Avoiding excitement in seeking the blood of the martyred leader according to the parliament member: in the immediate reaction, anger is discharged at the same moment and no complex is formed/ let's be vindictive, not spiteful

The member of the presiding committee of the parliament emphasized: We must be careful not to become spiteful in the issue of revenge and bloodlust of our dear and martyred leader. We should be vengeful and spiteful, but not spiteful. In the immediate reaction, excitement and anger are drained and finished at the same moment; Therefore, usually, a permanent psychological charge or a complex that remains inside the person is not formed.

According to Ambassador Arjan Ahmad Naderi, a representative of the people of Tehran and a member of the Board of the Islamic Council, in the meeting "Political Necessities of Revenge and Bloodlust" held by Imam Sadiq University (AS), examining the concept of revenge from the perspective of sociology and Iranian history, he stated: In order to understand the necessity of revenge and bloodlust, one must first look at the theoretical foundations of this concept in social sciences, and then by examining the history of Iran and the current state of society, its social and political requirements should be considered.

Referring to the views of Max Scheler, a classical German sociologist, and the discussions raised in his book about malice and revenge, he said: Scheler distinguishes between three concepts of immediate reaction, revenge and malice, and understanding the differences between these three concepts can be helpful in analyzing the current conditions of Iranian society.

Explaining the concept of immediate reaction, Naderi stated: Immediate reaction is mostly instinctive in nature and happens without delay. This type of reaction is common between humans and animals; This means that the living being reacts immediately to harm.

He added: In the immediate reaction, excitement and anger are discharged at the same moment and end; Therefore, usually, a permanent psychological charge or a complex that remains inside the person is not formed.

Referring to the concept of revenge in Scheler's thought, the member of the parliament committee stated: revenge begins when the actor consciously postpones his immediate reaction in order to retaliate at the right time. This time can be determined according to the material conditions, time and place and the provision of the necessary preparations.

He continued: Here, a person consciously decides to maintain his reaction and take countermeasures at the right time, place and conditions. The key point in this view is that revenge is an attempt to restore the balance and regain the trampled dignity; A goal pursued through an objective action in the future.

Stating that revenge in this context seeks to restore balance, Naderi said: When the dignity of a person or society is damaged, reciprocation can be done with the aim of compensating for that damage and restoring balance.

He further mentioned the third concept, that is, grudge and said: grudge is different from revenge. In this sense, the main issue is the existence of some kind of structural disability; A situation in which a person or society is unable to strike back at an attacker due to material, weapon, political or other obstacles.

The representative of the people of Tehran in the parliament added: Based on this analysis, when there is no possibility of reciprocating, the anger is trapped inside the individual or the society and instead of being discharged through an objective action, it returns to the society. This situation can have negative psychological and social consequences and trap the society in a cycle of hatred and feeling powerless.

Warning about turning foreign revenge into domestic grudge

Describing the social consequences of resentment, Naderi stated: When the society cannot counterattack the attacker due to structural incapacity, it may move towards a mechanism that Scheler refers to as "target displacement".

He added: In such a situation, since it is not possible to deal with the main cause of harm, the target of anger changes and people or internal groups, both insiders and outsiders, are exposed to revenge. This issue can lead to the weakening of social cohesion and the aggravation of internal disputes.

Referring to the current situation of the Iranian society, the member of the parliamentary board stated: We must be careful not to harbor grudges in the issue of revenge and bloodlust for our beloved and martyred leader. We should be vengeful and spiteful, but not spiteful.

He continued: "Unfortunately, what we observe is that currents within the society, especially some political currents, are moving in the direction of creating and highlighting social bipolarities." By highlighting social differences, these currents provide the basis for the formation of false dichotomies.

Naderi emphasized: Such a process is not revenge, but a move towards malice, according to Max Scheler. For this reason, I emphasize that theoretical and sociological discussion should be the basis of our analysis; Because by relying on the tradition of sociology and social sciences, the conditions of society and the difference between revenge and malice can be better understood.

From Safavid onwards; The formation of the feeling of structural helplessness in Iran

In the continuation of his speech, he examined the historical situation of Iran and said: If we examine the history of Iran from the Safavid period onwards, we witness the formation of a kind of historical confrontation with the West. During this period, the West gradually left its previous situation and took a new path in development and power with the occurrence of technological, social and political revolutions.

The member of the Majlis Board added: On the other hand, Iran, which was the heir of a great civilization, gradually experienced a reverse process and faced the decline of power and backwardness in various fields. With the accumulation of capital and the development of technology, the West became an industrial power, while Iran was placed in a weaker position.

Naderi continued: In this situation, Iranian society gradually faced a kind of structural weakness; The inability that manifested itself especially in the two centuries before the Islamic Revolution, in foreign interventions and the loss of parts of the country's soil.

Referring to the role of Russia, Britain and America in Iran's contemporary history, he said: During this period, foreign powers intervened in the country's affairs and placed Iran in a dependent position. Although Iran was not directly colonized, in my interpretation, it faced a kind of indirect colonialism in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Naderi added: The weak Qajar and Pahlavi governments imposed this situation on Iranian society. Coups, humiliating contracts and historical failures were examples of this structural inability that remained in the historical memory of Iranian society.

He clarified: Based on the discussed theoretical framework, this historical experience led to the formation of a kind of accumulated feeling of anger and humiliation in Iranian society. A feeling that can be analyzed with the concept of malice or accumulated resentment in Max Scheler's thought.

Islamic Revolution; A response to Iran's historical structural weakness

Stating that the Islamic Revolution was a response to this historical situation, the member of the Majlis Board said: The Islamic Revolution was a reaction to the structural weakness imposed on the Iranian society. In this revolution, the Iranian nation rose up against this situation and went through a process of identity search.

He added: From this point of view, the Islamic Revolution can be seen as an identity uprising against about two centuries of historical humiliation and conditions that were imposed on the Iranian society.

Referring to the role of the Martyr Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Naderi said: In my opinion, one of the greatest achievements of Ayatollah Khamenei, the Martyr Leader of the Revolution, in the past four decades was that he moved Iran from the stage of slogan to the stage of material consolidation of power.

He emphasized: This achievement was a product of the Islamic Revolution, but the stage of material power consolidation in recent decades was followed by the efforts of the martyred leader of the revolution. This approach was based on the historical understanding of Iran's relations with the West and the recognition of the experience of humiliation and structural weakness in the past two hundred years.

Referring to the examples of this evolution, the member of the parliament's board said: the development of point missiles, drones and nuclear technology are among the examples that can be mentioned in this framework. The martyr leader of the revolution paid special attention to science, university, youth and various fields of technology and believed in their capacity to create material power.

He added: Based on this, Iran was able to move from a position that was associated with structural weakness to becoming a regional power and appear on the level of global powers in some fields. I believe that recent developments and war have revealed the dimensions of this power and the efforts of the Martyr of the Revolution played an important role in its formation.

Referring to the efforts of Iran's enemies and rivals to weaken these capacities, Naderi stated: The current effort of our enemies and rivals is to break the chain that started with the Islamic Revolution and led to the stabilization of material power during the leadership of the Martyr of the Revolution.

He continued: From this point of view, the actions that are being taken against Iran are aimed at cutting the ties that have led the country to overcome its structural weakness. The goal is to force Iran to accept the previous position once again; Therefore, we have to gain knowledge about this historical situation and gain self-awareness, because I believe that a part of Iranian society has not yet achieved this historical self-awareness.

Iran is not in a position of weakness and submission

The member of the parliament's presiding committee continued by raising the question of how Iran's situation should be evaluated in the conditions of an imposed war and after the martyrdom of the revolutionary leader, and said: The first point that we should pay attention to is that Iran is not in a position of passivity, weakness, surrender and compromise, and is no longer in the same state of historical structural weakness that it experienced before the Islamic Revolution.

He added: The proud operations of Iran's armed forces have shown that the country is not in a position of helplessness. These developments, I believe, refute the hypothesis that Iran is still in the same position of historical and structural weakness as in the past.

Referring to the views of some internal currents, Naderi stated: There are currents inside the country that still insist that Iran is in a position of historical weakness. Without wanting to name individuals, these currents can be identified in the political atmosphere of the country.

Naderi: The closure of the Strait of Hormuz is a sign of a change in the balance of power

In another part of his speech, referring to the situation of the Strait of Hormuz, he stated: One of the examples that can be cited to show the change in Iran's position is the issue of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. We have emphasized the position that the strait remains closed and the passage of some cargoes through certain routes or under limited conditions does not mean that it is completely open.

The member of the parliamentary board continued: If the Strait of Hormuz was really open, there would be no need to release strategic reserves and oil prices would not be at high levels. Therefore, I believe, the insistence that the strait is open, especially from the President of the United States, Donald Trump, does not correspond to the existing realities.

Naderi emphasized: Strait of Hormuz is closed because we have decided that it will be closed. Of course, the restrictions may have been applied more strictly on some days, but the limited passage of some cargoes through certain routes should not be considered as the opening of the strait.

At the end of this part of his speech, he noted: What is important is to understand the historical situation and current power of Iran. While recognizing the difference between revenge and malice, Iranian society should prevent the anger caused by facing a foreign enemy from turning into internal divisions and bipolarities and not allow social cohesion to be damaged in this way.