Modernization, simply as the term
expresses, means getting modern and being an object or subject of modernity. As
a vague expression, it has been approached by many scholars with slightly
different understandings and definitions. Anthony Giddens in his book “The
Consequences of Modernity” suggests a start point to modernity and calls it a
European product saying,
"As a first approximation, let
us simply say the following: 'modernity' refers to modes of social life or
organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onward and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence."
The most distinct feature of modernization I guess is globalization, subsequently introducing modern world development, being exceedingly at the mercy of technology and media, radically, changing the pre-modern traditional world.
While modernization is internationally accepted and welcomed as a wave of positive changes attractively shaping the globe with its products such as industrialization, advanced technology, democratization, governmental improvements and a fresh art, music, and literature, on the contrary, it is highly criticized for delivering radical changes to traditional societies, which at first was thought worth the price. Critics insist that traditional societies were often destroyed without ever gaining the advantages modernity had promised by, amongst other things, rise in the economic level between the progressive societies whom successfully managed to deal with modernization surviving the consequences and such outdated societies failing to cope up with modernity, which we can clearly see in the bodies of the so called third world backward states existing today; some of them being Tunisia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and most of the east and north African countries. Therefor it wouldn’t be wrong to claim that the net effect of modernization for some societis was the replacement of traditional poverty by a more modern form of misery, rather than any sort of economic enhancement.
Some other challenges that modernization posed to the traditional societies was taking away the certainties and believes of individuals imparted by various traditional, especially religious, sources which governed their life style by replacing them with a new, extremely unrestricted, social system and subsequently creating an open space where transformed population suddenly found themselves in, totally unsure of what to do with. Modernization was also threatening the legitimacy bestowed upon the rulers and monarchs as well as the ruling systems backed by traditional laws and statutes in those regions. Professor Afsah also pointed towards these facts in his lectures stating Modernity “creates a sense of emptiness and the loss of certainties of past”1 and saying “Modernity brings at the same time enormously powerful tools for industrial production, scientific insight, bureaucratic innovations and cultural changes. But with these opportunities, with this power to control comes the fear of destruction of old communities, values and even individuals. And so this control that is now possible by particularly the state, breeds anxiety and resentment”2. To some fundamentalist traditional societies specially shaped and inspired by religious laws, say Islamic states, such as Afghanistan, Iran, Indonesia, Egypt etc. accepting modernity was an equivalent of “humiliating” imposition of foreign/western domination.
Coming
to Iran, before assessing and analyzing its response towards modernity, I would
like to briefly mention the challenges Iran faced since 19th century. Iran's
geopolitical importance made it a central focus of the colonial "Great
Game" between Russia and Great Britain. Ultimately, in August 1907, the
two great powers decided to carve Iran up into spheres of influence; the
agreement sealed Russian supremacy in the north and British supremacy in the
south of Iran. At the same time, a struggle was taking place within Iran's
borders, as the country was undergoing the Constitutional Revolution (1905–11).
World War I found Iran in difficult straits. Its economy was shattered, and the
country suffered from a growing power vacuum which was a great symbol of Iran’s
Failure in approaching modernity. In 1921 Reza khan demanded that the cabinet
be dissolved and that the failing Qajar shah appoint him commander of the military
and He subsequently toppled the Qajar dynasty in 1925, which had ruled Iran
since 1785. Shortly thereafter, Reza Khan assumed the position of Shah
establishing the Pahlavi Dynasty. Iran under the leadership and direct
supervision of the Shah became a nation-state, brought back from the verge of
certain disintegration and achieved a degree of progress only dreamed of a
generation before. In 1951, the Shah appointed Mossadeq as prime minister.
Mossadeq followed through on his plans to nationalize the oil industry, and the
National Iranian Oil Company was formed which was highly against the interests
of west. In 1953 the British MI-6 and the CIA undertook Operation Ajax, which
toppled Mossadeq from power.
During the 60s and 70s Iran experienced an exceptional transformation that left nothing unaffected, including Islam that became radicalized under the influence of crude Marxism-Leninism. The new Muslim radicals and high clerics among them concealed their rejection of modernity in a language of anti-imperialism and quasi-socialism. They successfully turned culture and national identity, which were equated with Islam, into a weapon against westernization. And finally the Islamic revolution of Iran takes place in 1979 putting an end to Pahlavi’s dynasty and the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran and establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Soon Iran found itself in war with Iraq, lasting for 8 years finally ending up with Iraq’s defeat which consequently favored the newly established Islamic Republic with important legitimacy and self-image.
The Iranian modernizers in their search for applicable models looked to Turkey and later Japan. Japan would seem a perfect model but since it was far away and nobody knew much about it, Turkey proved a more practical example. During the years of Reza Shah Pahlavi's ascendance (1921 - 41) Iran, wholeheartedly, pursued a program of modernization copied from Turkey. According to late 19th century’s intellects, modernization was the only way to defend Iran's independence, culture and identity and this defensive and limited view of modernization, distorted Iran's discourse of Modernity. Iranian Islamists and the role of Islamic clergy has always resulted in national backwardness by not letting secularism get into Iran and has continuously distorted the trend of modernization to an extent that Iran at the beginning of 21st century faces the same old problem: how to become a truly modern society?
1- Video Lecture 2.3, 08:53
Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
www.coursera.org
2- Video lecture 2.3, 00:53)
Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
www.coursera.org
Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
www.coursera.org
2- Video lecture 2.3, 00:53)
Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
www.coursera.org
Abdul Basit Radmanes
Saturday, 11 January 2014
Bhopal-India
