|
|
Article1
IN DEFENSE OF IRANIAN LIBERALS
By
Sam Ghandchi
The
following is a copy of ghandchi’s article entitled “IN DEFENSE OF
IRANIAN
LIBERALS”, which was posted on SCI newsgroup on
**********************************************************************
“AAA”,
an SCI reader, in his message says that he has lost a brother
and
many close friends and comrades. I can
only sympathize with
his
loss and say that yes, Iranians have buried so many of their
brightest
intellectuals in mass graves in the last century, without
even
achieving half of what some nations such as
achieved.
Why? I think because of sensational assessments of
the world and
of our
society; and replacing brevity and fearlessness contests for
reason. I am sorry to be so harsh and cold-blooded in
my response
to
AAA's tragic report, but I do not want to see the sacrifice of
another
soul for sensationalism. I am afraid
that Iranian
intellectuals
have already lost too much by resorting to
sensationalism,
especially in the last four decades and I prefer to
have my
reason, rather than my emotions, to direct my actions.
AAA's
final call for action goes as follows:
>In
summary, my message is the following. First,
>revolutionary
change to take it back from the IRI's rule. Second, it is
>not
clear that any leading opposition group will be a practical force
>for
implementing this revolutionary change and therefore, a new
>independent
force must be created to fill this void or otherwise we
>can
look forward to living in conditions similar to our neighbors in
>
>now
and we must take the leadership role that will complement
>the
change within the Iranian society.
The
above analysis reminds me of the period after the 1953 coup,
i.e.
after the overthrow of Dr. Mossadegh's government. Many
Iranian
intellectuals who were tired of the politics and defeats of
the
Tudeh Party and Jebh-e Melli chose two new sensational
alternatives. The first one was the Cheriki leftist
guerrilla movement
and the
second one was the Shariati mystical-Islamic movement.
The
former felt dead in the quiet times of 1953-1962. Amir Parviz
Pooyan
called the intellectuals of the time BAGHA (meaning status
quo)
supporters. Massoud Ahmad-Zadeh looked to
Regi Dubre's
theories
for action and being alive. Thus the
former tendency, that is
the
leftist guerilla practitioners, with prominent figures such as Bijan
Jazani,
finally were consolidated in the Fadaeean Khalgh organization.
The
latter group, that is Shariati and his Hosseiniiieh-Ershad, created
a
mixture of Existentialism and Islam in a mystical fashion. They
attacked
liberalism by undermining rationalism; and they idealized
emotionalism
by choosing the path of heart. They
partly joined the
forces
that finally are part of the current regime; and partly became
the
body of Mojahedin organization (MKO), which was previously
formed
by the radical elements of Nehzat Azadi.
Actually
the above two tendencies among the Iranian intellectuals
for over
30 years, were the reasons why the liberalism did not grow
in Iran
in this period. Yes we did have a
liberal tradition which was
continued
from the time of Mashrootiat. People
like Alameh
Dehkhoda
continued that tradition even after Mossadegh's fall.
Dehkhoda
himself was always a supporter of Mossadegh.
Unfortunately,
the new intellectuals of the 60s had no patience for
this
liberalism, which was already tarred by Tudeh Party within the
opposition
and was damaged by the Shah's repression from the other
end.
It is
ironic that the fathers of the two individuals who were founders
of the
above two tendencies, were both members of the National
Front,
namely Ahmad-Zadeh and Shariati. The new
sensational
leftist
and Islamic tendencies attacked liberalism so much that the
word
"liberal" became a dirty word in Iranian political literature. If
you see
in our times that Mohandes Bazargan was attacked as the
menacing
"liberal", as if the word is pointing at something dirty, this
is a
heritage of that period.
Let me
return to one of the AAA’s own statements below. He writes:
>Can
anyone of you imagine a dictatorship running France or England
>for
extended period of time? The answer is no as these countries
>have
gone through the evolution of democracy. It is not too difficult
>to
imagine the rise of a dictator for life in Nicaragua or Iran despite
>the
revolutions that they have gone through.
Therefore, we must
>understand
that the change we need and should seek is an
>evolutionary
change and not a revolutionary one IF
we had the
>time,
but we are not given that luxury.
The
above reminds me so much of Ahmad-Zadeh and Shariati's
writings. We never have time for liberalism. But the real reason for
France
and England's strong footholds of democracy is the long
liberal
tradition. They also had to deal with
dictatorships. AMIR
KABIR
ALSO DEALT WITH DICTATORSHIP, BUT CHOSE LIBERALISM,
WHEREAS
MIRZA REZA KERMANI CHOSE SENSATIONALISM IN
RESPONSE
TO THE SAME SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES.
It is
not because of the conditions, Conditions are used as an excuse
to
justify oneÕs chosen path, although the conditions do reciprocally
help to
strengthen that chosen path. In other
words, for our post
1953
coup intellectuals, liberalism was not noble enough and the
post-coup
repression reinforced them in their belief to abandon
liberalism
as a feasible path. In the above, the
arguments that were
repeated
over and over again since Ahmad-Zadeh, by Cheriki
activists
of Iran, are being repeated above by AAA.
Who do
you think attacked the liberal government of Mohandes
Bazagan
right after the revolution? The leftists
and radical Islamic
groups
did. Do you remember how
"liberal" was such a dirty word in
those
days. In those days, these groups always
sided with the more
conservative
groups of Ruhaniiat, such as Khoeineeiha, and they
pointed
their attacks against the more moderate factions such as
Rafsanjani
[at the time of hostage-taking, Rafsanjani took more
moderate
positions as compared to Khoeiniha and his politics at that time
was
more similar to Khatami’s politics of 90’s-Note SG 2001]
I never
forget the attacks on Mohandes Bazargan's government.
Ibrahim
Yazdi was attacked daily by our leftist and Shariati type
intellectuals. The Jebh-e Melli representatives in that
government,
such as
Sanjabi, never received any support from our intellectuals.
It is
so unfortunate that in the first years after the 1979 revolution,
the
Iranian intellectuals themselves, more than anybody else,
damaged
the growth of consciousness for liberalism among the
people
and they damaged the growth of the democratic movement to
address
the individual rights among Iranian people, by their attacks
on the
liberals, as the lackeys of the Western states.
During the
hostage
crisis, most of the Iranian left was one voice with the
extremist
right in attacking the liberal government of Bazargan.
Please
read the following conversation between AAA and BBB. BBB
who is
an ardent supporter of MKO on SCI:
AAA
writes:
>Islam,
whose very soul is to free and liberate, has turned into a
>sword,
whose only goal is to chain and murder.
BBB of
Mojahedin responds:
>Again
although I do not consider myself a religious person, I agree
>with
you completely. I do believe Islam and other religions brought
>the
message of equality and compassion for the human race and
>certainly
do not believe what the Akhunds are doing in Iran has
>anything
to do with Islam.
In
other words, BBB representing an organized party, is more
realistic. He sees that what AAA says is what MKO has
been in its
youth. AAA admires the early MKO and wants to return
to those
days. In other words to return to the days when MKO
was filled with
Shariati
type Islamic sensationlism. Here is
AAA's own words:
>I,
like many others in my age group, was a sympathizer of the MKO
>for
many years as to me they were a manifestation of the ideas and
>goals
that captivated my young mind and came from Dr. Shariatie
>and
others like him. The admiration that I felt towards MKO was
>dimmed
and finally put to rest after the current crop of their
>leaders
took over the organization. Mr. Rajavi in my opinion is as
>much
responsible for the murder of many of our brothers as is
>Larijanee
who ordered the actual executions. ..... His lack of trust in
>others
and his egoism has turned a potentially viable option into an
>organization
that is hated by the masses of Iranian people and has
>turned
MKO into a useful tool for the regime. By
having an
>illegitimate
and highly unpopular opposition group the regime has
>succeeded
in labeling all other opposition forces with even a slight
>bias
towards left as MKO supporters or MKO imitators and thus, has
>deprived
them of any popular support.
I am
writing in defense of Iranian liberalism.
I hope that Iranian
intellectuals
today not to make the same mistake that their
predecessors
made after the 1953 coup. IT WAS SO
UNFORTUNATE
THAT
THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF PEOPLE LIKE AMIR KABIR, ALAMEH
DEHKHODA,
AND DR. MOSSADEGH WERE REPLACED WITH THE
SENSATIONALIST
APPEALS OF TERRORISTS LIKE MIRZA REZA
KERMANI
IN THE MINDS OF OUR YOUTH. THE
RESPONSIBILITY WAS
MAINLY
WITH THE SHAH'S SAVAK WHICH STOPPED EVEN
THE
MOST INNOCENT GATHERINGS OF IRANIAN INTELLECTUALS.
In
fact, unfortunately, the brightest Iranian intellectuals never
became
attracted to the liberal groups such as Jebh-e Melli and
Nehzat
Azadi. Thus these liberal organizations
seldom have anybody
of high
caliber (such as Dr. Sanjabi or Dr. Mossadegh) in their ranks
from
the 60s generation. If you read the
history of very top-level
Iranian
intellectuals such as Ahmad-Zadeh, Hanif-Nejad or Jazani;
they
all started in these liberal organizations, but ended up in one of
the
leftist or Islamic extremist organizations.
What a
pity that we have the greatest number of brightest minds in
our
graves and even more pity that their sacrifices did not contribute
to the
growth of a liberal society in Iran.
Socialist movement without
a
strong liberal background in Iran, not only did not help the growth
of a
liberal society, it even damaged its growth.
I hope
one day someone would write a book entitled "In Defense of
Iranian
Liberals". The people who worked
hard for almost a half
century,
without much support from the majority of Iranian
intellectuals.
It
seems to me that inside Iran, the publication of so many modern
futuristic
works points to a new focus of Iranian intellectuals, a focus
that is
radically different from the sensationalist alternatives.
Regards,
- Sam
Ghandchi
Feb 24,
1994