khalaji, Trans.). Tavana Digital Publishing. [in Persian] Arendt, H. (2022a) Andishidan va molahazat-e akhlaghi [Thinking and moral considerations] (A. Bagheri, Trans.). Ney. [in Persian] Arendt, H. (2022b) Vaz-e bashar [The human condition] (M. Olia, Trans.; 10th ed.). Ghoghnos. [in Persian] Arendt, H. (2023) Azadi, azad budan va chand maghale-ye digar [Freedom to be free and other essays] (H. Kharaghani, Trans.; 2nd ed.). Khub. [in Persian] Aristoteles. (1994) Poetik. Reclam. [in German] Aristotle. (1963) Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Clarendon Press. Aristotle. (1984) Poetics (1450a.15). In The complete works of Aristotle (Vol. 2, p. 2320). Princeton University Press. Bal, M. (2009) Narratology: Introduction to the theory of narrative (3rd ed.). University of Toronto Press. Barthes, R. (1982) Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives. In S. Sontag (Ed.), A Barthes reader (pp. 251–252). Hill and Wang. Benhabib, S. (1990) Hannah Arendt and the redemptive power of narrative. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 57(1), 167–196. Bernstein, R. J. (1977) Hannah Arendt: The ambiguities of theory and practice. In Political theory and praxis: New perspectives (p. 65). University of Minnesota Press. Bracht, K. (2020) The art of social distancing according to Hannah Arendt. Braton, T. (2023) Mafahim-e bonyadi va ravesh-haye tahlil-e ravayat [Basic concepts and methods of narrative analysis] (H. Payandeh, Trans.; 4th ed.). Morvarid. [in Persian] Curthoys, N. (2002) Hannah Arendt and the politics of narrative. Journal of Narrative Theory, 32(3), 348–370. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1353/jnt.2011.0070">https://doi.org/10.1353/jnt.2011.0070</a> Fay, B. (2011) Paradigm-shenasi-ye olum-e ensani [Contemporary philosophy of social science] (M. Mardiha, Trans.; 1st ed.). Research Institute for Strategic Studies. [in Persian] Gadamer, H.-G. (2004) Truth and method (2nd rev. ed., J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). Continuum. Gauthier, R. A., & Jolif, J. Y. (1970) L’éthique à Nicomaque: Introduction, traduction et commentaire. Publication Universitaires de Louvain. [in French] Habermas, J. (1990) Moral consciousness and communicative action. MIT Press. Irwin, T. (1985) Nicomachean ethics. Hackett. Jameson, F. (1982) The political unconscious: Narrative as a socially symbolic act. Cornell University Press. Kristeva, J. (1980) Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art. Columbia University Press. Kristeva, J. (2022) Hannah Arendt: Zendegi ravayat ast [Hannah Arendt: Life is a narrative] (M. Parsa, Trans.; 3rd ed.). Shavand. [in Persian] Lyotard, J.-F. (1979) The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. University of Minnesota Press. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984) The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.; Vol. 10). University of Minnesota Press. Moeinzadeh, M. (2020) Ta’alom-e nazar va amal dar talaghi az olum-e ensani be masabeye phronesis [Harmony of theory and practice in the view of human sciences as phronesis]. Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. [in Persian] Morgenstern, K. (2014) Funktionen der Narrativität für das politische Denken bei Hannah Arendt. In W. Hofmann, J. Renner, & K. Teich (Eds.), Narrative Formen der Politik (pp. 191–209). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02744-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02744-5</a> [in German] Nussbaum, M. C. (2001) The fragility of goodness: Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge University Press. Sim, S. (2015) Lyotard va na-ensan [Lyotard and the inhuman] (1st ed.). Mehregan-e Kherad. [in Persian] Straßenberger, G. (n.d.). Über das Narrative in der politischen Theorie. Akademie Verlag. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050084732">https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050084732</a> [in German] Tadayon-Rad, A., & Najafpour, S. (2023) Siasat va dastan-sara’i: Karkardha va moalefe-haye (dastan) dar siasat bar asas-e araye Hannah Arendt [Politics and storytelling: Functions and components of (story) in politics based on Hannah Arendt’s ideas]. Pazhuhesh-haye Rahbordi-ye Siasat, 11(45), 133–168. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22054/QPSS.2022.69846.3105">https://doi.org/10.22054/QPSS.2022.69846.3105</a> [in Persian] Weißpflug, M. (2014) Erzählen und urteilen: Narrative politische Theorie nach Hannah Arendt. In W. Hofmann, J. Renner, & K. Teich (Eds.), Narrative Formen der Politik (pp. 209–227). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02744-5_12">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02744-5_12</a> [in German] Young, J. (2022) Falsafe-ye trazhdi (az Aflatun ta Zizek) [Philosophy of tragedy: From Plato to Žižek] (H. Amir-Ara, Trans.; 4th ed.). Ghoghnos. [in Persian].     <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: M.A Student of Political Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. mohadesehteymori13@gmail.com https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2384-2998 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Professor, Department of Political Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. amanoochehri@yahoo.com https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0324-3687مفهوم «روایت» در دهه&zwnj;های اخیر، هم&zwnj;زمان با تحولات زبان&zwnj;شناسی و نظریه روایت، به یکی از مباحث مهم فلسفه تاریخ تبدیل شده است. این مقاله روایت&zwnj;گری را در اندیشه هانا آرنت به منزله رویکردی هنجاری و توانشی وجودی بررسی می&zwnj;کند؛ رویکردی که امکان فهم جهان، کنش انسانی و زندگی سیاسی را فراهم می&zwnj;آورد. با توجه به جایگاه پدیدارشناسی در شیوه اندیشیدن آرنت، پژوهش حاضر با رویکردی پدیدارشناسانه و با بهره&zwnj;گیری از روش بینامتنیتی، آثار او را در نسبت با سنت&zwnj;های فکری مرتبط، به&zwnj;ویژه آرای ارسطو، تحلیل می&zwnj;کند. یافته&zwnj;های پژوهش نشان می&zwnj;دهد که روایت در اندیشه آرنت با ظهور «کیستی» انسان، ماندگاری کنش، شکل&zwnj;گیری جهان مشترک و تحقق زندگی نیک پیوندی بنیادین دارد. از این منظر، روایت&zwnj;گری یکی از مؤلفه&zwnj;های اساسی اندیشه مدنی آرنت و افقی برای فهم سیاست و روابط انسانی به شمار می&zwnj;آید.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/49391

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923The Political Implications of the Theory of Truth in Richard Rorty’s Thoughtتضمنات سیاسی نظریۀ صدق در اندیشۀ «ریچارد رورتی»2352faسمیراغلامیدانشجوی دکتری، گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشکده حقوق، الهیات و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایرانhttps: //orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-7066محمد مهدیمجاهدیاستادیار گروه پژوهشی مطالعات بین¬رشته¬ای، پژوهشکده دانشنامه¬نگاری، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایرانhttps: //orcid.org/0000-0002-5819-2573مجیدتوسلی رکن آبادیاستاد علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشکده حقوق، الهیات و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-364xایرجرنجبراستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد کرمانشاه، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمانشاه، ایران https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-5183-50542025105The Political Implications of the Theory of Truth in Richard Rorty’s Thought Samira Gholami<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Mohammad Mahdi Mojahedi<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a> Majid Tavassoli Roknabadi<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">***</a> Iraj Ranjbar<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4">****</a> In the Western philosophical tradition, the theory of truth has predominantly been based on the “correspondence” model a model that seeks truth in the discovery of and adaptation to a fundamental, transhistorical, and mind-independent reality. Consequently, this model can imply a truth-centered politics based on objective and transcendent authorities. Rorty criticizes this view, arguing that truth is not a representation of an ultimate reality, but the result of linguistic consensus, social habits, and practical utility within human communities. This article, utilizing a meta-theoretical approach and a descriptive-analytical method, examines the political implications of this shift from “correspondence truth” to “pragmatic truth.” It concludes that Rorty’s theory of truth, by rejecting philosophical liberal democracy, points toward “bourgeois liberal democracy” a democracy that, being free from metaphysical foundations, relies on solidarity, dialogue, and the contingency of beliefs. Thus, the consequence of such a conception can be the critique of truth-oriented ideologies, the strengthening of political pluralism, the acceptance of cultural diversity, the reduction of ideological self-censorship, and the cultivation of “ironic” citizens who continuously rethink their own beliefs.   Keywords: Theory of Truth, Pragmatism, Bourgeois Democracy, Linguistic Turn, Constructed Truth.   Introduction Richard Rorty is one of the most prominent figures of contemporary pragmatism who, by criticizing the tradition of modern epistemology particularly foundationalism and representationism rethinks the prevailing understanding of truth and knowledge. In the Western philosophical tradition, it has often been assumed that there exists an objective reality independent of the mind, and that the human mind can reflect it representationally in the form of true propositions. Rorty calls this view, rooted in the Cartesian and Kantian tradition, the “mirror of nature” (the mirror-like theory of knowledge), and believes that this approach has driven philosophy toward a search for metaphysical foundations of truth. Inspired by the tradition of pragmatism and influenced by thinkers such as Wittgenstein, Sellars, and Davidson, Rorty argues that human knowledge is formed within the context of language and social interaction. Accordingly, truth is not the correspondence of a proposition with an independent reality, but a concept that finds meaning within the framework of vocabularies and social agreements. This conception of truth has implications beyond epistemology and leads to a rethinking of political concepts. Therefore, examining the political implications of the theory of truth in Rorty’s thought and explaining the relationship between his epistemological critique and a specific understanding of democracy constitutes the main problem of this article.   Literature Review Studies related to Rorty’s thought can be divided into three main categories: Epistemological Critique: Research focusing on Rorty’s critique of traditional epistemology and correspondence theories of truth, emphasizing concepts such as anti-foundationalism, the role of language in constructing meaning, and the contingency of truth. While these works have clarified the theoretical foundations of Rorty’s thought, they often remain at the level of epistemological analysis. Metaphysical Critique: Studies that have addressed the critique of metaphysics and the rejection of absolute truth, interpreting truth as dependent on dialogue and social consensus, without systematically examining the political implications of this view. Political Philosophy: Studies that focus directly on Rorty’s political philosophy, particularly debates concerning liberal democracy, irony, and pluralism, but which often neglect the theoretical link between these topics and his conception of truth. The main gap in the existing literature is the absence of an analysis that directly links Rorty’s theory of truth to its political implications a gap that the present research aims to fill.   Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework of this research is based on Rorty’s neopragmatic reading of truth and knowledge. By rejecting foundationalism and representationism, Rorty argues that human knowledge is not a reflection of objective reality but a product of linguistic and social interactions. In this framework, the value of beliefs is measured not based on their correspondence with a supra-linguistic truth, but based on their effectiveness in solving problems and advancing dialogue. This view is linked to the “linguistic turn” in contemporary philosophy, according to which meaning and truth are shaped within linguistic games and historical contexts. For Rorty, beliefs and values are contingent and historical, and there is no fixed metaphysical foundation for them. Thus, instead of seeking definitive foundations for truth, philosophy should serve to strengthen dialogue and social solidarity.   Research Methodology This research is qualitative and conducted using a descriptive-analytical method. In this framework, Richard Rorty’s primary works on truth, knowledge, and democracy have been directly studied, and key concepts related to the theory of truth have been extracted and analyzed. Subsequently, through argumentative reconstruction, the relationship between Rorty’s conception of truth and its political implications has been examined.   Findings and Discussion Analysis of Rorty’s works shows that his critique of the correspondence theory of truth has significant implications for understanding politics. Rorty views truth as a pragmatic concept formed in the context of linguistic and social interactions, where the criterion for evaluating beliefs is their utility in solving problems and strengthening social cooperation. Consequently, truth no longer provides a metaphysical foundation for political legitimacy. Accordingly, Rorty defends a type of democracy whose legitimacy derives not from universal principles, but from practical functions and its ability to foster social solidarity. In this framework, values such as freedom and equality are historical constructs that are stabilized through dialogue and social consensus. Furthermore, Rorty’s emphasis on “irony” and the contingency of beliefs leads to an attitude that encourages citizens to constantly rethink their own beliefs and accept value pluralism.   Conclusion The present research has shown that the theory of truth in Rorty’s thought, by rejecting the metaphysical foundations of truth, transforms truth into a linguistic and social concept. This epistemological shift has significant political implications and leads to the defense of a type of liberal democracy based on dialogue and social solidarity. In this framework, the legitimacy of the political order derives not from transhistorical truths, but from practical effectiveness and its ability to manage social plurality. Thus, Rorty’s approach, by distancing itself from ideologies based on absolute truth, provides the possibility of formulating a democratic politics based on the acceptance of plurality, dialogue, and the continuous critique of beliefs.   References Akrami, M., & Mahmoudi, M. (2009) Richard Rorty: Az no-amalgara-ye Zedde-mabad-tabiee ta tard-e falsafe [Richard Rorty: From anti-metaphysical pragmatism to the rejection of philosophy]. Metaphysics, New Series, 1(3–4), 43–64. [in Persian] Dewey, J. (1929) The quest for certainty. Minton, Balch & Company. Habermas, J. (2000) Richard Rorty’s pragmatic turn. In R. B. Brandom (Ed.), Rorty and his critics (pp. 31–55). Blackwell Publishers. Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1927) James, W. (2005) The works of William James. Harvard University Press. Nietzsche, F. (1994) Dar bab-e haghiqat va dorugh be mafhum-e gheyr-akhlaqi [On truth and lie in a moral sense] (M. Farhadpour, Trans.). Arghanun, 121–136. [in Persian] Nietzsche, F. (1999) The birth of tragedy and other writings (R. Speirs, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1873) Nietzsche, F. (1996) On the genealogy of morals (D. Smith, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1887) Nozari, H. (2013) Ta’sir-e neo-pragmatism-e Richard Rorty bar democracy-e mosavat-talabane dar nazariye-ye siasi-ye moaser [The impact of Richard Rorty’s neopragmatism on egalitarian democracy in contemporary political theory]. Political Science Quarterly, 9(22), 7–46. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (1979) Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton University Press. Rorty, R. (1982) Consequences of pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press. Rorty, R. (1985) Payamad-ha-ye pragmatism [Consequences of pragmatism] (A. Azarang, Trans.). Ney. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (1988) Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1989) Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1990) Falsafe va ayeneh-ye tabi’at [Philosophy and the mirror of nature] (M. Nouri, Trans.). Markaz. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (1991) Objectivity, relativism, and truth: Philosophical papers (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press. Rorty, R. (1993) Olaviyat-e democracy bar falsafe [The priority of democracy to philosophy] (Kh. Deyhimi, Trans.). Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (1998) Pishamad, bazi va hambastegi [Contingency, irony, and solidarity] (P. Yazdanjou, Trans.). Ney. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (1999) Pishamad, bazi va hambastegi [Contingency, irony, and solidarity] (P. Yazdanjou, Trans.). Ney. [in Persian] Rorty, R. (2000a) Philosophy and social hope. Penguin Books. Rorty, R. (2000b) Charkhesh-e zabani: Maqalat-i dar mord-e ravesh-e falsafi [The linguistic turn: Essays in philosophical method] (S. M. H. Shirazi, Trans.). Shabkhiz. [in Persian] Safavi, A., & Meshkat, M. (2025) Realism pas az charkhesh-e zabani az manzar-e Rorty [Realism after the linguistic turn from Rorty’s perspective]. Metaphysics, 17(2), 25–51. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22108/mph.2024.141814.1572">https://doi.org/10.22108/mph.2024.141814.1572</a> [in Persian] Sadeqi Aval, H., & Mohseni, H. (2019) Irony-e siasi va ta’amol-e an ba democracy dar andisheh-ye Richard Rorty [Political irony and its interaction with democracy in Richard Rorty’s thought]. Political Quarterly (Journal of Faculty of Law and Political Science), 49(4), 1081–1099. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2019.234534.1007079">https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2019.234534.1007079</a> [in Persian] Shabani, M., & Mansouri, A. (2020) Arzyabi-ye roykard-e Richard Rorty be ma’refat-shenasi bar asas-e amoozesh-haye aqlaniyat-e naqad [An evaluation of Richard Rorty’s approach to epistemology based on the teachings of critical rationality]. Philosophical-Theological Research, 22(4), 51–70. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22091/jptr.2020.5559.2336">https://doi.org/10.22091/jptr.2020.5559.2336</a> [in Persian] Williams, M. (2016) Didgah-e Richard Rorty dar bab-e ma’refat va sidq [Richard Rorty’s view on knowledge and truth]. In Sidq be che kar miayad? [What is truth good for?] (R. Rorty & P. Engel; R. Mahmoudi, Trans., pp. 87–116). Kargadan. [in Persian]   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Ph.D. Student, Department of Political Science, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. s.gholami7270@iau.ac.ir https: //orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-7066 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">** </a>Corresponding Author: Assistant Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies Research Group, Encyclopedia Compilation Institute, Research Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran. <a href="mailto:m.mojahedi@ihcs.ac.ir">m.mojahedi@ihcs.ac.ir</a> https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-5819-2573 <a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">***</a> Professor, Department of Political Science, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. <a href="mailto:m-tavasoli@arbiau.ac.ir">m-tavasoli@arbiau.ac.ir</a> https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-364x <a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4">****</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Ker.C., Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran. <a href="mailto:Iranjbar@iau.ac.ir">Iranjbar@iau.ac.ir</a> https: //orcid.org/<a href="https://www.orcid.org/0000-0002-5183-5054">0000-0002-5183-5054</a>نظریۀ صدق در سنت فلسفۀ غرب، غالباً بر الگوی «مطابقت» استوار بوده است؛ الگویی که صدق را در کشف و انطباق با واقعیتی بنیادین، فراتاریخی و مستقل از ذهن و زبان می&zwnj;جوید و از همین&zwnj;رو، می&zwnj;تواند متضمن سیاستی حقیقت&zwnj;محور و مبتنی بر مرجعیت&zwnj;های عینی و فرابشری باشد. رورتی با نقد این تلقی، صدق را نه بازنماییِ واقعیتی غایی، بلکه حاصل توافق زبانی، عادت&zwnj;های اجتماعی و سودمندی عملی در درون جماعت&zwnj;های انسانی می&zwnj;داند. این مقاله با رویکردی فرانظری و روشی توصیفی- تحلیلی، تضمنات سیاسیِ این جابه&zwnj;جایی از «صدق مطابقتی» به «صدق پراگماتیستی» را بررسی نموده و به این یافته منتج شده که نظریۀ صدق رورتی با نفی دموکراسی لیبرالِ فلسفی، به «دموکراسی لیبرال بورژوایی» راه می&zwnj;برد؛ دموکراسی&zwnj;ای که بینیاز از بنیادهای متافیزیکی، بر همبستگی، گفت&zwnj;وگو و پیشامدی&zwnj;بودن باورها تکیه می&zwnj;کند. بدینسان پیامد چنین دریافتی میتواند، نقد ایدئولوژی&zwnj;های حقیقت&zwnj;مدار، تقویت پلورالیسم سیاسی، پذیرش تکثر فرهنگی، کاهش خودسانسوری ایدئولوژیک و پرورش شهروندانی آیرونیک باشد که باورهای خویش را پیوسته بازاندیشی می&zwnj;کنند.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51669

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923The State and Well-Being: An Analytical Comparison of Modelsدولت و نیک‌زیستی: مقایسۀ تحلیلی الگوها5380faگیتیپورزکیاستادیار گروه اندیشه سیاسی در اسلام، پژوهشکده امام خمینی و انقلاب اسلامی، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3164-2061202596The State and Well-Being: An Analytical Comparison of Models   Giti Poorzaki<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a>   Whether or not it is humanity’s most important end, the “good life” and well-being have undoubtedly been among the most significant human pursuits throughout history. Consequently, determining the state’s role in securing and promoting the well-being of its citizens remains one of the most critical and contentious issues in contemporary political philosophy. This article addresses the central question: What role should states play in the well-being of their citizens, and which model of state intervention is justifiable? The answer varies depending on the diverse models of governance and the state. This article first identifies four types of states based on their approach to the relationship between the state and well-being. The primary finding is that the “well-being-focused state” (or “solicitous state”) model better satisfies the criteria of consistency, coherence, and empirical outcomes, appearing more defensible from an argumentative standpoint. The research employs an analytical-argumentative method.   Keywords: Well-being, Happiness, State, Well-being-focused State, Neutral State.   Introduction Should states be concerned with the well-being of their citizens, or is this not their duty, but rather a task each individual must pursue alone, in an Odyssean fashion? The World Values Survey has indicated that a significant portion of subjective satisfaction and happiness depends on the quality of governance (Layard, 2005: 230). The core question is: What role do states play in the well-being of their citizens, and which model of state intervention is justifiable? Answers differ based on one’s philosophical approach. We can identify at least four types of states based on their relationship with well-being: <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li>The Neutral State</li> <li>The Liberal Perfectionist State</li> <li>The Authoritarian or Ideological Perfectionist State</li> <li>The Caring (Well-being-focused) State</li> </ol> Our primary hypothesis is that the Caring State (model 4) is more justifiable than the other three models. We utilize the analytical-argumentative method to examine this hypothesis.   Literature Review Derek Bok’s The Politics of Happiness (2010) examines the role of states in improving citizens’ well-being but focuses primarily on the United States rather than comparing various models of governance. Richard Layard’s Wellbeing: Science and Policy (2023) provides a scientific foundation for well-being-based policymaking but concentrates on a single policy model. This article differs by focusing on a theoretical evaluation of diverse state models. Additionally, Paul Dalziel’s Wellbeing Economics: The Capabilities Approach to Prosperity (2018), drawing on the Capabilities Approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum, attempts to provide a theoretical and practical foundation for well-being economics in public policy.   Methodology This research employs an Analytical-Argumentative method, involving the following steps: <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li>Precise and comprehensive definition of concepts.</li> <li>Logical presentation of supporting arguments for existing viewpoints.</li> <li>Challenging these arguments through counter-arguments.</li> <li>Critical evaluation and comparison of the models.</li> <li>Defending a specific position or theory as the conclusion of the analysis.</li> </ol>   Findings and Discussion By scrutinizing these four models, we sought to determine which is most defensible. We evaluated each based on three criteria: (1) Internal consistency, (2) Compatibility (coherence), and (3) Empirical and practical consequences. The models of the Neutral State, the Liberal Perfectionist State, and the Authoritarian Perfectionist State face internal inconsistencies. Conversely, the “Caring” or “Well-being-focused” state seeks not to be indifferent to the actual conditions of human well-being. Rather than imposing a specific image of the “good life,” this model utilizes empirical data and multidimensional metrics, attempting to structure institutions such that flourishing is possible for all. Conceptually, this approach attempts to reduce the conflict between liberty and well-being more effectively than the other three models. Discussion: Four Theoretical Models on the State and Well-being   <ol style="text-align: left;"> <li> The Neutral State: Known in the tradition of political liberalism as a state that avoids intervening in judgments regarding the nature of the “good life.”</li> </ol> <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Counter-argument: Critics argue that absolute neutrality is impossible in practice, as every policy even if ostensibly neutral reinforces or weakens specific values (MacIntyre, 1984; Sandel, 1982). Furthermore, neutrality-based liberalism holds an unrealistic view of individual identity. Individuals are “encumbered selves,” not isolated atoms devoid of moral and social bonds (Sandel, 1982).</li> </ul> <ol style="text-align: left;" start="2"> <li> The Liberal Perfectionist State: Assumes that the state can, and sometimes should, support and intervene in favor of reasonable and human forms of the good life.</li> </ol> <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Counter-argument: (1) Monistic Liberalism: Critics argue that any valuation even in favor of seemingly reasonable values may lead to paternalism. (2) Immature vs. Mature Well-being: When the state, in the name of “true freedom,” “self-realization,” or happiness, ignores the current desires of individuals and forces them toward what they “should want” or “should be,” it enters the dangerous path of authoritarianism (Berlin, 1969).</li> </ul> <ol style="text-align: left;" start="3"> <li> Authoritarian or Ideological Perfectionist States: These states, based on a comprehensive ideology, claim to understand human good better than the citizens themselves and thus believe it is their duty to guide individuals toward that “higher good,” even by force.</li> </ol> <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Counter-argument: (1) Imposing a specific conception of the good life, even with benevolent intentions, inevitably leads to the suppression of diversity, the exclusion of dissenting voices, and the disregard for human moral dignity, paving the way for justifying violence and domination. (2) The “architects of destiny” typically destroy individual autonomy (self-rule), which is a prerequisite for well-being (Pourzaki, 2022: 82).</li> </ul> <ol style="text-align: left;" start="4"> <li> The Caring (Well-being-focused) State: This approach attempts to measure, explain, and strengthen factors affecting human well-being through empirical data. Its central tenet is that well-being should be the axis and criterion of sound policy.</li> </ol> <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Counter-argument: Critics ask: Which well-being? Based on whose criteria? They warn that the state, even with good intentions, might violate the sphere of personal choice or lead to “forced happiness” or “mandatory well-being.” As argued by Eva Illouz and Edgar Cabanas in Happycracy, this can lead to forcing citizens to live in an “earthly paradise” (Cabanas & Illouz, 2018: 4). Michel Foucault, in his lectures at the Collège de France, also addresses these issues through concepts like biopolitics, governmentality, and technologies of the self (Foucault, 2008: 63-65).</li> </ul>   Conclusion Evaluation of Arguments: How do proponents of the Caring State respond to these criticisms? Reliance on Scientific Evidence, Not Ideology: The Well-being-focused state relies on data and empirical sciences (e.g., psychology, neuroscience, behavioral science, and new economics) rather than a specific philosophy of a “higher good.” It utilizes techniques such as double-blind psychological interviews or scientific surveys. Neutrality is Neither Possible nor Desirable: The claim to complete state neutrality is often a deception.   References Ahmed, S. (2010) The promise of happiness. Duke University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822392781">https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822392781</a> Aristotle. (1999) Akhlagh-e Nikomakhoosi [Nicomachean ethics] (M. H. Lotfi, Trans.). Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Berlin, I. (1969) Two concepts of liberty. In Four essays on liberty. Oxford University Press. Buck, D. (2017) Siasat-e shadkami [The politics of happiness] (N. Salahshoor, Trans.). Farhang-e Nashr-e No. [in Persian] Cabanas, E., & Illouz, E. (2018) Happycracy: How the science of happiness controls our lives. Polity Press. Cahn, S., & Vitrano, C. (2015) Goodness and happiness. Columbia University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.7312/cahn17240">https://doi.org/10.7312/cahn17240</a>. Creswell, J. W. (2013) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Dalziel, P., Saunders, C., & Saunders, J. (2018) Wellbeing economics: The capabilities approach to prosperity. Palgrave Macmillan. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93194-4">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93194-4</a>. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302. https://, Ed.; G. Burchell, Trans.). Picador. <a href="https://doi.org/10.105.2.276">https://doi.org/10.105.2.276</a>. Foucault, M. (2008) The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979 (M. Senellart, Ed.; G. Burchell, Trans.). Palgrave Macmillan. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230594180">https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230594180</a> Foucault, M. (2009) Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (M. Senellart, Ed.; G. Burchell, Trans.). Picador. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245075">https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245075</a> Galston, W. A. (2002) Liberal pluralism: The implications of value pluralism for political theory and practice. Cambridge University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613579">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613579</a> Gray, J. (1995) Isaiah Berlin. Princeton University Press. Helliwell, J. F., Huang, H., Wang, S., & Norton, M. (2020) World happiness report 2020. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Kymlicka, W. (1995) Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford University Press. Larmore, C. (1996) The morals of modernity. Cambridge University Press. Layard, R. (2005) Wellbeing: Science and policy. Cambridge University Press. Layard, R. (2024) Shadkami, dars-haye az yek elm-e jadid [Happiness: Lessons from a new science] (G. Pourzaki, Trans.). Kargadan. [in Persian] Layard, R., & De Neve, J.-E. (2023) Wellbeing: Science and policy. Cambridge University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009040822">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009040822</a>. MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue (2nd ed.). University of Notre Dame Press. Nussbaum, M. C. (2000) Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841286">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841286</a> Nussbaum, M. C. (2011) Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press. Plato. (2001) Doreh-ye asar-e Aflatun [Works of Plato] (M. Lotfi & R. Kaviani, Trans.). Kharazmi. [in Persian] Popper, K. (2024) Jame’e-ye baz va doshmanan-e an [The open society and its enemies] (E. Fouladvand, Trans.). Kharazmi. [in Persian] Pourzaki, G. (2022) Khodfarmanravi be masabeye khastgah-e nik-zisti dar andisheh-ye siasi [Autonomy as the origin of well-being in political thought]. Contemporary Political Studies, 13(1), 59–83. <a href="https://doi.org/10.30465/cps.2022.38985.2903">https://doi.org/10.30465/cps.2022.38985.2903</a> [in Persian] Rawls, J. (1993) Political liberalism. Columbia University Press. Raz, J. (1986) The morality of freedom. Oxford University Press. Sandel, M. J. (1982) Liberalism and the limits of justice. Cambridge University Press. Sen, A. (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. Sher, G. (1997) Beyond neutrality: Perfectionism and politics. Cambridge University Press. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2010) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. Penguin. Yanow, D., & Schwartz-Shea, P. (2006) Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. M.E. Sharpe. <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315704562">https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315704562</a>   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Thought in Islam, Imam Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. gitipoorzaki@yahoo.com https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3164-2061زندگی خوب و نیک&zwnj;زیستی اگر مهم&zwnj;ترین غایت انسان نباشد، حداقل یکی از مهم&zwnj;ترین غایات بشر در طول تاریخ بوده است. از همین رو چیستی و چگونگی نقش دولت در تأمین و ارتقای نیک&zwnj;زیستی شهروندان، یکی از مهم&zwnj;ترین و مناقشه&zwnj;برانگیزترین مسائل در فلسفه سیاسی معاصر است. از این&zwnj;رو پرسش اصلی مقاله این است که دولت&zwnj;ها چه نقشی در نیک&zwnj;زیستی شهروندان خود دارند؟ و چه الگویی از مداخلۀ دولت قابل &zwnj;دفاع است؟ پاسخ به این پرسش&zwnj; با توجه به الگوهای مختلف دولت و حکمرانی می&zwnj;تواند متفاوت باشد. در این مقاله ابتدا چهار گونه دولت با توجه به رویکردی که نسبت به رابطۀ دولت و نیک&zwnj;زیستی دارند، بازشناسی شده است. یافتۀ اصلی پژوهش این است که الگوی دولت دغدغه&zwnj;مند نیک&zwnj;زیستی&zwnj;محور بیشتر می&zwnj;تواند معیارهای سازگاری، انسجام و پیامد عینی را برآورده سازد و به &zwnj;لحاظ استدلالی موجه&zwnj;تر به &zwnj;نظر می&zwnj;رسد. روش مورد استفاده، تحلیلی- استدلالی است.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51378

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923A Comparison of the Concept of Violence and the Revolutionary Subject in the Thought of Marxism and Post-Marxismمقایسۀ مفهوم خشونت و سوژۀ انقلابی در اندیشۀ مارکسیسم و پسامارکسیسم81111faمحمدحسن اسدیدانش‌آموخته کارشناسی¬ارشد علوم سیاسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه یاسوج، یاسوج، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7549-0118علیرضا سمیعی اصفهانی دانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0009-0001-4729-075Xعلیباقری دولت‌آبادیاستاد روابط بین‌الملل، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه یاسوج، یاسوج، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4584-587020251118A Comparison of the Concept of Violence and the Revolutionary Subject in the Thought of Marxism and Post-Marxism   Mohammadhasan Asadi<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Alireza Samiee Esfahani<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a> Ali Bagheri Dolatabadi<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">***</a>   The present study seeks to answer the key question: What changes and transformations have the concepts of violence and the revolutionary subject undergone in the transition from classical Marxist thought (Marx) to the post-Marxist current (Laclau and Mouffe)? The aim of this research is to answer this question and explain the theoretical evolution of violence and the revolutionary subject in these two intellectual currents. The importance of this issue lies in the fact that the theoretical representation of violence and the definition of the revolutionary subject shape the relationship between humanity, power, and social order, reflecting fundamental changes in the logic of struggle and political resistance. The necessity of the research arises from the fact that the transformation of the concept of violence and the representation of the revolutionary subject in the transition from classical Marxism to post-Marxism cannot be reduced to a simple shift from violence to reformism; rather, this transformation concerns deeper shifts in the degree to which the economy and politics influence the mode of action of the revolutionary subject, the emergence of plural political subjects, and the transformation in the logic of contestation from violence to peaceful forms of competition.   Keywords: Violence, Revolutionary Subject, Marxism, Post-Marxism, Quentin Skinner’s Hermeneutics.   Introduction In recent years, questions concerning violence and the revolutionary subject have come to prominence in contemporary political and social theories. Among the most significant of these theories are Marxism and post-Marxism, which have exerted a profound impact on society, academia, politics, and international relations. Marxism is the only doctrine named after a single individual: Marx. In Marxist sociology and according to the theory of historical materialism, societies pass through five stages to achieve a communist society: primitive communism, slavery, feudalism, bourgeoisie (capitalism), socialism, and ultimately communism. In Marx’s thought, violence is understood not as a desirable normative principle in itself, but within the framework of the historical analysis of class struggle. Marx views history as the arena of class struggles and conflicts, arguing that the working class (or proletariat), as the revolutionary subject, in the process of gaining consciousness and political action, is inevitably driven to confront and ultimately dismantle the capitalist structure through violence because, according to Marx, those who benefit from the privileges of capitalism will not surrender their power and property without war. Post-Marxists are, in most cases, former Marxists whose point of departure is the critique of classical Marxism (especially economic reductionism and the conception of a singular revolutionary subject), aimed at reconstructing and redeeming the Left under present complex conditions where it finds no answers to the transformations of capitalism and new social movements. Laclau and Mouffe are among the post-Marxists who strive in this direction; they argue that the world is the product of discourses and that discursive conflicts must exist, for otherwise, difference and plurality would be eradicated, giving way to rigid hierarchies. In Laclau and Mouffe’s view, the greater the capacity of discourses to transform antagonism into agonistic competition (through the politics of pluralist democracy and an agonistic approach), the more their position becomes stabilized. Consequently, the question of violence and the modes of confronting political enmity acquires a distinct significance within democratic and discursive contexts. Despite numerous studies on Marxism and post-Marxism, a coherent investigation specifically addressing the conceptual evolution of violence and the redefinition of the revolutionary subject in the transition between these two intellectual traditions has received comparatively little attention. Hence, this study, focusing on this theoretical gap, attempts to answer how the concepts of violence and the revolutionary subject have been transformed in the transition from classical Marxism to post-Marxism. To this end, employing the methodological framework of Quentin Skinner’s hermeneutics, the concepts under study are analyzed not as static categories, but in relation to the historical contexts and ideological-intellectual climates prevailing during the eras of each examined thinker, including Marx, Laclau, and Mouffe.   Literature Review Alex Callinicos (2011), in his book The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx, argues that Marx’s view that the working class must overthrow the capitalist system and replace it with a classless society is even more necessary today than in Marx’s own time. This is because capitalism is still founded upon the exploitation of the working class and remains susceptible to continuous crises crises such as inequality in wealth distribution, economic austerity policies that have provoked militant waves of resistance, war, the accumulation of nuclear weapons, and talk of nuclear conflict, all casting a shadow over the whole of humanity. Under these conditions, a socialist revolution becomes an imperative, presenting a choice between socialism or barbarism. James Ryan (2012), in his book Lenin’s Terror: The Ideological Origins of Early Soviet State Violence, argues that ideology is of primary importance in understanding the violent and dictatorial nature of early Soviet party elites like Lenin, since ideas and ideologies generally play a critical role in dictating behavior. Nevertheless, ideology cannot be understood in a contextual vacuum, as contextual factors such as the oppressive nature of Tsarist rule, the bloodshed of the First World War, and the vulnerability of the early Soviet state to internal and external opponents were of immense significance. Thus, the author situates Lenin’s ideas within Russian and European historical contexts, arguing that Bolshevik violence (and the communist outlook) was a reaction to the violent and unjust political systems of Russia and Europe, as well as a struggle for survival. Oliver Harrison (2014), in his book Revolutionary Subjectivity in Post-Marxist Thought, examines the theory of revolutionary subjectivity in the works of post-Marxists such as Ernesto Laclau, Antonio Negri, and Alain Badiou. He contends that although each of these theories has gradually distanced itself from Marx in its own distinctive manner forming what we know as post-Marxism Marx’s theory of revolutionary subjectivity nevertheless remains at the center of each of these thinkers’ reflections.   Methodology The methodological framework employed in this study is Quentin Skinner’s hermeneutic method, with data and source material collected via desk-based library research for subsequent analysis and interpretation. Skinner’s methodology is a historical and interpretive approach in political thought, developed through a critique of both textualist and contextualist paradigms. According to Skinner’s methodology, to understand a thinker’s political thought, one must first comprehend the intellectual-ideological context and climate governing their era; for Skinner posits that the works and utterances of any thinker are responses to the questions and problems of their own time, making the identification of the political questions and dilemmas of that age a prerequisite for understanding any political text. Second, one must grasp the thinker’s intention to communicate within the discourse of their era, as weighing the intention of authors is critical when attempting to interpret the meaning of their texts. However, it must be noted that while Skinner emphasizes the importance of authorial intent, he maintains that primary attention should not be directed solely toward individual authors, but rather toward the prevailing discourse of the author’s period, through which the author’s intent and what they intended to do can be uncovered.   Findings The findings demonstrate that Marx influenced by the intellectual-ideological climate of his historical context prioritized the economy (as the base) and maintained that the structure of class societies is the product of their mode of production. In his view, there has always existed a ruling class and an exploited class, from which the contradictions of the mode of production and class struggle emerge contradictions and class struggles that persist until the attainment of a socialist and communist society. Therefore, in terms of analyzing revolution and the concepts of violence and the revolutionary subject, the problem presents itself as a conflict between the productive forces and the relations of production, or generally within the mode of production that determines the structure of social relations; the replacement of one mode of production with another does not occur peacefully or incrementally, but requires a violent revolution in which the old ruling class is expropriated and a new class is installed in its place. In contrast, Laclau and Mouffe shaped by the intellectual-ideological climate of their own time dismantled objectivism or essentialism, arguing that there are no objective laws dividing society into pre-given groups; existing groups are always the product of political and discursive processes. Hence, for Laclau and Mouffe, political processes are of paramount importance because political articulation determines how we create society. It is here that the deterministic role of the economy is entirely discarded within discourse theory, and this dual realm (base/superstructure) is referred to the level of discourse. Utilizing a discursive approach to explicate contemporary society, alongside discourse theory to foster peaceful competition, they propose “radical democracy” as a reliable horizon for Left-wing parties and thinkers in the contemporary world a democracy complemented by an agonistic relation that ultimately eliminates violence from Laclau and Mouffe’s revolutionary subject.   Conclusion Through an analytical comparison, it becomes evident that classical Marxism (including Marx’s economy-centered approach) divides society into two primary classes (workers and capitalists) and perceives the path to emancipation in the dismantling of the capitalist structure through violence and material force. In post-Marxism (including the thought of Laclau and Mouffe), however, politics and discourse replace the economy as the locus of analysis. Within this framework, social divisions are understood not through objective economic laws, but as the outcomes of political and discursive processes. Consequently, the deterministic role of the economy is abandoned, and rather than engaging in violent class struggle, the subject must manifest its resistance and rebellion through the deployment of biopolitics within the framework of new social movements. The findings of this research thus indicate that in the transition from classical Marxism to post-Marxism, the perspective on violence has shifted from a necessary instrument of class emancipation to an analytical and discursive component, and the revolutionary subject has transformed from a singular, violence-oriented agent into a plural, multifaceted subject rooted in peaceful, discursive contestation.   References Bayat, A. (2017) Revolution without revolutionaries: Making sense of the Arab Spring. Stanford University Press. Callinicos, A. (2011) The revolutionary ideas of Karl Marx. Haymarket Books. Ghadery, H. (2013) Andisheh-haye siasi dar gharn-e bistom [Political thoughts in the 20th century]. Samt Publications. [in Persian] Harrison, O. (2014) Revolutionary subjectivity in post-Marxist thought: Laclau, Negri, Badiou. Ashgate. Laclau, E. (2005) On populist reason. Verso. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2014) Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (M. Rezaei, Trans.). Sales Publishing. (Original work published 1985) [in Persian] Marx, K. (1887) Capital: A critique of political economy, Volume I (S. Moore & E. Aveling, Trans.; F. Engels, Ed.). Progress Publishers. Marx, K. (1988) Naghd-e falsafe-ye hagh-e Hegel [Critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right] (R. Salahshoor, Trans.). Naghd. [in Persian] Marx, K. (2003) Moghadame-ie bar naghd-e egtesad-e siasi [A contribution to the critique of political economy] (S. Ansari & A. Barzegar, Trans.). Akhgar. [in Persian] Marx, K. (2006) Sarmaye (Capital), Vol. 1 (I. Eskandari, Trans.; Y. Azari, Ed.). Socialist Worker Publishing. [in Persian] Marx, K. (2009) Tezhayi dar bare-ye Feuerbach [Theses on Feuerbach]. In F. Engels (Ed.), Ludwig Feuerbach and the end of classical German philosophy (M. Pourhormozan, Trans.). Tudeh Party of Iran. [in Persian] Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1998) Ideology-e Almani [The German ideology] (T. Niki, Trans.). Payam Pirouz. [in Persian] Marx, K., & Engels, F. (2006) Manifest-e hezb-e komonism [Manifesto of the communist party] (M. Pourhormozan, Trans.). Tudeh Party of Iran. [in Persian] Moeini Alamdari, J. (2021) Ravesh-shenasi-ye nazariye-haye jadid dar siasat [Methodology of new theories of politics]. University of Tehran Press. [in Persian] Mouffe, C. (1995) Dimensions of radical democracy: Pluralism, citizenship, community. Verso. Mouffe, C. (2005) On the political. Routledge. Mouffe, C. (2012) Dar bare-ye amr-e siasi [On the political] (M. Ansari, Trans.). Rokhdad-e No. [in Persian] Ryan, J. (2012) Lenin’s terror: The ideological origins of early Soviet state violence. Routledge. Schmitt, C. (2014) Mafhoom-e amr-e siasi [The concept of the political] (Y. Jirani & R. Namazi, Trans.). Ghoghnos. [in Persian] Skinner, Q. (1993) Machiavelli (E. Foladvand, Trans.). Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Skinner, Q. (2011) Azadi moghadam bar liberalisme [Liberty before liberalism] (F. Majlesi, Trans.). Farhang-e Javid. [in Persian] Skinner, Q. (2014a) Bonyadha-ye andisheh-ye siasi-ye modern, Vol. 1: Renaissance (K. Firouzmand, Trans.). Agah. [in Persian] Skinner, Q. (2014b) Binesh-haye elm-e siasat, Vol. 1: Dar bab-e ravesh [Visions of politics] (F. Majidi, Trans.). Farhang-e Javid. [in Persian] Tajik, M. (2006) Post-marxism va post-marxism [Post-Marxism and post-Marxism]. Research in Theoretical Politics, 2(2), 25–45. [in Persian] Tully, J. (1988). Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics. Princeton University Press. Wolff, J. (2003) Why read Marx today?. Oxford University Press.   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> M.A. in Political Science, Faculty of Humanities, Yasouj University, Yasuj, Iran. mohammad.asadi9595@gmail.com <a href="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7549-0118">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7549-0118</a> <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Corresponding Author: Associate Professor, Political Sciences, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. a.samiee@ase.ui.ac.ir <a href="https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4729-075X">https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4729-075X</a> <a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">***</a> . Professor in International Relations, Department of Political Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Yasouj University, Yasouj, Iran. abagheri@yu.ac.ir  <a href="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4584-5870">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4584-5870</a>پژوهش پیشِ رو درصدد پاسخ به این پرسش کلیدی است که مفهوم خشونت و سوژه انقلابی در گذر از اندیشه مارکسیسم کلاسیک (مارکس) به جریان پسامارکسیسم (لاکلائو و موف) دستخوش چه تغییر و تحولاتی شده است؟ هدف پژوهش حاضر، پاسخ به این پرسش و تبیین تحول نظری خشونت و سوژه انقلابی در این دو جریان فکری است. اهمیت این موضوع از آن جهت است که بازنمایی نظری خشونت و تعریف سوژه انقلابی، رابطه انسان با قدرت و نظم اجتماعی را شکل می&zwnj;دهد و بازتاب تغییرات بنیادین در منطق مبارزه و مقاومت سیاسی است. ضرورت پژوهش از آنجا ناشی می&zwnj;شود که دگرگونی مفهوم خشونت و بازنمایی سوژه انقلابی در گذار از مارکسیسم کلاسیک به پسامارکسیسم را نمی&zwnj;توان به یک جابه&zwnj;جایی ساده از خشونت به اصلاح تقلیل داد؛ بلکه این تحول، ناظر بر تغییرات عمیق&zwnj;تر در نسبتِ اثرگذاری اقتصاد و سیاست بر نحوه کنشِ سوژه انقلابی، ظهور سوژه&zwnj;های سیاسی متکثر، و تحول در منطق منازعه از خشونت&zwnj; به رقابت&zwnj;های مسالمت&zwnj;آمیز است.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51951

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923Revolution in Two Conceptions: Lawson’s Structural-Historical Analysis and Zakaria’s Liberal-Political Discourseانقلاب در دو برداشت: تحلیل ساختاری- تاریخی لاوسن و گفتمان لیبرال- سیاسی زکریا113140faمهدی زیبائیدانشیار روابط بین‌الملل، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی (ره)، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5600-8552محمدکامکاریدانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5130-558220251118Revolution in Two Conceptions: Lawson’s Structural-Historical Analysis and Zakaria’s Liberal-Political Discourse   Mahdi Zibaei<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Mohamad Kamkari<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a>   Using a comparative method and operationalized criteria (level of analysis, driving factor, and desired outcome), the present study examines the analytical differences between George Lawson’s structural-historical approach and Fareed Zakaria’s liberal-political approach in interpreting the phenomenon of revolution. Lawson considers revolution to be a structural phenomenon in the recreation of the global order, formed through the three-layered interaction of global, national, and domestic levels, emphasizing the role of international networks and structure-agent conflicts. In contrast, Zakaria analyzes revolution as an instrument for realizing national liberalism, focusing on economic crises, class inequality, and the necessity of consolidating liberal institutions. The findings indicate that Lawson’s framework is effective in explaining the structural conditions surrounding the occurrence of revolution but has weaknesses in analyzing institutional resilience; Zakaria’s framework is useful for examining democratic consolidation but falls short of grasping structural-historical interactions. Consequently, synthesizing these two frameworks can provide a model for understanding the gap between the occurrence of a revolution and the consolidation of its liberal outcomes.   Keywords: Revolution, Lawson, Zakaria, Structural-Historical, Liberal-Political. Introduction As one of the most complex and transformative phenomena in human history, revolution has consistently been at the center of attention for theorists in political science, sociology, and international relations. Accompanied by fundamental, rapid, and often non-linear changes in power structures, political institutions, social relations, and even value and cultural systems, this phenomenon has played a decisive role in shaping the evolutionary trajectories of civilizations. However, in the academic literature, there is no single, consensus-based definition of revolution, and each school of thought highlights different dimensions of it by relying on its own epistemological presuppositions. While this proliferation of approaches has enriched the theoretical landscape of revolution studies, in practice it has generated numerous conceptual and explanatory challenges particularly in distinguishing between why revolutions occur and how their outcomes are consolidated or distorted. In this context, two contemporary thinkers George Lawson (a theorist of revolution and international relations) and Fareed Zakaria (a political analyst and specialist in liberal discourse) each relying on distinct theoretical traditions, have offered specific analytical frameworks for understanding the phenomenon of revolution. Emphasizing the link between structure and agency within the context of global history, Lawson views revolution as an inter-societal and multi-layered phenomenon that takes shape through the interaction of global, national, and domestic levels and recreates the world political order. In contrast, with a pragmatic and institution-centered perspective, Zakaria analyzes revolution as a political instrument for realizing liberalism at the national level, holding that the durability of its outcomes requires robust institutional infrastructures such as the rule of law, judicial independence, and guarantees of individual rights. Despite the significance of both frameworks, no independent comparative study has yet scrutinized the epistemological, methodological, and analytical differences between these two thinkers in explicating the phenomenon of revolution. Aiming to bridge this theoretical gap, the present study seeks to answer the primary question: What are the analytical differences between Lawson’s structural-historical approach and Zakaria’s liberal-political approach in interpreting the phenomenon of revolution? And how can synthesizing these two frameworks offer a more comprehensive model for understanding the gap between the occurrence of revolution and the consolidation of its democratic outcomes?   <h3 style="text-align: left;">Method</h3> In terms of objective, this study is applied-theoretical, and in terms of nature, it is descriptive-analytical, conducted using a comparative method. The comparative method in political science is recognized as an effective tool for identifying similarities, differences, causal patterns, and distinctions in levels of explanation across competing or complementary theories. In this regard, relying on the published writings of the two studied thinkers especially Lawson’s key books and articles such as Anatomies of Revolution, On Revolutions, and The Global Transformation, and Zakaria’s works such as The Age of Revolutions, The Future of Freedom, and From Wealth to Power this study extracts theoretical data and organizes it within a systematic comparative framework. To operationalize the comparison, three key criteria “level of analysis,” “driving factor,” and “desired outcome” have been defined as comparative variables. The level of analysis refers to the distinction between the locus of explanation (global/inter-societal versus national/institutional); the driving factor addresses the causes and initial conditions of revolution; and the desired outcome relates to post-revolutionary consequences and consolidation processes. The research approach is qualitative and grounded in theoretical discourse analysis, wherein the epistemological foundations of each framework are first examined independently, then brought into conceptual confrontation, and ultimately their points of convergence and analytical gaps are drawn out. This method allows the distinctions in their levels of explanation to be accurately identified rather than resorting to reductionism or treating two disparate theories as equivalent, thereby preparing the ground for presenting a synthesized theoretical model.   <h3 style="text-align: left;">Findings</h3> The research findings indicate that although both Lawson’s and Zakaria’s frameworks address the phenomenon of revolution, they operate at different epistemological and analytical levels and are therefore not directly commensurate. In George Lawson’s approach, revolution is conceptualized as a “structure-agent” and “inter-societal” phenomenon. Critiquing both pure structuralism and extreme agency-centrism, Lawson emphasizes the dynamic interaction of these two levels. From his perspective, revolutions are rooted in structural crises of the global system, inter-state rivalries, shifts in the patterns of power hierarchies, and the failure of nation-states in confronting internal and external pressures. Introducing the concept of “causal configurations,” he regards revolution not as a discrete event, but as an ongoing historical process unfolding across three stages: revolutionary situations, revolutionary trajectories, and revolutionary outcomes. Lawson maintains that contemporary revolutions, even when appearing non-violent or electoral, still reflect macro-transformations in the global order and can alter geopolitical balances and international discourses. The strength of his framework lies in explaining why revolutions occur within specific historical contexts and in illustrating transnational networks and local-global interactions; however, in analyzing how institutions are consolidated after victory and the conditions under which a revolution transforms into a durable democracy, his framework lacks sufficient depth. In contrast, Fareed Zakaria analyzes revolution within the framework of liberal-political discourse, centered around “institutional consolidation.” Locating the roots of revolution primarily in economic crises, class inequalities, and the pressures resulting from rapid modernization, Zakaria directs his primary emphasis toward the post-revolutionary stage. In his view, revolutionary victory alone does not guarantee sustainable transformation; rather, its success depends on the existence of prior or concurrent liberal institutions, such as an independent judiciary, a free press, the rule of law, and guarantees of individual rights. Examining cases such as the American Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, and recent transformations in developing countries, Zakaria warns that rapid and superficial democratization without liberal infrastructures leads to the emergence of “illiberal democracies” or the reproduction of authoritarianism. Therefore, his approach is predominantly focused at the national-institutional level, emphasizing post-revolutionary crisis management, the gradual pacing of transformations, and the institutionalization of the rules of the political game. Zakaria’s strength lies in providing clear criteria for measuring the durability of revolutionary outcomes and critiquing naive optimism regarding mere regime change; however, his framework proves incapable of explicating the structural-historical contexts behind the outbreak of revolution, the role of international networks, global geo-economic shifts, and the cross-border interactions of social movements. A comparative evaluation based on the three criteria indicates that: in the “level of analysis,” Lawson emphasizes multiple (global, national, domestic) and inter-societal layers, whereas Zakaria limits the analytical focus to the national and institutional level. In the “driving factor,” Lawson stresses crises in the global balance of power and the structural failure of the nation-state, while Zakaria focuses on the absence of liberal institutions alongside political participation and domestic economic crises. In the “desired outcome,” Lawson views the recreation of the political order at the global level as the ultimate end, whereas Zakaria takes the consolidation of liberal institutions at the national level as the primary objective. Furthermore, both frameworks feature complementary limitations: Lawson is not inattentive to the colonial and structural-historical dimensions yet pays less attention to the mechanisms of institutional consolidation; Zakaria is strong on institution-building but downplays macro-cultural, ideological factors, and geopolitical contexts.   <h3 style="text-align: left;">Conclusion</h3> Through a comparative investigation of these two major theoretical frameworks in revolution studies, this study demonstrated that George Lawson’s structural-historical approach and Fareed Zakaria’s liberal-political discourse, rather than being competitors, represent two complementary yet disparate levels of analysis. The findings suggest that the conceptual gap in the literature on revolution largely stems from the failure to distinguish between the “conditions surrounding the occurrence of revolution” and the “factors consolidating its outcomes.” By focusing on the interaction of structure and agency within the context of global history, Lawson effectively explains why revolutions occur under conditions of structural crises, geopolitical shifts, and transnational networks; however, he lacks adequate analytical tools to answer why some revolutions lead to sustainable liberal democracies while others descend into despotism or institutional chaos. In contrast, Zakaria, by emphasizing the role of liberal institutions, the rule of law, and the gradual management of transitions, provides clear metrics for assessing the durability and consolidation of revolutionary outcomes, yet falls into a nation-centric reductionism regarding the structural-historical roots and international contexts in which revolutions take shape. Consequently, synthesizing these two frameworks is not only viable, but essential for the theoretical renewal of revolution studies in an era of globalization. The analytical model proposed in this study rests on the principle that a complete understanding of the revolutionary cycle requires linking the structural-historical level (based on Lawson’s perspective) with the national-institutional level (based on Zakaria’s perspective). This synthesis enables researchers and policymakers to move beyond the two extremes of “structural determinism” (which disregards the role of institutional factors and human choices) and “nation-centric reductionism” (which ignores global and historical contexts). In practice, this integrated approach demonstrates that revolutions lead to lasting and democratic transformation only when they possess structural foundations and transnational backing, and when, in the post-victory phase, liberal institutional infrastructures are progressively reproduced and consolidated at the national level. Beyond its theoretical contribution, this study carries methodological and policy-oriented implications: methodologically, it underscores the need to avoid false equivalencies between disparate theories and highlights the imperative of analyzing separate levels of explanation.   <h3 style="text-align: left;">References</h3> Abrams, B. (2019) A fifth generation of revolutionary theory is yet to come. Journal of Historical Sociology, 32(4), 378–386. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12248">https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12248</a> Allinson, J. (2021) On generations of revolutionary theory: A response. Journal of Historical Sociology, 34(1), 150–160. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12316">https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12316</a> Almond, G. A., & Powell, B. B. (1966). Comparative politics: A developmental approach. Little, Brown and Company. Arendt, H. (1963) On revolution. Penguin Books. Basinger, M. (2023) Shahr-e enghelabi: Shahri-shodan va tahavol-e jahani-ye enghelab [The revolutionary city: Urbanization and the global transformation of revolution] (D. Najafi, Trans.). Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Bayat, A. (2023) Enghelab-e bedoon-e engelabioon [Revolution without revolutionaries] (A. Sadeghi, Trans.). Shiraze. [in Persian] Beck, C., Lawson, G., Becquens, M., Chenoweth, E., Nepstad, S. E., & Ritter, D. P. (2023) Dar bare-ye enghelab-ha [On revolutions] (M. Zibaei & M. Babaei, Trans.). Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Bishara, A. (2020) Dar bare-ye enghelab va zamine-haye an [On revolution and its backgrounds] (K. Heydari, Trans.). Mania Honar. [in Persian] Buzan, B., & Lawson, G. (2016) Explanation, geopolitics, and liberalism: A reply to Luke Cooper. Journal of Historical Sociology, 29(1), 1–14. Buzan, B., & Lawson, G. (2024) Degargooni-ye jahani: Tarikh, madaniyat va takvin-e ravabet-e beynolmelal [Global transformation: History, modernity and the making of international relations] (M. J. Soltani Gishini & M. R. Chitsazian, Trans.). Abrar-e Moaser-e Tehran. [in Persian] Calvert, P. (2008) Enghelab va zedd-e enghelab [Revolution and counter-revolution] (H. Ghane’i, Trans.; 2nd ed.). Ashian. [in Persian] Giddens, A. (1989) Sociology. Polity Press. Hadian, N. (2012) Mafhoom-e enghelab va tahavolat-e jahan-e Arab [The concept of revolution and the developments in the Arab world]. Political Quarterly, 42(4), 205–222. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2012.35301">https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2012.35301</a> [in Persian] Huntington, S. P. (1968) Political order in changing societies. Yale University Press. Huntington, S. P. (2007) Saman-e siasi dar javame-e dast-khosh-e degargooni [Political order in changing societies] (M. Salasi, Trans.; 4th ed.). Elmi. [in Persian] Karami, K. (2010) Forsat-ha va chalesh-haye Amrika dar jahani motefavet [Opportunities and challenges of the US in a different world]. Regional Studies Quarterly, 11(36), 99–121. [in Persian] Kosari, M. (2008) Ravesh-e moghayese-ee [Comparative method]. In A. Manouchehri (Ed.), Rahyaft va ravesh dar olum-e siasi [Approach and method in political science] (pp. 385–404). Samt. [in Persian] Lawson, G. (2021) Kalbod-shekafi-haye jadid-e enghelab [Anatomies of revolution] (M. Zibaei, Trans.). Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693. Manouchehri, A. (Ed.). (2008) Rahyaft va ravesh dar olum-e siasi [Approach and method in political science]. Samt. [in Persian] Marsh, D., & Stoker, G. (Eds.). (2010) Theory and methods in political science. Palgrave Macmillan. Panjalipour, M. (2023) Arzyabi-ye tamayoz-e mian-e nasl-e chaharom va panjom-e nazariye-haye enghelab [Evaluating the distinction between the fourth and fifth generation of revolutionary theories] [Master’s thesis, Shahid Beheshti University]. [in Persian] Robertson, R. (2021) Jung-shenasi-ye karbordi [Applied Jungian psychology] (S. Sargolzaei, Trans.; 11th ed.). Bonyad-e Farhang-e Zendegi. [in Persian] Shojaei, R. A., & Simbar, R. (2023) Vakavi va naghd-e nazariye-ye realisme dolat-mehvar-e Fareed Zakaria [An analysis and critique of Fareed Zakaria’s state-centric realism theory]. Foreign Relations Quarterly, 15(3), 112–134. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22034/fr.2024.411934.1434">https://doi.org/10.22034/fr.2024.411934.1434</a> [in Persian] Skocpol, T. (1979) States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press. Tilly, C. (1978) From mobilization to revolution. Addison-Wesley. Zakaria, F. (2001) Zohoor-e democracy-e gheyr-e liberal [The rise of illiberal democracy] (A. Sadeghi, Trans.). Middle East Studies Quarterly, 8(2), 269–292. [in Persian] Zakaria, F. (2009) Jahan-e pasa-Amrikayi [The post-American world] (A. Azizi, Trans.). Hermes. [in Persian] Zakaria, F. (2011) Ayandeh-ye azadi: Olaviyat-e liberalisme bar democracy [The future of freedom: Illiberal democracy at home and abroad] (A. H. Nowroozi, Trans.). Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Zakaria, F. (2020a) Az servat be ghodrat [From wealth to power] (N. Sheikh-Sarayi et al., Trans.). Roozaneh. [in Persian] Zakaria, F. (2020b) Bazi-ye bozorgan [The great game] (A. Molyani, Trans.; 2nd ed.). Ettela’at. [in Persian] Zakaria, F. (2024) Asr-e enghelab-ha [Age of revolutions] (M. Karbasi, Trans.). Sales. [in Persian]   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Imam Khomeini International University.  <a href="mailto:zibaei@soc.ikiu.ac.ir">zibaei@soc.ikiu.ac.ir</a> https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5600-8552 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Ph.D. Student in Political Science, Imam Khomeini International University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Iran. <a href="mailto:mohamadkamkari@gmail.com">mohamadkamkari@gmail.com</a> https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5130-5582پژوهش حاضر با روش تطبیقی و معیارهای عملیاتی&zwnj;شده (سطح تحلیل، عامل محرک و نتیجه مطلوب)، تفاوت&zwnj;های تحلیلی رویکرد ساختاری-تاریخی جورج لاوسن و رویکرد لیبرال-سیاسی فرید زکریا را در تفسیر پدیدۀ انقلاب بررسی می&zwnj;کند. لاوسن انقلاب را پدیده&zwnj;ای ساختاری در بازآفرینی نظم جهانی می&zwnj;داند که در تعامل سه&zwnj;لایه جهانی، ملی و داخلی شکل می&zwnj;گیرد و بر نقش شبکه&zwnj;های بین&zwnj;المللی و تعارضات ساختار-کارگزار تأکید دارد. در مقابل، زکریا انقلاب را ابزاری برای تحقق لیبرالیسم ملی تحلیل می&zwnj;کند و بر بحران&zwnj;های اقتصادی، نابرابری طبقاتی و ضرورت تثبیت نهادهای لیبرال تمرکز دارد. یافته&zwnj;ها نشان می&zwnj;دهد چارچوب لاوسن در تبیین زمینه&zwnj;های ساختاری وقوع انقلاب کارآمد است اما در تحلیل استحکام نهادی ضعف دارد؛ چارچوب زکریا برای بررسی تثبیت دموکراتیک مفید است اما در درک تعاملات ساختاری-تاریخی ناتوان است. در نتیجه، تلفیق این دو چارچوب می&zwnj;تواند الگویی برای درک شکاف میان وقوع انقلاب و تحکیم نتایج لیبرال آن فراهم آورد.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/52127

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923The Methodology of Theorizing the Theory of the State in Sixteenth- to Eighteenth-Century Europeروش‌شناسی نظریه‌پردازی نظریۀ دولت در اروپای قرون شانزده تا هجده میلادی141168faعلیرضاآقاباباگلیدانشجوی دکتری جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1116-069Xسید محمدعلیحسینی زادهاستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی و روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7646-28052025412The Methodology of Theorizing the Theory of the State in Sixteenth- to Eighteenth-Century Europe   Alireza Aghababagoli<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Seyed Mohammad Ali Hosseinizadeh<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a>   The genesis of the modern state coincided with political theorists moving beyond classical forms of rule and publishing treatises articulating a distinct “theory of the state.” Due to the constitutive (tāʾsīsī) character of this emergent organization of power, these theories adopted a non-positivist methodology rooted in the tradition of political philosophy to formulate an exhaustive and exclusive (jāmiʿ wa māniʿ) prescription for establishing the optimal dimensions of the state as an institution. The proliferation of these state theories provided the groundwork for its religious legitimation and political acceptance. Accordingly, this study’s hypothesis posits the feasibility of deriving a methodology of theorizing the state in sixteenth- to eighteenth-century Europe through a critical examination of Jean Bodin’s Six Books of the Commonwealth, Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan, and Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws. These seminal texts explain and justify the alignment of the state’s “peripheral institutions” such as the government, bureaucracy, and standing army around a theorist’s specific “central idea,” such as sovereignty, security, or constitutionalism. By uncovering the fundamental methodology underpinning the theories of Bodin, Hobbes, and Montesquieu as a practical guide for state-theorizing, one can envision the articulation of constitutive theories of the modern state for non-European contexts.   Keywords: Methodology, Theorization, Theory of the State, Nation-State, Constitutive State.   Introduction and Problem Statement The central problem of this article arises from the relationship between the emergence of the nation-state in Europe and the necessity of theorizing the state. The modern European state in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries was not merely another iteration of classical governments; rather, it was a new form of power organization that required comprehensive theories to achieve internal territorial stabilization, legitimize authority, regulate relations between the government and society, and enable its own external projection. From this perspective, the theory of the state is neither a scattered reflection on politics nor a historical report of power transformations, but a constitutive text through which the theorist attempts to explain and prescribe the creation, establishment, harmonization, and legitimation of their desired state. Focusing on three important texts of the European political philosophy tradition Jean Bodin’s Six Books of the Commonwealth, Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan, and Charles de Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws the present article asks: Can a methodology for theorizing the state be extracted from these works and utilized as a guide for state-theorizing in new non-European societies? The importance of this question stems from the fact that in many Persian studies, and even in some general political science works, sufficient distinction is not made between concepts such as the state, government, political system, political theory, and theory of the state. The result of such conflation is that any type of essay-writing on political power, without carrying a coherent plan for establishing or reconstructing the state, is introduced under the title of “theory of the state.”   Background and Research Gap Research shows that a significant part of existing works on the state either remain within the history of political thought, introduce types of political systems, or conflate the state with the government and the executive branch. Some works also equate the theory of the state with political theory, while the relationship between the two is one of general-to-specific; every theory of the state is a type of political theory, but not every political theory is a theory of the state. A theory of the state emerges when the main subject of thought is the state itself as the comprehensive institution of power, and the theorist attempts to explain its main elements namely, the central idea, legitimacy, sovereignty, territory, government, administrative apparatus, and military force in a harmonious relationship with one another. In this regard, the article, while using Thomas Spragens’s discussion on understanding political theories critically, distances itself from the “live film” analogy and compares the theory of the state to a “screenplay.” Just as a screenplay is an antecedent text and a guide for making a film, the theory of the state is also an antecedent text and a guide for establishing, stabilizing, or reconstructing the organization of power. This analogy allows the theory of the state to be examined not merely by testing the truth and falsehood of its propositions, but in terms of its internal structure, narrative order, crisis diagnosis, solution provision, and formulation of the necessary institutions to realize the solution.   Theoretical Framework and Methodology The article’s framework is based on the distinction between foundational methodology and applied methodology. Foundational methodology, instead of examining the application of a theory to external subjects, addresses how the theory is formed, its epistemological and logical foundations, its relationship with the historical and cultural context, and its internal structure. Therefore, the goal of the article is not to judge the correctness or incorrectness of the theories of Bodin, Hobbes, and Montesquieu, but to focus on discovering the logic of their theorizing in the realm of the state. The article is inspired by Syd Field’s three-act screenplay structure model to demonstrate the structure of the theory of the state. Based on this, the theory of the state is understood as a text having a beginning, a middle, and an end: the beginning is accompanied by observing the crisis and diagnosing the pain; the middle is dedicated to defining the state, explaining the central idea, and organizing peripheral institutions; and the end is the formulation of the treatment or prescribing the desired form of the state. This model allows researchers to reconstruct a minimal and common structure for constitutive state theories behind the substantive and historical differences of the three examined texts. Regarding the implementation method, the article is a historical-conceptual and text-oriented study. The three selected texts are chosen not for a complete comparison of the history of the state in Europe, but because of their position in formulating three important moments of the theory of the state: the sovereignty-centric moment in Bodin, the security-centric moment in Hobbes, and the constitutional-centric moment in Montesquieu. Therefore, the research does not claim to have collected all examples of state theory in Europe, but attempts to reconstruct the minimal logic of state-writing by studying cases that have the highest constitutive capacity. For this reason, the repeating elements in these works, such as the definition of the state, the relationship between state and government, the concept of legitimacy, the issue of sovereignty, territorial domain, army, administrative apparatus, law, judiciary, and the desired form of government, have been examined as structural signs of the theory of the state. This research method allows the article to go beyond the level of mere historiography and reach a model of theorizing.   Findings The study of Six Books of the Commonwealth shows that Bodin constructs his theory of the state around the central idea of sovereignty. He defines the state at the beginning, considers sovereignty indivisible, distinguishes between the state and the government, and then discusses institutions such as the government, the senate, the judiciary, the administrative apparatus, officials, citizens, territory, and the standing army. His theory is formed in reaction to the crisis of civil war and the collapse of the political order in France, and in the end, he prescribes monarchy as the most appropriate form of the state. In Leviathan, Hobbes places the central idea of security at the center of his theory. For him, the state is an artificial man and a legal person created to escape the state of war and ensure peace. Hobbes also distinguishes between state and government, speaks of types of government, discusses sovereignty, civil law, territory, judiciary, public agents, and subordinate organizations, and finally introduces his theory as a response to establishing a new state. In The Spirit of the Laws, Montesquieu does not start with a direct definition of the state, because after Bodin and Hobbes, the concept of the state was somewhat established; instead, he seeks his central idea in the concept of the constitution and its relationship with political liberty. He explains the constitutional state through the separation of powers, the moderation of power, the proportionality of law to the nation’s situation, and the organization of relations between the legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Therefore, if Bodin formulates the absolute sovereignty-centric state theory and Hobbes the security-centric state theory, Montesquieu expands the constitutional, law-centric state theory.   Innovation and Implications The innovation of the article lies in formulating the theory of the state as a special type of political theory consisting of two main parts: the central idea and the peripheral institutions. The central idea determines the main meaning of the desired state, and the peripheral institutions are the tools for realizing that meaning at the objective level of power. This understanding shows that the theory of the state is efficient only when it can establish a link between the conceptual level and the institutional level. If the theorist places an idea like sovereignty, security, or the constitution at the center, they must show how the government, army, administrative apparatus, law, judgment, taxation, territory, and citizenship relations should be at the service of realizing that idea. Therefore, a theory of the state lacking peripheral institutions is reduced to a political slogan, and peripheral institutions lacking a central idea will turn into scattered organizations lacking direction.   Applications and Limitations From the perspective of the article, the use of the European experience is defensible only when a distinction is made between methodological adaptation and substantive imitation. Bodin, Hobbes, and Montesquieu’s theories were written in the context of specific European crises, and their answers cannot be directly transferred to other societies. But their method can be used to raise fundamental questions: Around which central idea should the desired state be consolidated? What is the relationship of this idea with government, law, military force, and the administrative apparatus? What kind of legitimacy supports it? And how can harmony be created among peripheral institutions? Answering these questions separates the theory of the state from the level of general reflection about politics and turns it into a strategic text for state-building. The limitation of the research is also that it only examines three prominent texts and does not claim to offer a complete history of the theory of the state in Europe.   Discussion and Conclusion The main finding of the article is that in these three theories, the sequence of discussions is not completely identical, but all of them address a set of common elements: observation of crisis, definition or redefinition of the state, determination of the central idea, explanation of the relationship between state and government, determination of the status of legitimacy, sovereignty and territory, and harmonization of peripheral institutions such as government, army, and administrative apparatus. From this perspective, a constitutive theory of the state is a text that establishes a systematic link between the central idea and the peripheral institutions. The function of such a text is not merely describing the existing state of affairs, but increasing the theoretical and practical capacity of the state for survival, administration, control, legitimation, and public persuasion. Another result of the research is that the theory of the state should not be conflated with the theory of government, the theory of the political system, or political theory in a general sense. Also, the European experience of the theory of the state is not substantively and directly adaptable for other societies, but its method i.e., starting from a crisis, defining the state, determining a central idea, and organizing peripheral institutions around that idea can be a guide for state-theorizing in non-European societies. Thus, the article shows that the lack of an indigenous and coherent theory of the state in countries facing the issue of the modern state is not just a theoretical deficiency, but can also lead to a vacuum of legitimacy, institutional incoherence, and inability to lead society. Hence, the foundational methodology of Europe’s constitutive state theories is important not for imitating the content of absolute or constitutional European states, but for learning the method of theorizing about the state.   References Aghababagoli, A. (2024a) Seminar-e eslam-e siasi va nazariye-ye dolat dar Iran [Seminar on political Islam and the theory of state in Iran] [Seminar presentation]. Department of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Shahid Beheshti University. [in Persian] Aghababagoli, A. (2024b) Nazariye-ye dolat va eslam-e siasi dar Iran [Theory of state and political Islam in Iran] [Master’s thesis, Shahid Beheshti University]. [in Persian] Ahmadvand, S. (2015) Tarikh-e tahavol-e dolat dar Eslam (ta payan-e Omavian) [History of the evolution of the state in Islam (until the end of the Umayyads)]. Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Afzali, R. (Ed.). (2020) Dolat-e modern dar Iran [The modern state in Iran]. Mofid University Press. (Original work published 2007) [in Persian] Anbarani, A., Azghandi, A., Modir-Shanechi, M., & Zibakalam-Mofrad, S. (2018) Dar chisti-ye dolat-e modern (be sooye yek rooykard-e sazmani) [On the nature of the modern state: Towards an organizational approach]. Political Science Quarterly, 14(43), 60–133. [in Persian] Anter, A. (2014) Max Weber’s theory of the modern state: Origins, structure and significance (K. Tribe, Trans.). Palgrave Macmillan. Bashirieh, H. (2019a) Tarikh-e andisheh-haye siasi dar gharn-e bistom: Andisheh-haye Marxist-i [History of political thought in the 20th century: Marxist thought] (Vol. 1; 2nd ed.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Bashirieh, H. (2019b) Tarikh-e andisheh-haye siasi dar gharn-e bistom: Liberalism va mohafeze-kari [History of political thought in the 20th century: Liberalism and conservatism] (Vol. 2; 2nd ed.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Bloom, W. T. (1994) Nazariye-haye nezam-e siasi: Classic-haye andisheh-ye siasi va tahlil-e siasi-ye novin [Political systems theories: Classics of political thought and new political analysis] (A. Tadayyon, Trans.; Vol. 1). Aran. [in Persian] Bodin, J. (1993) Les six livres de la République [The six books of the commonwealth]. Librairie Générale Française. Danaeifard, H. (2009) Ravesh-shenasi-ye omumi-ye nazariye-pardazi [General methodology of theorizing]. Humanities Methodology, 15(58), 7–32. [in Persian] Descartes, R. (n.d.). Goftar dar ravesh-e rah bordan-e aghl [Discourse on the method] (M. A. Foroughi, Trans.; Vol. 1). Kanoon-e Ta’lif va Tarjomeh. [in Persian] Eivazi, M. R., & Mohammadi, E. (2011) Ravesh-shenasi va karbord-e an dar nazariye-pardazi dar olum-e ejtemaei [Methodology and its application in theorizing in social sciences]. Strategic Defense Studies, 12(46), 90–167. [in Persian] Field, S. (2020) Chegouneh film-nameh benevisim [Screenplay: The foundations of screenwriting] (A. Akbari, Trans.). Niloufar. [in Persian] Field, S. (2022) Kalbod-shekafi-ye chahar film-nameh [The screenwriter’s workbook] (A. Akbari, Trans.). Niloufar. [in Persian] Firahi, D. (2008) Ravesh-shenasi-ye danesh-e siasi dar tamaddon-e Eslami [Methodology of political knowledge in Islamic civilization]. Research Institute of Hawzah and University. [in Persian] Firahi, D. (2016) Nezam-e siasi va dolat dar Eslam [Political system and state in Islam]. Samt. [in Persian] Gill, G. (2003) The nature and development of the modern state. Palgrave Macmillan. Golmohammadi, A. (2023) Chisti, tahavol va cheshm-andaz-e dolat [The nature, evolution and perspective of the state]. Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Hobbes, T. (2020) Leviatan [Leviathan] (C. B. Macpherson, Ed.; H. Bashirieh, Trans.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Malek, N. (2013) Motale-e tatbighi-ye mafhoom-e ravesh-shenasi va nazariye az manzar-e pazhoohesh-haye kammi va keifi ba takid bar nazariye-pardazi dar memari [Comparative study of the concept of methodology and theory from the perspective of quantitative and qualitative research with an emphasis on theorizing in architecture]. Comparative Art Studies, 3(5), 29–117. [in Persian] Mannheim, J. B., & Rich, R. C. (1998) Ravesh-haye tahghigh dar olum-e siasi: Tahlil-e tajrobi [Empirical political analysis: Research methods in political science] (L. Sazgar, Trans.). University Publishing Center. [in Persian] Montesquieu, C. L. (2023) Rooh-e ghavanin [The spirit of the laws] (A. A. Mohtadi, Trans.; Vol. 1). Amirkabir. [in Persian] Mosleh, P. (2019) Moghadamat va osul-e nazariye-pardazi-ye siasi [Fundamentals and principles of political theorizing]. Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. [in Persian] Naghibzadeh, A. (2018) Tarikh-e diplomasi va ravabet-e beynolmelal: Az peyman-e Vestfali ta emrooz [History of diplomacy and international relations: From the Peace of Westphalia to today]. Ghomeys. [in Persian] Nelson, B. R. (2006) The making of the modern state: A theoretical evolution. Palgrave Macmillan. Parsania, H. (2013) Nazariye va farhang: Ravesh-shenasi-ye bonyadin-e takvin-e nazariye-haye elmi [Theory and culture: Fundamental methodology of the formation of scientific theories]. Rahbord-e Farhang, 6(23), 7–28. [in Persian] Pilbeam, P. (2022) Saltanat dar Faranse 1814-1848 [The monarchy in France 1814-1848]. Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Rakkabian, R. (2014) Barresi-ye entegadi-ye nazariye-haye dolat dar tabyin-e dolat dar Jomhuri-ye Eslami-ye Iran [A critical study of state theories in explaining the state in the Islamic Republic of Iran] [Doctoral dissertation, Baqir al-Olum University]. [in Persian] Spragens, T. A. (2021) Fahm-e nazariye-haye siasi [Understanding political theory] (F. Rajaei, Trans.). Agah. [in Persian] Tabatabai, S. J. (2005) Dibache-i bar nazariye-ye enhetat-e Iran [An introduction to the theory of decline in Iran] (Vol. 1; 4th ed.). Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Tabatabai, S. J. (2020) Tarikh-e andisheh-ye siasi-ye jadid dar Oropa: Jeld-e nokhost: Az nozayesh ta enghelab-e Faranse [History of modern political thought in Europe: Vol. 1: From the Renaissance to the French Revolution]. Minooye Kherad. [in Persian] Tahaee, S. J. (2006) Andisheh-ye dolat-e modern (be sooye nazariye-ye dolat-e Imam Khomeini) [The thought of the modern state: Towards Imam Khomeini’s theory of state]. Orouj. [in Persian] Vincent, A. (1997) Nazariye-haye dolat [Theories of the state] (H. Bashirieh, Trans.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Weiner, P. P. (Ed.). (2018) Farhang-e andisheh-haye siasi [Dictionary of the history of ideas] (I. Berlin, Ed.; K. Deyhimi, Trans.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Zeidabadi, A. (2018) Elzamat-e siasat dar asr-e mellat-dolat [The necessities of politics in the era of the nation-state]. Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian]   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: Ph.D. Student in Political Sociology, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran. <a href="mailto:alirezaghababagoli@gmail.com">alirezaghababagoli@gmail.com</a> https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1116-069X <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. <a href="mailto:m_hosseinizadeh@sbu.ac.ir">m_hosseinizadeh@sbu.ac.ir</a> https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7646-2805تکوین دولت مدرن، هم&zwnj;زمان با عبور نظریه&zwnj;پردازان سیاسی از اشکال قدیم حکومت و انتشار رسائل حاوی نظریه دولت بود. این نظریه&zwnj;ها به دلیل خصیصه تأسیسی سازمان جدید قدرت، تلاش می&zwnj;کرد با روشی غیر &zwnj;اثباتی و استفاده از سنت فلسفه سیاسی، به شکلی جامع و مانع، چگونگی استقرار نوع مطلوب ابعاد مختلف نهاد دولت را تجویز کند. رواج نظریه&zwnj;های دولت زمینه مشروعیت دینی و مقبولیت سیاسی آن را فراهم ساخت چنان&zwnj;که فرضیه پژوهش را امکان حصول روش&zwnj;شناسی نظریه&zwnj;پردازی نظریه دولت در اروپای قرون شانزده تا هجده میلادی با مطالعه «شش رساله دولت»، «لویاتان» و «روح&zwnj;القوانین» قرار می&zwnj;دهد. آثاری که به توضیح و توجیه هماهنگی «نهادهای پیرامونی» دولت، نظیر حکومت، بوروکراسی و ارتش حول «ایده مرکزی» خاص هر نظریه&zwnj;پرداز، مانند حاکمیت، امنیت یا قانون اساسی می&zwnj;پردازد. با روش&zwnj;شناسی بنیادین نظریه&zwnj;های ژان بُدَن، هابز و منتسکیو به&zwnj;مثابه راهنمای عملی نظریه دولت&zwnj;نویسی می&zwnj;توان به نگارش نظریه&zwnj;های تأسیسی دیگر دولت&zwnj;های جدید غیر اروپایی امید داشت.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/49921

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923The Modes of Emergence of Federal Systems and Their Institutional Consequences: A Comparative Study of the United Arab Emirates and Iraqشیوه پیدایش نظام¬های فدرال و پیامدهای نهادی آن؛ بررسی مقایسه‌ای امارات و عراق169195faسعید عطاردانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی دانشکده حقوق، علوم سیاسی و تاریخ، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-6189 آرشماندنی زاده دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی¬ارشد گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق، علوم سیاسی و تاریخ، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0009-0004-6725-2779 20251024The Modes of Emergence of Federal Systems and Their Institutional Consequences: A Comparative Study of the United Arab Emirates and Iraq   Saeed Attar<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Arash Mandanizadeh<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a>   Why do some federal systems achieve stability and efficiency while others remain unstable? Adopting the theoretical framework of Rational Choice Institutionalism, this paper argues that the “mode of emergence” of federalism is the key independent variable in explaining this divergence. Through a comparative study between the UAE (convergent/coming-together federalism) and Iraq (holding-together federalism), the paper demonstrates how the logic of elite calculations in each model leads to different outcomes. In the UAE, federalism was the product of a positive-sum game in which ruling elites, in order to maximize security and economic interests, voluntarily ceded part of their sovereignty and created stable institutions. In contrast, federalism in Iraq was the result of a zero-sum game intended to prevent state collapse, in which conflicting ethno-sectarian elite calculations led to a fragile compromise and inefficient institutions. Consequently, institutional stability depends more on the alignment of rational elite incentives at the moment of founding than on reliance on formal institutional design.   Keywords: Rational Choice, United Arab Emirates, Federalism, Iraq, Institutionalism.   Introduction and Problem Statement Throughout history, societies with ethnic, religious, and linguistic diversity have faced the dual challenge of “maintaining order and stability” on the one hand, and “establishing efficient systems of territorial governance” on the other. In this context, proponents of federal political systems argue that this model can resolve the problems of pluralistic societies and provide institutional efficiency by dividing sovereignty between the central government and autonomous units. However, historical experience shows that federalism is not always a definitive panacea; in some countries, it has led to political stability, sustainable economic development, and peaceful coexistence, while in others, it has resulted in intensified ethnic conflicts, chronic instability, and the paralysis of sovereignty. This research seeks to resolve this puzzle of divergence in institutional outcomes. The central question is: Why do some federal systems succeed while others fail? To answer this, two contrasting examples in the Middle East have been selected: the United Arab Emirates as a model of political stability and remarkable economic growth (established in 1971), and post-2003 Iraq, which, despite choosing federalism to manage ethno-sectarian diversity, is mired in chronic instability and violent conflict.   Research Hypothesis The fundamental hypothesis of this paper is that the “mode of emergence” of federalism is the key independent variable in determining the fate of political institutions. The authors argue that the UAE’s federal system is an example of “convergent” (coming-together) federalism, formed based on voluntary elite bargaining to achieve mutual benefits (a positive-sum game), which has led to “self-enforcing” and stable institutions. Conversely, Iraq’s federal system represents “holding-together” federalism; a model born from a forced compromise and an unavoidable fear of central state collapse (a zero-sum game) that has created fragile and unstable institutions.   Theoretical and Practical Significance This research is significant in three aspects: <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Theoretical richness: Moving beyond purely descriptive analyses, it applies the systematic approach of “Rational Choice Institutionalism” to analyze the state-building process.</li> </ul> <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Regional understanding: Comparing two key cases in the Middle East contributes to a deeper understanding of the dynamics of state-building in this turbulent region.</li> <li>Policy implications and lessons learned: This research emphasizes the vital importance of the “founding moment.” It serves as a clear warning to countries like Iran that the imposition of formal federalism, without the alignment of elite interests, will merely create a new platform for the continuation of conflict.</li> </ul>   Background and Literature Review Existing literature on federalism includes classical theories and empirical findings. Theoretically, William Riker believes federalism is the product of rational elite bargaining to aggregate military or economic power against threats (consistent with the convergent model). On the other hand, Alfred Stepan introduces the “holding-together” model, in which power is devolved from the center to the periphery to prevent the country’s disintegration. Empirical findings in domestic Iranian literature also show that previous researchers (such as Saei and Moradi, Sardarnia, and Bodaghi) have mainly sought the reasons for Iraq’s failure in constitutional ambiguities, historical identity crises, clientelist political culture, foreign interventions, and administrative corruption. However, none of these studies have focused on the logic of elite calculations as the most important factor in institutional stability a gap this paper seeks to fill using a precise comparative approach. Theoretical Framework: Rational Choice Institutionalism This micro-founded analytical approach considers macro political phenomena to be the product of the strategic behavior of individual actors (elites). In this framework, political actors are rational beings who, based on cost-benefit analysis, seek to maximize their utilities (including power, security, or wealth). Institutions act here as the “rules of the game” that structure interactions and reduce transaction costs. An institution remains stable when it becomes a “self-enforcing equilibrium” a state where adherence to the rules is more beneficial for all key actors than violating them. Otherwise, institutions lead to suboptimal outcomes and remain fragile.   Application to federal bargaining: <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Convergent model (Positive-sum game): Independent units bargain with each other to achieve benefits by aggregating resources that they would be unable to obtain alone. The benefit of union exceeds the cost of relinquishing autonomy, forming a stable “Nash equilibrium.”</li> <li>Holding-together model (Zero/Negative-sum game): The state devolves power to prevent disintegration. Regional elites accept this structure only as a “second-best” option (better than suppression, worse than full independence). Here, the goal is to maximize relative power at the expense of others, leading to a fragile compromise.</li> </ul>   Methodology The present research utilizes a qualitative “comparative study” method, relying on the logic of a “most different systems design.” The UAE and Iraq are different in terms of demographic context (a homogeneous tribal society versus deep ethno-sectarian diversity) but share a commonality in possessing a federal legal structure and a rentier political economy. This method allows the confounding variable of “social context” to be controlled, demonstrating that the difference in institutional outcomes is precisely due to the “mode of emergence” and the “logic of elite bargaining.” Case Study 1: The United Arab Emirates (Convergent Federalism) The UAE is a classic example of federalism in which actors, facing an environmental shock, chose the path of unification. <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Historical context and rational incentives: Until 1971, the region was a British protectorate. The sudden British withdrawal created a massive “security vacuum.” The ruling elites, particularly Sheikh Zayed (ruler of Abu Dhabi) and Sheikh Rashid (ruler of Dubai), faced potential threats from powerful neighbors. Their rational calculation showed that a defense union was necessary. On the other hand, the discovery of oil in Abu Dhabi provided a powerful economic incentive. Sheikh Zayed raised the opportunity cost of not joining the union through generous assistance.</li> <li>Institutional design and cooperative equilibrium: Negotiations were conducted solely between the rulers with full consent. The 1971 provisional constitution was the product of a rational compromise that reflected the actual balance of power; Abu Dhabi assumed the presidency of the federation due to its greater wealth, and Dubai the vice-presidency. The Federal Supreme Council was designed so that major decisions required the affirmative vote of these two emirates. This intelligent division of labor turned institutions into a “self-enforcing equilibrium.”</li> <li>Empirical implications: World Bank and IMF data show that the UAE consistently ranks in the top deciles in indices of rule of law, control of corruption, and political stability. Oil rent here has been put to the service of development. GDP per capita (PPP) has reached staggering figures (over $88,000 in 2023), and the country alone has attracted tens of billions of dollars in foreign capital. Very low unemployment and economic diversification are other fruits of this stable institutional stability.</li> </ul>   Case Study 2: Iraq (Holding-Together Federalism) The story of Iraq post-2003 invasion is a completely different narrative of a forced compromise in the heart of anarchy. <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Historical context and conflict of elite interests: The fall of the Ba’athist regime created a competitive and violent situation among Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis, each of whom had conflicting calculations:</li> <li>Kurds: Sought to legitimize a distinct identity and maintain their practical autonomy. Their goal was to weaken the center and control natural resources.</li> <li>Shiites: As the demographic majority who had been oppressed for decades, they initially wanted decentralization, but upon taking hold of the center, they inclined toward full control of state resources.</li> <li>Sunnis: Viewed federalism as a conspiracy to break up Iraq and permanently sideline them, and strongly opposed it.</li> <li>Fragile bargaining and ambiguous institutional design: The 2005 constitution was drafted under pressure from US forces and in the absence of cohesive Sunni organization, mainly based on the agreement between Kurds and Shiites. Instead of resolving conflicts, this text was full of deliberate ambiguities; issues such as the status of Kirkuk and the distribution of oil revenues remained unresolved. The result of this process was the establishment of the Muhasasa (ethno-sectarian quota) system, which divided positions and resources among elites like spoils of war.</li> <li>Empirical implications: Iraq was caught in a fragile balance based on deterrence (rather than cooperation). The constitution was repeatedly violated, governments were paralyzed for long periods, and institutionalized corruption disrupted public service delivery. In comparison to the UAE, Iraq’s economic growth has been accompanied by contraction, and oil dependency is extremely high. Foreign investment in the country has shown a negative trend (capital flight), and the unemployment rate, especially among youth, is critical. In regulatory quality and control of corruption indices, Iraq has consistently ranked among the lowest globally.</li> </ul>   Comparative Analysis and Research Findings A systematic comparison of these two cases demonstrates the fundamental contrast between the “logic of consent” versus the “logic of coercion.” In the UAE, federalism was a rational social contract, the output of which, due to the alignment of incentives and the recovery of mutual interests, became solid institutions, remarkable development, and freedom from sectarian tensions. But in Iraq, federalism was a “temporary ceasefire” without the consent of a large demographic group (Sunnis). In this imposed structure, each group strives to maximize its own ethnic interests, which has led to a “tragedy of the commons” in the political structure; where the pursuit of individual/group interests has completely destroyed the public good and national stability. Furthermore, objective and economic indicators clearly confirm this difference. While the UAE has one of the highest human development indices, the lowest unemployment rate, and the most stable space for investment in the region, Iraq, despite having massive oil revenues, struggles with the problem of capital flight, inflation, and the lowest levels of rule of law and regulatory quality. These data prove that wealth alone does not guarantee success; rather, the “initial institutional equilibrium” determines the country’s economic fate.   Conclusion By utilizing the theoretical framework of rational choice, this paper proved that the success or failure of federal systems is dependent on the logic of elite bargaining at the founding moment, rather than the legal design of institutions on paper. Stable institutions are created when they are the result of a win-win game and an endogenous agreement of elites to maximize collective interests. Integrating the rational choice approach with historical institutionalism shows that the rationality of actors does not occur in a vacuum, but is reinforced by historical conditions. Practically, the findings of this research are a serious warning for countries in the region, including multi-ethnic societies; imposing federalism in situations where elites are looking to gain relative power in a zero-sum game not only does not solve any problems but turns new institutions into battlegrounds for more violent conflicts and steers the country toward collapse.   References Al-Banna, S. (2016) From the Coast of Oman to the United Arab Emirates (1952–1971): Attempting to federate the Emirates [Doctoral dissertation, University of Exeter]. Anderson, E., & Stansfield, G. R. (2003) Iraqi Kurdistan: Political development and emergent democracy. Routledge. Anderson, L., & Stansfield, G. (2009) The future of Iraq: Dictatorship, democracy, or division? Palgrave Macmillan. Asaad, Z., & Mustafa, H. (2020) The impact of FDI inflows on GDP growth in Iraq for the period (2004–2017): An applied study. Tanmiyat Al-Rafidain, 39(128), 56–86. <a href="https://doi.org/10.33899/tanra.2020.167369">https://doi.org/10.33899/tanra.2020.167369</a> Attar, S., & Vahedi, S. (2025) Towse-e emarati: Tajrobe-ye dolat va bakhsh-e khosusi dar towse-e paydar [Emirati development: The experience of government and private sector in sustainable development]. Negarestan-e Andisheh. [in Persian] Bodaghi, J., Khalili, M., & Heidari, A. (2021) Ravand-pajoohi-ye tarikhi va ayandeh-ye federalism-e Eragh [Historical trend analysis and the future of Iraqi federalism]. Geopolitics Quarterly, 17(1), 84–115. [in Persian] Collier, D. (1993) The comparative method. In A. W. Finifter (Ed.), Political science: The state of the discipline II (pp. 105–119). American Political Science Association. Davidson, C. M. (2009) Abu Dhabi: Oil and beyond (D. Vanderwalle, Ed.). Columbia University Press. Dawisha, A. (2013) Iraq: A political history. Princeton University Press. Diamond, L. (2007) Squandered victory: The American occupation and the bungled effort to bring democracy to Iraq. Macmillan. Dodge, T. (2017) Iraq–from war to a new authoritarianism. Routledge. Dodge, T., Kaya, Z., Luchtenberg, K. N., Mathieu-Comtois, S., Saleh, B., van den Toorn, C., Turpin-King, A., & Watkins, J. (2018) Iraq synthesis paper: Understanding the drivers of conflict in Iraq. LSE Middle East Centre. Fearon, J. D. (2007) Iraq’s civil war. Foreign Affairs, 86(2), 54–65. Haccius, L. (2018) The making and breaking of federalism in Iraq (IFF Working Paper No. 26). <a href="https://doi.org/10.51363/unifr.diff.2018.26">https://doi.org/10.51363/unifr.diff.2018.26</a> Hadad, H. (2023) From shock and awe to stability and flaws: Iraq’s post-invasion journey. European Council on Foreign Relations. Haddad, F. (2016) Shia-centric state-building and Sunni rejection in post 2003 Iraq. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Hafez-nia, M. R., Ghorbani-nejad, R., & Ahmadi-pour, Z. (2010) Tahlil-e tatbighi-ye olgoo-ye khodgardani-ye Kordestan-e Eragh ba olgoo-haye khod-mokhtari va federalism [Comparative analysis of the Kurdistan self-governance model with autonomy and federalism models]. Amayesh-e Faza va Geomatics, 14(2), 196–216. [in Persian] International Labour Organization. (2024) ILOSTAT database. <a href="https://ilostat.ilo.org">https://ilostat.ilo.org</a> International Monetary Fund. (2024) United Arab Emirates: 2024 Article IV consultation-press release; and staff report (IMF Staff Country Reports No. 325). <a href="https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400293245.002">https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400293245.002</a> International Monetary Fund. (2025) World economic outlook database (April 2025). Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. (2024) The worldwide governance indicators. World Bank. Krzymowski, A. (2024) Economic diversification of the United Arab Emirates through the space sector and its diplomacy. Virtual Economics, 7(4), 30–47. <a href="https://doi.org/10.34021/ve.2024.07.04(2)">https://doi.org/10.34021/ve.2024.07.04(2)</a> Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693. <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513">https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513</a> Miller, D. E. (2011) Emarat-e Mottahede-ye Arabi [United Arab Emirates] (S. Azadi, Trans.). Ghoghnoos. [in Persian] Moradi, J. (2022) Chalesh-haye esteghrar-e hokoomat-e eyali dar eghlim-e Kordestan-e Eragh [Challenges of establishing a state government in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq]. Mesopotamian Political Studies, 1(1), 1–29. [in Persian] Muluye, K. T. (2020) Holding together, coming together or putting together? A [re] examination on the formation of Ethiopia’s federation. RUDN Journal of Public Administration, 7(1), 70–82. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8313-2020-7-1-70-82">https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8313-2020-7-1-70-82</a> Niri, B., & Ansari, M. A. (2012) Naghsh-e ghomiyat-ha dar takapooy-e federalism-e novin-e siasi-ye Eragh [The role of ethnicities in the struggle for Iraq’s new political federalism]. International Relations Studies, 5(20), 163–194. [in Persian] Noormohammadi, M. (2017) Naghsh-e amoozesh va daneshgah-ha dar solh-sazi va modiriyat-e monaza’at-e mantaghe-i: Motale-e moredi-ye khavar-e mianeh [The role of education and universities in peacebuilding and regional conflict management: A case study of the Middle East]. International Relations Research, 7(23), 181–206. [in Persian] Peck, M. C. (2010) The A to Z of the Gulf Arab States. Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. Pelton, V. J. (2018) Rule of law in the UAE. The International Lawyer, 51(1), 87–108. Romano, D. (2006) The Kurdish nationalist movement: Opportunity, mobilization, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Rugh, A. B. (2007) The political culture of leadership. In The political culture of leadership in the United Arab Emirates (pp. 217–236). Palgrave Macmillan US. Sa’i, A., & Moradi, J. (2011) Mo’zelat-e federalism dar Eragh [The dilemmas of federalism in Iraq]. Political and International Research, 3(7), 31–58. [in Persian] Safavi, S. H. (2016) Emarat-e Mottahede-ye Arabi [United Arab Emirates]. Institute for Future Studies of the Islamic World. [in Persian] Sardarnia, K., & Zare-Mehrabadi, M. (2015) Federalism va farhang-e siasi dar Eragh [Federalism and political culture in Iraq]. Foreign Relations Quarterly, 7(1), e123673. [in Persian] Sfayih, G., Ahamat, H., Al-Khfaji, A., & Althabhawi, N. (2025) Economic development strategies: A comparative analysis of Iraq and the UAE. Geopolitics Quarterly, 21(e219657). <a href="https://journal.iag.ir/article_219657.html">https://journal.iag.ir/article_219657.html</a> Shams-ed-dini, S., Mortazavi, S. K., & Navabakhsh, M. (2021) Peyvand-e pluralism va federalism ba takid bar democracy-e anjomani (Motale-e moredi: Eragh-e jadid) [Linking pluralism and federalism with an emphasis on associative democracy: Case study of new Iraq]. Political Knowledge, 17(1), 139–162. [in Persian] Shepsle, K. A. (2006) Rational choice institutionalism. In The Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 23–39). Oxford University Press. Stepan, A. C. (2001) Arguing comparative politics. Oxford University Press. Ulrichsen, K. (2016) The United Arab Emirates: Power, politics and policy-making. Routledge. United Arab Emirates Government. (2024) Foreign direct investment. <a href="https://u.ae/en/information-and-services/finance-and-investment/foreign-direct-investment">https://u.ae/en/information-and-services/finance-and-investment/foreign-direct-investment</a> United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2024) World investment report 2024. <a href="https://unctad.org/publication/world-investment-report-2024">https://unctad.org/publication/world-investment-report-2024</a>. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2025) UAE foreign direct investment report 2025. <a href="https://www.investuae.gov.ae/assets/UAE_Foreign_Direct_Investment_Report_2025_EN.pdf">https://www.investuae.gov.ae/assets/UAE_Foreign_Direct_Investment_Report_2025_EN.pdf</a> United Nations Development Programme. (2024a) Human development report 2023-24: Breaking the gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world. <a href="https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2023-24">https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2023-24</a> United Nations Development Programme. (2024b) Iraq, Human development indicators. <a href="https://data.undp.org/countries-and-territories/IRQ">https://data.undp.org/countries-and-territories/IRQ</a> Watts, R. L. (2008) Comparing federal systems (3rd ed.). McGill-Queen’s University Press. World Bank. (2024) World development indicators. <a href="https://data.worldbank.org">https://data.worldbank.org</a> World Health Organization. (2024) Global health observatory. <a href="https://www.who.int/data/gho">https://www.who.int/data/gho</a>.   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law, Political Science and History, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran. s.attar@yazd.ac.ir <a href="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-6189">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-6189</a> <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> M.A Graduate, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law, Political Science, and History, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran. <a href="mailto:arash.mandanizadeh@gmail.com">arash.mandanizadeh@gmail.com</a> <a href="https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6725-2779">https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6725-2779</a>چرا برخی نظام&zwnj;های فدرال به ثبات و کارآمدی دست می&zwnj;یابند اما برخی دیگر بی&zwnj;ثبات هستند؟ با اتخاذ چارچوب نظری نهادگرایی انتخاب عقلانی، مقاله استدلال می&zwnj;کند که «شیوه پیدایش» فدرالیسم، متغیر مستقل کلیدی در تبیین این واگرایی است. مقاله از طریق یک مطالعه مقایسهای میان امارات (فدرالیسم همگرا) و عراق (فدرالیسم نگهدارنده)، نشان می&zwnj;دهد که چگونه منطق محاسبات نخبگان در هر مدل، به نتایج متفاوتی منجر می&zwnj;شود. در امارات، فدرالیسم محصول یک بازی با حاصل جمع مثبت بود که در آن نخبگان حاکم برای حداکثرسازی امنیت و منافع اقتصادی، داوطلبانه بخشی از حاکمیت خود را واگذار و نهادهایی باثبات خلق کردند. در مقابل، فدرالیسم در عراق نتیجه یک بازی با حاصل جمع صفر برای جلوگیری از فروپاشی دولت بود که در آن محاسبات متعارض نخبگان قومی-فرقه&zwnj;ای به مصالحه&zwnj;ای شکننده و نهادهایی ناکارآمد منجر شد. در نتیجه، ثبات نهادی بیش از اتکا به طراحی صوری نهادها، به همسویی انگیزه&zwnj;های عقلانی نخبگان در لحظه تأسیس بستگی دارد.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51896

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923The Language of Politics and the Encounter with Modernity: An Analysis of Language-Games of Power in Contemporary Iranزبان سیاست و مواجهه با مدرنیته: تحلیل بازی‌های زبانی قدرت در ایران معاصر197226faمحمدرضا صالحی وثیقدانش آموخته دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1157-6326سید مهدی ساداتی نژاداستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4802-07352025930The Language of Politics and the Encounter with Modernity: An Analysis of Language-Games of Power in Contemporary Iran   Mohammadreza Salehi Vasigh<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Seyyed Mahdi Sadatinejad<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a>   The present research explains Iran’s encounter with modernity not as a substantive dispute, but as a disruption of the “grammar of politics” and a shift in the rules of the language-games of power. The central question is why democracy and civil society have not become institutionalized in Iran, even while works such as Al-e Ahmad’s Gharbzadegi (Westoxification) or Shariati’s “revolutionary martyrdom” continue to reconstruct political reality. The theoretical framework rests on three principles: the historicity of concepts, the grammatical incompatibility of language-games, and re-grammaring as political action. Iranian intellectuals, functioning as engineers of political grammar, are grounded in structural contradictions. Al-e Ahmad makes cultural resistance the dominant discourse via the “pathology” of the West; Shariati produces the language of revolution by re-engineering religious concepts; Shayegan makes living within multiple language-games possible via “fragmented identity”; Soroush historicizes revelation and democratizes religious authority; Shabestari reveals tyranny by critiquing the language of taklif (duty/obligation); and Malekian enables rational dialogue through conceptual precision. The conclusion is that contemporary Iran’s intellectual history must be understood as a history of the transformation of the rules of the language-game of politics. Keywords: Language-games of power, grammar of politics, conceptual engineering, encounter with modernity, Iranian intellectualism.   Introduction At the outset of this research, we addressed one of the most fundamental philosophical developments of the twentieth century: the “linguistic turn,” which elevated language from a neutral tool for representing reality to a constitutive and foundational level. Relying on the works of Frege, Austin, Foucault, Bourdieu, and Habermas, we demonstrated that political conflicts occur not merely over the distribution of resources, but at a deeper level over the definition of concepts and the control of discursive rules. However, we noted that the bulk of these theories have focused on discourse at a macro level, paying insufficient attention to the finer, more fundamental layers of language namely, grammar and the rules of language-games in the Wittgensteinian sense. Consequently, we turned to the later philosophy of Wittgenstein to provide a framework for more precise analysis. We described Iran’s encounter with modernity, which began in the late nineteenth century and continues to the present, as a prominent example of a “grammatical crisis” a crisis in which two systems of semantic rules were in tension, with no possibility of simple translation between them. We traced the historical trajectory of this encounter from the Constitutionalist intellectuals, to the generation of Al-e Ahmad, Shariati, and Shayegan in the 1960s and 1970s, and subsequently to late religious intellectualism in the works of Soroush and Shabestari. In our literature review, we categorized existing studies into three types: content-critical studies that view language primarily as a tool for conveying meaning; ideological-dualist studies that assume the semantic stability of concepts such as “the West” or “tradition”; and macro-discourse studies that remain at a high level of abstraction without addressing the finer layers of language. Based on this, we identified a theoretical-methodological gap that shaped our central research question: How can we understand Iran’s encounter with modernity as a struggle over redefining the grammar of politics?   Methodology To answer this question, we utilized a conceptual-grammatical analysis approach, in which key political concepts served as our unit of analysis. Our method comprised three steps: reconstructing the prior grammar of a concept, identifying the grammatical operations performed by the intellectual, and evaluating the political consequences of this re-grammaring. We constructed our theoretical framework by combining three approaches: applying Spragens’s four-stage model to clarify the historical context of intellectual crises; employing Skinner’s concepts of “normative vocabulary” and “affirmative action” (کنش ایجابی) to reveal the operational and political dimensions of conceptual innovation; and utilizing the later Wittgenstein’s theory of “language-games,” “grammar,” and “forms of life” to analyze the underlying rules of meaning-making. We selected thinkers who have directly intervened in the redefinition of fundamental political concepts: Al-e Ahmad, Shariati, Shayegan, Soroush, Shabestari, and Malekian. This selection was based on two complementary logics: a theoretical logic (the degree of the thinker’s intervention in the linguistic and semantic rules of politics) and a historical-spectral logic (the continuity and transformation of the encounter with modernity from the 1960s to the present).   Discussion and Findings In our case analysis, we demonstrated that each thinker, by intervening at the level of semantic rules, constructed a new grammar that itself carried structural contradictions. Regarding Al-e Ahmad, we argued that by combining “West” and “-strickenness” (-zadegi), he shifted modernity from the language-game of “politics and choice” to the language-game of “medicine and therapy,” thereby transforming the political opponent into a “patient.” We showed that his rigid dualisms (authenticity vs. imitation) created a “grammatical monopoly” that excluded a third position from the sphere of meaningfulness. Writing on Shariati, we argued that by redefining “martyrdom” from a passive event into a history-making action, he created the language of revolutionary mobilization, yet we showed that by essentializing the “Imamate” and maintaining a command structure, he remained trapped in the conflict between “individual consciousness” and “obedience to leadership.” In our examination of Shayegan, we clarified that through “fragmented identity” and “parallel consciousnesses,” he opened the possibility of living in multiple language-games; however, we concluded that he lacked a clear criterion for distinguishing “living tradition” from “dead tradition,” and his intermediary grammar led to relativism devoid of prescriptive power. In analyzing Soroush, we showed that by separating “Sharia” from “human understanding,” he moved revelation from “absolute divine command” to “sacred human experience,” thus democratizing religious legitimacy; yet, we argued that his simultaneous effort to maintain sanctity while accepting the historicity of interpretation led to ambiguity in defining “the self of religion.” Writing on Shabestari, we noted that through the theory of the “prophetic reading of the world,” he considered the Quran to be the “Prophet’s speech” rather than direct divine speech, effectively deconstructing the language of duty (taklif); however, we showed that he provided no clear criterion for distinguishing “prophetic revelation” from “mystical inspiration.” In our analysis of Malekian, we demonstrated that by dividing beliefs into “objective” (āfāqi) and “subjective” (anfosi), he sought to base the public sphere on empirical rationality; we argued, however, that this division itself rested on a secular presupposition that marginalized the majority of religious beliefs. We also showed that in his critique of metaphysics, he relied on metaphysical presuppositions himself. In our comparative analysis, we concluded that in escaping traditional grammar, all these thinkers became trapped in new grammars that reproduced similar structural limitations; we found the root of this paradox in the “untranslatability” between language-games based on different forms of life.   Conclusion In our conclusion, we demonstrated that Iran’s encounter with modernity is, beyond an ideological dispute, a struggle over the rules of the language-game of power. We argued that every instance of re-grammaring, while conceptually innovative, has been grounded in a structural contradiction rooted in a shared fundamental challenge: the untranslatability between language-games based on different forms of life. We showed that democracy is not merely a political system but a specific language-game that demands a form of life based on negotiation, pluralism, and the acceptance of uncertainty. We argued that the incompatibility of this language-game with the authoritarian grammar of certainty and hierarchy in Iran explains why the superficial adoption of modern concepts has been more prevalent than their deep internalization. The essential paradox revealed in this research is that intellectuals, in their attempt to escape traditional grammar, became captives of new grammars that reproduced similar limitations: we showed that Shayegan remained reliant on Western hermeneutic vocabularies, Soroush fueled interpretive relativism, Shabestari reached a grammatical dead-end, and Malekian, in rejecting metaphysics, relied on metaphysical presuppositions. We concluded that the primary implication of these findings for understanding contemporary Iranian politics is that legitimacy crises are rooted in the structural conflict between the official language, based on the grammar of duty, and the social language, based on participatory concepts a tension that explains why formal reforms, without changes to the underlying structure of the language of politics, have often failed. Finally, we stated that although we have illuminated these grammatical dynamics, we do not offer a definitive solution for overcoming the untranslatability between language-games, positing instead that sustainable transformation depends on designing strategies for constructive interaction between different forms of life.   References Al-e Ahmad, J. (1977) Gharbzadegi [Westoxification] (A. Mostafavi, Ed.). Ravaq. [in Persian] Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and symbolic power (J. B. Thompson, Ed.; G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.). Harvard University Press. Foucault, M. (1972) The archaeology of knowledge (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). Pantheon Books. (Original work published 1969) Habermas, J. (2003) Truth and justification (B. Fultner, Ed. & Trans.). The MIT Press. (Original work published 1999) Hashemian, F. S., & Ghaffari Qarabagh, S. A. (2025) Baz-khani-ye enteqadi-ye mo’alefeh-haye modernite dar ma’naviyat-e jadid bar asas-e andisheh-haye Allameh Tabatabaei [A critical rereading of the components of modernity in new spirituality based on the thoughts of Allameh Tabatabaei]. Biannual Journal of Islamic Spirituality Studies, 3(1), 191–224. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22081/jsr.2025.68866.1086">https://doi.org/10.22081/jsr.2025.68866.1086</a> [in Persian] Hesam-Ghazi, R., & Nezhad-Iran, M. (2022) Risheh-yabi-ye tahavvol-e negaresh-e Dariush Shayegan be modernite [Tracing the roots of the evolution in Dariush Shayegan’s attitude toward modernity]. Political Quarterly, 52(3), 665–690. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2023.318019.1007734">https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2023.318019.1007734</a> [in Persian] Honari Latifpour, Y., et al. (2024) Baznamayi-ye zehniyat-e Doctor Ali Shariati dar bab-e modernite [Representation of Dr. Ali Shariati’s mentality regarding modernity]. Journal of Islamic Revolution Research, 14(52), 73–92. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22084/rjir.2024.29219.3778">https://doi.org/10.22084/rjir.2024.29219.3778</a> [in Persian] Imani, A., & Azarang, P. (2024) Barresi-ye tatbiqi-ye movajeheh ba modernite-ye gharbi dar ara-ye falsafi-ye Seyyed Ahmad Fardid va Reza Davari [A comparative study of the confrontation with Western modernity in the philosophical views of Seyyed Ahmad Fardid and Reza Davari]. Contemporary Political Essays, 15(1), 197–227. <a href="https://doi.org/10.30465/cps.2023.41318.3018">https://doi.org/10.30465/cps.2023.41318.3018</a> [in Persian] Malekian, M. (n.d.-a) Aqlaniyat va zendegi-ye aqlani [Rationality and rational life]. [PDF file]. [in Persian] Malekian, M. (n.d.-b) Chalesh-haye din va modernism dar jahan-e Eslam [Challenges of religion and modernism in the Islamic world] (S. N. Ahmadi, Interviewer). Khat-e Sevvom, (3–4). <a href="https://bidgoli1371.blogfa.com/category/22">https://bidgoli1371.blogfa.com/category/22</a> [in Persian] Malekian, M. (2012) Aqlaniyat va ma’naviyat ba’d az dah sal [Rationality and spirituality after ten years]. <a href="https://bidgoli1371.blogfa.com/post/143">https://bidgoli1371.blogfa.com/post/143</a> [in Persian] Malekian, M. (2013) Vahy va tajrobe-ye dini-ye Payambar (pbuh) [Revelation and the religious experience of the Prophet]. [PDF file]. [in Persian] Mojtahed-Shabestari, M. (2002a) Naghd-i bar qera’at-e rasmi az din (bohran-ha, chalesh-ha, rah-hal-ha) [A critique of the official reading of religion (crises, challenges, solutions)]. Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Mojtahed-Shabestari, M. (2002b) Hermeneutik, ketab va sonnat (farayand-e tafsir-e vahy) [Hermeneutics, the book, and tradition (the process of interpreting revelation)]. Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Mojtahed-Shabestari, M. (2008) Theori-ye qera’at-e nabavi az jahan [The theory of the prophetic reading of the world] (F. Noroozi, Ed.). Anjoman-e Ehyagaran-e Falsafe-ye No. [in Persian] Nezhad-Iran, M., & Hesam-Ghazi, R. (2024) Tamayoz-e rooykard-e siasi ba rooykard-e falsafi be mafhoom-e gharbzadegi dar andisheh-ye Al-e Ahmad va Shayegan [Distinction between political and philosophical approaches to the concept of Westoxification in the thought of Al-e Ahmad and Shayegan]. Social Theories of Muslim Thinkers, 14(4), 1–19. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22059/jstmt.2024.370747.1686">https://doi.org/10.22059/jstmt.2024.370747.1686</a> [in Persian] Pourzaki, G. (2024) Tahavvol dar adat-vareh-haye meidan-e rowshanfekri-ye orfi dar movajeheh ba modernite va gharb [Transformation in the habitus of the secular intellectual field confronting modernity and the West]. Theoretical Politics Research, (36), 231–257. [in Persian] Sabbagh Kaljahy, H., et al. (2023) Ta’ammoli dar nesbat-e sonnat va tajaddod-garaei dar andisheh-ye Shariati [A reflection on the relation between tradition and modernism in Shariati’s thought]. Fundamental Western Studies, 14(2), 119–139. <a href="https://doi.org/10.30465/os.2024.48820.1981">https://doi.org/10.30465/os.2024.48820.1981</a> [in Persian] Shariati, A. (1971). Tashayyo’-e Alavi va Tashayyo’-e Safavi [Alid Shi’ism and Safavid Shi’ism]. Hosseiniyeh Ershad Publications. [in Persian] Shariati, A. (2012) Ommat va emamat [Ummah and Imamate]. Teribon-e Mostaz’afin. [in Persian] Shayegan, D. (1999). Asia dar barabar-e Gharb [Asia facing the West]. Amirkabir. [in Persian] Shayegan, D. (2001) Bot-haye zehni va khatere-ye azali [Mental idols and perennial memory]. Amirkabir. [in Persian] Skinner, Q. (1969). Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas. History and Theory, 8(1), 3–53. <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2504188">https://doi.org/10.2307/2504188</a> Skinner, Q. (2016) Ideas in context: Conversation with Quentin Skinner (H. Li, Interviewer). The Chicago Journal of History, 1(2), 119–127. Soroush, A. (1988). Bast va qabz-e theoric-e shari’at [The theoretical contraction and expansion of religion]. Keyhan-e Farhangi. [in Persian] Soroush, A. (2006) Bast-e tajrobe-ye nabavi [The expansion of prophetic experience]. Serat Cultural Institute. [in Persian] Spragens, T. A. (2010) Fahm-e nazariye-haye siasi [Understanding political theory] (F. Rajaei, Trans.; 6th ed.). Agah. [in Persian] Wittgenstein, L. (2001) Pazhoohesh-haye falsafi [Philosophical investigations] (F. Fatemi, Trans.). Nashr-e Markaz. [in Persian]   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: Ph.D. in Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. mo.rezasalehi@ut.ac.ir https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1157-6326 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. msadatinejad@ut.ac.ir https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4802-0735پژوهش حاضر مواجهه ایران با مدرنیته را نه نزاعی محتوایی، بلکه برهم&zwnj;خوردن «گرامر سیاست» و جابه&zwnj;جایی قواعد بازی&zwnj;های زبانی قدرت تبیین می&zwnj;کند. پرسش اصلی این است که چرا دموکراسی و جامعه مدنی در ایران نهادینه نمی&zwnj;شوند، حال&zwnj;آنکه «غرب&zwnj;زدگی» آل&zwnj;احمد یا «شهادت انقلابی» شریعتی واقعیت سیاسی را بازمی&zwnj;سازند. چارچوب نظری بر سه اصل استوار است: تاریخمندی مفاهیم، ناسازگاری گرامری بازی&zwnj;های زبانی، و بازگرامرسازی به&zwnj;مثابه کنش سیاسی. روشنفکران ایرانی همچون مهندسان گرامر سیاسی، بر تناقضات ساختاری استوارند. آل&zwnj;احمد با «بیماری&zwnj;وارگی» غرب، مقاومت فرهنگی را گفتمان مسلط می&zwnj;کند؛ شریعتی با بازمهندسی مفاهیم دینی، زبان انقلاب را تولید می&zwnj;کند؛ شایگان با «هویت چندپاره»، زیست در چند بازی زبانی را ممکن نشان می&zwnj;دهد؛ سروش وحی را تاریخی و اقتدار دینی را دموکراتیزه می&zwnj;کند؛ شبستری با نقد زبان تکلیف، استبداد را برملا می&zwnj;کند؛ ملکیان با دقت مفهومی، گفت&zwnj;وگوی عقلانی را ممکن می&zwnj;سازد. نتیجه آن است که تاریخ فکری معاصر ایران را باید تاریخ تحول قواعد بازی زبانی سیاست دانست.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51652

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923An Introduction to the “Theory of Iranian Civilizational Cultural Nationalism” Based on the Analysis of the Ancient Foundations of Iranian Nationalityدرآمدی بر «نظریۀ ناسیونالیسم تمدنی فرهنگی ایران» بر پایه واکاوی بنیان¬های کهن ملیت ایرانی227254faمحمد کوراونددانشجوی دکتری جامعه شناسی سیاسی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران https: //orcid.org/0009-0005-1779-2184مسعودشهرام نیادانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران https: //orcid.org/0000-0001-8333-0256سید غلامرضادوازده امامیاستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-7758-0854202592An Introduction to the “Theory of Iranian Civilizational Cultural Nationalism” Based on the Analysis of the Ancient Foundations of Iranian Nationality   Mohammad Kouravand <a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Masoud Shahram-Nia<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a> Seyyed Gholamreza Davazdah-Emami <a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">***</a>   From a macro-perspective, there exist two fundamental narratives regarding the authenticity of the nation and the concept of nationalism: one grounded in a modern, political conception, and the other rooted in a historical and cultural understanding of the nation. By exploring the “ancient foundations of Iranian nationhood,” this study seeks to formulate the continuity and evolution of Iranian nationhood through an interpretation of the relations among natural, civilizational, and cultural phenomena since prehistory, serving as a prelude to proposing a “Theory of Iran’s Cultural-Civilizational Nationalism.” According to the research findings, the distinct physical geography of the Iranian Plateau particularly its interconnected mountain ranges, which shielded the plateau’s inhabitants from historical adversaries to the east and west as well as from climatic shifts in the central plateau combined with the ancient naturalism of the plateau’s denizens and their reverence for elemental nature as manifested in the Mazdean intellectual system, played the primary role in forging the continuous cultural-civilizational structure of Iranian nationhood and Iran’s historical persistence.   Keywords: Nation, Cultural Nationalism, Civilization, Culture, History.   Introduction and Objectives  In a broad sense, there are two basic narratives about the origin of the nation and consequently the concept of nationalism. One is based on a political, conventional and modern understanding and the other is based on a natural, historical and cultural understanding of the nation. This historical research, within the framework of the second understanding of the concept of nation, seeks to prove the ancient and continuous structure of the Iranian nation. Within this framework, it is possible to propose a theory of Iranian cultural civilizational nationalism and reflect on it through the analysis and re-understanding of the ancient roots of Iranian nationality from prehistory to the historical era. This theoretical project seeks to formulate the continuity and evolution of Iranian nationality by describing the relationships between natural, civilizational and cultural phenomena and analyzing their impact on each other.   Background  Ahmad Ashraf (2020) in a study entitled “Iranian Identity from Antiquity to Pahlavi” with the help of Hamid Ahmadi, formulates articles on Iranian identity. In examining the various narratives of Iranian identity, he chooses the historical narrative as a middle solution for analyzing Iranian identity, and although he considers national identity to be a category of the modern era, he considers Iranian cultural identity to be a historical category. Hamid Ahmadi and Habibollah Fazeli (2007) in a study “Nationalism, the Problem of Identity and the National State in Social Theory” try to distinguish between two types of classical and modern nationalism, reject the idea of nationalism as a product of modernism and enlightenment, and extend the nationalist sense and sacrifice for national ideals throughout human history. In the first volume of his book “A Reflection on Iran,” Javad Tabatabaei (2001) expresses the concept of Iran from the perspective of the philosophy of history. Tabatabaei believes that this reflection, or in other words, "Iranology" and fundamental knowledge, will begin when we can accurately apply the system of concepts to our history and thought.   Method  In the present study, the re-understanding of the foundations is carried out through the interpretation of the development of Iranian civilization and with an interpretative historical approach. The type of research is historical and analytical based on text and content, and the data collection method is documentary-library. Findings: According to the findings of this study, the specific nature of the Iranian Najd, and especially the interconnected mountain ranges of the plateau, has played a major role in the formation of the civilizational structure of the Iranian nation. The high climate of the Alborz and Zagros in its heart protected the inhabitants of Najd against invaders in the east and west of Najd, as well as against the effects of the drying up of the central lakes, climatic changes in the center of the plateau, and forced migration. The first carvings and the construction of temples and cities in the mountains were created to record history and to determine the territorial territory, and the most important civilizational mixing between the old and new inhabitants of the plateau occurred in the middle Zagros. The formation of a stable habitat and civilization within Najd, in contrast to the "Mesopotamian Semitic" civilizations in the west and the "nomadic Turanian" tribes in the east, caused a distinct society to form in this geographical area from the prehistoric period, with its own territory, independence, sense of mutual loyalty and mythology (the main features of the definition of a nation), and the mountain entered Iranian mythology as one of the important national manifestations. In this way, the foundation of Iranian nationality and the sense of solidarity and defense of the common land in the Alborz and Zagros ecosystems emerged within the Iranian Najd. Iranian nationality then had its own "geographical, biological and civilizational territory" and the phenomenon of "Iran-land" emerged. The link between the civilizational and cultural foundation of the Iranian nation in prehistory was the ancient naturalism of the inhabitants of Najd, which was rooted in the gifts and feelings that nature had bestowed upon the people. With the establishment of a stable civilization in Najd, Iran, the protection of the sanctity of nature, the praise of natural elements and light, with the development of thought, were manifested in the intellectual and spiritual system of Mazdaism. The Avesta mentions the Aryan lands from which the prehistoric unity and the sense of belonging to a common land and mythology (the defining characteristics of the nation) and the praise of Iran originated. With the emergence of Zoroastrianism, the development and defense of one's own land and civilization were praised. With the spread of Zoroastrianism, natural chronology, calendars and national celebrations became a social and unifying tradition, and Iranian culture acquired Minoan and national symbols. Ahura Mazda, the symbol of light, wisdom, and monotheism (as the epitome of Iranian wisdom), was raised, and Shahryar Nik (the originator of political theology) led to the idea of an ideal kingdom to create order and defend the homeland and religion. Fire became a common point of civilization, and fire temples became a sign of cultural distinction of the Iranian nation throughout its territory and borders, because in the East, "Turanian idols" were worshiped, and in Mesopotamia, "Semitic gods." In this way, with Mazda worship and the symbol of fire, the Iranian nation was unified with a "mythological, ritual, and cultural realm," and the concept of "Ahuraic Iran" became the cultural and spiritual foundation of the Iranian nation in the transition from prehistory to the historical stage of Iran.   Conclusion This historical-interpretive research, within the framework of a historical and civilization-oriented understanding of the concept of nation, attempted to formulate the continuity and evolution of Iranian nationality and national sense by reflecting and exploring the "ancient foundations of Iranian nationality" from the prehistoric era by interpreting the relationships between natural, civilizational, and cultural phenomena and analyzing their impact on each other. According to the findings of this research, contrary to modern political views, the phenomenon of nationalism and the originality of the Iranian nation has an ancient civilizational and cultural foundation with cumulative, evolutionary, and continuous properties. According to the argument of the "Theory of Iranian Civilizational and Cultural Nationalism", in the prehistoric period, based on the specific nature of the Iranian Najd, the civilizational foundation of Iranian nationality and the phenomenon of "Iran of the Earth" were formed, and on this civilizational structure, the cultural foundation of Iranian nationality and the concept of "Ahurian Iran" were formed. Then, in the historical period, the foundation of the ideal Iranian monarchy and the phenomenon of "Iranshahr" and the foundation of the Pahlavi-Persian language and literature are based on these two ancient structures and continue in the concept of "Cultural Iran". This continuous structure became the most important factor in the national convergence and historical continuity of Iran and led to many times of rebirth during the ups and downs of the era. The present study states that the Iranian nationality and its special sense of nationalism arose from the process of evolution of Iranian civilization and culture and was formed in connection with the natural, civilizational and historical requirements and structure of this people, and this evolutionary structural connection in the philosophy of history is the "unique civilizational and cultural spirit of the Iranian nation". A magnificent structure that can be symbolically called the ziggurat or the tower of the originality of the Iranian nationality.   References Ahmadvand, S., & Bakhshi, M. (2022) Barresi-ye zamineh va paradigm-e zabani dar andisheh-ye siasi-ye Zartosht [Review of the background and linguistic paradigm in Zoroastrian political thought]. Pajoohesh-e Siasat-e Nazari, 31(1), 139–163. [in Persian] Ahmadi, H., & Fazeli, H. (2007) Nationalism, moshkele-ye hoviyat va dolat-e melli dar theori-ye ejtemaei [Nationalism, the problem of identity, and the nation-state in social theory]. Political Quarterly, 37(4), 21–40. [in Persian] Ashraf, A. (2020) Hoviyat-e Irani az doran-e bastan ta payan-e Pahlavi [Iranian identity from antiquity to the end of the Pahlavi] (H. Ahmadi, Trans.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Barthold, W. (1998) Joghrafiya-ye tarikhi-ye Iran-e bastan [Historical geography of ancient Iran] (H. Sanati, Trans.). Bonyad-e Moqoofat-e Mahmoud Afshar Yazdi. [in Persian] Cameron, G. G. (1986) Iran dar sepideh-dam-e tarikh [Iran at the dawn of history] (H. Anoosheh, Trans.). Elmi va Farhangi. [in Persian] Christensen, A. (1953) Iran dar zaman-e Sasaniyan [Iran in the Sasanian period] (R. Yasami, Trans.). Ebn-e Sina. [in Persian] Cottam, R. (1978) Nationalism in Iran. University of Pittsburgh Press. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1996) Din-e Iran-e bastan [The religion of ancient Iran] (R. Monajem, Trans.). Fekr-e Rooz. [in Persian] Frye, R. N. (2007) Tarikh-e bastani-ye Iran [The history of ancient Iran] (M. Rajabnia, Trans.). Elmi va Farhangi. [in Persian] Ghirshman, R. (1957) Iran az aghaz ta Eslam [Iran from the beginning to Islam] (M. Moein, Trans.). Bongah-e Tarjomeh va Nashr-e Ketab. [in Persian] Herzfeld, E. (1975) Tarikh-e bastani-ye Iran bar bonyad-e bastanshenasi [Ancient history of Iran based on archaeology] (A. A. Hekmat, Trans.). Anjoman-e Asar-e Melli. [in Persian] Hutchinson, J. (1994) Cultural nationalism and moral regeneration. In J. Hutchinson & A. D. Smith (Eds.), Nationalism (pp. 122–131). Oxford University Press. Kohn, H. (1944) The idea of nationalism: A study in its origins and background. Macmillan. Kuhrt, A. (2009) The Persian Empire: A corpus of sources from the Achaemenid period (Vol. 1). Routledge. Maskoub, S. (2000) Hoviyat-e Irani va zaban-e Farsi [Iranian identity and the Persian language]. Farzan. [in Persian] Mirzaei, A. (2017) Nationalism va ghomiyat dar Iran [Nationalism and ethnicity in Iran]. Iranian Journal of Sociology, 18(1), 32–68. [in Persian] Miscevic, N. (2020) Nationalism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/">https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/</a> Pirnia, H. (2004) Asr-e asatiri-ye tarikh-e Iran: Khotoot-e barjeste-ye dastan-haye Iran-e qadim [The mythical age of Iranian history: Prominent lines of ancient Iranian stories]. Hirmand. [in Persian] Pourdavood, E. (1998) Gatha: Kohantar-in bakhsh-e Ovesta [Gathas: The oldest part of the Avesta]. Asatir. [in Persian] Renan, E., & Renouvin, P. (2012) Mellat, hess-e melli, nationalism [Nation, national feeling, nationalism] (A. Ahmadi, Trans.). Agah. [in Persian] Shafiei-Kadkani, M. R. (2025) Gozideh ash’ar [Selected poems] (20th ed.). Morvarid. [in Persian] Skocpol, T. (2018) Binesh va ravesh dar jame’eh-shenasi-ye tarikhi [Vision and method in historical sociology] (S. H. Aghajari, Trans.). Markaz. [in Persian] Smith, A. D. (2004) Nasionalisam, nazariye, ideology, tarikh [Nationalism: Theory, ideology, history] (M. Ansari, Trans.). Motale’at-e Tamadon-e Irani. [in Persian] Tabatabai, J. (2001) Ta’amol-i darbare-ye Iran: Dibache-i bar nazariye-ye enhetat-e Iran [A reflection on Iran: A preface to the theory of the decline of Iran]. Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Vaziri, M. (2013) Iran as imagined nation: The construction of national identity. Gorgias Press. Woods, E. T. (2016) Cultural nationalism. In D. Inglis & A. A.-M. Almila (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of cultural sociology (pp. 429–441). SAGE Publications.   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Ph.D. Student in Political Sociology, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. mo.kouravand@ase.ui.ac.ir https: //orcid.org/0009-0005-1779-2184 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Corresponding Author: Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.  m.shahramnia@ase.ui.ac.ir https: //orcid.org/0000-0001-8333-0256 <a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">***</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.  gh.12emami@ase.ui.ac.ir https: //orcid.org/0000-0002-7758-0854در یک نگاه کلان، دو روایت اساسی در باب اصالت ملت و مفهوم ناسیونالیسم وجود دارد. یکی بر مبنای برداشت سیاسی و مدرن و دیگری بر مبنای برداشت تاریخی و فرهنگی از مفهوم ملت است. این پژوهش با کاوش در «بنیان&zwnj;های کهن ملیت ایرانی» در پی آن است تا پیوستگی و تکامل ملیت ایرانی را با تفسیری از روابط بین پدیده&zwnj;های طبیعی، تمدنی و فرهنگی از عصر پیشاتاریخ همچون درآمدی بر طرح «نظریه ناسیونالیسم تمدنی فرهنگی ایران» صورت&zwnj;بندی کند. بنا &zwnj;بر یافته&zwnj;های پژوهش طبیعت خاص نجد ایران به&zwnj;ویژه رشته&zwnj;کوه&zwnj;های به&zwnj; هم پیوند&zwnj; خوردة فلات که درون خود از ساکنان نجد در برابر دشمنان تاریخی شرق و غرب و تغییرات اقلیمی مرکز فلات محافظت کرد و سپس طبیعت&zwnj;گرایی کهن ساکنان نجد و پاسداشت عناصر طبیعت که در نظام فکری مزدایی متجلی شد نقش اصلی را در شکل&zwnj;گیری ساختار پیوسته تمدنی- فرهنگی ملیت ایرانی و تداوم تاریخی ایران بر عهده داشته است.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51342

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923Daryush Shayegan’s First Intellectual Phase: The Orientalist Approach and the Transition to Impasseدورۀ اول فکری «داریوش شایگان»: رویکرد شرق‌شناسانه و گذار به امتناع255277faعطاءالهکریم زادهدانش‌آموخته دکتری اندیشه‌های سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران https: //orcid.org/0009-0004-9777-424420251020Daryush Shayegan’s First Intellectual Phase: The Orientalist Approach and the Transition to Impasse   Ataollah Karimzadeh<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a>   This article demonstrates, through an interpretive and explanatory lens, that the first phase of Daryush Shayegan’s intellectual work is a reproduction of Orientalist discourse. Influenced by Western thought and operating within the dominant knowledge system both intellectually and structurally Shayegan perceives “the East” as a totality in a downward trajectory compared to the West. Consequently, while Shayegan is preoccupied with the “reason for the decline” of Eastern civilizations, he occupies the very same position as Orientalists or Western intellectual systems that view the East from a position of Orientalization. Shayegan moves within the continuum of Orientalism; he is simultaneously attached to the East a “both/and” state which lands him in a “position/non-position” that leads to an “impasse” (emtena) This “self-Orientalization” leads Shayegan to accept Western judgments regarding the East positively, without critical reservation.   Keywords: Daryush Shayegan, The East, Orientalism, Primordial Memory, Impasse (Emtena).   Introduction Daryush Shayegan accepts Western technique and technology, along with its culture, as an inseparable whole; it is based on this perspective that he differentiates the West from the East. Shayegan’s writings must be viewed “diachronically,” such that one can generally distinguish between an “early” and a “late” Shayegan in two distinct intellectual phases. In his first phase, encompassing the 1960s and 1970s up to the 1979 Revolution, Shayegan influenced by ancient Eastern thought and religions, as well as thinkers like Nietzsche and Heidegger juxtaposes the East (Asia), with its mythological foundations, customs, and primordial memory, against a West that has followed a downward trajectory in its technical thinking to arrive at nihilism. He posits that for the East to preserve its identity and avoid the “historical destiny” it has fallen into, it must return to its roots and perform a “housecleaning.” Furthermore, he argues that we must understand and recognize Western thought and the West within our own context, review our ethnic memories, and avoid a “new obscurantism” or a sense of entitlement, which he views as a form of “Orientalized Westoxification.” This article argues that Shayegan’s “neither this, nor that” conceptualization essentially envisions a neutral position/non-position, where the Easterner (Asian) is caught at a crossroads between tradition and Western modernity and is forced to choose between the two. This results in a suspension of the present moment from which there is no escape. This article also addresses how the East (Asia) is viewed as an indeterminate whole: is the East a real entity, or is it a construct of the Westerner?   Research Background Significant research has been conducted on Shayegan’s views, which can be broadly categorized into two groups. The first category addresses the works of Shayegan’s first phase, focusing on his Orientalism and critical approach to the West. Scholars such as Vahdat, Mirsepassi, Farastkhah, and Shojaei-Jashouqani fall into this category. The second category relates to research on his first intellectual phase based on his discourse on identity in relation to Iran and Islam. The works of scholars such as Boroujerdi and Hashemi are included in this group.   Research Methodology Methodologically, the present article employs an explanatory and interpretive method, utilizing Paul Ricoeur’s hermeneutics in a text-oriented approach. For Ricoeur, the “text” as a work reveals its structure in a specific new emergence which is a form of interpretation. What is important in a text is not the author, the hypothetical intent, or its immanent structure, but rather the “intended world” beyond the text as the text’s referent. This inherently entails the act of reading, wherein the reader appropriates the world of the text to enable a better understanding of themselves; that is, through the act of reading, the possibility of an expanded hermeneutic can be realized. Accordingly, this article interprets and explains the works of Shayegan’s first phase textually to clarify the intellectual and epistemological foundations of his thought regarding the relationship between East and West, and the reproduction of Orientalist discourse.   Research Findings Asia (Primordial Memory) vs. the West (Nihilism): The Stasis of Absolute Dualism By intrinsically differentiating the West from the East setting up two different modes, one based on reason (Western/European) and the other on revelation, faith, and intuition (Eastern) Shayegan proposes a form of absolute dualism. In this view, the East has the answers to its questions a priori, while the West deconstructs and desecrates to answer its own. Nevertheless, although Shayegan is concerned with the East (Asia), he utilizes the problems and problematic of Western ideas to find the desired response for the East from the perspective of Western nihilism. Consequently, wherever Shayegan speaks of the East, he considers the West as a metric to facilitate the framing of his desired issues. Thus, paradoxically, Shayegan derives the primary basis of his arguments not merely from his dualistic holism, but from Western philosophy and the history of Western philosophy. It is a fundamental issue whether Western nihilism and the existing understanding of it can be projected onto the East Shayegan envisions and put to work, because Shayegan views the West in a “reified” manner. Overall, one can argue that Shayegan differentiates between East and West from an Orientalist and presupposed position. Although he is a critic of modernity in a comprehensive approach, he subordinates the East (Asia) to the West (Europe); in fact, the East has an existence dependent on the West, and Eastern identity is intelligible only in line with the understanding that the West has presented of Easterners. Shayegan and Metamorphic Orientalism An Orientalist may view the East from the position of the Western knowledge system without necessarily having an intentional Orientalist stance, even if they are Eastern themselves. For Shayegan, the Asian civilizations in question have reached a decline and are condemned in the face of the West, its technology, and its culture. Although he was concerned with the stasis of his envisioned East and held a romantic feeling toward Eastern religions and schools of thought, the East of Shayegan’s imagination lacks not only society but even the individual, existing in silence as a mere spatial location. Shayegan enters into a type of “phantasmagoria” which possesses the quality of “thought without place,” basing his writing on the history of Western thought to compose the history of Eastern thought. The metamorphosis of Shayegan’s thought and the evolution of his conceptual system indicate a “metamorphosis of inverted Orientalist discourse.” He doubts the validity of the biting and contemptuous attitude of Iranian intellectuals and is aware of the epistemological poverty, hidden distortions, and terrifying dead-ends of nativism. Shayegan’s writings in this intellectual phase obstruct fluidity, becoming, diversity, and plurality; essentially, they preclude the possibility of the disclosure and self-manifestation of the present moment, as well as the possibility of subjectivity and agency. He frames issues from an Orientalist perspective, treating the static state of the present as a transitional state moving toward a non-existent and incomprehensible future. Shayegan attempts to define where we stand and what relationship we have with existing worldviews and Lebenswelten (life-worlds). However, he merely stands in a text-like, positional, and local situation in the cultural dimension a culture that maintains an elitist approach.   Shayegan: Impasse and the Dead-end of Emancipation in the Suspension of Time Although it was stated that Shayegan moved in the trajectory of Orientalism, this does not mean there is only one Orientalism, or that Shayegan’s Orientalism is a perfect copy of European Orientalism. Just as the objectification of Orientalism and “suspension” are not essentially monolithic, there are, in fact, countless mechanisms of suspension and different types of Orientalism. In this perspective, Shayegan not only empties the mythological state of time, but also envisions a repetitive cycle that establishes no connection between the three temporalities of past, present, and future. Each stands in a separate, distinct, and static situation; for this reason, Shayegan’s approach neutralizes its own critical idea and, by accepting the status quo, renders the possibility of emancipation void. The question that must be asked is this: Does Shayegan have an answer to how the East (Asia) can exit this “position/non-position” in a way that allows for the possibility of emancipation? Our path lies in a type of inner and spiritual purification, which can be an individual matter rather than a comprehensive political, social, or cultural situation. In fact, for Shayegan, liberation is not found in questioning, challenging, establishing the new, or rebellion; rather, it moves along with the mythological tradition. It is from this perspective that Shayegan views all Asian civilizations as uniform, where their problem is culture, while politics, economics, and society have no relevance for him forming a type of essentialism that not only denies plurality and diversity but simultaneously drags the possibility of any change into an impasse (emtena)   Conclusion This article addresses a period of Shayegan’s thought that is not only not a rupture from the dominant knowledge system, but, by borrowing from the West and attributing these borrowings to the East, Shayegan has imagined an “untimely” situation that is merely a continuation of Western ideas and cannot possess a reliable foundation in his envisioned East. Furthermore, there is no single East, just as there is no single West. Perhaps one can say that Shayegan’s idea functions as “placeless thought” that cannot be concretely situated. His views are not “immanent”; rather, he views East and West in a general and universal way, from which his approach remains external and Orientalist. Although Shayegan attempts to link tradition and modernity, he thinks only in abstract, phantasmagoric terms and forms of “identity and recurrence,” not in concrete understanding and connection; this is because the East is the negative determination of the West, and the East is understood based on the idea of absence. For this reason, this transition leads pre-emptively to a dead-end and an impasse (emtena)   References Anderson, B. (2014) Imagined communities (M. Mohammadi, Trans.). Rokhdad-e No. [in Persian] Ayoobi, E., Etefagh Far, F. S., Dabiri Mehr, A., & Askari Jahghi, M. (2021) The place of tradition and modernity in the works and thought of Dariush Shayegan before the Islamic Revolution of Iran. International Journal of Political Science, 11(1), 109–120. Boroujerdi, M. (2014) Iranian intellectuals and the West: The tormented triumph of nativism (J. Shirazi, Trans., 6th ed.). Farzan. [in Persian] Cassirer, E. (2020) The philosophy of the Enlightenment (Y. Moghun, Trans., 4th ed.). Niloufar. [in Persian] Farastkhah, M. (2019) The five versions of Dariush Shayegan in five decades. Contemporary Wisdom, 10(1), 173–192. [in Persian] Foucault, M. (1991) On Kant’s Enlightenment (H. Fouladpour, Trans.). Kelk-e Di, (20), 58–67. [in Persian] Grondin, J. (2014) Hermeneutics (M.-R. Abolghasemi, Trans.). Mahi. [in Persian] Haghdar, A. (2003) Dariush Shayegan and the crisis of traditional spirituality. Kavir. [in Persian] Hashemi, M. (2005) Identity-thinkers and the intellectual heritage of Ahmad Fardid (2nd ed.). Kavir. [in Persian] Heidegger, M. (2023) Technique and the turn (M. Asadi, Trans.). Porsesh. [in Persian] Kaji, H. (1999) Who we are from the perspective of Iranian intellectuals. Rouzaneh. [in Persian] Lukács, G. (1998) History and class consciousness (M.-J. Pouyandeh, Trans.). Tajrobeh. [in Persian] Mirsepassi, A. (2007) Intellectual discourse in Iran: Narratives of despair and hope (A. Mokhber, Trans., 2nd ed.). Tose’eh. [in Persian] Nietzsche, F. (2008) The will to power: An attempt at a revaluation of all values (M.-B. Houshiar, Trans., 6th ed.). Farzan. [in Persian] Qezelsolfi, M., & Ma’as-Sani, S. (2010) Cultural Iran in the thoughts of Dariush Shayegan. Political Science Research Journal, 5(4), 137–171. [in Persian] Ricoeur, P. (2008) Existence and hermeneutics. In Modern hermeneutics: A selection of essays (B. Ahmadi, M. Mohajer, & M. Nabavi, Trans., 7th ed.). Markaz. [in Persian] Ricoeur, P. (2016) Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action and interpretation (J. B. Thompson, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge University Press. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781316534984">https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781316534984</a> Ricoeur, P. (2018) History and hermeneutics (M. Feizi, Trans., 1st ed.). Markaz. [in Persian] Said, E. (2011) Orientalism (L. Khonji, Trans., 2nd ed.). Amirkabir. [in Persian] Shayegan, D. (1995) Under the skies of the world: Conversations of Ramin Jahanbegloo with Dariush Shayegan (N. Azima, Trans.). Farzan-e Rouz. [in Persian] Shayegan, D. (2001) Mental idols and eternal memory (4th ed.). Amirkabir. [in Persian] Shayegan, D. (2012) Asia in the face of the West (11th ed.). Amirkabir. [in Persian] Shojaei Jeshoughani, M. (2024) The thought of early Shayegan: From the discourse of oriental authenticity to critical occidentalism. Quarterly Journal of Western Philosophy, 2(6), 101–118. [in Persian] Tabashir, M., & Shakouri, A. (2018) Reading the works of Dariush Shayegan based on the concept of the playful subject. Two-Quarterly Scientific-Research Journal of Theoretical Politics, (24), 199–222. [in Persian] Tabatabai, J. (1995) Ibn Khaldun and the social sciences: The status of social sciences in Islamic civilization. Tarh-e No. [in Persian] Tofigh, E., Eslami, R., Olad-e Dameshqiyeh, S., Tamjidi, M., Khorasani, A., Sari, H., Farvardin, F., Vazavaei, N., & Yousefi, S. M. (2019) Nāmidan-e ta’liq: A research program for critical historical sociology in Iran. Mania-ye Honar. [in Persian] Vahdat, F. (2004) Iran’s intellectual encounter with modernity (M. Haghighatkhah, Trans.). Ghoghnoos. [in Persian]   <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Ph.D. in Political Thought, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. atakarimzadeh@yahoo.com https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9777-4244این مقاله از دریچه&zwnj;ای تفسیری و تبیینی نشان می&zwnj;دهد که دور&zwnj;ۀ نخست فکری داریوش شایگان بازتولید نوشته&zwnj;های شرق&zwnj;شناسانه است. شایگان در این دورۀ فکری با تأثیرپذیری از اندیشه&zwnj;های غربی بر مبنای نظامِ دانش مسلط چه به لحاظ فکری و چه ساختاری و نهادی، شرق را به مثابۀ کلیت در سیری نزولی&zwnj;تر نسبت به غرب می&zwnj;بیند. بر همین اساس شایگان هر چند دغدغۀ «چرایی فترت» تمدن&zwnj;های شرقی را دارد؛ اما در همان جایی می&zwnj;ایستد که شرق&zwnj;شناسان و یا نظام&zwnj;های فکری غربی از موضع فهم شرقی&zwnj;سازی دارند. شایگان در تداوم و توالی شرق&zwnj;شناسی حرکت می&zwnj;کند، در عین اینکه دلبستۀ شرق است، یعنی «هم این است و هم آن» و به همین دلیل در یک «وضعیت/ ناوضعیت» قرار می&zwnj;گیرد که منجر به «امتناع» می&zwnj;شود. «خودشرق&zwnj;شناسانه&zwnj;سازی» شایگان موجب می&zwnj;شود که داوری غرب در مورد شرق به طور ایجابی بدون سویۀ انتقادی پذیرفته شود.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/51867

مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رسانی علوم و فناوریپژوهش سیاست نظری2008-579621392026923Capacities and Requirements of the Institutionalist Approach in the Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran ظرفیت‌ها و بایسته‌های رویکرد نهادگرایانه در سیاست خارجی ج.ا. ایران279299faعباس ضیاءالدینیدانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی، واحد تهران جنوب، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0009-5718-4128محمد کمالی زادهاستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات اجتماعی جهاد دانشگاهی، تهران، ایرانhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1391-6547سید خدایار مرتضویاستادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد تهران جنوب، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0514-4412سید عطاءالله سینائیاستادیار گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6999-3042202545Capacities and Requirements of the Institutionalist Approach in the Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran Abbas Ziaoddini<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">*</a> Mohammad Kamalizadeh<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">**</a> Seyyed Khodayar Mortazavi<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">***</a> Seyyed Ataollah Sinaei<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4">****</a>   This research seeks to examine the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran through the lens of institutionalism. This approach is predicated on the assumption that institutional structures and rules established upon specific principles, norms, attitudes, and values constrain the options available to policymakers and steer them toward particular decisions. The foreign policy approach of the I.R. Iran is no exception to this rule. By employing an institutionalist framework and a descriptive-analytical method, this article addresses the following research questions: How can the capacities of institutionalism be leveraged to render the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran more efficient and effective, and what indicators distinguish the foreign policy of the I.R. Iran from an institutionalist perspective? The findings indicate that strengthening institutional interactions, enhancing coordination among domestic institutions, and utilizing regional and international cultural, economic, and strategic capacities are among the key imperatives of institutionalism for the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.   Keywords: Institution, Institutionalism, Institutional Capacities, Constitution, Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.   Introduction The general premise of foreign policy is that the state, as a social institution, is situated within two distinct environments: on the one hand, the domestic environment, comprising all institutions located within the territory defined by the state and their mutual interactions; and on the other hand, the external environment, consisting of all other states, their bilateral interactions, and international institutions. Conventional International Relations theory posits that the state is constantly engaged in attempts to intervene in both environments; that is, it enters into both domestic and foreign politics (Eslami & Akbari, 2020: 4). Foreign policy encompasses the decisions, actions, and initiatives of a country vis-à-vis other actors and the international environment (Reynolds, 2001: 63). Therefore, foreign policy is pursued on the basis of a predetermined plan, program, and strategy formulated by decision-makers to secure specific, defined objectives (Dehghani Firoozabadi, 2015: 21). This article seeks to examine the capacities and imperatives of institutionalism to offer solutions for reinforcing this approach in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The primary question addressed by this study is: How can the capacities and imperatives of institutionalism be leveraged to render the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran more efficient and effective?   Research Methodology and Theoretical Framework This study utilizes a descriptive-analytical method based on library research and document analysis to investigate the impact of institutionalism on the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The theoretical framework of the research is grounded in New Institutionalism. The foundations of New Institutionalism are attributed to March and Olsen, who, in a seminal 1984 article, called for renewed attention to the institutional character of politics. The primary themes of their argument can be outlined as follows: <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>Political institutions possess relative autonomy and independent effects, and their organizational properties matter. From the perspective of New Institutionalism, both contextualism which reduces politics to a mere reflection of society and reductionism which reduces politics to the aggregate behavior of individuals are rejected.</li> <li>Politics revolves around the interpretation of life, the elaboration of meaning, purpose, and direction, and not merely around policymaking and resource allocation.</li> <li>Attention must be paid to the ways in which institutionalized rules, routines, standards, and norms shape behavior, underscoring that political action cannot be reduced solely to the conduct of calculating individuals. History is not sufficient, yet institutions cannot be regarded as ahistorical (March & Olsen, 1984: 749).</li> </ul> From their perspective, political actors organize themselves and their conduct in accordance with socially constructed routines and rules that are publicly known and accepted. By virtue of these rules and procedures, political institutions define fundamental political rights and duties, structure and regulate the allocation of privileges, opportunities, and obligations in society, and establish authority to resolve conflicts. Administrative bodies, legislative committees, and courts while serving as arenas for the contestation of social forces are also sets of standard operating procedures and structures that define and constrain individual interests and choices, constituting political agents in their own right.   Institutions and Institutionalism in the Foreign Policy of the I.R. Iran The institutional capacities embedded in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran comprise the following: <ul style="text-align: left;"> <li>The Role of Domestic Institutions in Iran’s Foreign Policy: These institutions include the government and the diplomatic apparatus, the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majles), and extra-branch (supra-constitutional) bodies such as the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and the Supreme Leader. Each of these institutions, by virtue of its legal standing, exercises a decisive influence over the formulation and execution of foreign policy (Dehghani Firoozabadi, 2019: 23).</li> <li>The Executive Branch and Diplomatic Apparatus: The government and specifically the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is regarded as the primary executive institution in Iranian foreign policy. It bears direct responsibility for conducting negotiations, implementing international accords, and managing the state’s diplomatic relations.</li> <li>The Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majles): As the legislative authority, the Islamic Consultative Assembly helps delineate the legal parameters of foreign policy. The parliament influences foreign affairs by ratifying or rejecting international treaties and agreements, allocating budgetary resources to the diplomatic apparatus, and exercising oversight over the executive branch. The Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission is a specialized body tasked with reviewing foreign policy matters.</li> <li>Extra-Branch Institutions and the Leadership: In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Supreme Leader occupies a strategic position in steering foreign policy. The regime’s overarching macro-policies in international relations are formulated based on the directives of the Supreme Leader in consultation with bodies such as the Supreme National Security Council (Dehghani Firoozabadi, 2019: 56). The SNSC, as the country’s highest political and security decision-making institution, plays a vital role in determining foreign policy strategy and oversees the trajectory of international negotiations and engagements (Rahmani, 2020: 45).</li> <li>Regional and International Institutions and Iran’s Position: Regional and international organizations constitute a vital pillar of institutionalism in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. These bodies provide Iran with opportunities to utilize multilateral cooperation to secure its national interests. Notable examples include the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the United Nations and its affiliated agencies, and regional pacts and organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) (Rahmani, 2020: 102).</li> <li>Iran’s Cultural, Economic, and Strategic Capacities in Leveraging Institutionalism: Possessing a historical civilization, extensive energy resources, and an advantageous geopolitical position, Iran exhibits high potential for active participation in international institutions. For instance, Iran’s participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) reflects the mobilization of economic capacities within international interactions (ibid.: 152).</li> <ul> <li>Cultural Capacities: With its rich historical civilization and cultural footprint across the Islamic world and the Shia sphere, Iran possesses substantial potential for cultural diplomacy. Iranian cultural centers abroad, international media presence, and participation in global cultural organizations represent key institutional strategies in this domain (Dehghani Firoozabadi, 2019: 18).</li> <li>Economic Capacities: As one of the world’s leading oil and natural gas producers, Iran can play a pivotal role in global energy governance through platforms such as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) (Reuters, 2025: 5).</li> <li>Strategic Capacities: Iran’s geopolitical position across the Middle East, the Caspian Sea, and the Persian Gulf enables the state to maintain an active role in regional security architectures and political processes.</li> </ul> </ul> Conclusion The Islamic Republic of Iran possesses expansive capacities for utilizing institutionalism in its foreign policy. Domestic institutions such as the executive branch, parliament, the Supreme National Security Council, and the Leadership play key roles in foreign policymaking. Concurrently, Iran’s engagement with regional and international organizations lays the groundwork for strengthening multilateral cooperation. Furthermore, Iran’s cultural, economic, and strategic assets can be mobilized as instruments of institutional diplomacy in the nation’s foreign affairs. Reinforcing the role of domestic institutions in foreign policy decision-making, pursuing constructive engagement with international bodies and multilateral diplomacy, managing structural challenges and barriers, and outlining strategies to consolidate institutionalism were focal points of this analysis. By enacting viable and operational policies in these domains, Iran can more effectively harness the capacities of institutionalism to render its foreign policy more efficient and efficacious in safeguarding its national interests.   References Ahmadi, H., & Fazeli, H. (2007) Nasionalism, moshkele-ye haviyat va dolat-e melli dar theori-ye ejtemaei [Nationalism, the problem of identity, and the nation-state in social theory]. Political Quarterly, 37(4), 21–40. [in Persian] Ahmadvand, S., & Bakhshi, M. (2022) Barresi-ye zamineh va paradigm-e zabani dar andisheh-ye siasi-ye Zartosht [Investigating the context and linguistic paradigm in Zoroastrian political thought]. Theoretical Politics Research, 31(1), 139–163. <a href="https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2023.318019.1007734">https://doi.org/10.22059/jpq.2023.318019.1007734</a> [in Persian] Ashraf, A. (2020) Haviyat-e irani az doran-e bastan ta payan-e pahlavi [Iranian identity from antiquity to the end of the Pahlavi era] (H. Ahmadi, Ed. & Trans.; 10th ed.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Bartold, V. (1998) Joghrafiya-ye tarikhi-ye iran-e bastan [Historical geography of ancient Iran] (H. Sanati, Trans.). Bonyad-e Moqoofat-e Mahmoud Afshar Yazdi. [in Persian] Cameron, G. G. (1986) Iran dar sepideh-dam-e tarikh [Iran at the dawn of history] (H. Anoosheh, Trans.). Elmi va Farhangi. [in Persian] Christensen, A. (1953) Iran dar zaman-e sasaniyan [Iran in the Sassanid period] (R. Yasemi, Trans.). Ebn-e Sina. [in Persian] Cottam, R. (1978) Nationalism in Iran. University of Pittsburgh Press. Dehghani Firoozabadi, J. (2015) Osool va mabani-ye ravabet-e beynolmelal [Principles and foundations of international relations] (Vol. 1). Samt. [in Persian] Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1996) Din-e iran-e bastan [Religion of ancient Iran] (R. Monajem, Trans.). Fekr-e Rooz. [in Persian] Eslami, R., & Akbari, Z. (2020) Asib-shenasi-ye siasat-e khareji-ye jomhuri-ye eslami-ye iran az manzar-e nehad-geraee [Pathology of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran from the perspective of institutionalism]. Quarterly Journal of Public Policy Strategies, (35), 3–26. [in Persian] Frye, R. N. (2007) Tarikh-e bastani-ye iran [The history of ancient Iran] (M. Rajabnia, Trans.; 3rd ed.). Elmi va Farhangi. [in Persian] Ghirshman, R. (1957) Iran az aghaz ta eslam [Iran from the beginning to Islam] (M. Moein, Trans.). Bongah-e Tarjomeh va Nashr-e Ketab. [in Persian] Haghighat, S. (1997) Masooliyat-haye faramelli dar siasat-e khareji-ye dolat-e eslami [Transnational responsibilities in the foreign policy of the Islamic government]. Center for Strategic Research. [in Persian] Herzfeld, E. (1975) Tarikh-e bastani-ye iran bar bonyad-e bastan-shenasi [Ancient history of Iran based on archaeology] (A. A. Hekmat, Trans.). Anjoman-e Asar-e Melli. [in Persian] Hodgson, G. M. (1998) The approach of institutional economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(1), 166–192. Hosseinizadeh, S. M. A. (2012) Az nehad-geraee ta gofteman: Daramadi bar karbord-e nazariye-haye nehad-geraee dar oloom-e siasi [From institutionalism to discourse: An introduction to the application of institutional theories in political science]. Baqir al-Ulum, 15(60), 83–109. [in Persian] Hutchinson, J. (1994) Cultural nationalism and moral regeneration. In J. Hutchinson & A. Smith (Eds.), Nationalism. Oxford University Press. Ishiyama, J. T. (2012) Comparative politics: Principles of democracy and democratization. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Jackson, R., & Sorensen, G. (2015) Daramadi bar ravabet-e beynolmelal [Introduction to international relations] (M. Zakerian, A. Taghizadeh, & H. Saeid Kolahi, Trans.). Mizan. [in Persian] Kazemi, H. (2013) Nehad-geraee be onvan-e olgooei baraye tahlil-e siasi [Institutionalism as a model for political analysis]. Theoretical Politics Research, (13), 1–27. [in Persian] Khoshvaght, M. H. (2006) Tajziye va tahlil-e tasmim-giri dar siasat-e khareji [Decision-making analysis in foreign policy]. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Printing and Publishing Center. [in Persian] Kohn, H. (1944) The idea of nationalism: A study in its origins and background. Macmillan. Kuhrt, A. (2009) The Persian Empire: A corpus of sources from the Achaemenid period (Vol. 1). Routledge. March, J., & Olsen, J. (1984) The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749. Maskub, S. (2000) Haviyat-e irani va zaban-e farsi [Iranian identity and the Persian language] (2nd ed.). Farzan. [in Persian] Miscevich, N. (2020) Nationalism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2020 ed.). <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/">https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/</a> Mirzaei, A. (2017) Nasionalism va ghomiyat dar iran [Nationalism and ethnicity in Iran]. Iranian Journal of Sociology, 18(1), 32–68. [in Persian] Mohammadi, H. R. (2014) Tabyeen-e neshegan-e ghodrat va ta’sir-e an bar siasat-e khareji-ye amrika dar ghebal-e iran [Explaining the signs of power and their impact on US foreign policy toward Iran]. International Geopolitics Quarterly, 10(53), 122–148. [in Persian] Motevaseli, M., et al. (2010) Eghtesad-e nehad-i: Pishgaman-e nehad-geraee ke elm-e eghtesad ra motahavvel kardand [Institutional economics: Pioneers of institutionalism who transformed economics]. Imam Sadiq University Press. [in Persian] O’Sullivan, M. L. (2018) Shrewd diplomacy: Iran’s foreign policy and the global order. Oxford University Press. Pirnia, H. (2004) Asr-e asatiri-ye tarikh-e iran: Khotoot-e barjaste-ye dastan-haye iran-e ghadim [The mythological age of Iranian history: Prominent lines of ancient Iranian stories]. Hirmand. [in Persian] Pourdavoud, I. (1998) Gatha: Kohan-tarin bakhsh-e ovesta [Gathas: The oldest part of the Avesta]. Asatir. [in Persian] Rahmani, M. (2020) Institutionalism and foreign policy: An analysis of the role of domestic and international institutions. Routledge. Ramezani, R. (2001) Charchoobi tahlili baraye barresi-ye siasat-e khareji-ye jomhuri-ye eslami-ye iran [An analytical framework for examining the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran] (A. Tayeb, Trans.). Nashr-e Ney. [in Persian] Ramezani Baseri, A., & Mirfardi, A. (2014) Tabyeen-e nehad-geraee va gerayesh-e an be towse-e [Explaining institutionalism and its tendency toward development]. Economic Journal, 14(3–4), 133–150. [in Persian] Renan, E., & Renouvin, P. (2012) Mellat, hess-e melli, nasionalism [Nation, national feeling, nationalism] (A. Ahmadi, Trans.). Agah. [in Persian] Reuters. (2025, February 4) An overview of Iran’s energy industry and infrastructure. <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/an-overview-irans-energy-infrastructure-2025-02-04/">https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/an-overview-irans-energy-infrastructure-2025-02-04/</a> Reynolds, P. A. (2001) Shenakht-e osool-e ravabet-e beynolmelal [Introduction to international relations] (J. Zanganeh, Trans.). Ministry of Foreign Affairs Printing and Publishing Center. [in Persian] Rhodes, R. A. W. (2005) Rahyaft-e nehad-geraee [The institutional approach]. In D. Marsh & J. Stoker (Eds.), Method and theory in political science (A. M. Haj-Yousefi, Trans.). Strategic Studies Research Institute. [in Persian] Sahraei, A. (2011) Daramadi bar siasat-e khareji-ye jomhuri-ye eslami-ye iran az 1979 ta 2005 [Introduction to the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran from 1979 to 2005]. Sokhangostar. [in Persian] Sariolghalam, M. (2011) Mafhoom-e ghodrat va amalkard-e siasat-e khareji: Moghayese-ye chin va iran [The concept of power and foreign policy performance: Comparing China and Iran]. Foreign Relations Quarterly, 3(1), 49–74. [in Persian] Sedghi, A. (2007) Siasat-e khareji-ye jomhuri-ye eslami-ye iran az aghaz ta sal-e 1368 [Foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran from the beginning to 1989]. Center for Islamic Revolution Documentation. [in Persian] Shafiei-Kadkani, M. (2025) Gozine-ye ashar [Selected poems] (20th ed.). Morvarid. [in Persian] Skocpol, T. (2018) Binesh va ravesh dar jame-e-shenasi-ye tarikhi [Vision and method in historical sociology] (S. H. Aghajari, Trans.; 3rd ed.). Nashr-e Markaz. [in Persian] Smith, A. (2004) Nasionalism, nazariye, ideology, tarikh [Nationalism: Theory, ideology, history] (M. Ansari, Trans.). Iranian Civilization Studies. [in Persian] Sotoudeh, M. (2006) Tahavolat-e nezam-e beynolmelal va siasat-e khareji-ye jomhuri-ye eslami-ye iran [Developments in the international system and the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran]. [in Persian] Tabatabai, J. (2001) Ta’amoli darbare-ye iran: Dibache-i bar nazariye-ye enhetat-e iran [Reflections on Iran: A preface to the theory of Iranian decadence]. Negah-e Moaser. [in Persian] Vaziri, M. (2013) Iran as imagined nation: The construction of national identity. Gorgias Press. Woods, E. T. (2016) Cultural nationalism. In D. Inglis & A. M. Almila (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of cultural sociology (pp. 429–441). SAGE Publications.       <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">*</a> Corresponding Author: Ph.D. Student in Political Science, Tehran South Branch, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. a.ziaeddin@yahoo.com https://orcid.org/0000-0009-5718-4128 <a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">**</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Institute for Humanities and Social Studies, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. mohammadkamalizadeh@gmail.com https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1391-6547 <a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">***</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Tehran South Branch, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. <a href="mailto:Kh-mortazavi@azad.ic.ir">Kh-mortazavi@azad.ic.ir</a> https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0514-4412 <a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4">****</a> Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran. sinaee@pnu.ac.ir                   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6999-3042پژوهش حاضر در پی شناخت سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران با نگاهی به رویکرد نهادگرایی است. این رویکرد بر این فرض استوار است که ساختارها و قواعد نهادی که با تکیه بر اصول، هنجارها، نگرش&zwnj;ها و ارزش&zwnj;ها ایجاد شده&zwnj;اند، گزینه&zwnj;های سیاست&zwnj;گذاران را محدود کرده، آنها را به سمت تصمیمهای مشخصی هدایت می&zwnj;کنند. رویکرد سیاست خارجی ج.ا.ا نیز از این قاعده مستثنی نیست. این مقاله با استفاده از رویکرد نهادگرایی و روش توصیفی&zwnj;- تحلیلی به&zwnj; دنبال پاسخ به این پرسش است که چگونه می&zwnj;توان با بهره&zwnj;گیری از ظرفیت&zwnj;های نهادگرایی، سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران را کارآمدتر و مؤثرتر ساخت و چه شاخص&zwnj;هایی، سیاست خارجی ج.ا.ا را از منظر نهادگرایی متمایز می&zwnj;نماید. نتایج نشان می&zwnj;دهد که تقویت تعاملات نهادی، افزایش هماهنگی بین نهادهای داخلی و بهره&zwnj;گیری از ظرفیت&zwnj;های فرهنگی، اقتصادی و راهبردی منطقه&zwnj;ای و بین&zwnj;المللی، از جمله الزامات کلیدی نهادگرایی در سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران است.

http://political.ihss.ac.ir/ar/Article/Download/49862