From overthrowing the government to getting prepared to establish a democratic society
In case you have got the chance to watch Ice Age 2, you probably remember the story of a mammoth who thinks she is a possum. If we take such a line of thought, we can ask two interesting questions regarding Iran’s Islamic Republic government, and Iran’s Green movement which is often referred to as a democratic one. The questions, in order of difficulty, are first, “Is Iran’s present government an Islamic Republic?” and second, “Is Iran’s Green movement a democratic one?”
In case you have got the chance to watch Ice Age 2, you probably remember the story of a mammoth who thinks she is a possum. If we take such a line of thought, we can ask two interesting questions regarding Iran’s Islamic Republic government, and Iran’s Green movement which is often referred to as a democratic one. The questions, in order of difficulty, are first, “Is Iran’s present government an Islamic Republic?” and second, “Is Iran’s Green movement a democratic one?”
It is now 30 years that the Islamic Republic is distancing itself from rules of both Islam and a Republic. The government has confined the social education to its own rather radical interpretation of Islam. The courses on humanities offered in schools and universities do not give any chance to students to study any ideology that questions tenability of Mullahs principles, except for tenuous versions of some historically important schools of thought that could be easily refuted and are in fact meant to be refuted. Moreover, all media, including newspapers, journals, TV and radio stations in Iran are monitored by the state government and therefore, any medium that could somehow influence the public does not do justice to even heterogeneity of Iranian cultures, let alone to the international ones. The fraudulent elections in the last June and its aftermath provide even more evidence for the claim that Islamic Republic is not much more than just a title. The government has committed lots of crimes such as torture, rape, and murder, just to name a few, that if anything, probably only its own radical ideologies could justify such acts. In a nutshell, the Islamic Republic is neither Islamic nor a Republic. It is like the mammoth in Ice Age 2 who thinks she is a possum. However, the difference between the two is that in the end the mammoth gets to know that she is not a possum and acts more like a mammoth, but as time goes by, the Islamic Republic acts more and more differently from any conceivable Islamic Republic.
The parallel question about the Green movement is that, if Greens succeed to establish a democratic country, is it going to be a democracy as it should be, or will there be only the title of democracy and the state and citizens will deviate from democratic standards? After all, most Greens, given the fact that some of them are in exile, have grown up in a society of censorship that the Islamic Republic has brought to them. However, practicing one’s freedom is something to be learnt, whether as a radical Muslim, a democrat, or as an anarchist. It is the society which teaches us how to act as a proponent of a certain ideology and how to go beyond words when we give a specific title to a nation’s establishment. So the Green movement had this challenge in their early stages. The ostensibly democratic movement was comprised of civilians who did not have that much chance to learn the rules of living in a democratic country. Consequently, even if the Greens could have toppled the Islamic Republic in the first few weeks, it was still dubious whether or not Iran’s theocracy would be effectively replaced by a liberal democracy at all social layers.
However, at this juncture, both the millions of individuals who consider themselves Green and the leaders of this movement have proven to be well prepared for a democratic society. The discussions regarding the Greens’ behavior on Ashura day (December 27) and the tone of Mir Hossein Mousavi especially in his 17th statement support the claim that as time passed by, the Greens have proven mature in playing the game of an open society. One of the peculiarities of clashes on Ashura day was that although protesters tried to hold a huge peaceful rally like that of June 15, the government crackdown on Ashura day was so violent that as we saw in some videos, protesters found fighting back as the only solution at certain points. They set fire on dozens of basij motorbikes, took off the uniforms of the guards trapped between protesters, and threw stones at anti-riot police guards. This behavior of protesters was a bit unprecedented. Some interpreted it as a kind of bravery and some interpreted it as an equally violent act which should be denounced. Some others, like Masoud Behnoud the Iranian political journalist in exile or Agh Bahman the Iranian blogger, went further and announced the failure of the Green hope in that the Greens are now playing the same game that the government does, namely violence, and so there is not any significant difference between Greens and the Islamic Republic anymore. Whether or not the protesters’ acts on Ashura day is defendable, the very fact that Greens were so much concerned about not getting violent that in less than 48 hours so many articles were written about the incidents of that day and the related discussions are still going on between Greens on Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc. shows the difference between the values of the Green movement and those of the Islamic Republic. The Islamic Republic answered protestors’ question of “Where is my vote?” with batons, tear gases, and bullets, while the Greens answered the question whether or not protesters were violent on Ashura day by meaningful discussions based on common sense and rationality. The fact that the Greens are so much open to criticism shows the maturity of the movement and the huge number of discussions, articles, and blog posts indicates that the Greens have learnt how to build a society based on public debates and rational arguments.
Moreover, Mousavi, as the most prominent leader of the Green movement, distanced himself and his notion of leadership from that of Iran’s hardliners in his 17th statement, emphasizing on a democratic conception of leadership. Islamic Republic is based on the principle of Velayate Faghih, which gives full power to a Supreme Leader who should be a high ranking Ayatollah as well. Such an ideology is intrinsically undemocratic for the civilians are supposed to simply follow the orders of the leader. Mousavi, however, sees himself as only one member of the Green movement and declares he is as important as any other Green, and even if he gets assassinated by the Islamic Republic he will be one of the martyrs who have lost their lives in the quest for their legitimate demands. Mousavi’s statements show his notion of leadership is far more democratic than that of the Islamic Republic. He is aware of the fact that people are the true leaders of the Green movement and he only speaks out for them, instead of giving orders to them.
Thus, although the future of Iran’s Green movement in not clear, Iranian protesters have shown the government they deserve is a democratic government that respects social values such as freedom of speech and equality. If they succeed, the society will be built upon open public debates, and the future leader will be representing people’s voices instead of imposing specific doctrines on them.
