This is a caption.
The hero Qanbari.

I was in fourth grade when I first encountered the name “Farhangestan-e-Zaban-e-Farsi” (Academy of Persian Language), which was unfamiliar to me. It had a pleasant but serious voice that occasionally said on TV programs with a rhythmic beat: “Let’s not say… Let’s say…! Let’s preserve Persian”; the kids had added a joke that we should also preserve Turkish or Kurdish! In that same year, our teacher would assign one person each week to be in charge of monitoring and fining anyone who spoke Turkish, starting from one toman and increasing by one toman for each repetition. Our teacher would use the money collected each week to buy sweets or fruits and distribute them among the students.

This terrifying experience may have been my second crisis after the first grade, when I encountered someone named “Fars”. Fars, who held superiority over the languages we spoke at home. It was instilled in our minds that the language we spoke was inherently worthless compared to Farsi. Like how we, as non-Persian humans, are inferior and worthless in front of a Persian person. Even after years, when we pronounce “ق” as “گ”, we become a source of laughter for our Persian friends. We are a source of ridicule even without Turkish jokes. This does not stem from our belief that the result of research on the inherent value of the Persian language and the resulting stereotype of Persian speakers is a reflection of the political authority that imposes our inherent worthlessness as speakers of non-Persian languages on our souls and minds. If we have not encountered a Persian person as an other and subjective authority since childhood, we learn from an early age to see ourselves through the eyes of

In his book, “Anti-Semite and Jews,” Jean-Paul Sartre examines the issue of anti-Semitism and the relationship between Jews and French Christians. He argues that throughout history, Jews have learned to view themselves through the eyes of their oppressors, seeing themselves as inferior and worthless. In response, humans, in their daily struggle against this feeling of inferiority, often resort to self-deprecation and belittling of themselves and their peers. This leads to a strong desire to escape this feeling, often resulting in the adoption of negative stereotypes and denial of one’s own identity. By denigrating themselves and their peers, who are also struggling with assimilation into Christianity, they attempt to overcome this sense of inferiority. However, this only reinforces the negative stereotypes they are trying to escape. Sartre argues that this cycle is perpetuated by the constant efforts of Jews to prove their worth through material success and assimilation, ultimately leading to a class of Jews who have successfully

The systematic massacre of Jews during World War II provoked a significant reaction due to the heinous crimes committed. The result of this inhumane act was their historical dehumanization, which over the years had successfully removed them from the eyes of Christians and stripped them of their humanity. As a result of this oppression, they were ultimately subdued and looked down upon by their neighbors.

Today, millions of non-Persian Iranians in Iran feel inferior. They have been perceived as multiple times lower than their Persian compatriots since birth. This claim that all of our compatriots consider us inferior may be an unfair accusation or judgment, or even a disrespectful insult to individuals and humans with Persian as their mother tongue. Their feeling towards non-Persian languages in their country is the same feeling they have towards a Persian speaker, and they cannot even imagine looking down on their non-Persian compatriots. They may even be more demanding of national rights than the Turks, Kurds, and Baloch, but these are important but also very secondary issues. The main issue here is the high status of Persian stereotypes and the low status of non-Persian languages. The problem is that this system has been able to establish inferiority and self-deprecation in the minds of non-Persian speakers. The problem is that this masochism, as mentioned by Sartre

Years ago, Mohammad Ali Foroughi, one of the founders of the Academy of Persian Language, during his time as the Iranian ambassador to Ankara, in letters to his friends with the title of teaching Persian language in Azerbaijan, recommends that his concerns be conveyed to the Ministry of Education. He believes that the beginning of teaching in Azerbaijan should be different from other Persian-speaking regions, as a Turkic-speaking child is not logical to learn with the same methods and books as a child whose mother tongue is Persian. He concludes that if the necessary delicacies are not taken into account, we will not only burden the child with unnecessary pain and suffering, but also may create a sense of animosity and hatred towards the Persian language in their minds. He gives the example of the pain and suffering we have experienced in learning Arabic, which may be the main reason for Iranians’ animosity towards the Arabic language and Arabs. He says that teaching the same way in Azerbaijan – where the mother tongue is Turkish – as

Even the workers themselves are aware of the deprivation of millions of non-Persian speakers from learning their mother tongue, and by denying them, they unnecessarily burden them with pain and suffering. But the temptation and attraction of a country and a language has captivated them to the point where they are unable to recognize the rights of their non-Persian speaking compatriots. They have such a religious belief in the unity of a government and a nation with one language that they do not feel any guilt for inflicting additional pain and suffering on the souls and minds of their compatriots. It could be said that Mohammad Ali Foroughi was concerned about the additional pain and suffering inflicted on the souls of his non-Persian speaking compatriots; of course, this is not the only issue. Foroughi’s main concern was the resistance that this additional pain and suffering could bring about. It is true that governments and planners have made it difficult to resist against a system of one nation and

The issue of teaching mother languages in Iran is not just a cultural and educational issue, but it is also a highly political and ideological issue for the government. The problem is not that in other parts of the world, language learners are taught to consider whether they are learning their mother tongue or a second language, and then use the appropriate teaching methods for success. The problem is that in monolingual and monocultural systems, any language other than the official language – which in Iran is Persian – is not recognized. Our existence is only acknowledged when we are denied and belittled. Our existence is only for ourselves, to see ourselves as inferior and lowly through the lens of stereotypes, and to carry no burden other than the burden of humiliation.

The situation is the same all over the world; countries, like humans, are closely related to each other. Today, in Turkey, Kurdish language is considered to be a dialect of Turkish, either a mountain or a village accent. In Iran, the remaining Turkish language is the old Azeri dialect, which has Persian roots. The situation of Kurdish, Balochi, Arabic, Luri, and other languages in Iran is similar; they are all considered rough, rural, and inferior accents of Persian. If the request for teaching their language in Iranian schools is not a foreign conspiracy and a result of foreign espionage to overthrow Iran, it ultimately shows the backwardness and tribalism of its supporters. The idea that not teaching the mother tongue will lead to the strength and unity of the country is a problem that is more based on fear of the imaginary disintegration of Iran, along with an extreme sacredness of Iran’s borders, rather than a future-oriented approach. The reality is that it is

Although language plays an important role in shaping the personality and thoughts of humans, it is not the only necessary factor for the formation or unity of countries with each other. In this case, many Arab countries would have turned into one country a long time ago, or the people of America would not have fought against the rule of their British compatriots in the War of Independence. Another point is that now many of these languages are spoken in their own regions and the ability of their speakers to write and learn their own language cannot be a reason for division. The desire for independence from Iran is more rooted in discrimination and a desire to break free from daily humiliations and denials, which, through personal experience from childhood to old age, has caused a lot of damage and harm to the spirit and psyche of those who are victims of ridicule – whose existence is even denied – and the first and most important root of this desire for independence or division of regions from the country is in the process of wanting independence

Acquiring knowledge in one’s mother tongue or teaching it to non-Persian or Persian-speaking people in the future does not work miracles for them, nor does it bring happiness to them in a Napoleonic way, but it restores humanity to millions of non-Persian speakers. Teaching mother tongue is not the only issue of today and tomorrow, but it is not a minor issue either. Being respected and recognized is the most fundamental and essential right of every human being, without which life may not be worth living and a person who denies humanity may not be considered a human being. It is morally permissible to support the deprivation of humanity from someone. Patriotism is not about denying or belittling fellow citizens, but it is about supporting the elimination of discrimination and recognizing the humanity of each individual, so that the country can be protected from any danger – both external and internal.

Resources.

• Sartre, Jean-Paul, “Anti-Semite and Jew (1944)”, New York: Schocken Books, pp. 81-101.

• Foroughi, Mohammad Ali, Collection of Articles, Ketabnak Website, p.92.