Why don't Iranians read their history? / Why do French students know more about Iranian history than Iranian students?

Reading history in Iran has been reduced to its mere narration and has been limited to the narration of a series of events related to the elite (the history of kings), while this same history has neglected the narration of the role of the lower classes and their agency (the history of the people). It is clear that if historical criticism, in the sense of a sociological look at past events with the aim of discovering the logic governing historical periods and de-familiarizing them (discovering order in irregularities, and rules in exceptions), becomes dominant in schools and society, the desire for history will increase.

Fayyaz Zahid, a political analyst and university history professor, believes that our textbooks are becoming more and more non-Iranian every day, as Iranian students, unlike European students, pay much less attention to their historical background. The experience of history teachers also indicates a growing disregard for this issue in the classroom. It is clear that part of this disregard can be explained by the decline in patriotism among Iranians, which is most evident in the increase in immigration and the tendency towards cosmopolitanism. But why do we read our history less today?

Historical gap; Nation-state: According to Katouzian’s theory, since the government in Iran was not based on social classes and in which the will of the king was considered the only source of legislation and regulation of political relations, it was unable to lead to the participation of citizens in the appointment, criticism, and dismissal of rulers (democracy). The historical gap; Nation-state is also the result of such conditions, which, by destroying public trust, led to the decline in patriotism among Iranians.

Dual emergence; Nation-nation: The 1957 revolution was based on a political reading of Islam and achieved victory with the claim of spreading justice and fighting oppression through the issuance of the revolution. It was then that this duality was formed and the ideal of liberating the Islamic nation from the clutches of global imperialism was manifested in the constitution of the newly founded Islamic Republic. Now, for fourteen decades, the dysfunctional duality of nation-nation has not only failed to realize its original ideal, but by weakening national solidarity, it has slowed down the process of development and diminished the sense of patriotism.

Narrative of history instead of critical history: The reading of history in Iran has been reduced to its narration and has been limited to the narration of a series of events related to the superiors (the history of kings), while this same history has neglected the narration of the role of the inferiors and their agency (the history of the people). It is clear that if the criticism of history, meaning a sociological look at past events with the aim of discovering the logic governing historical periods and making them less familiar (discovering order in irregularities, and rules in exceptions), prevails in schools and society, the passion for history will increase.

Failure to integrate three cultures: Iranians have inherited Iranianness, Islamism, and modernity as cultures institutionalized in their collective consciousness for two centuries. However, instead of allowing people to create harmony between these three cultures, governments have tried to expropriate some in favor of one and remove them from the public sphere. Efforts that were made during the Pahlavi and Islamic Republic eras led to results that were contrary to the rulers’ wishes. For the helpless nation, however, cultural schizophrenia, the decline of patriotism, and public distrust have been the only unfortunate results of these indiscretions.

More Abbas Kashani's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions