گفتمان سکولاریسم و لاییسیته نزد جبهه ملی چهارم (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
سکولاریسم و لاییسیته دو مفهوم در علوم سیاسی هستند که معمولاً به جای یکدیگر به کار می روند. اما این دو مفهوم به رغم شباهت هایشان، دارای وجوه افتراق بسیاری هستند. سکولاریسم نوعی جهان بینی فلسفی ناظر بر مادی نگریستن و تبیین این جهانی امور و پدیده های طبیعی، سیاسی و اجتماعی است که البته خود به شاخه هایی تقسیم می گردد، ولی لاییسیته یک نوع حکومت است که در آن نهاد دین و دولت از یکدیگر تفکیک می شوند و دولت در مسائل مربوط به مذهب و امور اعتقادی بی طرف است. با توجه به این امر، مقاله حاضر به منظور فهم نسبت جبهه ملی چهارم با این دو گفتمان، به تحلیل و تفسیر مواضع این جریان سیاسی می پردازد تا بدین طریق، راهی به تبیین چگونگی همراهی آن با جریان روحانی مذهبی در آستانه انقلاب اسلامی بیاید و به این سؤال پاسخ دهد که چرا جبهه ملی به رغم مشی سکولار و لاییسیته اش، به برخی از مؤلفه های دین گرایانه جمهوری اسلامی تن داد. نتایج مقاله نشان می دهند جبهه ملی چهارم همانند اسلاف خود، یعنی جبهه های موسوم به اول تا سوم، قرابتی با گفتمان سکولاریسم نداشت و به رغم استثناهایی، در مجموع به لاییسیته پایبندی کلی داشت. این جریان چه پیش و چه پس از انقلاب، به رغم اتکا به مذهب در تحلیل مسائل سیاسی و اجتماعی، با پیوند مستقیم نهاد دین و دولت یا همان حکومت روحانیون مخالف بود. با این حال، همین نزدیکی حداقلی به مذهب از یک سو و عدم پافشاری رهبر مذهبی جنبش بر حکومت روحانیون در مقطع انقلاب از سوی دیگر، زمینه همکاری دو جریان را در آن عصر فراهم کرد.Discourses of Secularism and Laicity according to the Fourth National Front
Secularism and laicity are two concepts in political science that are usually used interchangeably. However, despite their similarities, these two have many differences. Secularism is a philosophical worldview that looks at the world and explains natural, political, and social affairs and phenomena, which of course is divided into branches. Laicity is a type of government in which the institution of religion and the institution of the state are separated from each other and the government is neutral in matters related to religion and belief. Considering this, the article aims to analyze and interpret the positions of the Fourth National Front to find the relationship between this political trend and these two discourses, and to explain how it accompanies the spiritual-religious trend on the eve of the Islamic Revolution. In addition, It seeks to answer the question of why the National Front, despite its secular and laicity policy, gave in to some of the religious components of the Islamic Republic. Introduction The National Front was a movement with the ideas of freedom and independence, which was established in the conflict of events that led to the nationalization of the oil industry, and at several times appeared in the political scene of Iran with the unofficial titles of the Second, Third and Fourth National Front, until the time of the Islamic Revolution. This political group often tried to keep its distance from religious movements in its struggles; they did not cooperate with Fadayiane Eslam and Nehzat Azadi (a religious branch of nationalists) and did not support the uprising of clergy in 1963. In other words, they followed an idea that was called by titles such as secularism or laicity. However, since the middle of 1979, there have been signs of a change in the approach of the National Front, the most obvious of which is the official declaration of unity with Ayatollah Khomeini, the religious and spiritual leader of the revolutionary movement, in Paris, during the three-point declaration by Karim Sanjabi, the leader of the National Front on November 5th, 1979. Materials and methods: In the current research, an attempt has been made to answer the questions by using the method of discourse analysis and examining the components of the two discourses of secularism and secularism in the expression and writing of the Fourth National Front.Results and discussion: According to the components governing its discourse, the Fourth National Front has had no communication with secularism. Both before and after the revolution, they have repeatedly used transcendental explanations to explain social-politics affairs. However, despite some contradictions, in most cases, they demand the non-interference of the clergy in the affairs of the governments and the neutrality of the religious institution in political affairs.Two important factors brought closer the National Front and Ayatollah Khomeini and other revolutionary clerics. First of all, the National Front’s distance from secularism and interest in religious analysis of the events brought them one step to Ayatollah Khomeini’s discourse. On the other hand in the statements of the religious leader of the revolution in the pre-revolution period, there was less talk about the details of the Islamic government and the role of clerics in the future of Iran. Conclusion: The results of the article show that the Fourth National Front, like its predecessors, has no affinity with the discourse of secularism. However, despite some exceptions, it has generally adhered to laicity. Both before and after the revolution, despite the reliance on religion in the analysis of social and political issues, this trend has been against the direct link between the institution of religion and the state, or the government of clerics and religious leaders. Despite this, due to this minimal closeness to religion on the one hand and the non-insistence of the religious leader of the movement on the rule of the clerics during the revolution on the other hand, the cooperation between the two currents was provided in that era.
تبلیغات
