Dear Hazhir, I found your post intriguing and since your post directly relates to my area of academic interest, I also found it very insightful. I would like to add a few points: In political science, there is a different approach, very similar to that of yours that categorizes the modes of analyses into two: 1) Outcome oriented; and 2) Process oriented; This categorization became very popular after John Rawls came up with his idea of a liberal democratic state in "A Theory of Justice" (1971). He left the idea of substance to those of ideologies. Nonetheless, Rawls insisted that certain fundamental principles have to be in place to ensure that those with different ideas of arranging the society abide by so that the competition of ideas play against each other, and not violently fight against each other. Despite you have not gone at length in explaining what you... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

This is a worthy article, addressing an important issue. Some of the ideas here reminded me of, although they are not identical to, a recent article by Emadeddin Baghi (in Persian) titled ESLAHTALABI-E BAZIGARANEH, ESLAHTALABI-E TAMASHAGARANEH. (Search the archive of http://iran-emrooz.de if you can read Persian.) I think the distinction between democracy as a "process" and democracy as a "structure" is better elaborated on in Hazhir's writing. However, in both articles a question is left unanswered: In exactly what ways can individuals, as opposed to institutions, contribute to producing a more democratic environment? In other words, what does the term "acting democratically" really signify? And what are the instances of such action? Some examples would be clarifying. Another question that is left unanswered, even hardly brought up, in the public discourse among us Iranians concerns the Why of democracy. More precisely, why should people, individually or as groups, struggle... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

Follow-up as usual: First, I meant "the ideal OF democracy", not the "ideal democracy". An important difference. Second, I hope the more secular-minded readers do not jump into conculsions about the "motives" of me for making such comments! In Particular, wherever I invoke God in my comments (such as in "God bless Jalal"), I do not mean it literally, but symbolically, the same way that in Persian people say KHODA-HAFEZ (literally: May God protect you) when departing each other whether they believe in God or not. It's just a figure of speech. :-) There seem to other rather unimportant typoes in my comment above that I'm sure you can fix yourself.

Both comments and the article itself challenge the very important question of democracy, I want to look at it from a different aspect and I appreciate Hazhir’s attention to the topic, the first appealing point is the abstraction which I see in the definitions for democracy, I see the “democracy” as a method for governing a “country” (by definition based on the concept of sovereign territory, defined after France revolution 1789), which is running regarding the majority’s opinion. About what Hazhir says in the article, I do not think that we can categorize democracy, to 2 parts. Both mentioned parts are joined concepts of a unite movement, that is basically affected by history, culture and many other factors, our country Iran is not in the good shape for accepting neo-democracy because of lack of post-modern and even modern look among governors and intellectuals and people are not acquainted with... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

Thanks Saoshyant and Senior Grad for thoughtful comments. First, I acknowledge Senior Grad's point about the lack of examples and not bringing up the "Why" of democracy. I will try to write more later on the example part, and hopefully other people will chip in on the important question of "Why Democracy?". To address Saoshyant clarification questions, I should first point out that my posting had two dimensions, First, the more academic part, which was about explaining/understanding/studying democracy. There I argued that a more balanced view (less structure focus and more process focus) of democracy will help us understand the phenomenon better. Second, the practical aspect, was that a process view of democracy is enabling and empowering for individuals, and therefore for the real audience of such public discussions and this article. From my explanatory point of view, I do not think that one can dismiss the importance of... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

I just read Navid's comment and also Hazhir's detailed and eloquent reply to saoshyant's comment, but I need to read them again and think more before I can add something, if anything at all, in response to what you have brought up, especially Navid's thoughts on "West" and Jalaal... Here, I would like to add something to my own comment(s) on democracy and how Iranians are related to it. I want to start by trying to clarify a possible misunderstanding that is likely to occur due to my bad choice of words. It's about the word "reaction-ary". Unfortunately, this word has an established meaning in the political jargon and my using it could hardly be more misleading. Reactionary is normally translated to the Persian word ERTEJA'I, while by using that I had meant to mean VAKONESHI[=as a reaction, rather than an action]. What I mean by calling Iranians' approach... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

I liked the word "conviction" in saoshyant's comment and although it is not yet very clear to me at this point what the instances of "acting democraticaly" are (and I am looking forward to Hazhir's forthcoming article to see what he has in mind by "democratic processes"), it made me wonder: How could someone persuade a human agent (in particular, one of our fellow Iranians) to act democratically in a given social situation? In other terms, how could this agent be convinced that acting democratically is the "right" way to behave vis-a-vis other agents in the social unit that he is acting in? Why shouldn't he be ZERANG[=smart] instead, as Iranians happen to be most of the time, and form bonds with a few of other agents in the group that are somehow, even on purely circumstantial bases, related to him and thus pursue the well-being of this smaller... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

As a short comment, I do not agree that Iranians outside the country cannot initiate a substantial “change”. It is totally based on our look to the word “change”. I am not talking about some immediate, physical change in the country ‘s atmosphere; I am talking about the delicate changing of minds toward a more stable point so that we can judge ourselves according to our surrounding world. As Senior Grad mentioned, the key factor is “education”, and first of all educating ourselves. Broad knowledge that is needed to destroy the biases is sth which will be gained by a solid intention for learning. In this regard sharing our ideas in such forums will gradually ignite the sparks of a movement toward a self-aware and outside-aware life among the ones that can be a source of change for the place they were born in, I mean Iran.

Hereby seconded.

There is a specific term for what you call the "process view of democracy." Eastern European dissidents during the days of the Soviet Empire called it "living in truth." Some also called it "living as if." It was very powerful.

0) I prefer short and organized comments so that my comments been clarified by numbered parts.. 1) Related to the 2 suggested points of view in studying democracy , I think that attention to "process" may not be ended to build a democratic structure and it can be a critic area in case people sometimes attribute democratically in the life but don't effort to creating a democratic system ;because of their many reasons such as comfortable with thoughts or etc. I mean a trapin process view in practice. 2)As a matter in fact, there are so many persons or groups who attempt to install a democratic system or try to maintain the existing version of it, BUT they disable to achieve it in their real life or unfortunately ever think about this important matter. it can be endangered and create problems according to a long-duration angle. I believe that... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

I would like to thank all of you for providing us with this great Open Forum about Democracy. I learnt a lot and I will try to contribute to it as much as my knowledge and English language competency allow. The idea that Democracy has a moral base is theoretically convincing and undestandable. However, I think, history does not show that the exsiting so called democratic societies/governments had first developed a moral democratic ground,before creating a democratic state/system. As you know, Britian, as the birth place of Industerial Revolution, and one of the earlist parlimantry systems of the world, did not accept women poltical right and their right to vote until 1926. Also, USA did not stopped race discrimination against the black people until about 1970. Still there are many forms of social and political discriminations, violance, inequality, and anti-social, anti-moral, aniti-human right behaviours in the so called democatic... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

C'mon, N., your English is more than good enough. Welcome aboard! Since it was me who brought up the moral thing, I guess I have to make it clear what I mean by "moral". I do not necessarily use the term as one having a positive connotation. An issue, for instance, is a "moral issue", if it has to do with what we *should* do, what choice we should make, in certain given circumstances. I by no means suggested that a society must first reach moral perfection (here I'm using the term in a positive way), before it starts developing democratic institutions. What a meant was the following: democracy has deep-rooted moral prerequisites (i'm using the term in its neutral sense here), without which it will not last. I was suggesting that Iranians, elites and laymen alike, pay little attention to this aspect of democracy. Democracy is not only... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

My question was do emprical evidences support and prove the existing of a democratic morality among the democratic societies before these countries establish a democratic society? Your response is that You are not suggesting that idea. But you have again argued that democracy has deep-rooted moral prerequisites. Maybe my understanding of prerequisite is different from yours. I agree with you in that democracy is a culture and a value system, rather than a political system. But, again, the question is do western people act and behave democratically? If yes, is American foreign policy a democratic policy? Is the structural inequlities existing in capitalism compatible with democratic values? I can list a thousand examples of undemocratic practices among western people in an individual level. It is a matter of fact that democracy requires a certain kind of value system. But in reality it is a relative issue. Some societies are... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

We're not making much progress here; are we? I guess it's called a deadlock! Let me step back a little bit and start over from another angle, so hopefully I can reach you via a detour. :-) Let me use a hypothetical scenario. Your buddy, an Iranian male, comes to your place and among many other things, he shares with you his story with a girl that you happen to know very well (but he doesn't know it). You know that she has not been as happy as she used to be recently, but do not know why. Your buddy tells you, proudly, how he fooled that girl into sleeping with him over a period of time, only to let her know later that he was only playing with her and all he has said to her were a bunch of lies. Imagine also, for the sake of argument,... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

Thank you for your cogent argument and provocative writing style. I think it is not so much necessary to reach in a certian point that we all have to be agree about it, are we? In particular, when we talk about such cultural and social themes as democracy. Democracy means all voices, colors, senses, views, and all diversities and differnces are equally legitimate and have the right to be different and alive. Anway, there is another critique towards your opinion about democracy in Iran. Here I shall briefly explain it. As an anthropologist who is expert in contemporary Iranian culture and society, I do believe that Iran has in recent years structurally changed into a more democratic society. Becuse of this we should not assess the present state of Iranian society according to its past periods. Individualism in Iran has developed, the society is much more pluralistic than ever... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

N. Fazeli: I am glad I am dealing with an expert in the fascinating field of anthropology. I like your optimism (or, as you would like to have it, your realism), and I admit that it helps to see the full half of the glass sometimes rather than being cynical all the time. I agree, to a good extent, with the changes you have mentioned in the Iranian society, thanks to, among other things, relatively free press in Khatami's era. I do have my doubts, however, whether these changes have been deep-rooted and "structural", or we could expect to go back to the old modes of behavior any time, because the changes have been more of a cosmetic nature. We have seen in the past how such changes backfire at times. For example, there seems to be more tolerance towards the issue of women's public clothing for a while,... [more at the permalink of the entry above]

Follow-up: bringing up the irony and mentioning Iraq as an example at the same time may have confused some readers. My fault. True, the majority of Iraqis are Shiites too, but what I meant was, among all Islamic countries, most of them with a strong Sunni majority, Iran seems to have a better chance for adjusting itself to a democratic system, as far as I can tell. I once mentioned this idea to somebody who is more knowledgeable than I am in these matters (what are the odds?) and he said Lebonan has a fairly democratic system. Is Lebonan an Islamic country though? Hmmm.