SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 60

BETWEEN TRADITION AND INVENTION OF TRADITION: THE PLACE OF KHOMEINI’S REGIME IN POLITICAL CULTURE OF IRAN

GELENEK VE GELENEK İCADI ARASINDA: İRAN SİYASAL KÜLTÜRÜNDE HUMEYNİ REJİMİNİN YERİ

Halil KANADIKIRIK
Pages
142–154
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result it as put forward that on the field where the secular political authority couldn’t continue its patrimonial legitimacy in the process of political modernization of Iran the religious institution solved the mentioned legitimacy crisis by means of inventing tradition.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study has been to describe the place of Iran Islamic Revolution and the regime found afterward within the political culture of Iran and Shiism.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Hereunder these have been aimed to demonstrate that the political thought of Khomeini was not a unique interpretation of political Shiism and it was a pragmatic body in the point of both the social consent and the practices of political actors.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result it as put forward that on the field where the secular political authority couldn’t continue its patrimonial legitimacy in the process of political modernization of Iran the religious institution solved the mentioned legitimacy crisis by means of inventing tradition.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this study has been to describe the place of Iran Islamic Revolution and the regime found afterward within the political culture of Iran and Shiism. For this purpose the characteristics of the relation between the political culture and Khomeini’s ideology has been revealed by bringing the social components of the revolution and the political practices of the Islamic Republic up for discussion. Hereunder these have been aimed to demonstrate that the political thought of Khomeini was not a unique interpretation of political Shiism and it was a pragmatic body in the point of both the social consent and the practices of political actors. Starting from this point of view the historical foundations of the regime have been investigated. This investigation consists of a chapter which analyzes where and how did the religious institution begin to improve its political legitimacy against the secular political authority and of another chapter which analyzes the legitimacy crisis involved by the secular political authorities of Iran in the modern age and their capacities to find solutions for that. As a result it as put forward that on the field where the secular political authority couldn’t continue its patrimonial legitimacy in the process of political modernization of Iran the religious institution solved the mentioned legitimacy crisis by means of inventing tradition.

Özet

Bu çalışmada İran İslâm Devrimi ve ardından kurulan rejimin İran’ın ve Şiîliğin siyasal kültüründeki yerininbetimlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla devrimin toplumsal bileşenleri ile İslâm Cumhuriyeti’nin siyasal pratikle ritartışmaya açılarak siyasal kültür ile Humeyni’nin ideolojisi arasındaki ilişkinin niteliği ortaya konmuştur. Buna göreHumeyni’nin siyasal düşüncesinin siyasal Şiîliğin yegâne yorumu olmadığı ve gerek toplumsal kabul gerek siyasalaktörlerin pratikleri açısından pragmatik bir yapıda olduğu gösterilmek istenmiştir. Buradan yola çıkılarak rejimintarihsel temelleri sorgulanmıştır. Bu sorgulama dinî kurumun seküler siyasal otoriteye karşı siyasal meşruiyetini nezaman ve nasıl geliştirmeye başladığının incelendiği bir bölüm ile modern çağda İran’ın seküler siyasal otoritelerininiçine düştükleri meşruiyet krizinin ve buna çözüm üretebilme kapasitelerinin incelendiği bir bölümden oluşmuştur.Sonuç olarak İran’ın siyasal modernleşme sürecinde seküler siyasal otoritenin patrimonyal meşruiyetin isürdüremediği bir zeminde dinî kurumun gelenek icat etmek suretiyle söz konusu meşruiyet krizine çözüm ürettiğiileri sürülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

KANADIKIRIK, H. (2022). BETWEEN TRADITION AND INVENTION OF TRADITION: THE PLACE OF KHOMEINI’S REGIME IN POLITICAL CULTURE OF IRAN. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 60, 142–154. https://ajindex.com/articles/492562

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Abrahamian, E. (1968). The crowd in Iranian politics 1905-1953. Past & Present, 41(1), 184-210.
  2. Abrahamian, E. (1974). Oriental despotism: The case of Qajar Iran. International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 5(1), 3-31.
  3. Abrahamian, E. (2002). Humeynizm: İslam Cumhuriyeti üzerine denemeler. (M. Toprak, Çev.). İstanbul:
  4. Metis. Abrahamian, E. (2017). Modern İran tarihi. (D. Şendil, Çev.). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
  5. Adelkhah, F. (2015). İran’da modern olmak. (İ. Yerguz, Çev.). İstanbul:
  6. Metis. Afary, J., & Anderson, K. B. (2015). Foucault ve İran devrimi: Toplumsal cinsiyet ve İslamcılığın ayartmaları. (M. Doğan, Çev.). İstanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi.
  7. Ahavi, Ş. (1990). İran’da din ve siyaset: Pehlevi devrinde ulema-devlet ilişkileri. (S. Ayaz, Çev.). İstanbul:
  8. Yöneliş. Alamdari, K. (2005). The power structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Transition from populism to clientelism, and militarization of the government. Third World Quarterly, 26(8), 1285-1301.
  9. Algar, H. (1987). Ayatallah. Encyclopedia Iranica içinde (C. 3, s. 133). New York: Encyclopaed ia Iranica Foundation. Algar, H. (1988). İslâm devriminin kökleri. (M. Ç. Demirhan, Çev.). İstanbul:
  10. İşaret. Algar, H. (2004). Merci-i taklîd. TDV İslâm ansiklopedisi içinde (C. 29, ss. 172-174). İstanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi. Arasteh, A. R. (1963). The role of intelectuals in administrative development and social change in modern Iran. International Review of Education, 9(3), 326-334.
  11. Arasteh, A. R. (1970). Man and society in Iran. Leiden: E.J.Brill. Arjomand, S. A. (1988a). The mujtahid of the age and the mulla-bashi: An intermediate stage in the institutionalization of religous authority in Shi‘ite Iran. S. A. Arjomand (Ed.), Authority and political culture in Shi‘ism içinde (ss. 80-97). Albany: State University of New York Press.
  12. Arjomand, S. A. (1988b). The turban for the crown: The Islamic revolution in Iran. New York: Oxford University Press.
  13. Ashraf, A. (1981). The roots of emerging dual class structure in nineteenth – century Iran. Iranian Studies, 14(1), 5-27.
  14. Bayat, A. (2008). Sokak siyaseti: İran’da yoksul halk hareketleri. (S. Tarlak, Çev.). Ankara:
  15. Phoenix. Behrooz, M. (2007). Nasıl yapılamadı: İran’da solun yenilgisi. (E. Özkaya, Çev.). Ankara:
  16. Epos. Cemil Said Bey. (2014). İran mektupları. (A. E. Çınar, Haz.). İstanbul:
  17. Kitabevi.
  18. Chehabi, H. E. (1990). Iranian politics and religious modernism: The liberation movement of Iran under the