 |
| Alirza Quluncu |
This text is a transcript of Alirza Quluncu's speech at the seminar "Forecasting Political Pluralism: Exploring the Role of Nationalities in Iran," organized by the Tabriz Studies Center in Stockholm in November 2016.
As indicated in the seminar program, the topic of my speech is examining the widespread assumptions, stereotypes and prejudices against ethnic movements in Iran. This is a crucial topic as these movements often work towards promoting the linguistic, ethnic, social, economic, and environmental rights and issues of their communities in the face of discursive and institutional constraints. Let us first briefly discuss the concept and function of stereotypes:A stereotype is a simplistic and exaggerated visual image that categorizes individuals based on group affiliation in the form of derogatory and exaggerated traits. Stereotypes attribute general and comprehensive characteristics to individual members of a society or specific group, thus overlooking community members' diverse personalities and capabilities. Stereotypical images represent rigid and inflexible characteristics that define a repetitive and permanent role for the targeted groups. These stereotypes also appear in the form of racial or ethnic jokes.
Here, I will discuss the function of stereotypes, prejudices, labelling, and terminology, which enable the system and defenders of the dominant discourse to shame, intimidate, ridicule, control, restrict, and ultimately suppress ethnic movements and their members at a low cost. This systematic suppression affects not only the movements but also the communities they represent, leading to a perpetuation of marginalization and oppression. The dominant discourse categorizes the members and supporters of ethnic movements based on their reactions to these stereotypes into "reasonable" or "unreasonable," "moderate" or "extremist groups," thus subjecting a significant portion of these movements to self-censorship and causing multiple schisms.
Dealing with the function of stereotypes and prejudices is vital because, aside from being wielded by opponents of ethnic and language movements, they also possess the potential to be internalized by activists within these movements or their broader community members. Stereotypes and prejudices thus become fundamental factors in normalizing and deepening existing inequalities against linguistic and ethnic minorities, making it very difficult to achieve an inclusive pluralism formula. Emphasizing inclusivity and pluralism is essential because, even in advanced Western democracies, numerous intellectuals, discourses, and policies still aspire to assimilation-based plural societies.
Here, I will refer to examples of stereotypes, prejudices, and terminologies created and common regarding Turks and their movement in Iran.
Stereotype: Inclination towards violence in ethnic movements
The dominant discourse and its media promote violence as part of the identity of ethnic movements and defenders of linguistic rights. Meanwhile, certain centralist political groups aligning with this discourse, such as the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, employ violence as their primary means to attain their objectives. There are other groups as well who do not conceal their interest in foreign intervention and resort to violence to bring about regime change. However, among the movements associated with Turkish activists in Iran, there is no armed group or faction that advocates for violent operations. Violence can be a detriment to any political or social movement. However, these defenders of the ethnic and linguistic rights of non-Persian groups in Iran are constantly compelled to explain and strive to prove that they neither intend nor engage in violence-based activities and that their civil activism inherently cannot lead to violence.
Stereotype: Ethnic movements' association with foreign countries
The dominant system and discourse are inclined to monopolize the right to engage with foreign countries and mutual cooperation with political groups and civil society organizations of those countries. Therefore, the stereotype of ethnic and linguistic rights defenders being associated with foreign countries is promoted as part of the identity and nature of these movements. This propaganda occurs while the extensive financial support from major powers to Persian-language media and the relationships between foreign countries and political groups belonging to the dominant groups are incomparable to the interactions and influence of ethnic movements by foreign or international institutions. By promoting this stereotype, the dominant discourse controls the relationships of these movements with other communities. It shapes a simplistic and immature image of these movements in the public mind, making them easily deceived and instruments of foreign powers.
This stereotype, depending on its context of use, serves not only as a means of stigmatization, delegitimization, and derogatory accusation but also as a label of the backwardness of ethnic movements. Foreign relations, whether economic, political, or cultural, based on common language or utilizing cultural affinities to enhance advocacy domestically and internationally, are standard practices in Western and Eastern countries, including Iran, and are not exclusive to national and linguistic rights defenders.
Stereotype: Reducing Movements to Ethnic and Linguistic Issues Alone
The stereotypes related to ethnic movements portray a homogeneous image of members of non-Persian communities and activists of ethnic movements within these communities, disregarding their diverse and varied gender, sexual, political, intellectual, scientific, ideological, and class identities. Civil society and media under the control of the dominant discourse overlook these individuals' experiences and capabilities and, at best, only accept them within a limited scope of their activities in ethnic and linguistic fields. However, the identities, experiences, knowledge, political insight, and concerns of a linguistic rights defender, an independence advocate, or a federalist cannot be simplified or diminished. Many of them are experts and leaders in various areas of civil society. Even in some cases, their shared language or connections with communities in regional and neighbouring countries have made them more familiar with various political, legal, and social systems, thereby allowing them to gain new insights. However, the dominant discourse, much like it portrays feminists as a group confined to gender issues and oblivious to other fundamental issues, also ridicules non-Persian ethnic movements in a similar vein.
Orientalist perspective and the stereotype of Turks not being Turks
The misrepresentation of Turks not being Turks is often perpetuated through the use of Orientalist perspectives and the engineering of identity with the help of resources provided by Western Orientalists. Turks, especially those residing in Azerbaijan, as well as Arabs, are the targets of this denial stereotype and misrepresentation. Pay attention to the terminology such as Turkish-speaking, Azeri, Azeri-speaking, or Azerbaijani in its ethnic sense. Despite the superficial differences in these terminologies, their common nature is the erasure and denial of Turkish identity. Critics of such terms are accused of ethnicism, anti-intellectualism, and being overly sensitive and reactive. Here, the function of orientalist stereotypes in self-censorship is very apparent. Why orientalist stereotypes? Because we are talking about a perspective that does not accept the identity of an ethnic group in its own terms, researchers of that ethnic group also refer to the sources of the dominant discourse. In such circumstances, researchers, historians, academics, journalists, and even Turk activists accept imposed terminologies and labels out of fear of being eliminated and accused of extremism and sacrifice the people's identification and narrative about themselves for the narrative of the dominant discourse.
Audrey Scott and Daniel Noll, in a visual travelogue of East Azerbaijan province published by BBC in April 2014, wrote that the people of the region call themselves Turks. Then, in the exact text, they referred to people's self-identification as "informal" and, in their article, labelled the ethnicity of East Azerbaijani residents as "ethnic Azerbaijani," perhaps based on an "official" identification.
The Misconception of Turks as Not Marginalized
One of the prominent human rights activists of Turkish descent received a recommendation from an international human rights organization suggesting that the image of a Turk person as a victim of oppression is not particularly believable in the Western imagination, and it is better to use terms like Azeri or Azerbaijani in their ethnic sense. This stereotype of Turks not being marginalized is further strengthened and perpetuated within Iran with seemingly positive stereotypes like "Tehran's market is dominated by Turks."
The stereotype of the unimaginability of Turks as marginalized in Iran is further compounded when their activists are labelled as pan-Turkists. On the one hand, the dominant discourse disseminates the stereotype that Turks are not marginalized across various layers of society. On the other hand, the widespread usage of the pan-Turkist label in mainstream media, universities, political forums, and the judicial system remains unchallenged. Unfortunately, this label has even permeated the literature of democracy advocates and other non-Persian groups. The famous statement "I am against pan-Iranism/Persianism, pan-Turkism, pan-Arabism, and any other pan" has been widely used, even though no region in Iran has imposed the Turkish language on non-Persians, nor has any ethnic movement related to Turks desired such a situation. In this claim, however, those who advocate for compulsory teaching of Persian for all Iranians are not considered pan-Iranist/Persianist because the dominant discourse has normalized the existing situation, even though it's unjust and oppressive. Supporters of this statement, while attempting to present an impartial image of themselves, actually become part of the dominant discourse by consenting to the continuation of the current status quo.
The dominant discourse, alongside historical narratives and references to its coercive power, also employs stereotypes to restrict the connection of non-Persian communities with their co-ethnics and language speakers abroad. For example, by promoting a combination of stereotypes and prejudices, this discourse initially dissuades those activists and intellectuals of Turkish descent who are wary of being labelled as "separatists" and stigmatized based on their cultural affiliation from engaging constructively with civil society in countries like Türkiye. To demonstrate their loyalty to their country, maintain an image of neutrality, and safeguard their position as researchers, journalists, and academics, while avoiding exclusion by the media of dominant groups and civil society spaces, they are compelled to continuously criticize Türkiye and participate in the media's negative portrayal of this country. This function of stereotypes is important for the ruling group because the relationship between the elites and defenders of Turkish ethnic and linguistic rights with the civil society of Türkiye makes the policy of language engineering and the identity of the dominant discourse difficult.
The stereotype of the unimaginability of Turks as marginalized in Iran is further compounded when their activists are labelled as pan-Turkists. On the one hand, the dominant discourse disseminates the stereotype that Turks are not marginalized across various layers of society. On the other hand, the widespread usage of the pan-Turkist label in mainstream media, universities, political forums, and the judicial system remains unchallenged. Unfortunately, this label has even permeated the literature of democracy advocates and other non-Persian groups. The famous statement "I am against pan-Iranism/Persianism, pan-Turkism, pan-Arabism, and any other pan" has been widely used, even though no region in Iran has imposed the Turkish language on non-Persians, nor has any ethnic movement related to Turks desired such a situation. In this claim, however, those who advocate for compulsory teaching of Persian for all Iranians are not considered pan-Iranist/Persianist because the dominant discourse has normalized the existing situation, even though it's unjust and oppressive. Supporters of this statement, while attempting to present an impartial image of themselves, actually become part of the dominant discourse by consenting to the continuation of the current status quo.
The dominant discourse, alongside historical narratives and references to its coercive power, also employs stereotypes to restrict the connection of non-Persian communities with their co-ethnics and language speakers abroad. For example, by promoting a combination of stereotypes and prejudices, this discourse initially dissuades those activists and intellectuals of Turkish descent who are wary of being labelled as "separatists" and stigmatized based on their cultural affiliation from engaging constructively with civil society in countries like Türkiye. To demonstrate their loyalty to their country, maintain an image of neutrality, and safeguard their position as researchers, journalists, and academics, while avoiding exclusion by the media of dominant groups and civil society spaces, they are compelled to continuously criticize Türkiye and participate in the media's negative portrayal of this country. This function of stereotypes is important for the ruling group because the relationship between the elites and defenders of Turkish ethnic and linguistic rights with the civil society of Türkiye makes the policy of language engineering and the identity of the dominant discourse difficult.
What are some ways to confront destructive stereotypes?
The first step is to strive for deconstruction and increased public awareness. Critically examining stereotypes and explaining them simply can significantly mitigate potential and actual internal conflicts, confusion, and stigmatization.
Ethnic movements in Iran find themselves compelled to engage in a defensive struggle against a broad spectrum of civil society actors, including political activists, journalists, and even human rights defenders. While these individuals may claim to have no inherent opposition to ethnic and linguistic rights, they have effectively been swayed by stereotypes and prevailing prejudices, becoming proponents of Iranian exclusivist nationalism and contributors to the dominant discourse.
The establishment of stereotypes in society against minority movements contributes to the dominant discourse, which initially presents itself as an opponent of the nationalist discourse. However, disguised as journalists, researchers, academics, and even human rights activists, it silences critical discussions and the emergence of discourses on behalf of ethnic and linguistic rights groups who call for a re-examination of the ethnic relations within the country.
Stereotypes often persist until they are actively challenged and dismantled. Take, for instance, the lack of support, news censorship, and neglect of human rights violations against minorities and their political prisoners in Iran. These issues are not solely perpetuated by individuals with racist tendencies; they are often upheld and justified within broader society through discourses of labelling, such as "separatist" or "pan-Turkists." These labels serve to rationalize and legitimize the silencing of dissenting voices, not only among the dominant group but also within some segments of the minoritized communities that have internalized these stereotypes and oppressive discourses.
Research on stereotypes and prejudices towards non-Persian communities and their movements, challenging these clichés, will help increase public awareness of their destructive effects. Only in this way will those members of civil society who do not fundamentally oppose ethnic and linguistic rights have the opportunity to hear the arguments of ethnic movements and understand them. This will largely enable a healthy dialogue between non-Persian movements and civil society inclined towards the center but critical of the dominant discourse.
Without transcending stereotypical images and existing prejudices toward non-Persian communities and their movements, fostering genuine dialogue and conversation becomes challenging. Unfortunately, this often means that a significant portion of representatives from these communities may be excluded from participating fully. Some individuals refuse to conform to the dominant discourse's imposed single image, resisting pressure to self-censor or conform to labels and accusations. Thus, creating an inclusive space for dialogue requires actively challenging and dismantling stereotypes and prejudices, allowing diverse voices to be heard and respected.
Suppose Iranian intellectuals aim to contribute to a genuinely inclusive plural society that embraces all national, ethnic, linguistic, and gender identities. In that case, they must first confront and overcome their prejudices and stereotypes against these diversities. Subsequently, they should engage in empowering ethnic-civil movements that resist suppression by representatives of the dominant discourse, who frequently seek to enforce assimilationist agendas. These movements possess the potential to advocate for and create a society where diversity is celebrated and embraced, thereby providing an opportunity for the emergence and practice of a culture of inclusion and respect for all identities.
The first step is to strive for deconstruction and increased public awareness. Critically examining stereotypes and explaining them simply can significantly mitigate potential and actual internal conflicts, confusion, and stigmatization.
Ethnic movements in Iran find themselves compelled to engage in a defensive struggle against a broad spectrum of civil society actors, including political activists, journalists, and even human rights defenders. While these individuals may claim to have no inherent opposition to ethnic and linguistic rights, they have effectively been swayed by stereotypes and prevailing prejudices, becoming proponents of Iranian exclusivist nationalism and contributors to the dominant discourse.
The establishment of stereotypes in society against minority movements contributes to the dominant discourse, which initially presents itself as an opponent of the nationalist discourse. However, disguised as journalists, researchers, academics, and even human rights activists, it silences critical discussions and the emergence of discourses on behalf of ethnic and linguistic rights groups who call for a re-examination of the ethnic relations within the country.
Stereotypes often persist until they are actively challenged and dismantled. Take, for instance, the lack of support, news censorship, and neglect of human rights violations against minorities and their political prisoners in Iran. These issues are not solely perpetuated by individuals with racist tendencies; they are often upheld and justified within broader society through discourses of labelling, such as "separatist" or "pan-Turkists." These labels serve to rationalize and legitimize the silencing of dissenting voices, not only among the dominant group but also within some segments of the minoritized communities that have internalized these stereotypes and oppressive discourses.
Research on stereotypes and prejudices towards non-Persian communities and their movements, challenging these clichés, will help increase public awareness of their destructive effects. Only in this way will those members of civil society who do not fundamentally oppose ethnic and linguistic rights have the opportunity to hear the arguments of ethnic movements and understand them. This will largely enable a healthy dialogue between non-Persian movements and civil society inclined towards the center but critical of the dominant discourse.
Without transcending stereotypical images and existing prejudices toward non-Persian communities and their movements, fostering genuine dialogue and conversation becomes challenging. Unfortunately, this often means that a significant portion of representatives from these communities may be excluded from participating fully. Some individuals refuse to conform to the dominant discourse's imposed single image, resisting pressure to self-censor or conform to labels and accusations. Thus, creating an inclusive space for dialogue requires actively challenging and dismantling stereotypes and prejudices, allowing diverse voices to be heard and respected.
Suppose Iranian intellectuals aim to contribute to a genuinely inclusive plural society that embraces all national, ethnic, linguistic, and gender identities. In that case, they must first confront and overcome their prejudices and stereotypes against these diversities. Subsequently, they should engage in empowering ethnic-civil movements that resist suppression by representatives of the dominant discourse, who frequently seek to enforce assimilationist agendas. These movements possess the potential to advocate for and create a society where diversity is celebrated and embraced, thereby providing an opportunity for the emergence and practice of a culture of inclusion and respect for all identities.