Shahrvand 1261 — Thursday, December 24, 2009
 |
| Dr. Alireza Asgharzadeh |
This is a text of a speech by Dr. Alireza Asgharzadeh, a sociology professor at York University, discussing the Autonomous National Democratic Movement of Azerbaijan (1945-1946) and its goals for linguistic, cultural, social, political, and economic rights. He connects this movement to the 2009 Green Movement in Iran, highlighting the lessons that center-based movements can learn from the struggles of marginalized groups to move beyond a one-size-fits-all vision of democracy and human rights towards a more pluralistic approach that embraces diversity and inclusion.
First, I would like to congratulate everyone on the 64th anniversary of the 21 Azer popular movement and thank the Azerbaijan Language and Culture Foundation of Iran–Canada for organizing this event. I will present my speech in four sections:
The Grand Narrative of Nationalism (Persian/Iranian Nationalism)
The Grand Narrative of Religious Fundamentalism (Shi'ism and Khomeinism)
Azerbaijan’s Alternative: The 21 Azar Movement
Azerbaijan and the Green Movement
In examining the modern history of Iran, the ideology of Persian/Iranian nationalism can be identified as the first grand narrative that emerged from the Constitutional Revolution, became the official state ideology during the Pahlavi era, and has continued to coexist alongside the second dominant grand narrative, religious fundamentalism, during the Islamic Republic.
Since its inception, Iranian nationalism has equated Iran with Persia, defining being Iranian as synonymous with being Persian, and has framed Iran's identity based on Persian identity, in opposition to non-Persian identities, particularly denying the identities of Turks and Arabs. At the same time, this exclusionary nationalism has skillfully avoided mentioning its own name (Persian) and has deceitfully hidden behind the mask of "Iran." Since its institutionalization in 1925, this oppressive nationalism has committed the most blatant racist aggressions against non-Persian peoples under labels such as the superior Aryan race, the preservation of the official status of the Persian language, and the defense of territorial integrity. The violent suppression of the progressive 21 Azar movement is a prominent example of such aggressions.
In a multi-ethnic society like Iran, concepts such as the Aryan race, Iranian nation, official language, and national identity are not simple words. As Michel Foucault reminds us, they function as builders of power relations and tools of exclusion and oppression. Over the past eighty years, these tools of oppression have been consistently produced and reproduced under the guise of ancient, historical, and patriotic teachings, to the point where their exclusionary meanings and roles have been normalized and accepted by the public as "natural" and "normal." The normalization of racist concepts like "Aryan racial superiority" and the "degradation of Turks, Arabs, and Semitic peoples" has led to the institutionalization of racism in Iranian society, so much so that state institutions like the education system, schools, universities, and mass media have become natural agents of racism in Iranian society. Additionally, racist concepts and expressions have penetrated informal literature, such as poetry collections, stories, novels, proverbs, and even humor and jokes, acting as visible and invisible levers of a racist system in the alienation and degradation of non-Persian peoples. For instance, many of our compatriots are still unaware that the racist jokes that spread like wildfire among Iranians are considered hate literature in progressive cultures, and their propagators can be prosecuted through legal channels.
It is no coincidence that today, intellectuals from oppressed cultures devote much of their energy to deconstructing and dismantling these racist concepts and manifestations of hatred and contempt. The irony is that some accuse these deconstructive thinkers of "ethnocentrism," unaware that if they are "ethnocentric," then the ones who are more "tribal" and "ethnocentric" are those who have accepted the linguistic and cultural dominance of one ethnicity as divine revelation, believing that by fully embracing the supremacy of one language and culture, they have reached a so-called "transnational" and "trans-ethnic" stage! All it takes is for these individuals to glance at the basics of schools of thought like post-structuralism, post-colonialism, and postmodernism, and they would learn that there is no such thing as being beyond society, beyond territory, beyond culture, or beyond language. What exists is the diversity and plurality of cultures, languages, and human beings. In fact, recognizing differences and diversity is what centralist intellectuals still fail to comprehend. The bloody suppression of national governments in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan clearly shows that it is under the shadow of torture, execution, and genocide that a language and culture dares to call itself trans-ethnic, transnational, and transcendent. This is because culture and language always operate within a social-territorial context and cannot transcend that context. Intellectuals from oppressed cultures are demystifying concepts such as "the Iranian nation," "Iranian culture," "the Aryan race," "official language," and others, stripping them of their sanctity. This is a postmodern and post-structuralist act. Those who defend the dominant language and culture while accusing these activists of ethnocentrism and calling themselves "transnational" are, in fact, exposing their own foolishness. Unquestioning support for the hegemony of one ethnicity has never been defined as "transnational" in any dictionary.
In contrast to the grand narratives of Persian nationalism and Islamic fundamentalism, the people of Azerbaijan have a 64-year-old progressive discourse rich with valuable practical experiences and theoretical insights: the 21 Azar Movement. The practical experiences of this movement include the formation of a national government, anti-racist struggles, official recognition of oppressed languages (in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan), education in one's mother tongue, equal rights for women and men, land reforms, the emancipation of peasants, and hundreds of progressive economic, social, and cultural programs. From a theoretical perspective, the 21 Azar Movement was the first in modern Iranian history to successfully replace the racist Aryan theory with a progressive pluralistic discourse. With access to such a valuable democratic legacy, the people of Azerbaijan are not forced to accept the exclusionary nationalist definitions of human rights and democracy proposed by centralist theorists. On the contrary, it is these centralist movements and intellectuals who must familiarize themselves with the contemporary meanings of concepts like democracy, pluralism, and human rights.
The Green Movement, which has emerged with the discourse of "democracy" and "human rights," has paid attention to feminism and the movement for women's equality, but it has yet to reach the stage of linking its struggles with the struggles of various ethnic groups, or for those groups to join the movement. However, that day will come, because if the fight for human rights in Iran is to be successful, it cannot be achieved by sidelining the rights of ethnic groups, including Kurds, Arabs, Turks, Turkmens, Persians, and Baloch, as well as the rights of workers, students, and LGBTQ individuals. It is essential for the leaders and theorists of this movement to have a proper understanding of human rights, especially in a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi-cultural society.
In this context, we Azerbaijanis, along with other oppressed nationalities, must also make full use of the opportunities that the modern world offers us to raise awareness about the issues facing our people. We need to inform the global community that there are diverse interpretations of the history, culture, anthropology, and sociology of Iran and its peoples, and it is the ethical responsibility of Western academics and researchers to reflect this diversity of voices and perspectives in their works. Over the past eighty years, the nationalism of the ruling nation has used its extensive and institutionalized resources to prevent the spread of different perspectives, experiences, and voices in the linguistic, cultural, and socio-political spheres. For example, in the case of the 21 Azar Movement, the dominant narrative has been exclusively that of Persian/Iranian nationalism. In essence, those who crushed this movement in blood and fire, after burning books and killing thousands of people, confidently sat down and wrote its history. What has been absent from the dominant narrative are the experiences of the oppressed people of Azerbaijan and the voices of the victims of this atrocity, which have never found their way into the official narrative.
The intellectuals of the dominant nationalism are still clinging desperately to the flawed historiographical and narrative-building methods of the Pahlavi era, trying at all costs to maintain their monopoly over information in the fields of Iranian history, politics, and society. They are oblivious to the fact that the world has changed, and in the age of computers and the internet, monopolizing information is impossible. For example, as soon as a distorted translation of Professor Jamil Hasanli's valuable work on 21 Azar is published in Iran, the disgrace of this act immediately resonates across the globe, shaming the deceitful claimants. Thus, accurate information dissemination must continue and be strengthened. We must show the world that Iran is a multi-ethnic society. Therefore, the analysis of events and historical movements like the 21 Azar Movement must reflect the inherently multi-voiced and diverse nature of Iranian society. Ethically, the perspectives and voices of the people of Azerbaijan, especially the experiences of the many victims of the Shah's army during the events of 21 Azar, should be given special priority. This is precisely what is known in academic circles as the principle of integrity and ethics in research methodology.
Link to the original text: https://shahrvand.com/archives/4132