جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "discourse of war" در نشریات گروه "علوم انسانی"

The Freedom Movement of Iran is among political groups that were active before and after the victory of Islamic Revolution and joined and supported Imam Khomeini during his stay in Paris. Knowledge and experience of organizational work helped the movement to form the first cabinet after the victory of the Islamic Revolution. During the Iran-Iraq war, especially after the liberation of Khorramshahr, based on some basic religious principles of Islam, the movement adopted different positions and practices, compared to the revolutionary forces. Regarding the continuation of war or terminating it, the stance of the movement was different from revolutionary forces. Freedom Movement's stances on war fluctuated from full support to harsh criticism of the authorities of the Islamic Republic. They followed a foreign policy based on good neighborliness and détente through diplomatic channels. Finally, a fundamental shift in their stance and political discourse after the liberation of Khorramshahr, side by side with their isolation from political scene, turned them into a dissident minority within the system. This article is an attempt to study the attitude of the Freedom Movement of Iran towards the Islamic Revolution and the status of Iran-Iraq war in their political discourse. Positions and performances of the Freedom Movement in various stages of the war has been studied within the framework of discourse analysis authored by Laclau and Mouffe as well as Martin White's theory of continuity of the Revolution and the War

In addition to the historical and social significance of Tarikh-e Jahangosha by Joveyni, the text is notable according to discourse analysis. In the discourse of war as the hegemonic discourse of the text, one of the distinctive discourses should be studied according to social presence of women. On the one hand, gender equality in Mongolian culture, and from the other hand the Iranian-Islamic identity of Iranian women have created a bipolar discourse which in Iranian women are ineffective slaves, while Mongolian women, as champions equal to men, are dominant and victorious.
Using Halliday’s ideational metafunction, naming and processes, all parts of the text where Iranian and Mongolian women attended were studied; then by collecting all statements about them, characteristics of each were extracted.
Under the effect of religious beliefs, Iranian-Islamic identity of women is represented in the form of defeated participants of discourse of war, by introducing their social characteristics, indirectly expressing their names and their low-frequency presence. While the identity of Mongol women, as the dominant and triumphant participants, is expressed directly and a special way of naming is used by the author. In many cases, the Mongolian woman is wise, hero and politician; whereas the Iranian, except in few cases, is a nameless veiled who goes into captivity.