پژوهش نامه انتقادی متون و برنامه های علوم انسانی
پیاپی 94 (شهریور 1400)

The future of Iran’s history largely depends on narratives we present from its past. The narratives can lead to freedom and responsibility, or they can impose a kind of retrospective on us that prevents us from progressing. Depending on what approach and values we have in mind, Iran's past will also be different. In this article, by reviewing “Iranian Ministry and Bureaucracy (Vezarat & Divansalari) in the Islamic Era” (written by Sadeq Sajjadi), I have critiqued our vicious history with regard to the author's approach to validation of the past, and have expressed some critical arguments in a suspicious hermeneutic method. In my opinion, the future of Iran’s progress is first and foremost dependent on the deconstruction of its bureaucratic (Divansalari) relations. This bureaucracy, instead of order and efficiency, and transparency, leads to obscurity. This is the future that is a searchlight for, and the beacon of the past.

This article reviews the book “Can Democracy Be Saved? Participation, Deliberation and Social Movements” Written by Donatella Della Porta. Della Porta’s main question in this book is, "Can democracy be saved?” And his response is to “going beyond its liberal model, broadening reflection on participation and deliberation inside and outside institutions" through social movements. Della Porta's book is two books in one. The first part of the book deals with the normative discussion of the evolution of the concept of democracy from liberal to deliberative in the last two centuries. The second part is the practice of democracy by social movements in the contemporary world in light of the evolution of the Internet and social networks, which seeks to move from representative democracy to direct democracy. This book is a discussion of the New Left and radical democracy, which seeks to transition from representative democracy to deliberative democracy through social movements. Contemporary social movements, according to Della Porta, are no longer labor movements, unlike in the past, but include a wide range of people and have a high capacity for mobilization using new communication media.

The book, “Dissection of ISIL: Essence, Organizational Structure, Inductions and Results”,  written by Seyed Ali Nejat, tries to say anything about ISIL. This book discusses the intellectual and ideological essence of ISIL, its history and formation, its organizational structure, its inducts and tactics, its media inducts, its army and militia, its economy and finance, why this group arose and collapsed, and the chances and threats of ISIL for Iranian foreign policy and proposes for countering with this group. In this paper we will introduce and describe the book, then after formal critique, in part of the analysis of the context of the book, we will criticize the parts of the book and will say that the essential problem of this book is the absence of theory. In the eventual analysis, we propose the alternatives for the book, some proposes for the next books in this area and with this methodology. The methodology of this paper is library studying the use of electronic data.

The book, “Understanding Political Philosophy in the Context of Social Life” written by Mel Thompson and translated by Narges Tajik Neshatia, was published by Pegah Rosgarno Publications in 1397. In this book, the author, adopting an audience-oriented strategy and paying attention to the issues and phenomena of the political day, has emphasized their analysis in the framework of political philosophy. One of the remarkable features of the book is the use of historical routines and trends in paying attention to the fundamental and modern concepts of political philosophy versus political science and reviving the normative attitude towards political affairs. In this article, the book is reviewed from the perspective of method and theoretical basis and analysis of data, and in general concludes that despite the use of new methods of writing, and structuring the text, and creating a content and form appeal to the audience, this book has not been able to show a proper analysis and explanation of the application of political philosophy in the problems of the social day. In this article, the reason for such a situation in the author’s strategic departure from attention and focus on political philosophy, from the fourth chapter onwards, scattering and confusion in the design of very diverse topics and phenomena and semantic and conceptual imbalance in expressing the views of philosophers and political thinkers are observed.

Numerous works and research have been written and published regarding the study and critique of the situation in the Middle East region. One of the most important analytical approaches in this regard is the analysis of identity conflicts. Regional and international thinkers and experts have analyzed the current situation in the Middle East from this perspective. Amin Maalouf, a Lebanese-French national, focuses on the situation in the region and, consequently, the situation in the contemporary world from the perspective of identity conflicts. This article is dedicated to the review and critique of the book “Deadly Identities” and consequently the well-known study approach in his other works. A review of the book “Deadly Identities” shows that Ma’louf takes a critical approach to the situation of identity confrontations and traces the current situation in the Middle East to the historical period of the Crusades and the main reason for today's situation is introducing the identity “insiders”. Another elimination causes dissatisfaction on the part of individuals, peoples and tribes in different nations and creates violence, terror, war, and suicide attempts.

Although interest in the discourse analysis of national development policies and plans has been growing in recent years; however, little attention has been paid to the context in which these texts are articulated. This article, by supposing essential relationships between text and its context, aimed to interpret the third development plan of Iran and to analyze the social context of the plan according to Baldwin’s monography and the method of the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The article identified “the order of discourse of planning and development” as a joint around which two dominant discourses including (i) “individually centralized planning discourse” and (ii) “growth-based development discourse” are articulated. In addition, “a participatory decentralized planning discourse” and “a distribution-based development discourse” have been identified as competing discourses in relation to the first two discourses. Finally, the article by analyzing the political and cultural context of the plan showed that the production of the plan as a text, instead of following a rational-scientific process, has mainly been influenced by ideological-discursive formulations seeking to maintain specific relation of power among key actors and geographical spaces through text.

For more than 40 years, Robert Dahl’s theory of polyarchy democracy has been considered by scholars as one of the most effective, robust, and enlightening forms of contemporary revisionist democratic theory. The English version of this book was published in 1971 and its translation was published in 2018. Polyarchy is defined as a set of institutional arrangements that allow for public opposition and inclusive participation in politics. The central assumption of the sign in this book, which involves a linear process, is that when hegemonic systems and competitive dictatorships move toward multiculturalism, opportunities for effective participation and questioning increase. Therefore, the number of individuals, groups, and interests whose policy priorities are considered increases. In this article, an attempt is made to examine the intellectual background and studies of Robert Dahl over two decades (1970-1950) and to identify the roots of the development of his theory of polyarchy democracy, presented in the form of an independent book, in his earlier works.

The tradition directs the changes and developments of Islamic society with a certain formulation of thought. Rejecting its historic rules, the tradition prevents critical questions, extends its domination to contemporary reading, and protects religion by adhering to it. The orientalist pattern and the traditional method of understanding are two important approaches in interpreting and understanding the tradition. Each of the two methods presents different perspectives and outcomes of Middle Eastern political knowledge. But none of them shows how power has shaped knowledge and products of religious thought while taking benefit of them in the favor of its own strategies and goals. None of these two methods have focused on identifying alternative political patterns that are altered and rejected in order to make the existing order the only possible model of legitimate political life. Adopting a discursive approach, the book, "Power and Knowledge in Iran, the Islamic Era", attempts to demonstrate how and through what mechanism, Islamic discourse highlights and diversifies plural concepts, and how it extends a central concept while projecting it as an absolute, beyond time and place notion. Nonetheless, the expectations resulted from adopting such a framework would go beyond that. Such expectations, being particularly based on the discursive presuppositions, are the evaluation core of this work along with other details of the text.

In “Spheres of Justice,”Walzer offers an explanation of the principles of distributive justice based on an understanding of the meanings of the various social good. This explanation of justice is “pluralistic” and based on the idea of “complex equality.” Walzer’s point is that each area of social life has its own criteria for distributing social good, and one area should not be extended to other areas. The opposite of Walzer’s ideal justice is coercion and domination, which means the domination of the standard of justice in one area over other areas of social life. The diversity of the principles of the distribution of social good, the attempt to reconcile pluralism and equality, and the opposition to the domination of capital over the realm of political power are among the highlights of Walzer”s theory of justice. Walzer’s critics, on the other hand, argue that Walzer’s conservative nature makes him unable to take a clear critical stance on the wrong ways of distributing social good. Lack of a clear criterion for understanding the social criteria of the distribution of goods, the relativity of social meanings, and inability to provide a criterion for criticizing incorrect methods in the distribution of social good are among the most important criticisms of Walzer’s theory of justice.

By now many have considered modernity as an integrated totality that was born and flourished in a given time and in a given location. From this point of view, modernity is incompatible and alien to other territories and cultures, but if we consider modernity as a “cultural text” creating a suitable context for human subjectivity, then we would know it as an omnipresent phenomenon in all the human aggregations. The book “Three Rival Versions of Modernity: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty” focuses on incompatibilities in understanding modern affairs. Hence it shows the different capabilities inside modernity. Therefore, the central problem of the book has to do with the way of approaching modernity. Though the main part of the book is dedicated to the analysis of six Western thinker’s theories, the last part focuses on Iranian thinkers and analyses their attitudes toward modernity from three different standpoints: exit, voice, and loyalty. Finally, the book could be considered as a precious effort in understanding modernity, which per se could lead Iranian society to adopt a more conscious approach in case of modernity.

Throughout different civilizations and cultures, political philosophers have contemplated on the meaning of “happiness” as the goal of human life, and so, their contemplation has extended to the normative and policy-making domain of the ideal political state. However, while classically philosophers tended to understand the term as a quality for the good life, in the modern era the quantitative explanation of the subject prevailed and the goal alternated into human satisfaction through capital accumulation and economic growth. Nevertheless, modern social abnormalities, such as Opium, depression, and tremendous family break-ups led the socio-political intellectuals to explore alternatives that might help to find real, sustainable satisfaction in human social life. Among others, Derek Bok’s “Politics of Happiness” is an exploration for such alternative which is based on Buhtan’s national policy towards substitution of “happiness” for “economic growth” and attempts to indicate different elements and aspects of such transformation in social policies in western states, namely the United States.

Researchers consider political thought as a reflection of political phenomena, which, of course, has come into being in a civilized and political society with a government structure. Each political society, based on the distinct structure that exists in the understanding and culture of its inhabitants, is distinct from other societies and has a particular attitude and mindset. Therefore, understanding the nature of the historical society and people’s behaviors and practices, as well as the causes of certain events, is possible only by studying the thought and political culture of those societies. Thus, the research can clarify the dark angles of a historical period and contribute to the richness of the audience's historical understanding. Also, the impartial and scientific critique of these works contributes to the scientific and educational richness and adds to their efficiency, usefulness, and privileges. Accordingly, in this article, one of the newly published works on “Political Thought in Ancient Iran” was covered to study the importance and credibility and, of course, some of its shortcomings and defects in the form and content. There is a hope of better presentation in the subsequent printing.

Javad Tabatabai’s intellectual project has been based on two main axes of the decline of political thought in Iran for the past three decades and in recent decades around the axis of Iranshahri thought. Tabatabai is one of the few writers who has used concepts to explain the history of political thought in Iran within a regular intellectual system, but the scope of his project has caused that not all the themes of Iranshahri political thought have been clearly outlined and studied. This article is an attempt to give a brief description of Tabatabai’s latest work and its important issues such as the position of the First Constitutional Assembly, the concept of tradition, the need to distinguish between nationalism and the Iranian idea, and a reflection on his views, especially on the relationship between his views and issues, contemporary Iran and its criticisms of contemporary intellectuals. The authors argue that although the legacy of ancient Iran is important and significant, without the reconstruction of the classical ideas that are called Iranshahri thought due to Tabatabai's own efforts nowadays, these ideas will remain in a state of ambiguity.

From which point of view should one think about a system of thought or a current of thought in the life of a political thinker? This is the question that will determine the final analysis of how we deal with the various philosophical-political apparatuses. A confrontation that has, more than anything else, within itself the specific intentions of the person who is describing a system of thought, as well as the issues that have necessitated a particular theory for the narrator. Any form of encountering a text, for the person who is writing about, is a search for an answer that must be presented to the concrete issues of political life at this point in time and space. It is with this premise that I try to write about some of the prison notes of the Italian thinker and political activist Antonio Gramsci. A collection for Persian speakers entitled “State and Civil Society”, translated by Abbas Milani, has been presented to the market by Akhtaran Publications. I will try to make this study based on an understanding of the concept of politics as a unifying factor to this part of Gramsci's writings,

The party is one of the important components that has an important place in democratic systems. In fact, the party is the link between the practice of governance and the standards of governance. Davood Farihi in his book “Jurisprudence and Party Governance” tries to reconcile political jurisprudence with the government. It is related to the emergence of parliament and the concept of law in the contemporary era and explains the position of parties in the Islamic political system. The results of Farihi’s efforts show that the “party issue” in political jurisprudence is a logical extension of jurisprudence’s confrontation with the modern government. It is jurisprudential “but the fact is that the party in Iran is not jurisprudential and in this article, we criticize “the issue of the party in Iran is jurisprudential” in a descriptive and analytical way and based on library studies.

In this manuscript, we try to examine the connection between the interpretation of the sacred text, the ideology of language, and the apparatuses of domination in Abu Zayd`s “Circles of Fear: Reading the Discourse about Women” with a focus on the issue of women. “Circles of Fear” is based on the text-based historical hermeneutics and Abu Zayd has a post-secular humanistic approach. In “Circles of Fear” he has used critical approaches such as subaltern theory and critique of ideological apparatuses within the framework of historical structuralism, and in addition to his Qur'anic views, he has also developed a kind of critical political sociology. In Abu Zayd’s critical theory, the abstractedness of the situation arises from the intertwined relations of Shari'a, political economy, and ruling power. In his analysis, we can see a net of power that overshadows the exploitative financial and economic relations and the interpretation of Sharia and with its repressive mechanisms, prevents critical awareness in the social space. This refusal of awareness in the Egyptian space is more severe and worse for women. This article reviews Abu Zaid’s views critically in five parts: Abu Zaid and critical theory of society; reconstruction of reawakening discourse and the history of Etzali belief; women in crisis discourse, the ideology of language and the production of domination; the defeat and historical decline and critique of anti-woman practices and discourses on the eve of the transition to the information age; and the critique of the commodification of women.

Conservatism as an idea or ideology is strongly linked to objective political action and experience. Conservatives are often interested in maintaining what they see as desirable and of course, their resistance to changes deemed necessary by social and historical conditions that have made them prone to titles such as reactionary. The book “Reactionary Mind” has formed and studied the dimensions of this idea especially in Western Europe and the United States with the main claim that the idea of conservatism has always been based on dealing with the revolutionary currents, especially from the left tradition. Although the book is composed of material that has been published separately in different places in the past, it still tries to discuss a common trajectory beyond the study of various historical and political issues. In this article, with a brief look at the idea of conservatism, the view of “Corey Robin”, as the author of this book, is reviewed and criticized according to its Persian translation. In addition, it is tried to survey other dimensions of the idea of conservatism which is ignored and should be covered later.

The dynamic nature of political changes in the last two decades has led to a move towards new areas of science in order to understand and provide a realistic analysis of these changes. In the meantime, political psychology has attempted to bridge the gap between psychological, sociological, historical, philosophical, anthropological, and linguistic issues, in spite of the complexities that exist in different scientific fields, and to open new possibilities for reflection on political transformations. The expanding knowledge of political psychology with the multidisciplinary, dynamic, and applied nature has opened new horizons for those interested in presenting a new analysis of politics. The focus of the present paper is the introduction, critique and evaluation of the “Political Psychology” book, edited by John T Jost and Jim Sidanius in 2004 and published in New York by the Psychology Press. The main purpose of this article is methodological and theoretical analysis, critique, and evaluation of “Political Psychology” textbook.

This is a review of the book "Islam in Russia: the politics of identity and security” by Shirin T. Hunter, the Iranian-American Professor of Georgetown University, in collaboration with two of the researchers at the Center for strategic and international studies, Jeffrey Thomas and Alexander Melikishvili, published in New York in 2004. A translation of this work is done by Elahe Koulaei, Professor at Tehran University, and two of his colleagues, Seyedeh Motahare Hussein and Asma Moini by Nei press in Tehran. Although the book may not be considered as the main textbook for political science course subjects, but may certainly be acknowledged as holding valuable information about the Soviet Government and politics, the big power's foreign policy, in all branches of BA, MA and PhD fields of political science, international relations, and regional studies. This article is also trying to introduce this work and its authors and translators, as well as critically analyze the structural and contextual weakness and suggest some corrective tips for the next edition of it.

The Problem of Development has always been a topic of discussion for researchers and thinkers in various fields of social sciences. In this framework, “Critical Approach to Community-Based Development” is one of the leading works in the field of sociology of development, written by Margaret Ledwith.  Ledwith is a researcher in the field of communitarianism and social justice, which in this work examines the development of community-based. She has focused both on objective developments in Western societies such as England in the context of globalization and on two philosophical turning points of the twentieth century: the Brazilian philosopher Paolo Freire and the Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci. According to Ledwith, community-based development requires a search between theory and method. According to him, community-based development forms the knowledge that is based on justice, equality, and democracy. It seems that the connection between theory and practice for change is one of the innovations of Ledwith in this work. The purpose of this article is to introduce the mentioned work, critique and evaluate it in both form and content and focus on Iranian society.