Discourse of Traditional Authoritarianism and Political Economy of Torture

دانشنامه حقوق اقتصادی

Article 5, Volume 25, Issue 14, October 2018, Pages 89-120   

Document Type: Scientific research

DOI: 10.22067/le.v25i13.64722

Author

mohamad javad sadati^*

ferdowsi university of mashhad

Abstract

Introduction
System of penal reactions in Iran for a long period has deep relation with patterns of torture. These patterns were the same as the terrible tragedy of division of pain along the body of the offender. Cannibalism, division of the body of the criminal into four parts and burning body of offenders were examples of torture.
Literature Review
From the birth of political power in Iran until the collapse of Qajar government, structure of power in Iran was in monopoly of discourse of traditional authoritarianism. For this several thousand years, central square of the cities were domination of imposing torture( supplice ). In Iran there are no precise studies about the reason of birth and continuing of these wonderful tragedies of torture. In contrast to our common idea, tragedies of torture in history of Iran were not tools for protecting justice. Few historical studies that have been done on the history of punishment in Iran, generally claims that torture was harsh shape of imposing justice. But this image from functions of torture is not true. In contrast, tragedy of torture that power creates in the eyes of audience was sample of rational calculating of power for protecting itself. The birth of torture must be studied in the paradigm of political economy of punishment. Imposing punishment is not meaningless imposing of pain. But is calculating behavior for protecting power. This is power that creates the political economy of punishment.
Results and Discussion
To understand the reasons of birth and continue the tragedy of torture in Iran, we must study the process of birth of discourse of Traditional authoritarianism in Iran. Because, it seems that the most important reason of the birth of torture in Iran is the formation of authoritarian states and society of under authority. It means that, authoritarian states and society of under authority have deep relation with each other. This is society and collective conscience that create authoritarian states. This is society that puts itself under authority of authoritarian states and because of it, discourse of traditional authoritarianism is created. This is the main principle of formation of power in Iran before Islamic revolution. In fact, in this long historical period collective conscious with the purpose of gaining security put itself absolutely under authority of states. During the time this equation( the equation between putting itself under absolute authority in order to gain security ) creates the habit of following the power. In fact, collective conscious, itself creates authoritarian power in Iran.
How does the birth of authoritarian state lead to the birth and continuing of torture? It seems that there is deep relation between the two phenomena. When the collective conscious has the habit of absolute following of power, no factor restricts power. When society accepts that in exchange for security it has absolute following of power, the state impose itself without any restriction. Because there is no factor that can restricts its power. Tragedy of torture births from this absolute following and from this process of imposing power without restriction.
Methodology
The genealogy of power discourses can shows us that there is deep relation between punishment and power. In fact, this essay has genealogical manner.
Conclusion
The tragedy of torture that discourse of traditional authoritarianism creates, produces special patterns of penalizing and criminalizing. First we have to talk about its special patterns of criminalizing. In the scope of discourse of traditional authoritarianism there is deep relation between crime and sin. In fact, there is a deep relation between punishment and religion. Because the power is the agents of God, thus, committing crime against power means committing sin against God. It is clear that committing sin against God must be punishes with a harsh reaction. Tragedy of torture births from this system of imaging from nature of crime. Also, in this discourse of power the king has the absolute power to criminalizing. In fact, criminalizing of behaviors depends on his discretion and not based on the process of rational and bureaucratic legislating.
Patterns of penalizing in the scope of discourse of traditional authoritarianism are based on the above imaging from crime. When the crime is in conflict with the will of God, punishment of this conflict will be harsh. Tragedy of torture is based on this imaging from crime. Torture is a reflection of God power against crime and criminal. Thus, greater torture means greater power. In the opposition between God and the offender the violence of punishment must be greater than the violence of crime. Otherwise, God is defeated in its conflict with the offender. Tragedy of torture is based on the distribution of pain and not fast death. Revenge of power, as Gods agent, is long and harsh. In addition to destroying the crime, torture sends a harsh massage to society. Based on this message, conflicting with the will of power, that is Gods agent, will be punished with the same reaction. Tragedy of torture was the public display of Gods power in front of society. The effectiveness of this display depends on greater harsh scaring of society. In fact, society must be scared. Continuing of discourse of traditional authoritarianism is based on this system of imaging from crime and this tragedy of distribution of pain.

Keywords

traditional authoritarianism; divine charisma; political theory of religion; political economy of punishment; fatalist identities

References

Book

[1] Abrahamian, Yervand. (2016). History of Modern Iran, Translated by Mohammad Ebrahim Fattahi, Twelve edition, Ney Publication

[2] Eslami, Rohallah. (2016). Iranshahar Governmentality(Countinuation Power Technology in Iran), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Publication

[3] Amin, Seyyed Hassan. (2004). History of Iran Law, Publication of Encyclopedia of Iranian

[4] Bashiriyeh, Hossein. (2016). Introduction to the Political Sociology of Iran(Islamic Republic period), seventh edition, Negahe Moaaser Publication

[5] Bashiriyeh, Hossein. (2017). Social basis of Iran Revolution, Translated by Ali Ardestani, Forth Edition, Negahe Moaser Publication

[6] Beyhaghi, A booalfazl. History of Beyhaghi, Under the Supervision of Ali Akbar Fayyaz, Second Edition, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Publication

[7] Pollack, Jakob, Pollack Travelogue, Translated by Keykavoos Jahandari, Kharazmi Publication

[8] Khazani, Yaaghoob. (2016). Process of Structuring of Prison, Agah Publication

[9] Nezam Almolk Toosi. (1969). Siyar Almolook, Tarjome & Nashr Publication

[10] Rabiyi, Naser & Rahro Khajeh, Ahmad. (2012). History of Prison in Qajar & Pahlavi period, Qoqnoos Publication

[11] Reza Qoli, Ali. (2016). Sociology of Autocracy, Twenty-second published, Ney Publication

[12] Janoos, Jany. (2010). Criminal Justice in the Sasani period, Translated by Rahim Foroghi nik, Encyclopedia of Criminal science

[13] Lady Sheel. (1990). Lady Sheel Memories, Translated by Hassan Abootorabian, Noo Pablication

[14] Foucault, Michel. (2014). Discipline and Punish(Birthday of Prison), Translated by Nikoo Sarkhosh & Afshin Jahandideh, Ney Publication

[15] Katoozian, Mohammad Ali Homayoon. (2017). Iran, Short term Society, Seventh Edition, Ney Nashr

[16] Katoozian, Mohammad Ali Homayoon. (2014). Government & Society in Iran, Translated by Hassan Afshar, Seventh Edition, Markaz Publication

[17] Kristen Sen. (2012). Iran in Sasani period, Translated by Rashid Yasami, Behzad Publication

[18] Xenophon. (1972). Cyrus Nameh, Translated by Reza Mashayekhi, Tarjome & Nashre Ketab Publication

[19] Nameye Tansar be Goshnasb(1974). under the Observation of Mojtaba Minavi, Second Edition, Sherkate Sahamiye Entesharate Kharazmi

[20] Will Durant. (1993). History of Civilization(The East, Civilization Cables), Third edition, Sherkate Entesharate elmi & Farhangi

Article

[21] Eslami, Rohh allah & Bahrami, Vahid. (2016), Political Phenomenology of Farah Yazidi in Avesta & Shahname, Journal of Political Science, Tenth year, p7-40

[22] Alvandi, Reza. (2017). Research about Trail and Punishment in Safavi Period, New History Quarterly, Seventh year, No. 18, p. 31-60

[23] Javan Jaafari, Abd alreza & Esfandiari, Mohammad Saleh. (2017). Function of Prison in Theories of Sociology of Punishment, journal of Criminal Law Doctrine, NO.12, P. 137-168

[24] Javan Jaafari, Abd alreza & Sadati Seyyed Mohammad Javad. (2016). Concept of Power in the Sociology of Punishment, Quartery of Research in Criminal law, No.11, p.9-38

[25] Farajiha, Mohammad, Roostayi, Mehrangiz. (2012). Comparative Aprroach about relation between value of Work Force and Criminal Justice System, Journal of Comparative Law, No. 4, p. 97-116

[26] Mohammadi, Zekr allah & Bitarafan, Mohammad. (2013). Transmission of idea of Farah Izadi from Ancient Iran to Islamic Iran, Journal of Speech of History, No. 16. P. 3-36

[27] Bashir,Sahzad. (2006). Shah Ismail and the Qazelbash: Cannibalism in the religious history of early safavid Iran, University of Chicago

[28] Rusch, George & Kirchheimer,Otto. (2009). Punishment and Social Structure, with a new introduction by Dario Melossi, fifth printing, transection Publisher

[29] Simon, Jonathan. (2007). Governing Through Crime, Oxford university press