Iran's inability to globalize is impeded by various factors such as a traditional dominant government, a need to preserve sacred tradition, and an unwillingness to conform yet hope for a new Iran can be found in the hearts and minds of the upcoming generation.
Iran’s globalized society has been impeded by several factors, all stemming from various sources: it has a somewhat well-founded distrust of Western culture, it has accepted radicalized religion as mainstream acceptance, and it has an oppressive government that squelches any sort of independent and progressive thinking. Stemming from the United States-led coup in the mid-twentieth century, Iranian hatred for Westernized (i.e. British, American, most of Western Europe) society and culture has created within its own society a close-minded way of life. Also a factor in the hindrances to globalization is the Iranian bastardization of Islam; instead of being taught in its true form as an accepting, giving, caring, equal, and loving religion, its instances of hatred and narrowness are instead focused. It is interesting to note that the government uses its influence to spread propaganda through religious channels, such as mosques and bazaars.
The challenge to change this society, while still retaining its own cultural identity, proves to be more difficult than it appears. How, then, must one change a society to be more accepting, open, and economically stable, while still retaining slivers of its culture, recently warped to meet the standards of a hateful government? The answer is this: education. One may see that the rising youthful population, who themselves never experienced a globalized Iran, wish to hold open elections, contact with other nations, and more freely dispersed information. They seem to desire a Western civilization, while the more conservative elders desire to retain the status quo. These two conflicting interests seem only to be helped as time passes; however, the proliferation of information and Western/Christian thought processes may expedite the change of Iranian culture.
Dave, While I agree that internal instability within Iran in terms of radical forms of religion and government have hindered their society's ability to globalize at a rate comparable to the more developed countries of the world (ie. United States and western European countries), a Globalized society has also exacerbated the current turmoil from a local to a global scale. Technological advancements in terms of communication and weaponry have enabled the radical Iranians to expedite the transmission of their beliefs globally through violence such as terrorism. In this respect, globalization has had an anti-climactic effect on Iran, their society circumventing the natural progress towards modernity.
Dave, you bring up the question “How, then, must one change a society to be more accepting, open, and economically stable, while still retaining slivers of its culture, recently warped to meet the standards of a hateful government?”, but is the answer as simple as education? Like you said, the youth of Iran is in fact trying to promote a democratic government and free elections through protests and strikes, but they already possess the education and awareness to provoke change. The current hinderance to achieving a new democratic society is the actual act of accomplishing such change. Mohammed Reza Heydari, Iran's former consul-general, who has applied for political refuge in Norway, is confident that the new generation is fully capable to bring about the awaited change. Heydari tells CNN reporters “he hopes the strikes, civil disobedience, and non-violent protests in his homeland will ‘break the back’ of the government and force it to listen to what the people say.” He also says “The cause (of) bringing the message, bringing different groups together, is starting a referendum to have free elections in Iran so all these groups can stand together and bring about a democratic government to meet the demands of all religious and ethnic minorities as well,” (Evans) yet to this very day, the efforts of Iranian reformists have been unsuccessful. Their non-violent approach fails to stand up to the governments’ threats of imposed physical brutality. The Iranian government is quick to put down any rise in protest in a matter of minutes, but this only seems to fuel the perseverance of the opposition groups. The government's short-term goals, which are to repress the voice of the Iranian people, may be met now but the long-term goals of the people have a better chance of succeeding in the future. As the reform movement becomes more popular and gains more support as well as power, the unchanging government is slowly losing support and stability. So ultimately, the answer to changing a society that seems to be so unwilling to conform is not education, but time. The group of reformists require time to expand and grow and then they will be able to effectively “break the back” of the government. The Iranian government is losing support in the growing spilt within society and it looks to remain true that the people are in favor to win this domestic battle for a “new” Iran. The political and religious future of a free Iran is in the hands of its rising youthful generation. -Victoria
a video on the progress of the protesters http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/02/12/rowlands.iran.los.angeles.cnn
Dave, your question of, “How, then, must one change a society to be more accepting, open, and economically stable, while still retaining slivers of its culture, recently warped to meet the standards of a hateful government?”, is not just simply answered by one factor alone. Yes, I agree that education plays a significant role in changing a society to be more economically stable and more globalized. However, the portion of your question stating, “retaining slivers of its culture”, I think would pose a problem. The Iranians would not want to change any of their culture and they would especially not be alright with solely keeping a “sliver” of it. Their culture is what makes them who they are, and while their economics and politics may need changing their culture does not. I also agree with Victoria who stated that it is time that will bring about the change in the Iranian Society. Unfortunately, in order for change to occur however, I believe that things need to get worse for the Iranian people or they will not view change as a necessity. Most of the radical changes in government came out of terrible living conditions and destitute economies. An example that comes to mind is Hitler. Germany was in shambles and the people demanded a revolution, which they were willing to allow horrible things to happen, solely for change. Until the Iranians as a whole see the need for change as dire situation, there will only be select groups advocating for change, which will not go far since they will not be the collective voice of the Iranian people. Finally, I do not think this push for a globalized society can be achieved without the presence of a charismatic leader. Going back to Hitler, although he did terrible and inexcusable things, he did appeal to the masses of Germany. If Iran wants change they need someone to step up to the plate, who is likable by the youth, the middle aged, and even some of the elders. In order to change Iran’s society they need a combination of education for males and females, a collective yearn for a new way of life, a charismatic leader, and finally time. This is not something that can or will happen overnight, it will take a long time. -Patrick
Dave, while you raise a good point that education has some pull in transforming the Iranian society, it is not necessarily the main valve through which such changes would occur. As stated in Victoria’s assessment, the step of education has already been taken, however simply being informed of a situation will not suffice in altering it. Rather, a more active approach needs to be taken. For example, Victoria also mentions the non-violent protests that continue to occur. Such movements are a stride in the right direction, however they are not enough on their own to completely alter the government. The notion of time being the deciding factor, while it always has some influence on a situation, is simply not enough to alter the course of an entire nation. An outside element is needed, not necessarily to force a change through, but rather to promote it. We, as a society that has knowledge and the means to actively provide this spark, have a sort of moral responsibility to at the very least attempt to provide such a nudge. This could be through the use of the media to disperse knowledge of the event, thereby adding an even greater influence in the Iranian government to change. While the people of Iran who have been, and continue to strive for this change have made a significant impact, it will require both the support of the rest of the nation as well as outside influence to make such a change a reality. -Jeremy
to research, rationalize and reconcile the religious, social, and political issues within Iran in relation to its ability to conform to a globalized society
Dave, While I agree that internal instability within Iran in terms of radical forms of religion and government have hindered their society's ability to globalize at a rate comparable to the more developed countries of the world (ie. United States and western European countries), a Globalized society has also exacerbated the current turmoil from a local to a global scale. Technological advancements in terms of communication and weaponry have enabled the radical Iranians to expedite the transmission of their beliefs globally through violence such as terrorism. In this respect, globalization has had an anti-climactic effect on Iran, their society circumventing the natural progress towards modernity.
ReplyDelete-Jimmy
ReplyDeleteDave, you bring up the question “How, then, must one change a society to be more accepting, open, and economically stable, while still retaining slivers of its culture, recently warped to meet the standards of a hateful government?”, but is the answer as simple as education? Like you said, the youth of Iran is in fact trying to promote a democratic government and free elections through protests and strikes, but they already possess the education and awareness to provoke change. The current hinderance to achieving a new democratic society is the actual act of accomplishing such change. Mohammed Reza Heydari, Iran's former consul-general, who has applied for political refuge in Norway, is confident that the new generation is fully capable to bring about the awaited change. Heydari tells CNN reporters “he hopes the strikes, civil disobedience, and non-violent protests in his homeland will ‘break the back’ of the government and force it to listen to what the people say.” He also says “The cause (of) bringing the message, bringing different groups together, is starting a referendum to have free elections in Iran so all these groups can stand together and bring about a democratic government to meet the demands of all religious and ethnic minorities as well,” (Evans) yet to this very day, the efforts of Iranian reformists have been unsuccessful. Their non-violent approach fails to stand up to the governments’ threats of imposed physical brutality. The Iranian government is quick to put down any rise in protest in a matter of minutes, but this only seems to fuel the perseverance of the opposition groups. The government's short-term goals, which are to repress the voice of the Iranian people, may be met now but the long-term goals of the people have a better chance of succeeding in the future. As the reform movement becomes more popular and gains more support as well as power, the unchanging government is slowly losing support and stability. So ultimately, the answer to changing a society that seems to be so unwilling to conform is not education, but time. The group of reformists require time to expand and grow and then they will be able to effectively “break the back” of the government. The Iranian government is losing support in the growing spilt within society and it looks to remain true that the people are in favor to win this domestic battle for a “new” Iran. The political and religious future of a free Iran is in the hands of its rising youthful generation.
ReplyDelete-Victoria
a video on the progress of the protesters
http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/02/12/rowlands.iran.los.angeles.cnn
Dave, your question of, “How, then, must one change a society to be more accepting, open, and economically stable, while still retaining slivers of its culture, recently warped to meet the standards of a hateful government?”, is not just simply answered by one factor alone. Yes, I agree that education plays a significant role in changing a society to be more economically stable and more globalized. However, the portion of your question stating, “retaining slivers of its culture”, I think would pose a problem. The Iranians would not want to change any of their culture and they would especially not be alright with solely keeping a “sliver” of it. Their culture is what makes them who they are, and while their economics and politics may need changing their culture does not. I also agree with Victoria who stated that it is time that will bring about the change in the Iranian Society. Unfortunately, in order for change to occur however, I believe that things need to get worse for the Iranian people or they will not view change as a necessity. Most of the radical changes in government came out of terrible living conditions and destitute economies. An example that comes to mind is Hitler. Germany was in shambles and the people demanded a revolution, which they were willing to allow horrible things to happen, solely for change. Until the Iranians as a whole see the need for change as dire situation, there will only be select groups advocating for change, which will not go far since they will not be the collective voice of the Iranian people. Finally, I do not think this push for a globalized society can be achieved without the presence of a charismatic leader. Going back to Hitler, although he did terrible and inexcusable things, he did appeal to the masses of Germany. If Iran wants change they need someone to step up to the plate, who is likable by the youth, the middle aged, and even some of the elders. In order to change Iran’s society they need a combination of education for males and females, a collective yearn for a new way of life, a charismatic leader, and finally time. This is not something that can or will happen overnight, it will take a long time.
ReplyDelete-Patrick
Dave, while you raise a good point that education has some pull in transforming the Iranian society, it is not necessarily the main valve through which such changes would occur. As stated in Victoria’s assessment, the step of education has already been taken, however simply being informed of a situation will not suffice in altering it. Rather, a more active approach needs to be taken. For example, Victoria also mentions the non-violent protests that continue to occur. Such movements are a stride in the right direction, however they are not enough on their own to completely alter the government. The notion of time being the deciding factor, while it always has some influence on a situation, is simply not enough to alter the course of an entire nation. An outside element is needed, not necessarily to force a change through, but rather to promote it. We, as a society that has knowledge and the means to actively provide this spark, have a sort of moral responsibility to at the very least attempt to provide such a nudge. This could be through the use of the media to disperse knowledge of the event, thereby adding an even greater influence in the Iranian government to change. While the people of Iran who have been, and continue to strive for this change have made a significant impact, it will require both the support of the rest of the nation as well as outside influence to make such a change a reality.
ReplyDelete-Jeremy