Towards Full Democracy
February 4, 1999 - 0:0
Part 2 ---Although there exists a notion of freedom of speech, which the West prides itself on , I have to say that even newspapers such as The New York Times and USA Today, (massively circulated around the world) and CNN, which are supposed to be pillar of Western democracy are nothing but agents of institutional power. In this kind of democracy the people rule, in principle.
But decision-making power over central areas of life resides in private hands, with large scale effects throughout the social order. One way to resolve the tension would be to extend the democratic system to investment, the organization of work and so on. That would constitute a major social revolution, which would consummate the political revolutions of an earlier era, and realize some of the libertarian principles on which they are based.
Or the tension could be resolved by forcefully eliminating public interference with state and private power. In the advanced industrialized societies the problem is typically approached by a variety of measures to leaving them formally intact. A large part of this task is assumed by ideological institutions that channel thought and attitudes within acceptable bounds, deflecting any potential challenge to established privilege and authority before it can take form and gather strength.
No doubt, as mentioned above, our revolution has gone through a very turbulent 20 years, and has slowly ( but surely) paved itself through a democratic process . And as we approach council elections, the process of democratization has finally reached to normal everyday people. That is the people have finally got a chance to have their say on matters which directly affect their everyday life.
Of course, the current and previous post-revolutionary governments have had a great effect on this democratization process. They have also paved the way for people participation, since it was this very people who brought about the current system. As the late Ayatollah Khomeini (RA) and President Khatami have reiterated in the past those who oppose people participation are counter-revolutionaries themselves. Having examined Western press and its contents, for a number of years, and then having looked at the current state of the ever- expanding Iranian press and its actual contents, I could not help but considering this as another form of the democratization process.
First of all, the current Iranian press arena is in a process of transition from the traditional news reporting, to people participation. That is people of all preferences can have their own say, leading the way to the formation of legal political parties. Now as I mentioned above, the West actually prides itself on the freedom of speech, and there is not doubt about the availability of all kinds of useful and destructive information.
However, if we look at the real content of the information they present to their public, we instantly find out that the information is as filtered as possible. Now I doubt the American public knows much about the real sufferings of the Iraqi children, or knows much about the unrest in almost all of Africa. American business analysts however, know exactly how much oil is flowing in Iraqi pipes, and how much oil reserves are there in Nigeria. Therefore to keep the price of oil at acceptable levels the Iraqis and the Nigerians must suffer.
Now in comparison, the Iranian press of all preferences, is one of the very few which does report on the ramification of Israeli attacks on the Lebanese, while reporting of alleged corruption in the local ministries. And, as we know, information can make the real difference between democracy and dictatorship. It is actually enlightening to see different political factions have their say, using various media outlets instead of what corporations have to say, and what products or policies they have for the offering.
On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Islamic revolution of Iran signs of full democracy are beginning to show . Once the people can have their own say, and actually force the rule of the majority in any society, the society reaches a balance which cannot even be removed by the strongest force, from the inside, as well as the outside.
(Concluded)
But decision-making power over central areas of life resides in private hands, with large scale effects throughout the social order. One way to resolve the tension would be to extend the democratic system to investment, the organization of work and so on. That would constitute a major social revolution, which would consummate the political revolutions of an earlier era, and realize some of the libertarian principles on which they are based.
Or the tension could be resolved by forcefully eliminating public interference with state and private power. In the advanced industrialized societies the problem is typically approached by a variety of measures to leaving them formally intact. A large part of this task is assumed by ideological institutions that channel thought and attitudes within acceptable bounds, deflecting any potential challenge to established privilege and authority before it can take form and gather strength.
No doubt, as mentioned above, our revolution has gone through a very turbulent 20 years, and has slowly ( but surely) paved itself through a democratic process . And as we approach council elections, the process of democratization has finally reached to normal everyday people. That is the people have finally got a chance to have their say on matters which directly affect their everyday life.
Of course, the current and previous post-revolutionary governments have had a great effect on this democratization process. They have also paved the way for people participation, since it was this very people who brought about the current system. As the late Ayatollah Khomeini (RA) and President Khatami have reiterated in the past those who oppose people participation are counter-revolutionaries themselves. Having examined Western press and its contents, for a number of years, and then having looked at the current state of the ever- expanding Iranian press and its actual contents, I could not help but considering this as another form of the democratization process.
First of all, the current Iranian press arena is in a process of transition from the traditional news reporting, to people participation. That is people of all preferences can have their own say, leading the way to the formation of legal political parties. Now as I mentioned above, the West actually prides itself on the freedom of speech, and there is not doubt about the availability of all kinds of useful and destructive information.
However, if we look at the real content of the information they present to their public, we instantly find out that the information is as filtered as possible. Now I doubt the American public knows much about the real sufferings of the Iraqi children, or knows much about the unrest in almost all of Africa. American business analysts however, know exactly how much oil is flowing in Iraqi pipes, and how much oil reserves are there in Nigeria. Therefore to keep the price of oil at acceptable levels the Iraqis and the Nigerians must suffer.
Now in comparison, the Iranian press of all preferences, is one of the very few which does report on the ramification of Israeli attacks on the Lebanese, while reporting of alleged corruption in the local ministries. And, as we know, information can make the real difference between democracy and dictatorship. It is actually enlightening to see different political factions have their say, using various media outlets instead of what corporations have to say, and what products or policies they have for the offering.
On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the Islamic revolution of Iran signs of full democracy are beginning to show . Once the people can have their own say, and actually force the rule of the majority in any society, the society reaches a balance which cannot even be removed by the strongest force, from the inside, as well as the outside.
(Concluded)