Principlist Discourse

Problem Statement: The political arena of the Islamic Republic of Iran constitutes a site of confrontation among rival discourses that seek to establish their own hegemony through the semantic articulation of fundamental concepts such as the "People," "Guardianship," "Justice," and "Law." This competition, primarily between the Reformist and Principlist currents, not only shapes policymaking trajectories and the distribution of power, but also reflects a deeper semantic struggle over political legitimacy. Nevertheless, existing studies have largely been either mono-discursive or confined to specific historical junctures, leaving a noticeable gap in comprehensive analyses of this discursive confrontation across a continuous period. Methodology: This study adopts a qualitative approach and employs Critical Discourse Analysis grounded in the discourse theory of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe. The data consist of official statements, key speeches, press materials, and documentary texts produced by the two dominant political currents during the period 1997 AD/1376 SH–2013 AD/1392 SH. These materials were selected through purposive sampling and analyzed with a focus on central signifiers and their modes of articulation. Findings: The findings indicate that the Reformist discourse, centered on signifiers such as the "People," "Law," and "Political Development," and the Principlist discourse, emphasizing "Velayat-e Faqih," "Islamic Values," and "Justice," each sought to redefine the field of meaning in their own favor. The study demonstrates that discursive competition during this period was dynamic, unstable, and highly contingent upon political and social contextual factors. Conclusion: The analysis of rival discourses during this period reveals that Iran’s political arena is characterized by an ongoing semantic confrontation in which each discourse attempts to establish hegemony by reconfiguring central signifiers and strategically mobilizing political and social contexts. This semantic struggle reflects a structural tension embedded in the relationship between republicanism and Islamism within Iran’s political system.