جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "freedom movement of iran" در نشریات گروه "تاریخ"

After the victory of Islamic Revolution in Iran, the so-called Liberal political groups such as the National Front and to some extent Freedom Movement of Iran publicized their belief in Westernization, nationalization, and secularism. They had their own attitudes toward the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic system of government. These groups gradually opposed the Islamic Republic system. Sheikh Sadeq Khalkhali, a senior official and a member of the Imam’s Line of Thinking, played a key role in confronting these groups.
The principal question of this paper is this: How and why the confrontation between forces loyal to Imam’s Line of Thinking and Liberals took place and what was the role of Sheikh Sadeq Khalkhali?
The answer to this question will be found through a descriptive-analytical method.
This paper hypothesizes that the confrontation between Imam’s Line of Thinking and the Liberals was due to the type of their world view and their attitude toward the role of religion in politics and the nature of the government.
The findings of this paper show that the two political groupings maintained opposing world view and political perspectives, wherein Khalkhali has played a key role in handling this confrontation.

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

The second half of Mordad 1342 (August 1963) marks major developments in the elections for the 21st term of National Consultative Assembly. Upon a request by the Muslim nation of Iran seeking advice from the sources of religious imitation, the ulema issued a fatwa )religious decree( on boycotting the elections. Political groups followed suit due to the disagreeable conditions for them in the society, the arrest of their leaders and the massive suppression of opponent voices. This paper uses a descriptive-analytical method to study the stance by the clergy and political circles vis-à-vis the 21st term of the National Consultative Assembly elections. The principal question of this paper is: On what basis, do the ulema and political groups boycotted the 21st National Consultative Assembly elections? Evidence shows that the reasons behind such an important decision were the prevalence of an atmosphere of political suffocation and obstruction, illegal behavior of the government, objections made to the Shah’s referendum, the arrest of Ayatollah Khomeini and a number of other senior clerics followed by June 5, 1963 uprising, and lack of freedom for a secure and fair elections. The dissident political groups such as Freedom Movement of Iran, National Front and Toilers’ Party (Zahmatkeshan) followed the clerics’ course of action for the first time in their history and boycotted the elections.