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.