Mohammad Farrokhi Yazdi; Life and political activity from the constitution to Reza Shah

poetry, press and parliament; Farrokhi Yazdi paid for his freedom in all these three strongholds and finally got to Shahrbani prison from exile and censorship. A review of the end of a poet who considered the authority of the state to be conditioned by the restraint of power.

According to ambassador Arjan; Mohammad Farrokhi Yazdi is one of the figures whose literary life and political work were connected. He did not keep the poem only in the form of metaphor. His poems were published in newspapers, his writings got into conflict with governments, and his opposition to the restriction of political freedoms led him from Yazd prison to Tehran press, the National Assembly and finally to Shahrbani prison. His death in Mehr 1318 during the reign of Reza Shah is still a matter of debate.

Farrokhi worked in a period when Iran was faced with this question after the constitutional revolution: how to have a strong government without parliament, law, press and people's rights being under the shadow of the executive power. He answered this question from the position of defending political freedoms, even when a part of the society and elites saw the concentration of power as a way to end insecurity.

From a worker in Yazd to entering politics

Mohammad Farrokhi Yazdi was born in 1268 in a family of Yazd farmers. Living in a low-income environment made him familiar with the difficulty of livelihood and social inequality since childhood. As a child, he used to do things like rowing and working in a bakery to earn a living. These experiences were later reflected in his poetry. The suffering of workers and peasants, the poverty of the people and the distance between the subordinates and those in power became the main themes of his poetry.

About his education, sources say that he was familiar with Persian and the basics of Arabic. He also studied for a while in a school affiliated with the British Hospital in Yazd. In the famous story, he was fired for writing a critical poem about school principals and teachers. This account, even if it differs in details, is consistent with the image that was formed of him later: someone who did not prioritize the considerations of position and livelihood over the expression of protest.

Farrokhi was interested in poetry since he was a teenager and he got acquainted with the principles of poetry and literary techniques from Shaukat Yazdi. What distinguished his poetry was the connection of classical Persian language with current issues. He kept the forms of ghazal and quatrain, but put political freedom, justice, tyranny and foreign influence in their center.

This link was formed in a situation where the constitutional revolution introduced the concepts of the constitution, parliament, responsibility of the government and the rights of the nation into the public space. Farrokhi joined the constitutionalists of Yazd and with the expansion of the Democratic Party of Iran, he became one of its serious supporters. For him, the constitution was not just a change in the form of government. It was supposed to limit political power and open the way for people's participation in determining the country's destiny.

The story of Dhigham al-Douleh and the formation of the face of the "poet of Lip Dokhte"

One of the important events of the beginning of Farrokhi's political activity dates back to Nowruz 1289. When eulogizing was a common practice of poets on government occasions, instead of praising the ruler of Yazd, Digham al-Dawlah Qashqai, he wrote a critical poem and accused him of tyranny. In this poem, he used mythological symbols of Iran and compared the state of the country with the times of Fereydoun and Iraj. He compared the intervention of Russia and Britain to the conflict between Salam and Tur.

The reaction of the local government was to imprison and harass him. The most famous part of this story is the sewing of the poet's lips with thread and needle, which gave him the nickname "lip-stitched poet". The details of this narration are disputed. Anwar Khameei, who later joined Farrokhi in prison, narrated that Farrokhi denied the principle of sewing the lips and said that the ruler of Yazd had only threatened; But the second narrative remained in public memory. Makki explained about this incident in the preface of Farrokhi Yazdi's court: "...on the other hand, Farrokhi was arrested one night with some of his freedom-loving comrades as a result of the resistance that he showed through the use of force and aggressions by Digham al-Dawlah. Farrokhi defended himself and his freedom-loving comrades bravely and fiercely during negotiations with Digham-ud-Dawlah, and Digham-ud-Dawlah ordered to sew his mouth shut. After seeing this shameful thing, Yazd libertarians and democrats gathered in the telegraph office and sent a telegram to the parliament and other officials. This arbitrariness and tyranny, which was a perfect example of tyranny during the constitutional period, incited the lawyers of the National Assembly, and the then interior minister was severely impeached, the interior minister denied this criminal incident. But at the same time, the description of this crime was published in Yazd on a large sheet of paper containing caricatures of Farrokhi Dehndokhte and the ruler of Yazd.

The story was not limited to prison. Freedom supporters protested in Yazd and a group besieged the telegraph office. The issue was brought to the parliament, although the responsible official denied the occurrence of what was said about the poet's abuse and explained the punishment in a different way. Farrokhi finally escaped from prison with the help of freedom fighters.

From this moment, Farrokhi's name was associated with protest against autocracy. He was also given the nickname "Lasan-ul-Mullah" among the freedom fighters. This reputation was later extended by his journalistic work, as he attempted to bring the voice raised against local power into the arena of national politics.

During the First World War, he went to Iraq for a while and was persecuted for his anti-colonial activities. His return to Iran was in a situation where the country was involved in the presence of foreign forces and the consequences of the war had increased political instability and the weakness of the central government. Acquaintance with developments outside Iran and attention to the Russian revolution affected his justice-seeking and socialist tendencies, although these tendencies should not be equated with organizational membership in communism.

In his thought, political freedom and national independence were not separate. A government that ignores people's rights inside could not be the real representative of the nation against foreign powers.

Tehran; From opposing the 1919 agreement to the publication of Tofan newspaper

Farrokhi went to Tehran at the end of 1298. A city that was the center of political competition, party activity and newspaper publication. He used to write articles and publish political poems in the press of the capital, and gradually he became known among the opponents of the government of Watuq al-Dawlah. One of the main points of his protest was the 1919 agreement between Iran and Britain. The contract that was concluded in August 1298 and its opponents considered it a threat to Iran's independence.

Farrokhi's opposition to this contract led to his arrest and imprisonment. In his view, the issue was not only the terms of an agreement. The main concern was that the Iranian government, instead of relying on public will and legal institutions, would limit the country's independence within the framework of relations that gave Britain the upper hand. This position remained throughout his political career, and criticism of governments he considered dependent on British politics became an important part of his writings.

His opposition to the government of Wathouq al-Dawlah cannot be reduced to a disagreement with a cabinet. In the same years, he also warned against the formation of a kind of internal authoritarianism. An authoritarianism that might begin with the promise of ending disorder, but ultimately deprives constitutional institutions of their true function.

This concern became more obvious after the coup d'état of March 1299 and Reza Khan's rise to power. In a situation where a part of the political forces considered the formation of a powerful government necessary to end the chaos, Farrokhi made a difference between the authority of the government and the power of the nation. In one of his poems he wrote:

This was a compact quartet of his political views. Farrokhi was not against the principle of existence of the state. The issue was where the government's authority comes from, what are its limits and what institution is it accountable to. He feared that the concentration of power would lead to a new tyranny if separated from the parliament's supervision and law enforcement, even if it was initially offered with the promise of security and order.

In the article "Government of Pressure" he addressed the same issue and criticized the consequences of the expansion of the powerful government without guaranteeing political freedoms. In his writings, the historical experience of Iran and the successive transfer of people's hopes to different politicians was evidence that relying on a strong person or government without a monitoring mechanism is not a sustainable solution.

He also protested against the repression of Sheikh Mohammad Khayabani in Tabriz and in an article in Tofan newspaper, he blamed the political responsibility for this incident on the authorities of the time.

storm; A newspaper for public protest and awareness

In 1300, Farrokhi published Tofan newspaper. A magazine whose name suited the tense political atmosphere of those years. This newspaper talked about peasants, workers and low-income groups, and along with news and articles, it turned political poetry into a tool for criticizing the government and expressing social demands.

Farrokhi used traditional forms, especially quatrains and ghazals, to react to the events of the day. Short and clear poems along with critical articles allowed concepts such as law, freedom, justice and independence to go beyond the limits of political and literary circles. He had even set up a reading room in connection with the newspaper to expand people's access to information.

With the increase of Reza Khan's power, Tofan became one of the serious critics of the government. Farrokhi protested against the declaration of martial law, threats against journalists and the confiscation of publications. The contradiction between the claim of freedom and dealing with the press was the basis of his writings and poems. In one of his quatrains, he described the state of parliament and the narrowing of the political space as follows:

On the one hand, our parliament is stylish and beautiful

In Farrokhi's view, the presence of the parliament building or the holding of official meetings alone was not a sign of the rule of law. The constitutional institution was meaningful when the representatives could ask the government questions, the press could criticize and the government officials were responsible before the law. For this reason, he repeatedly protested arbitrary arrests and confiscation of newspapers without legal proceedings.

Tofan newspaper was banned many times. The collected sources speak of more than 15 arrests. During the periods when its publication was stopped, Farrokhi used the permission of other publications such as Qiyam, Talia, Ayane Afkar and Setera Shargh to publish his writings and poems. He also published Pikar newspaper, but that newspaper could not survive against the political pressure.

On the one hand, this continuity showed Farrokhi's insistence on press work, and on the other hand, it revealed the restrictions imposed on the Iranian press during the years of Reza Khan's consolidation of power. The successive banning of a newspaper cut off the communication between the author and the audience and reduced the possibility of forming a public discussion about the government's performance.

In his articles, Farrokhi also attacked Qawam al-Sultaneh and Watuq al-Dawlah and saw their policies in the context of British influence. Titles such as "Ominous Cabinet", "Ashiane Fatna" and "Treason Family" in Tofan newspaper show his sharp and polemical tone.

One of the key concepts in his writings was "security". In an article titled "What is security?" His question was whether a country can be considered safe if people are arrested for political protest and newspapers cannot write about the government's performance for fear of being arrested. Farrokhi separated security from the absence of opposing voices. According to him, the peace achieved by removing freedom and public fear is not necessarily a sign of the establishment of law.

the seventh parliament; A representative in the minority

In 1307, Farrokhi entered the seventh term of the National Assembly representing the people of Yazd. His presence in the parliament provided a new opportunity to pursue his criticisms of the government, but the composition of the parliament and power relations limited this possibility. In the parliament where the majority of the representatives were with Reza Shah's government, Farrokhi and a small number of representatives were in the minority position.

He defended the parliament as an institution that should monitor the government and transform the constitution from a ceremonial text into an effective set of power limits. His criticism of the representatives was actually about the performance that he believed diverted the parliament from its main task. He objected to mandated elections, buying and selling of votes, involvement of the military and the approvals that were approved without effective supervision.

In one of the narrations quoted from him, the representatives aligned with the government were so used to saying "It is true sir" that they repeated this phrase even while taking a nap. He believed that the representative should speak on behalf of the people, not to be satisfied with the approval of the government's decisions.

The documents and reports related to the 7th Parliament make this confrontation clearer. A confidential report in December 1308 that tells about the criticism of his questions and speeches by government officials. Such documents show that Farrokhi's opposition in the official atmosphere of the Majlis aroused the sensitivity of government officials.

One of the important topics of his protest was the bill that allowed the Royal Bank of England to buy land and real estate in Iran. Farrokhi criticized this proposal from the perspective of economic independence and the risk of expanding foreign influence and compared it to the experience of the East India Company entering India. For him, the issue of foreign ownership was not only an economic issue, it was related to the question of how far the government should defend national interests against external financial and political powers.

The narratives are not the same about how Farrokhi ended his presence in the Majlis and left Iran. Anwar Khameei and Hossein Makki have given different details of the pressures, conflicts and circumstances that led to his departure. According to one of the narratives, after the end of the parliamentary term and the loss of parliamentary immunity, Farrokhi secretly went to the Soviet Union. Another story talks about the conflict with the representatives and his feeling of insecurity in the parliament. Therefore, all the details of this stage cannot be considered definitive without referring to the difference in sources.

What is clear is that Farrokhi could not continue his political activity in Iran in the same way after his experience as a representative of the Majlis and decided to emigrate.