Opinion

Write for The Iranian Editorial policy

Ganji's Paine
Following Paine's footsteps in the fight for democracy

By Farshid Bakhshi
July 17, 2001
The Iranian

Although it seems unlikely, the writings of the great American journalist Thomas Paine has much in common with the work of a present day Iranian journalist.

Paine's "Common Sense," published in 1776, urged the American colonies to fight for independence from England. Paine, in direct and commanding language, tried to shape the opinions of the colonists and change the status quo. He fiercely and passionately attacked the British monarchy and cautioned the colonies not to succumb. "It [monarchy] was the most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry," he wrote.

Paine's brisk and rhetorical style was powerful enough to change the colonists' notion of independence and to persuade many of them to join the fight for freedom. The U.S. Constitution adopted some of the suggestions Paine made in "Common Sense."

Now, more than two centuries later, many Iranian journalists are following Paine's footsteps in fighting for the establishment of a democratic regime in Iran. In a political system full of contradictions -- where die-hard conservative hard-liners and pro-democratic reformists jostle to expand their control -- journalists are the greatest threat to the hard-liners.

Ali Akbar Ganji, author of several books about Iran's recent political history, is Iran's leading investigative journalist. Late last year, following his participation in a Berlin conference on reforms in Iran, Ganji was arrested and charged with "undermining Iran's security." On Monday, a court sentenced him to six years in prison for "collecting confidential information" and "insulting the founder of the Islamic Republic" (Ayatollah Khomeini).

Paine and Ganji are uncompromisingly sincere writers who use a forceful, direct and rhetorical language to instigate action. Because of the similarity of their approach, one can say they have roots in the same journalistic tradition. One can see elements of Romanticism in both writers. Their prose encourages expression of opinions and connection with feelings, and it also promotes the individual and the importance of humanity as an inseparable part of society.

Paine and Ganji's writings are poignantly subjective because these writers were on a crusade to change the political system. However, Paine's style was more aphoristic than Ganji's. Unlike Paine, Ganji was able to use the media to gain support for his cause.

Ganji's most provocative articles appeared following a chain of murders of dissident authors and political activists in the Fall of 1998. His journalistic scoops began appearing in early 1999 with articles linking Iran's Intelligence Ministry to these murders of dozens of intellectuals, organized-crime figures and people killed because they knew too much about government dirty dealings.

In what he called "disclosure by drips," Ganji published one article after another explaining how shadowy operatives selected their victims and executed them. The Iranian community nicknamed Ganji "The Maverick" since nobody ever knew what he would write next or how far up the ranks of government he would go to point an accusing finger.

In an interview from his prison cell, Ganji said, "I have no doubt. Democracy and a civil society will be our future. Maybe we will still have to fight for that for two or three more years. But in the end, there will be no other way."

In the last paragraph of "Common Sense", Paine commented in a way strikingly similar to Ganji's prediction of the future: "These proceedings may at first seem strange and difficult, but like all other steps which we have already passed over, will in a little time become familiar and agreeable."

Both Paine and Ganji castigated the government, which to them, was the source of difficulties. Ganji wrote, "Happiness under a government's absolute sovereignty is impossible. People are not the tools and toys of the government bureaucracy. But because power by its nature tends to accumulate, humankind is absorbed by the government's control." Ganji offers only one solution to the conflict: "Liberation from this downfall is impossible unless the government's authority decreases and society's power increases."

These sentences exemplify the non-aphoristic style of Ganji. In contrast, one can see Paine's aphoristic style discussing a similar theme in the following paragraph: "Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness Positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher."

Paine also writes, "Absolute governments have this advantage with them, that they are simple; if the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering springs, know likewise the remedy."

Ganji analyzes absolutism in a similar way: "The three types of governments are: totalitarianism, democracy and authoritarianism." He argued that authoritarianism and totalitarianism are very close in their definition, but authoritarianism embodies elements of civility. He referred to Iran as being ruled by an authoritarian regime. "With lighting a candle of truth, the media in such a system [authoritarian] sheds light on the political spectrum and unravel the truth." He urged the media to capitalize on the hunger of the Iranians for democracy to force the die-hard conservatives to loosen their grip on Iran.

Paine divided the English political system into three components: monarchial tyranny, aristocratic tyranny and "the persons of the commons." When Paine used the term "the person of the commons," he referred to the English parliament that had the power to scrutinize the king's actions. He argued that the king had the authority to reject parliament's recommendations and enforce his own rule. Ganji and his peers use the same analogy to rebuff the Islamic Republic. They point their finger at the spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and accuse him of undermining the reform movement.

The reformists led by President Khatami dominate the Iranian parliament, but the hard-liners led by Khamenei control the judiciary, the Islamic militants, conventional army and the media. As spiritual leader, Khamenei has the final say over the president and the parliament. In the recent presidential election, Khatami was reelected in a landslide victory, grabbing 77 percent of the votes. Even though the reformists enjoy popular support, the hard-liners supervise the system.

In his book, "L'Eminence Rouge" (His Red-Robed Highness), Ganji scoffed at Iran's hard-line religious establishment. "First, one faction of the hard-liners will swallow one faction of its own. The hard-line aggressors will continue to eliminate more factions of their camp until they lose their public support. At last, they will be removed from the political arena."

Paine scoffed at the monarchy: "There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of Monarchy, the different parts, by unnaturally opposing and destroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd and useless."

Paine's "Common Sense" brought a rising revolutionary sentiment into sharp focus by placing blame for the suffering of the colonies directly on the reigning British monarchy. Paine, an English immigrant, adamantly advocated independence from English rule. Ganji supported the Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic. But when he saw that Khomeini's rule divorced Islam from basic human freedoms, he became disenchanted and distanced himself from the conservatives.

Many Iranian reform journalists underwent the same conversion. They were highly critical of the Shah's refusal to grant political freedoms and considered the monarchy as the source of every evil. They supported the revolution to oust the Shah. The main slogan used to describe Iran's 2,700-years of monarchy was: "God, Shah and People." Iranian journalists prior to the revolution accused the Shah of playing the role of God, an argument that attracted many to religious doctrines which claimed that Islam was the only way to get close to God.

Paine, too, often referred to God. He observed the monarchy as a system that tends to accumulate power that Paine claimed belonged to God. "And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that the Almighty, ever jealous of his honour, should disapprove a form of government which so impiously invades the prerogative of Heaven." Unlike the Islamic Republic's argument, which claims a monopoly on God, Paine claimed that God encourages pluralism. "For myself, I fully and conscientiously believe, that it is the will of the Almighty that there should be a diversity of religious opinions among us."

Paine elaborated on the political system to be formed in America. "Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only. |Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenient districts, each district to send a proper number of delegates to Congress, so that each colony send at least thirty."

Like Paine, who outlined the principles of a republic, a democratic regime to be established after independence, Ganji argues that people should be the ultimate arbitrator of the government.   "Iranians wonder why, at the start of 21st century, people are incarcerated because of their opinions. Why the judiciary instead of accommodating the people serves a political party," asked Ganji rhetorically. "Iran's honorable and courageous people have the power to establish a real democracy by participating in an election where they select their preferred parliament members." (Even though Iranians today can vote, current members of parliament have very little power.)

Ganji stresses the role of the free media in accelerating the reform movement. "At the beginning, when the serial murders occurred, everyone wanted to downplay the scandalous crime. But the media's adamancy and Khatami's persistence bent the judiciary and forced the hard-liners to make confessions." When the former president Ali Akbar Rafsanjani decided to join the race for parliament in early 2000, Ganji, in a series of articles, demanded Rafsanjani to explain what he knew about the killings, as well as his role in the "prolonged" eight-year war with Iraq. The powerful ex-president suffered a humiliating defeat in the elections.

Last February, when Ganji entered the Islamic courtroom after being brutally beaten by wardens, he stared at the journalists seated in the press area and screamed, "Write that they beat me up; write that I am not going to give up; write that our nation deserves freedom." The judge reprimanded him, but Ganji responded, "According to the Constitution this court is illegal."

"Common Sense" became the catalyst for the ferment of Paine's era. Likewise, Ganji's series of articles were a filter through which Iranians expressed their contempt for the government.   Ganji's robust and courageous reporting has already reserved him an honorable place in the history of Iran as a leading investigative journalist who solidly contributed to Iran's reform movement in an eminently sensitive historical juncture.

"I guess I am a trouble maker," Ganji said last year in an interview with Time. "I call it playing with death. One day something may happen to me. This fight for reform is lawful, but it has its price." Ganji is an excellent successor to carry on the political journalistic tradition of Paine.

Comment for The Iranian letters section Comment for the writer Farshid Bakhshi