برای آینده

در توییتر نوشتم که «درگیر جنگ با یک مشت حرام‌لقمه بی‌شرف شده‌ام. شرح کامل ماجرا را در یک پست زمان‌دار اینجا نوشته‌ام، که اگر اتفاقی برایم افتاد، داستانم دفن نشود.» آن پست را برای انتشار در آینده زمان‌بندی کرده‌ام که به طور خودکار منتشر خواهد شد. که صد البته امیدوارم کار به چنین جاهایی نکشد.

Interviews with Global Scholars

As of late December 2017, I was the editor of the Perspective Page in a national reformist newspaper called Vaghaye Etefaghiye, roughly meaning Current Affairs. The page was dedicated to bring new ideas to the audience, especially ideas of those foreign scholars which are relevant to the Iranian context.

Here is a list of my published interviews, including names, subject  matters and relevant links. The subjects in quotation refer to the book of the author(s). The list will not be updated as the newspaper got closed today, February 26.

1. Andrew Fagan on Human Rights, December 27, 2017

2. Loretta Baldassar on International Families, January 1, 2018

3. Benjamin Smith on Drug Cartels, January 4, 2018

4. Eric Lob on Social Unrest in Iran, January 6, 2018

5. Sahan Savas Karatasli on Social Unrest and Inequality, January 7, 2018

6. Christa Brunnschweiler on Social Unrest and Global Inequality, January 8, 2018

7. Bandy Lee on "Dangerous Case of Donald Trump," January 11, 2018

8. William Darity on Racism in the US, January 14, 2018

9. Jarrod Atchison on Conspiracy Theories, January 15, 2018

10. Ben Crow on Sociology of Water, January 17, 2018

11. David Castillo and William Egginton on "Medialogies," January 18, 2018

12. Rick Perlstein on "Invisible Bridge," January 20, 2018

13. Jury Kropotov on Free Will and Neurology, January 22, 2018

14. Inderjeet Parmar on "Foundations of the American Century," January 24, 2018

15. Eric Kasper on Celebrity Politics, January 25, 2018

16. Frank Furedi on "Power of Reading," January 27, 2018

17. Suzy Killmister on Human Rights, January 28, 2018

18. Matthew Beaumont on Utopia/Dystopia, January 31, 2018

19. John Mullins on "The New Business Road Test," February 1, 2018

20. Stephen Duncombe on Utopia/Dystopia, February 3, 2018

21. Christina Lodder on Utopia/Dystopia, February 4, 2018

22. Kenneth Roemer on Utopia/Dystopia, February 5, 2018

23. Rachel Sherman on "Uneasy Street," February 6, 2018

24. Ondřej Beránek on "The Temptation of Graves in Salafi Islam," February 7, 2018

25. Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi on Iranian Revolution, February 8, 2018

26. Ali Abootalebi on Iranian Revolution, February 12, 2018

27. Gary Sick on Iranian Revolution and Iran-US Relations, February 13, 2018

28. Peter Kuznick on Trump Administration, February 17, 2018
29. Sara Saedi on "Americanized: Rebel without a Greencard," February 22, 2018
30. David Cortright on International Sanctions, February 24, 2018
31. Keith Payne on "Broken Ladder," February 25, 2018
32. John Livingston on "In The Shadows of Glories Past," February 26, 2018.

Presidential Election as a Political Action – Or not?

Abstract: in my opinion, participation in presidential elections of Iran is more like attending a popular drama rather than a genuine political action, whose functions are more social rather than political. This can help explain some of the surprising features of Iranian presidential elections.

Let’s suppose that you are using a state-of-the-art telescope, exploring the extremes of universe. And you, accidentally, come across a living, seemingly smart population of humans. You observe them for a long time, and try to make sense of what they do. No matter how much effort you put into it, you are always prone to interpreting their actions in terms of what they mean to you and people around you, on your own planet.

Back on earth, this very problem complicates intercultural comparisons. Seemingly similar acts might mean differently to people from various cultural backgrounds. And there is a huge body of anecdotes of weird, funny or embarrassing incidents caused by this problem. When making cultural judgments, one should be careful not to get deceived by this internal temptation to assume “some things are/mean similar everywhere.”

The political culture is no exception to the above miscalculation. Whenever I read papers in western media about politics in Iranian society, especially when it relates to the ordinary citizens, I can usually trace some sort of false presumptions of this kind. As a matter of fact, many forms of political activity in Middle East states are borrowed from their western counterparts, thus making them share a formative appearance. This, however, doesn't mean that people’s perceptions, motivations and post-mortem evaluations of such activities are similar in two sides of the world.

Iranian presidential elections have always puzzled external observers as much as internal ones. As far as I know, some of the important, exotic features of presidential elections in Iran include: high rates of turnout (usually over 60 percent) with unexpected results in some cases; the rule of Two Terms in Office despite dissents; popular demand for dramatic events leading up to the election (that, this time, includes confusion over possible candidates with less than two months to go before the election date); failure of pollsters in depicting the true landscape; a short-term political memory that surprises observers; limited public protests against state-sponsored barriers to political activity; and a cool political atmosphere before and after the election.

These features together make me wondering if there is a genuine political action in Iran’s presidential elections. I can assume that every four years, masses gather up for an exciting event that takes almost three months, culminating on the election date and gradually disappearing a week or two later. It can be argued that in its modern sense, pervasive election should be the last episode of an ongoing political debate among citizens to demonstrate who has garnered most of the popular support. In Iran, however, it seems that presidential elections are somehow disconnected episodes of political activity by ordinary citizens. During this highly turbulent period, one could notice popular discussions going astray: talking points range from very fundamental issues to most superficial ones, as if there is only a limited three month period every four years to review politics, just to cast it aside after the election. Considering consecutive elections, this phenomenon becomes more significant: people change sides very easily during the rest period between elections. That could hardly happen in a place where political affiliations are continually constructed over time.

In my opinion, popular participation in presidential elections of Iran is more like a ritual custom, bringing excitements of a popular drama to an event whose functions are more social rather than political. This theory could explain some of the irregularities noticed in the political behavior of Iranians, including those explained in above paragraphs.

The new Reality Drama is up again, scheduled to reach its peak on 14 June 2013. Don’t get surprised if a majority of Iranians vote for a conservative candidate this time. That wouldn’t mean they betrayed Green Movement formed after 2009 elections. They have just got past the previous episode.

P.S. This piece raises a valid question: what about massive protests after 2009 presidential elections? I will explain my view on that in another post.

I'm Back

This place has been inactive for a while. No blame game. I’m going to write here frequently from now on. This is a place to practice English writing and journalism.

Major Life Changes:

A new window opened last summer: I’m currently a PhD Candidate in Media Management, University of Tehran. It is exciting, demanding and motivating. I'm glad it happened.

Minor Life Changes:

I celebrated my 31st birthday on December 27.

That’s all for now. See you soon :)

Daddy, I got a job!

(The previous generation believes we are lazy. That’s not true, I think. Here is why.)

As a kid, I used to hear my parents wishing me a happy life. They hoped to see me grown up, educated, living a decent life, and employed. To them, a good job would be an indispensable part of the bright future one might desire to achieve. They were right, indeed.

I managed to grow up, get higher education in prestigious universities, live a life conforming to principles I find reasonable, and find a job. I’m a freelance translator and media professional, doing business with many individuals, groups and companies. This is a lovely job with a good payment.

After a while of working, I’ve got a circle of friends whose occupations and preoccupations are somehow similar to those of mine. To keep ourselves up to minute and offer best services we can deliver, we practice many things, including surfing the web, reading news here and there, spending a good time on weblogs and social networks, attending conferences and meetings, etc. Even we have our hobbies related to the job we do. Watching movies, reading novels, participating in social events which have something to do with culture and media and taking photos are some of our leisure time activities. In sum, people who belong to this circle have a lot in common in terms of what they do.

My friends and I share a similar background, as well. We are from middle class, somehow traditional families. Our fathers, now retired, had been employed in state-run companies and organizations, working a certain number of hours a month to get a somehow fixed compensation. This latter issue plays a significant role in their definition of work and their perception of proper job.

Let’s recall their jobs. Their working hours were fixed, 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. in the case of my father who worked for Iranian Telecommunication Company. They had to carry out some predefined tasks which were determined by the boss. In other words, they were paid for doing what they were ordered to do. They never had the chance to run a business, to get to know the dynamics and forces of the market, to take risks.

And they had a permanent and almost fixed source of income which was risk-free and payable in the end of each and every month. In fact, the state-run economy of Iran in last decades made many people swear by almost risk-free status of employment in public companies. To them, the sense of security brought about by this type of working was very desirable, very true.

And they used to separate work from hobbies, job from the life. To them, whatever tasks which could directly lead to an income would be considered job, and other things were nothing but hobbies and leisure time activities. In that model of public economy, when the employee needed to learn a new method or technology, he/she was paid by the boss to do so. Hence, “taking time and even paying some money to learn something new which might probably lead to an income” could be just a secondary occupation, not the primary one.

However, above characteristics may not apply to doing business in free market. And in the case of what my friends and I do, none of them actually applies to our career.

Such differences are not problematic per se. The problem arises when the past generation judges us upon his preferred standards. Our fathers never try to understand that to work doesn’t necessarily mean going to office every morning. (In fact, I can stay in my own room and work and make a nice income.) To our fathers, taking working time to surf the web or participating in social events is a waste of time, while to us, i.e. idea-sellers of the information age, this is an investment and real work. To them, watching movies is a leisure time work, while we consider it a work-related practice.

Given above differences, my father believes that I’m not doing my best, that I’m lazy, that I’ve not yet found a real job. Sometimes I wanna yell, “Daddy, I got a job, believe me!”