REPUBLICAN MANFESTO II

Author:Akbar GanjiPublisher:freeganji.blogspot.comPublished:June 18, 2005Type:Journal articleBoycotting the presidential election(2005) is a step toward democracyand open societyEvin Prison May 2005

Political activism and the critique of theruling system are important: Intellectualshave a moral obligation to reduce the painand suffering of human beings ([Karl]Popper, [Richard] Rorty). Dictatorships andtyrannical systems impose pain andsuffering on their people in various ways. The endeavor to rid people of the evil of authoritarian systems and to replace themwith free and democratic ones is valuablein its own right. In today's world,dictatorship has become so infamous andthe appeal of democracy so universal thateven tyrants try to present their systemsas a kind of democracy (indigenousdemocracy, religious democracy, Asiandemocracy, African democracy, people'sdemocracy).Intellectuals and the elite should notexcuse themselves from their moral duty. The intellectual elite have been injectingdisappointment and hopelessness,passivity and indifference into Iraniansociety during recent years, whereas onemust create hope and inject life andpassion and exuberance into the society.Doing this demands self-sacrifice,boldness, and intrepidity. History hasshown that giant steps have been takenonly by men who were brave, idealistic,and self-sacrificing... Yes, it is true that all problems anddilemmas are not going to be resolved bypolitics alone or solely through democracy.Neither is the ruling political system theonly, or even the biggest, problem of society, so that by changing it allproblems would be resolved. Culturalproblems have cultural solutions.Economic problems have economicsolutions. Social problems need socialsolutions. It is also clear that neither ourpeople nor our intellectuals are democrats[in the true sense of the word]. But fromnone of these correct premises can onededuce the false conclusion that politicalactivity is useless, that fighting tyranny isa waste of time, or that the endeavor toestablish a democratic system is futile. The same goes for the conclusion that,even if a democratic system were to beestablished, it could not achieve muchsince not all our problems are of a politicalnature, cultural tradition is the root causeof all our problems, and as a result onemust instead change and correct thecorrupt and incorrect aspects of ourculture.When we become disappointed andhopeless, we try to find excuses for ourpassivity. This goes so far that evenprevious struggles for freedom areregarded as those of mere dreamers.Anyone who accepts the ruling system inits totality and participates in the Iranianpresidential elections has supposedlystepped out of this world of dreams, whilethose who pursue radical goals throughnonviolent methods are just walking onclouds. So anyone who boycotts thepresidential elections is supposedly adreamer.Some are of the opinion that people arethrough with politics and no longer payany attention to the political battlesbetween those in power and theopposition inside and outside Iran. Peoplewant to live, have fun, be comfortable. They want to be left alone. They do notwant to be bothered. It is not important forthem which system or which individualsare in power.Let us suppose that this description of thesocial situation in Iran is accurate. What

conclusion are we to deduce from it? Is theduty of the intellectual, the dissident, andthe political activist to be a follower of thepeople on the street? Would such anapproach not turn them into merepopulists (those who follow theobservations, beliefs, assumptions,suspicions, illusions, and imaginings of themasses)? What argument has been putforward that says all the thoughts andactions of the populace are correct? Arenot all men full of faults? Then why are weto suppose that the masses arecompletely innocent and infallible? Theirmodes of behavior must be challengedand criticized in the same way thatpolitical systems are criticized. Not allproblems come from the political system.One must criticize and judge the people(an intellectual is also one of the people).We must not look for what people like ordislike, but must defend freedom,democracy, and justice for the sake of thepeople. In this sense, one must be anidealist instead of a populist. If populism iscondemned, as indeed it is, then the flagof political activism cannot be left in thehands of the masses who, in times of crisis, have no goal other than to destroyor take vengeance, and who think only of punishing former rulers instead of establishing and consolidating ademocratic system.If there is some rightful claim, it must becommunicated to the people. If thestruggle against authoritarianism in orderto establish an open society and ademocratic system is just, then even if allthe people of a country happen to be infavor of a tyrannical system or indifferentto its existence, a freedom-lovingdemocrat still has the right (nay, the duty)to stand against such a system, alone andby himself. The struggle for freedom isalways initiated by a few people. Otherswill eventually join them. A politicalactivist cannot give up with the excusethat the people are not politicallymotivated or do not support the fight for justice and freedom. The dissidents in thesecond half of the twentieth centuryconstituted a small minority, in allnondemocratic societies. But that smallminority by its steadfastness and braveryin the face of suffering, opened up thedifficult road to democracy.On the other hand, even if the demands of the people are the ones proclaimed here,who says that the people have chosen theright way to attain them or that they canever achieve their goals within theframework of the current system? In moretechnical language, who says that the bestunderstanding of the collective actions of human beings is the one that theythemselves have of their actions, and notthat of the observer? Is not the meaning of pragmatic rationalism the proportionalitybetween methods and means on one side,and goals and objectives on the other?We must show the people that byadopting some kinds of methods andmeans they will not be able to achievetheir goals. We must bring the people ontothe scene. We must show them thatrunning away from political struggle is notthe remedy for their despair. The publicarena is very important. Politics is a nobleendeavor and all the people should beengaged in it, when it is understood tomean the creation and distribution of political power, the critique of the rulingpower, collaboration in the public arena,and judging the ruling system and those incharge. A political activist and intellectualknows that he should not make a rashanalysis of the public arena and should notexpect tyranny to be overcome easily andin a short span of time. Democracy is aprocess that needs people who not onlyare democratic-minded themselves butcan help others become democratic-minded as well. Yes, democratic people build democracies.But history shows that democraticsystems were not the product of societies

whose members were all democrats."Tolerating the other" and "trust" arenecessary conditions for building ademocratic system. But only out of necessity and after many wars andconflicts throughout history did humanbeings learn to tolerate each other, toacknowledge cultural differences and berespectful toward them, and not to denythe humanity of others because of theirbelief systems. So we should not believethat democracy is impossible until all thepeople become democratic-minded...A democratic political culture is thenecessary condition for the establishmentand consolidation of a democratic system. The sum of fundamental values andbeliefs that give the political process itsshape and structure is known as thepolitical culture. The political cultureestablishes fundamental principles fordoing politics. It determines the commonbeliefs and visions that shape the mainfoundations of a country's political life. It isimpossible for the political culture of allthe people to be democratic, but theculture of the political elite, who push theprocess of democratization forward, mustdefinitely be democratic. A political culturebased on mutual trust, tolerance of diversity and difference, and readiness tocompromise is a precondition for a stabledemocracy. According to learned opinions,a set of accidental historical and economicchanges created such a culture in theWest, and democracy appeared upon thebasis of this culture in Western countries.Our intellectual elite agree on democracyand freedom now more than at any othertime in our history. Everybody wants ademocratic system. But the point of greater importance is that all of themshould agree to resolve political conflictsthrough democratic methods andprinciples. They should give greatersignificance to the democratic process of resolving conflicts than to the outcome of that process. Seymour Martin Lipset says:"In the democratic political culture,processes and institutions give legitimacyto their outcomes, even if the outcomesare unfavorable." It is clear, of course, thatthe process of getting rid of a tyrannicalsystem does not need to have ademocratic character or political culture.But establishing, consolidating, andstabilizing a real democracy needs aconsensus of the political elite ondemocracy. Most scholars concur thatagreement among the elite on democraticinstitutions and constitutional rules is themain condition for a stable democracy. The political elite must accept freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press. The process of creating a democraticsystem needs a program with its mainsteps laid out clearly. In our opinion, giventhe current state of affairs, the boycott of the presidential elections by the politicalelite and the people is the first necessarystep in any program that will finally leadus to a democratic system. Tyranny and LegitimacyDemocracy is a sign of the existence of astrong civil society that is based onvarious intermediary groups, fromwomen's associations and labor unions tocooperatives and trade councils. Suchgroups serve as probably the mosteffective tools for communicating socialdemands to decision makers. They canalso play an important role in explainingthe meaning of democracy to theirmembers. From the start, the theory of liberal democracy considered voluntaryassociations as essential complements toofficial representative political institutionssuch as political parties, legislatures, andelected executives. The freedom of citizens to organize in civil societyprovides a framework that allows them toexpress their diverse interests andopinions, and makes a multipartydemocracy possible. A society of active,