First – not everything is worthy of creation!
Development, one of the sensitive, expansive and multidimensional concepts in humanities, and one of the important rights of citizens of a country/state, has been plagued by misunderstanding since its introduction to Iran. There is a spectrum of intellectuals in Iran who essentially see the “Iranian nation” itself as an obstacle to the development of Iran and consider the Iranian nation deserving of the current miserable situation, and in the most humiliating way possible, address this nation as “inferior beings”. Is this really the right of the nation?!
Before the revolution, almost all scientific statements about the concept of development were produced and presented in scientific centers and government decision-making centers. It seemed that traces of a precise understanding of development were forming in Iran’s political and legal system. Of course, a few texts were produced by some intellectuals and mainly leftists to criticize the development plans of the Pahlavi era, which had little to say. And the repetitive clichés of the tiresome leftists of that era were accompanied

Second – The legend of knowledge and wisdom and the ignorance of the nation.
“The Myth of Awareness” is one of the most important reasons and roots of misunderstanding about development, which traces back to the leftist ideology. Since the essence of leftist political thought is in opposition to the institution of government, and the ultimate goal of leftists and anarchists is the abolition of the institution of government, they believe in the necessity of acquiring awareness by the people. This idea has become so ingrained in the discourse of leftists and anarchists that they see any problems in society and government as a result of the people’s lack of awareness, and they exaggerate this issue. They also believe that any incompetent and ineffective government is a result of the people’s ignorance and narrow-mindedness. But the question is, is an “ignorant nation” deserving of misery and deserving of the calamities that befall them? And more importantly, is it even possible for a “knowledgeable nation” to exist if the opposite, an “ignorant nation,” also exists?

Many intellectuals,

Third – Developmentalism and Disdain!
Perhaps the first generation of intellectuals who looked down on the nation were educated in France. Generally, the tradition of enlightenment in Iran was heavily influenced by Francophiles and Germanophiles before the dominance of leftist groups, and it is likely that the dominance of the left is also the result of that initial tradition. However, the discussion of this text is not directly related to the roots of the enlightenment tradition in Iran. Mohammad Ali Jamalzadeh with his book “Our Iranian Characteristics” and Sadeq Hedayat with his book “Blind Owl” were the first sparks that exaggerated the blame on the Iranian nation for the country’s disorder in the modern era.
After the complete domination of leftist intellectuals, writers, and poets, exaggeration about some negative aspects of Iranian culture increased significantly and reached its peak in the 1940s. Perhaps this poem by Ferdowsi Tavalloli, which is full of insults and disdain, is the peak of this humiliation, in which he

Fourth – Authoritarian Development and Reforms, the Only Model of Development in the World.

Misunderstanding about development and reforms in Iran has led to the creation of false concepts, the biggest and most astonishing of which is the division of development into two types: “authoritarian development” and “non-authoritarian development”. The texts produced by think tanks and research centers of the so-called reform movement were full of these confusing concepts, with the peak being the translation of the book “Crises and Sequences in Development”.
In the world and in history, there is no such thing as “bottom-up reform” or “reforming society”. There is no such thing as non-authoritarian reforms and development. Reforms and development only take place from the top down and with the authority and power of the government.
There is no model of “bottom-up reform” in any part of the world or in any period of history. Even in a handful of Western countries that became modernization laboratories due to historical coincidence, reforms were carried out from the top down, except for England where reforms did