واکاوی رویکرد انتقادی کسروی به ناسیونالیسم باستان گرا در دوره پهلوی اول (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
شکست های متعدد از روس و انگلیس، ارتباط نابه سامان اقتصادی و سیاسی با آنها و ضعف ساختاری سلسله قاجار در مقابله با چنین مشکلاتی بسترهای فکری لازم را برای روشنفکران مهیا نمود تا به بررسی علل ضعف و عقب ماندگی ایرانیان و راه های برون رفت از آن بپردازند. از جمله عوامل مورد توجه برخی از روشنفکران پیش از مشروطه در این زمینه توجه به ناسیونالیسم باستان گرا بود. در دوران مشروطیت ناسیونالیسم بیشتر وجهه ای ضد استبدادی و ضد استعماری داشت و رویکرد باستان گرایی آن نسبت به سابق کمرنگ بود، اما با پایان گرفتن جنگ جهانی اول دوباره به آن توجه شد. با قدرت گیری پهلوی اول، ناسیونالیسم باستان گرا، به عنوان یکی از مهم ترین ایدئولوژی های ملت ساز، مورد توجه عوامل حکومتی قرار گرفت. براساس چنین گفتمانی، بر تاریخ ایران دوران باستان و برخی مؤلفه های آن از جمله نقش شاه و عرب ستیزی تأکید شد. تکوین اندیشه های کسروی در چنین زمانه ای صورت گرفت. پژوهش حاضر با روش تاریخی و با رویکرد توصیفی تحلیلی درصدد پاسخگویی به این پرسش است که کسروی به عنوان یک اندیشمند چه نگرشی به گفتمان ناسیونالیسم باستان گرا داشت؟ یافته های پژوهش نشان می دهد کسروی ضمن علاقه به تاریخ ایران باستان و تلاش برای احیای برخی سنت ها و آداب آن، با برخی از مؤلفه های افراطی باستان گرایان چون تازی ستیزی، ضدیت با اسلام، حمله اعراب را عامل عقب ماندگی ایرانیان دانستن و توجه به نژاد آریایی درافتاد و ترویج آنها را از عوامل تضعیف انسجام ملی دانست.Analyzing Kasravi's critical approach to archaic nationalism in the first Pahlavi period
The loss of national pride of the Iranians since the beginning of the Qajar era as a result of numerous defeats at the hands of Russia and England, and the chaotic consequences of economic and political relations with them, provided the necessary intellectual basis for intellectuals to find the causes of weakness. Among the factors that some pre-constitutional intellectuals focused on in this area was ancient nationalism. Although during the constitutional era, the dominant form of nationalism took on an anti-authoritarian and anti-colonial face, and its antiquarian approach became less important than before, attention to it matured again with the end of the First World War. With the rise to power of Pahlavi I, archaic nationalism became one of the main ideologies of nation-building for government officials. The development of Kasravi's ideas took place at such a time. The present study tries to answer this question by using historical method and analytical descriptive approach: what was Kasravi's attitude towards promoting the discourse of archaic nationalism as a thinker? The results of the research show that although Kasravi was interested in the history of ancient Iran, he opposed some of the extreme components of the antiquarians and considered their promotion as one of the factors weakening national unity. Introduction The formation and promotion of the discourse of archaic nationalism in Iran is a phenomenon that emerged in the cultural, social, and political spheres from the middle of the Nasrid dynasty to the end of the Pahlavi dynasty, influenced by the ideas of Western philosophers. This discourse occupied the minds of many intellectuals and politicians for several decades. It should be noted that many of the themes of archaism are not the product of the new era and that there was an Islamic era in Iran's history. In this regard, Fereydoun Adamiyat believes that the attention to antiquarianism has its roots in the history of Iran, and in a way, it became concrete with the expansion of the nationalist spirit of this era. Kasravi's ideas were developed in the age of nationalism and its various forms; however, his thoughts on nationalism and antiquarianism were his own. Based on this, antiquarian nationalism in his thoughts was not extreme and racist, contrary to the trend of the time. He believed in the unity of Iranians and the elimination of the factors of difference in the direction of the unity of Iranians.METHODOLOGY Since researchers have neglected Kasravi’s approach to the trend of archaic nationalism in his time, the present research attempts to answer the question of Kasravi’s approach in relation to the promotion of the discourse of archaic nationalism in the first Pahlavi period. Answering this question has made the necessity of conducting such research obvious.The research method is historical, with a descriptive and analytical approach, using library resources and referring to the main sources, including Peyman magazine.RESULT AND DISCUSSION The constituent elements of Iranian nationality in the discourse of the Pahlavi era did not have the anti-authoritarian and anti-colonial character of the constitutional era, and the meanings of patriotism and patriotism were also contrary to the themes of that era. The proponents of this thought were confused; on the one hand, they were admirers of ancient Iran, and on the other hand, they were against the authoritarian system; in the same way, they wanted to preserve the ancient traditions, but they were also interested in the concepts of modernism (such as democracy and political freedom).Since the development of Kasravi’s political thought was formed during the constitutional period, his view on the issue of nation-building and collective identity was based on the ideas of this period, as he believed that during the constitutional period, ethnic and religious conflicts disappeared and all Iranians were a single nation regardless of race, language and became one religion. For this reason, the trend of antiquarian nationalism viewed the Pahlavi period as a return to the pre-constitutional era and against the ideals of that period.Kasravi saw the development of extreme racism as a great danger to Iranian national unity. In his writings, he strongly supported the unity of the Easterners and warned against their common enemy, Western colonialism. He believed that the current of racism separates Iranians from their non-Aryan neighbors and the promotion of such ideas will create differences between Iranians and their neighbors, especially Muslim Arabs. According to him, colonial countries and Orientalists played an important role in promoting such ideas.CONCLUSIONS Despite his attention to and interest in the history of ancient Iran and his attempts to revive some of the traditions and customs of the ancient Iranians, even teaching the ancient Iranian language and correcting some ancient texts, Kasravi had a critical approach to the archaism of the first Pahlavi period. Kasravi opposed the ideas of the ancients about modernism (in Kasravi’s interpretation of Europeanism) and its emphasis on issues such as worshipping the king, promoting the religion of Zoroastrianism, and opposing the Arabs. He also felt that the idea of archaic nationalism lacked the values of constitutional nationalism, which was based on confronting internal tyranny and fighting foreign influence. According to Kasravi, such a movement both supported the Pahlavi dictatorship and, through its association with modernism or, in his interpretation, Europeanism, provided the means for another kind of Western influence, namely cultural domination. Kasravi saw the prevalence of archaic nationalism as the reason for the further dispersion of Iranians, the creation of hatred among Arab-speaking peoples and the intensification of enmity with Muslim neighbors. He saw the role of colonialist governments and their associated Orientalists and Iranian supporters as effective in promoting such attitudes. For this reason, he waged an all-out struggle against the various components of archaic nationalism, such as attention to the Aryan race, worship of the king, anti-Islam and Muslim Arabs, and Zoroastrianism. In this struggle, he used the science of history and arguments based on rationalism.
تبلیغات
