Monday, June 16, 2003
One of the issues that I am thinking about is Monarchial political system. These days are very important in the history of Iran and I think exploring different political systems would be interesting. Iran has a long history of monarchy and some people think that it is essential for Unity. If it is seen in the historical context, it may seem understandable, even if it is not acceptable. However, in IT (information technology) era, I wonder to know how such primitive system is interesting for some people in the world. In countries like England, Norway, Canada, Australia, even though Royal family does not have power, I do not know why people think that the country need these family. Are they the symbol of Unity, Nation and â€¦.? Donâ€™t other nations have Unity? I think that maintaining royal families in their position is wasting money. Indeed, I do not know why it is necessary in countries like Canada Queen's picture is printed on money! and their country send money for her! (somebody let me know if I am mistaken).
These questions and their answers are much more important in countries like Iran since it is more probable that a Monarchial government, even claim that they will follow democratic principles, becomes a dictator state.
Why Iran cannot be like England or Norway? Basically, these countries have established democratic system and the monarch is a constitutional monarch and is bound by rules and conventions and remains politically impartial. However, in Iran it would be an executive monarchs - that is, they had the right to make and pass legislation. It is said they believe democratic principles for election and political system. The question is that why they are interested in keeping this position in society?!
For which reason they have this right. If we look at the recent Iranian king's family (former Shah), you easily find them criminals who oppressed their nation and stole what this poor people had. In other words, even if we think that monarchy system is a good system for this country, these people do not have any special right to take power.
Let's come back to our first question "How can one explain that a modern state can maintain such an "antiquated" system?
(posted by Iman)
Posted:Monday, June 16, 2003 |
Comments: Post a Comment