Akbar Ganji Foreword by Joshua Cohen and Abbas Milani
Akbar Ganji, called by some "Iran's most famous dissident," was a commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. But, troubled by the regime's repressive nature, he became an investigative journalist in the 1990s, writing for Iran's pro-democracy newspapers. Most notably, he traced the murders of dissident intellectuals to Iran's secret service. In 2000 Ganji was arrested, sentenced to six years in prison, and banned from working as a journalist. His eighty-day hunger strike during his last year in prison mobilized the international human rights community.The Road to Democracy in Iran, Ganji's first book in English, demonstrates his lifelong commitment to human rights and democracy. A passionate call for universal human rights and the right to democracy from a Muslim perspective, it lays out the goals and means of Iran's democracy movement, why women's rights trump some interpretations of Islamic law, and how the West can help promote democracy in Iran (he strongly opposes U.S. intervention) and other Islamic countries.Throughout the book Ganji argues consistently for universal rights based on our common humanity (and he believes the world's religions support that idea). But his arguments never veer into abstraction; they are rooted deeply in the realities of life in Islamic countries, and offer a clear picture of the possibilities for and obstacles to improving human rights and promoting democracy in the Muslim world. Amazon.com book review
Endorsements
Akbar Ganji, called by some "Iran's most famous dissident," was a commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. But, troubled by the regime's repressive nature, he became an investigative journalist in the 1990s, writing for Iran's pro-democracy newspapers. Most notably, he traced the murders of dissident intellectuals to Iran's secret service. In 2000 Ganji was arrested, sentenced to six years in prison, and banned from working as a journalist. His eighty-day hunger strike during his last year in prison mobilized the international human rights community.The Road to Democracy in Iran, Ganji's first book in English, demonstrates his lifelong commitment to human rights and democracy. A passionate call for universal human rights and the right to democracy from a Muslim perspective, it lays out the goals and means of Iran's democracy movement, why women's rights trump some interpretations of Islamic law, and how the West can help promote democracy in Iran (he strongly opposes U.S. intervention) and other Islamic countries.Throughout the book Ganji argues consistently for universal rights based on our common humanity (and he believes the world's religions support that idea). But his arguments never veer into abstraction; they are rooted deeply in the realities of life in Islamic countries, and offer a clear picture of the possibilities for and obstacles to improving human rights and promoting democracy in the Muslim world. Amazon.com book review
Endorsements
"Americans first heard about Akbar Ganji during his decade as a political prisoner. It was thrilling to hear him say, 'My broken face is the true face of the Islamic Republic of Iran.' His face is healed today, and his book, The Road to Democracy in Iran, reveals a powerful and original mind. Not only is he devoted to his country, Iran; he conceives Iran as a prism for seeing the whole modern world. He advances powerful arguments for reform in Islam, but he sees that the struggle for reform is just as urgent in Christianity, in Judaism, and in every other world religion.. He understands this struggle as a permanent condition of modern life. But he argues persuasively that modern men and women have the inner strength to wage this struggle. Akbar Ganji is an exemplary 'public intellectual'. He gives new life to the promise of Martin Luther King, 'We Shall Overcome'."
--Marshall Berman, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, The City College of New York
"Akbar Ganji's exhilarating and courageous book, both readable and philosophically deep, maps out a blueprint for reform in Iran that focuses on human rights and shows how Islam can support both democracy and sex equality. If there is reason for hope in the current situation, it is because of people like Ganji and books like this."
--Martha Nussbaum, Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics, University of Chicago--Nikki R. Keddie, Professor Emerita of Middle Eastern and Iranian History, University of California, Los Angeles
"In this brief, lucid book Akbar Ganji advocates a gradual, persistent, non-violent effort of reform in Iran leading to a just, egalitarian democracy. What he so clearly describes as a program for Iran is in reality a program for all of us, for no society today lives up to the standards of global human rights that alone will bring peace to the world. This is a book we need to keep by our bedside and read once a month until we get closer to being the kind of society he describes."
--Robert N. Bellah Professor of Sociology, Emeritus, University of California, BerkeleyChanging Iran: An Interview with Akbar Ganji
Online June 9, 2008 Translated by Nader Hashemi
May 26, 2008— Iranian dissident journalist and author Akbar Ganji recently spoke with Boston Globe Ideas writer Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow about his life, his political activism, and the future of his homeland. His new book, The Road to Democracy in Iran, was published in April of this year by Boston Review Books.
May 26, 2008— Iranian dissident journalist and author Akbar Ganji recently spoke with Boston Globe Ideas writer Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow about his life, his political activism, and the future of his homeland. His new book, The Road to Democracy in Iran, was published in April of this year by Boston Review Books.
You grew up in a neighborhood in Tehran known for being home to many Islamists. What was that like?
The majority of its inhabitants were lower-income workers, but Islamic fundamentalists were not the only group in the neighborhood. Marxists often chose to locate their cells in working-class areas. These neighborhoods also produced young Muslim activists who later joined various Iranian political movements. To assume that such disadvantaged neighborhoods only produced Islamic fundamentalists is an ideological interpretation. The activist youth from my neighborhood mostly subscribe today to Islamic modernist thinking.
As a supporter of the 1979 revolution, what did you expect from it? Did it turn out differently than you thought it would?
In my view, the most important achievement of the revolution is that it turned the masses into agents of historical change and highly politicized them. The 1979 revolution demanded political independence and the end of external interference in Iran's domestic affairs. In this sense Iran has become independent, but globalization processes have made possible many new forms of foreign interference that affect Iran. For example, periodically the Iranian government is forced to open its most sensitive nuclear installations, which are hidden from its own people, to inspections by Western governments. National independence in the old sense of the term does not and cannot exist anymore.
What is the status today of the reform movement in Iran? Are you optimistic about its prospects?
The confrontation between Iran and the Unites States over nuclear power, terrorism, politics in the Middle East, and Iran's increasing influence in the region, has greatly overshadowed internal opposition activity. The specter of war, together with the regime's repressiveness, has pushed aside the struggle for democracy and human rights. Moreover, the regime in Iran uses the pretext of an "impending war" to crack down more severely on its opponents. Resistance under such circumstances is very difficult.
On May 19, 2005, you started a hunger strike in Evan Prison, where you were serving a sentence for having attended a conference in Berlin described by the government as "anti-Islamic." Why did you decide to go on a hunger strike? Do you think it was an effective tactic?
In your book, you write that intellectuals have a special responsibility to be politically engaged and struggle for human rights. What is your definition of "intellectual"€�? Why do you believe intellectuals have this particular obligation?
What would you say to those who insist that true Islam is incompatible with Western-style democracy?
Scriptures, just like any other text, are subject to human interpretation. There is no "un-interpreted" religion. From this perspective, there are three types of religious interpretations: fundamentalism, traditionalism, and modernism. Islamic fundamentalism and Islamic traditionalism, just like Jewish and Christian fundamentalism and traditionalism, conflict with democracy and human rights. But modernists have developed interpretations of Islam that are compatible with democracy, human rights, pluralism, secularization, and freedom.
One chapter in your book addresses the gender apartheid in Iran. Is sexism an issue that many male activists are concerned with? Are many women involved in the reform movement?
The principle of equality is at the core of democracy. Iranian male intellectuals are very concerned with the question of freedom for women. Women have been very active in the reform movement but they have realized that they need their own independent women's movement. Democracy is the product of a balance of power between civil society and the state. A strong civil society is one that is socially organized. The various interest and identity groups should be organized and mobilized so that society as a whole will be strong. Iranian women are taking steps in this direction and they are currently trying to organize themselves.
In your book you discuss the importance of gradually fomenting changes in attitudes and culture rather than imposing revolutionary change from above. How do you think this gradual cultural change can be accomplished?
Revolutions are very expensive with little accompanying benefit. Democracy is the product of a democratic culture. In this sense, without a critique of tradition and religion we cannot develop a democratic culture.
I understand you've been in the United States and Canada for several months. What are your impressions of North America?
Whatever humans have built so far is a combination of good and bad things, correct and incorrect, efficient and inefficient institutions. The United States is a very creative society, which has produced and trained great thinkers and it has also attracted great minds to its universities.
At the same time, the class differences in the United States are unbelievable. How can the biggest economy in the world produce so many homeless people, fail to provide health care to its citizens, and tolerate so much violence? The mass media provides very superficial analysis of existing problems and keeps people occupied with issues that do not have a connection with real problems, as if it all were some theatrical performance.
In your book you say that Islam faces a choice between following the path of the West, or becoming increasingly weak and failing to address its people's needs. Does this mean that there's no path to successful governance other than the Western model?
This is the issue: returning to the premodern era is impossible. Religion, and in this case Islam, if it wants to remain in this world, must be made relevant to the life of a modern person. Modern man will not accept the monopoly of one worldview.
Democracy is the most rational and just form of government created by humans so far. The development of human rights is an important modern human accomplishment. Accepting this fact does not mean we are becoming Westernized. Universal values have no national home. If ideals and ideas are rationally and morally defensible then they should be welcomed. The origins of these ideas are not as important as their contents.
The majority of its inhabitants were lower-income workers, but Islamic fundamentalists were not the only group in the neighborhood. Marxists often chose to locate their cells in working-class areas. These neighborhoods also produced young Muslim activists who later joined various Iranian political movements. To assume that such disadvantaged neighborhoods only produced Islamic fundamentalists is an ideological interpretation. The activist youth from my neighborhood mostly subscribe today to Islamic modernist thinking.
As a supporter of the 1979 revolution, what did you expect from it? Did it turn out differently than you thought it would?
The discourse of the 1979 Revolution was about justice, independence, and anti-imperialism. As a consequence of the Cold War and the Third World ideological thinking of this period, the United States was viewed as the source of all the social and political problems facing our society. In those days, social justice meant either the just rule of Ali, the first Shia Imam in the 7th century, or Soviet-style socialism.
The 1979 revolution did not bring about liberty, democracy, or human rights; it did not even fulfill its promise of social justice. The class gap is about the same today, if not worse. The political repression is greater than it was before the revolution. This is because the Pahlavi regime only repressed political opposition, but the Islamic Republic continues to repress the entire spectrum of cultural, social, and political activity.
In my view, the most important achievement of the revolution is that it turned the masses into agents of historical change and highly politicized them. The 1979 revolution demanded political independence and the end of external interference in Iran's domestic affairs. In this sense Iran has become independent, but globalization processes have made possible many new forms of foreign interference that affect Iran. For example, periodically the Iranian government is forced to open its most sensitive nuclear installations, which are hidden from its own people, to inspections by Western governments. National independence in the old sense of the term does not and cannot exist anymore.
What prompted you to become an investigative journalist?
Values of freedom, democracy, and human rights demand that we struggle against dictators and expose their crimes. The Islamic Republic has assassinated many dissident intellectuals both inside Iran and abroad. Exposing its acts of terror was our moral responsibility.
What is the status today of the reform movement in Iran? Are you optimistic about its prospects?
The confrontation between Iran and the Unites States over nuclear power, terrorism, politics in the Middle East, and Iran's increasing influence in the region, has greatly overshadowed internal opposition activity. The specter of war, together with the regime's repressiveness, has pushed aside the struggle for democracy and human rights. Moreover, the regime in Iran uses the pretext of an "impending war" to crack down more severely on its opponents. Resistance under such circumstances is very difficult.
In this way the government of the United States has harmed reformist forces in Iran. When President Bush says that Iranian reformists do not have a better friend than he, his words are both factually inaccurate and practically useless to the reform movement. But they provide a convenient excuse to Iran's fundamentalist rulers to paint their opponents as "American agents," and, under the pretext of fighting American intervention, proceed to crush them.
Given such circumstances, many of the reformist groups have placed their hopes on formal periodic elections in the Islamic Republic of Iran. What these reformists do not realize is that democracy and human rights will never emerge from the ballot box of the Islamic Republic. Other political activists have shifted their focus to civil society. This is the only way forward for us. Discontent is widespread, but people are not organized, and an effective leadership supported by a broad consensus does not exist at the moment.
On May 19, 2005, you started a hunger strike in Evan Prison, where you were serving a sentence for having attended a conference in Berlin described by the government as "anti-Islamic." Why did you decide to go on a hunger strike? Do you think it was an effective tactic?
A hunger strike is a good tactic in political struggle. Its success, however, depends on the circumstances. Under very harsh circumstances, a prisoner is sometimes forced to use his only weapon, his own life, in order to say "no" to an oppressive autocratic regime. He might sacrifice his life, but others will learn that the struggle continues.
The struggle for democracy, freedom, and human rights cannot be reduced to theoretical and intellectual debates. In order to achieve these ideals you have to be actively engaged in realizing them.
In your book, you write that intellectuals have a special responsibility to be politically engaged and struggle for human rights. What is your definition of "intellectual"€�? Why do you believe intellectuals have this particular obligation?
Ivory tower intellectuals occupy their time with abstract issues and are not engaged with the pain and suffering of people. What is important is reducing pain and human suffering. Public intellectuals are theoretically concerned with the question of truth, and practically they are concerned with reducing pain and human suffering. Is it possible to ignore the widespread poverty, destitution, and social injustice, and merely focus on questions of "truth" in the abstract?
What would you say to those who insist that true Islam is incompatible with Western-style democracy?
Scriptures, just like any other text, are subject to human interpretation. There is no "un-interpreted" religion. From this perspective, there are three types of religious interpretations: fundamentalism, traditionalism, and modernism. Islamic fundamentalism and Islamic traditionalism, just like Jewish and Christian fundamentalism and traditionalism, conflict with democracy and human rights. But modernists have developed interpretations of Islam that are compatible with democracy, human rights, pluralism, secularization, and freedom.
We need reconstructions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam that promote peace; religion should not be turned into a weapon of war and violence. If we suggest that Islam is inherently undemocratic, this is not going to benefit the promotion of peace and democracy around the world. Islam, to the same extent as Christianity and Judaism, opposes modernity and its logical implications and to the same degree can be reconciled with modernity.
One chapter in your book addresses the gender apartheid in Iran. Is sexism an issue that many male activists are concerned with? Are many women involved in the reform movement?
The principle of equality is at the core of democracy. Iranian male intellectuals are very concerned with the question of freedom for women. Women have been very active in the reform movement but they have realized that they need their own independent women's movement. Democracy is the product of a balance of power between civil society and the state. A strong civil society is one that is socially organized. The various interest and identity groups should be organized and mobilized so that society as a whole will be strong. Iranian women are taking steps in this direction and they are currently trying to organize themselves.
In your book you discuss the importance of gradually fomenting changes in attitudes and culture rather than imposing revolutionary change from above. How do you think this gradual cultural change can be accomplished?
Revolutions are very expensive with little accompanying benefit. Democracy is the product of a democratic culture. In this sense, without a critique of tradition and religion we cannot develop a democratic culture.
In a society such as ours, where the state rules in the name of religion, a critique of religion is tantamount to a critique of the state. During the last three decades we have witnessed important cultural and intellectual transformations, and the ideas of democracy and human rights have greatly expanded. The global spread of the idea of democracy has forced the autocratic government in Iran to call itself a religious democracy. Our culture, traditions, religion, and moral positions should be seriously critiqued and reconstructed anew.
I understand you've been in the United States and Canada for several months. What are your impressions of North America?
Whatever humans have built so far is a combination of good and bad things, correct and incorrect, efficient and inefficient institutions. The United States is a very creative society, which has produced and trained great thinkers and it has also attracted great minds to its universities.
At the same time, the class differences in the United States are unbelievable. How can the biggest economy in the world produce so many homeless people, fail to provide health care to its citizens, and tolerate so much violence? The mass media provides very superficial analysis of existing problems and keeps people occupied with issues that do not have a connection with real problems, as if it all were some theatrical performance.
In your book you say that Islam faces a choice between following the path of the West, or becoming increasingly weak and failing to address its people's needs. Does this mean that there's no path to successful governance other than the Western model?
This is the issue: returning to the premodern era is impossible. Religion, and in this case Islam, if it wants to remain in this world, must be made relevant to the life of a modern person. Modern man will not accept the monopoly of one worldview.
Democracy is the most rational and just form of government created by humans so far. The development of human rights is an important modern human accomplishment. Accepting this fact does not mean we are becoming Westernized. Universal values have no national home. If ideals and ideas are rationally and morally defensible then they should be welcomed. The origins of these ideas are not as important as their contents.
Editorial Reviews from Amazon.com
"Akbar Ganji writes with the focus of a philosopher, the punch of a journalist, and the credibility of someone who has fought and suffered for the good. His words, which have cost him dearly, are luminous and moving."
--Philip Pettit, Princeton University
"Akbar Ganji's exhilarating and courageous book, both readable and philosophically deep, maps out a blueprint for reform in Iran that focuses on human rights and shows how Islam can support both democracy and sex equality. If there is reason for hope in the current situation, it is because of people like Ganji and books like this."
--Martha Nussbaum, Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics, University of Chicago
"Akbar Ganji's small and readable book is the most intelligent and accessible program for the non-violent creation of democracy and human rights in Iran. Ganji has mastered both Western thought and Iranian cultural possibilities, and is one of the first male Iranians to see the centrality of achieving equal status and treatment for Iranian women, and to appreciate women's struggles and activities. He also shows the self-defeating nature of aggressive threats to Iran by the U.S. and calls for a new U.S. policy toward Iran that might encourage democracy and peace."
--Nikki R. Keddie, Professor Emerita of Middle Eastern and Iranian History, University of California, Los Angeles
""In this brief, lucid book Akbar Ganji advocates a gradual, persistent, non-violent effort of reform in Iran leading to a just, egalitarian democracy. What he so clearly describes as a program for Iran is in reality a program for all of us, for no society today lives up to the standards of global human rights that alone will bring peace to the world. This is a book we need to keep by our bedside and read once a month until we get closer to being the kind of society he describes."
--Robert N. Bellah Professor of Sociology, Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley
"Tending toward the philosophical more than the programmatic, Ganji’s aspirations—some idealistic, some practical—will resonate with all engaged with the human rights movement."
-- Gilbert Taylor, Booklist
No comments:
Post a Comment