Revolutionary act in Islamic republic revolution of Iran

Based on the votes of Roche

Abstract

In this paper, firstly as an introduction, there has been a brief review of some of the theories of revolution, and then in the main section of the paper, "the revolutionary action" on the basis of votes of Roche has been discussed and compared with the Islamic Republic of Iran. All events that are formed between "beginnings to the end of the revolution" - in all revolutions - addressed by Roche include: initial process, separations and vocal, unity and collective emotions, symbols, extremists and moderates, parties and the masses, and finally the counter-revolution. In the paper, first the theoretical abstract of Roche has been mentioned under any of the titles and then it has been compared with contrast and similar cases in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Introduction: a glance into the theories of revolution
One of the clear examples of social change is the phenomenon of revolution. Although functionalist sociologists like Talcott Parsons look at this phenomenon as a social disorder and provide anomie theory to justify and consolidate macro-social system, most of the sociologists know the phenomenon of revolution inevitable and necessary. According to Roche "sociology has not been able to provide special theory of the revolutionary process and consistent model based on the revolutionary phenomenon yet and now the most serious version is undoubtedly the Marxian model, but this model of course did not meet all the conditions due to disadvantages of determinism (and perhaps predicting) and also it does not notice all the facts so this model cannot be considered complete and without a defect."
Sociologists have usually claimed their theories about the revolution by the study of past revolutions, and thus, it is likely that by raise of other revolutions, the previous revolutions theory is canceled, modified or completed.
From the perspective of Marxist sociology, old reason of the revolutions that have influenced human history is private ownership of the means of production and social conflicts arising from it.
Another theory of revolution is functionalism theory based on "approach to the system of values». According to this theory, the revolution is only possible when there is a mismatch between the values of society and the realities of social life. Chalmers Johnson, transformer of the theory, says in his book "Revolutionary change": social systems can often achieve a balanced formation, and therefore, they can adapt to changes which occur in their environment. Whenever a community loses its capacity to adapt to environmental changes, it will be unbalanced. The unbalanced social system itself does not lead to revolution, but it requires suitable accelerators and ruling uncompromising elite to form a revolution. Johnson counts three accelerators: (1) military weakness or irregularity in the military, (2) the revolutionaries' certainty for defeating rulers, (3) revolutionaries military operations against the armed forces of the regime."
Another group of experts seek the causes of the revolution in the status of "mass psychology". Adherents of this theory say: stability or instability of any regime ultimately depends on the state of mind and mood. James Davis says in the essay "Toward a theory of revolution»: the possibility of occurrence of a revolution is when people understand (and this is more important than experience in practice) that their social and economic privileges and opportunities have decreased. The essence of his theory is this: revolutions happen when a long period of objective economic and social development suddenly is replaced by a brief period of inversion. The sudden stop of economic growth and loss of social and economic progress can fail hopes and expectations of people and this in turn motivates the political opposition. Davis, who knows mental frustration as the major cause of revolution, writes: revolution will not occur in a society that there are constant and without holding back opportunities to meet new needs and realization of new expectations and hopes and also in a society that there is no expectation.
Chalmers Johnson and James Davis believe that the revolution is an involuntary phenomenon, but Charles Tilly in the book of "From Mobilization to Revolution" knows revolution as result of voluntary efforts of political competing actors and believes that the fulfillment of two conditions can lead to revolution: 1) the emergence of opposition force that is trying to take over the powers of government, 2) an important part of people supporting the opposing side. So revolution does not occur unless important part of society legitimizes the authority of revolutionary political force, but whether how such a revolutionary force is formed, according to Tilly is "one of the secrets of our time." Samuel Huntington in his book "Political Order in changing Societies" recognizes revolution as a side effect of modernization and believes that modernization will lead to new social classes that want to participate in the political process. The middle class more than any other class wants to participate in the political process, and this is the class that forms "the true revolutionary class" in most renewal countries. The possibility of revolution is stronger when firstly, political institutions are not able to provide new channels for new social forces to attend at policy works; and secondly, the social classes that have been banned from participating in politics are interested in taking part in the political process actively.
Another theory of theories of revolution I Theda Skocpol. In his book "States and social Revolutions" he says: the revolutionary crises occur when the government loses its ability to deal with international challenges. These challenges often arise as a result of armed conflict between rival governments. Skocpol goes back to revolutions in France, Russia and China to prove his theory and says: dictatorship government on the brink of revolution is between the pressure of domestic class structures on the one hand and international requirements on the other hand, and its focused state and army collapse and the way opens for revolutionary social change. Skocpol has purely adjusted his political interpretation of revolution after the Islamic Revolution and believes that cultural factors may also play a decisive role in the revolution and its consequences. He also has revised his belief which says that revolution has involuntary nature and believes that the beliefs and actions of man are effective in the revolution as well.

Revolutionary action in Islamic revolution of Iran

"... The revolution is a rare moment in the long history of human society. Revolution is in fact a kind of turning point that significantly divides the history of the community into two parts of before and after the revolution which are totally different with each other. Revolution, depending on what happens before and after it, is a historical event that goes beyond sudden moment place during happening "...
Revolution is sudden and severe collective rebellion that its purpose is overturn of a power or a regime and changes in given situation. Thus, the revolution is a truly historic moment that a social explosion and at the same time individual emotional state is a characteristic of it. Therefore, revolution is an event that its time can be identified."
Mentioned sentences are Roche's explanations of the revolution and the revolutionary process. Roche's words may seem exaggeration for a person who has not experienced revolution in person. Today, those in Iran that are older than 30, can recall atmosphere of the Iranian community before the revolution in 1357. Description the atmosphere with pen and expression for those who have not understood the revolution is hardly possible. Those who have understood this event acknowledge that if at that time, "all" people were like a same body and people were not thinking about anything except overthrow the ruling regime. At any price they should have reached this goal. The image of something other than this was impossible.
Since the final, inevitable, public decision for the overthrow of the Shah's regime was taken, until the goal was achieved, can be called as revolution time or as the sociologists say "historic moment, and feverish social time". The "period" is very important for sociologists of the revolution. They put this period under magnifying glass of the sociology of revolution and seek to see how it began and how it was done.
Roche in the last argument of his book (social changes, Chapter VI) has studied "revolutionary process" in two parts:
Part I: backgrounds - factors and conditions of the revolution; Part II: the revolution process.
In the second part, he has counted some cases during a discussion under the title "Revolution" that the examples can be found in almost all revolutions. They include: opening process, separations and Vocal, unity and collective emotions, symbols, extremists and moderates, parties and masses, and finally counter-revolution. In this article, we intend to compare Roche's vote in the following "revolutionary action" with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
. The initial process
"The revolution often begins with small, insignificant events. In addition, revolutionary ideas are not always obvious at the first step. In fact, in all the revolutions, the idea of revolution has been already formed in operation and minds of people, and revolutionary behavior has unconsciously been established there. Revolutionary behavior is caused by successive decisions and actions that seem irrelevant at first, and also the gradual accumulation of hatred. The events that lead to the initial revolution, or in other words, provide a spark for revolution may not be comparable with the results that this brings."
If we ask questions about the starting point of the Islamic Revolution, we can frequently answer them: to insert the article "Iran and Red and Black colonialism" signed by the pseudonym Ahmed Rashidi absolute in Etelaat newspaper dated 10/17/1356.
Ehsan Naraqy, a close aide of Shah, said: in the midst of funerals of Mostafa Khomeini, Yasser Arafat transmitted a telegram of condolence to Khomeini in Najaf. Imam answered and said: My suffering and pain will be finished when Iranian people get rid of this dictator (the king). After this, the king says: I must be open about war with the clergy especially to Mr. Khomeini. Go and study up. SAVAK prepares an article and Nasiri showed it to the king. Shah said: provide a more conventional (insulting) paper. Then, they prepared and printed paper in Etelaat news, an article in which Ayatollah Khomeini was explicitly insulted.
It seems that the beginning of the Islamic Revolution from the perspective of a sociologist who wishes to pursue "the revolutionary action", was inserting the mentioned article or Imam's answer to the telegram of condolences from Yasser Arafat which led subsequent reactions. Perhaps neither King nor Imam nor the people never imagined that this seemingly small and trivial incident led to a massive revolution and as Roche also considered "The events that cause the beginning action of a revolution or in other words, creates spark of a revolution may not be comparable with the results that this brings. "
Nevertheless, the reaction of the people to the mentioned article was the spark that launched the revolution engine or exploded perennial nodes (or rather several hundred years old nodes).