“I have been saying for years that instead of simplistic statements like leaving everything to the market, we should turn the public space into a space for consensus on development. These are the final parts of the words of Kamal Atahari, a political economist and development researcher, in an interview with Khat-e-Solh magazine. The conversation began with questions about unemployment and lack of employment in Iran, the track record of recent governments in this area, and the impact of artificial intelligence on unemployment in Iran. However, with the introduction of concepts such as “the new vulgar right” by Mr. Atahari, other questions were also added to it.”

Kamal Atahari spoke throughout this conversation about the necessity of governing the discourse of development in Iran, and he believed that a part of the fundamental problem in the media and networks is that the development model must be transformed into the people’s goal. Of course, in another part of this conversation, he mentioned that we do not have political elites, and among the elites, there is no proper development model and direction.

You can read the explanation of the interview with Kamal Atahari, a political economy and development researcher, in the monthly magazine of “Khat-e-Solh” below.

The unemployment rate in the Iranian economy is not promising. In your opinion, what are the main factors contributing to the high unemployment rate in the country?

“We in Iran lack a model of knowledge-based development that can both promote the development of a knowledge economy and a knowledge society. Following the technological revolutions, the economy has entered the post-industrial or knowledge era, where knowledge has become the main factor of production. In the past, production was “resource-intensive”, then it became “labor-intensive”, and later “capital-intensive” (which is related to the more advanced industrial era). Now, production has become “knowledge-intensive”. The process of becoming knowledge-intensive is the main factor of production, and global trade is centered around knowledge-based goods. No country can enter the global value chain or develop its own internal value chain without making its production knowledge-intensive.”

To acquire this knowledge, there must be support for social policies. Past social policies are not sufficient. A society with these social policies is called a knowledgeable society. In a knowledgeable society, knowledge becomes a valuable asset and its main motto is “seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.” Based on this, incomes increase and the possibility of production arises, which can be consumed domestically and also be globally available. Our economy is based on its connection to the global value chain, and is therefore very vulnerable and susceptible to sanctions. When these sanctions occur, the domestic value chain is disrupted; because it is heavily dependent on the import of intermediary and capital goods. This is one factor. The main factor, however, is that you have not entered the economy of knowledge and cannot change the value chain. This is why industries that were previously established are heading towards bankruptcy.

Some industries dependent on oil, such as petrochemicals, can still survive. Also, industries such as car manufacturing, which are state-owned and have the potential for rent, are somehow preserved. But our small and medium industries, which are the foundation of today’s knowledge-based economy, go bankrupt. Well, the result is an increase in unemployment.

Automation has finally entered Iran. This automation is one of the reasons for this issue. In other words, in order to be able to even buy a production license, they must have certain conditions, and these conditions require more automation. This also leads to unemployment. Research shows that the relationship between investment and employment in Iran has become negative. Increasing investment in Iran does not lead to an increase in employment. All of these factors, along with each other, have increased the unemployment rate, especially among educated individuals, who make up 40% of the unemployed. Among educated women, 40% are unemployed, and among educated men, 20 to 30%. This is a general overview of the employment and unemployment situation in Iran that has been mentioned.

What role have the current government or previous governments played in exacerbating the unemployment rate?

This issue began during the Ahmadinejad era. When the Fourth Development Plan was introduced and its goal was a knowledge-based economy and positive interaction with the world (although the term knowledge-based was used in the Fourth Plan), it was put aside under the pretext of being capitalist. At this time, the engine of development in Iran became the housing sector. This is where the disaster began. In other words, when you want to enter the knowledge economy for economic development, the housing sector, which does not have the ability to interact with the outside world, becomes the focus of development. This issue manifested itself at that time. In the censuses between 2006 and 2011, employment growth in Iran was zero. This stoppage led to a decrease in employment in major cities like Tehran, which have a greater need for becoming knowledge-based compared to other regions and must enter the knowledge economy. The decrease in employment in smaller cities and other regions that were dependent on primary industries such as steel

The Rouhani government also followed Ahmadinejad’s approaches and from the beginning stated that housing is the engine of the economy. Until now, they have not been successful in formulating a development plan. Part of the conflict is between “traditional right” and “new vulgar right”; I say vulgar because the new right in the world enters the economy of knowledge and does not repeat these words that housing is the engine of development. What happened was that the Rouhani government repeated the same slogans that the previous right used to give. That is, they mistake the productive economy with market economy or price liberalization. The traditional right, which used to oppose this, from the beginning started saying that I want to perform surgery on the economy. This surgery means that I want to liberalize prices. In fact, instead of creating development institutions, they liberalize prices. With this action, the economy does not become competitive and does not fit within the framework of development plans. The only thing that happens is that

The result of such performance is the current situation, which is obvious considering what is being done.

You used the phrase “ridiculous new right”. If we consider the traditional right representative in Iran and the market trend, what exactly is this ridiculous new right?

The new wave of absurdity emerged during the era of developmental government. The first absurdity was the land speculation and marketization. This event was a clear sign of absurdity. In order to avoid market failure in the neoclassical economy, land is not handed over to the market. This also creates the possibility of rent-seeking and is counterproductive. These actions led to the Dutch disease in the Iranian economy, where on one hand, oil money was coming in, and on the other hand, it was being used for rent-seeking in the housing sector.

Another degradation in the marketization of society was the liberalization of prices. Measures such as sudden floating of exchange rates, exclusion of workers from labor laws in workshops with less than ten employees, and so on, were all actions that instead of establishing the foundations of a competitive economy within the framework of development, introduced the motivation for rent-seeking into the Iranian economy. This degradation escalated when they came and said that we do not accept the development economy at all. In developing countries, not accepting the development economy was also one of their masterpieces. Instead of building the foundations of a new economy, they pursued the liberation of prices, even in sectors that not even neoclassical economics does. This is vulgar. I use the word “vulgar” as the equivalent of “vulgar” in English. In fact, this was the true vulgar model of an economy that reduced the problem to the liberation of prices, until the Ahmadinejad era dominated the Iranian economy.

During Ahmadinejad’s era, populism was replaced by vulgar economics. This decline continued during Rouhani’s era. In previous eras, at least there was not as much decline among the country’s elite as to prevent them from formulating the Fourth Development Plan. However, the purging of the elite – meaning technocrats and elite bureaucrats – during Ahmadinejad’s era, left nothing behind for Rouhani’s era. What remained was also destroyed by Mr. Rouhani with his statement that we do not want any industrial development plan or foresight. In the end, during Rouhani’s era, they realized the need for foresight. So they included in the China deal that China will do foresight for us! This is a sign of degradation. It means that when you want to make a deal with a country, you must have already done the foresight for the deal; to the point where they say come and do foresight for us. This continues in the current government

Is there an accurate statistic on the unemployment rate and economic participation in the country?

What is the purpose of these statistics? Your question is somewhat pessimistic. Our discussion is about not having the right development model. The current development model leads to increased unemployment and the further we go, the more unemployment, economic bankruptcy, and the possibility of sanctions increase. Of course, it can be said that this unemployment is more prevalent among young people.

My question is regarding the published reports. At the end of the previous solar year, reports were published about a decrease in unemployment rates in the country compared to 1401. On the other hand, the statistics center has recently reported an increase in unemployment rates. Which of these statistics do you find more reliable?

These reports on unemployment reduction contradict themselves after a while. In the same statistics that showed a decrease, there was a point that received less attention. That is, the majority of those who had found a job last year were unemployed this year. It is clear that these jobs were temporary and not covered by insurance. These jobs do not last more than a year and are not continuous. That’s why I asked, what is the use of these statistics? Because we need to address structural issues. We need to address the structure and flow that exists not only in Iran but also in the world.

The issue is that we have entered the knowledge economy. This means a new era of production has emerged. This new era has made the labor situation similar to the industrialization threshold. At the threshold of industrialization in all countries of the world, manual labor jobs became bankrupt with the arrival of minimal automation, namely the steam engine, and a labor force emerged that, as Marx put it, went and threw a wrench in the steam engine to stop it from working and prevent unemployment. This reactionary response had no benefit. Marx also contradicts this in the Manifesto. He says that the reaction of the working class was somewhat natural because they still did not have knowledge. You cannot deprive humans of more abundant and higher quality production. That is why even imaginary socialists accept this kind of approach, that we must return to handicraft industries.

Now this has happened that automation resulting from advanced affairs will cause widespread unemployment. This widespread unemployment, which ranges from thirty to forty percent of the workforce, includes America, Korea, and China. This is even more in surrounding countries. This means that at least one billion people in the world are at risk of unemployment due to entering the knowledge economy. There is no possibility of preventing this process.

Does this mean that with the introduction of artificial intelligence into the job market, this level of unemployment will be created? What happens? Can you explain a little more?

Let me tell you the latest statistics for the year 2020. According to these statistics, in high-income countries in the year 2000, 36 to 37 percent of the workforce was highly skilled, 51 percent had average skills, and about 12 to 13 percent were unskilled. In 2020, these numbers increased to 42 percent for highly skilled workers and around 47 percent for workers with average skills, with little change in the percentage of unskilled or low-skilled workers. In contrast, in low-income countries, the percentage of highly skilled workers was only 5 percent in 2000, which has now grown to 6 percent in 2020.

In countries with low average income – including Iran – the highly skilled workforce was 10.5% in the year 2000, which has now increased to 16% in the year 2020. In countries with high average income, the percentage of skilled workforce was 14.4% in 2000, and has now reached 20.5% in 2020.

This combination shows that countries that have been able to enter the knowledge economy and attract workforce, have higher income, and those who have not been able to do so, fall into the trap of underdevelopment; meaning they have already industrialized and failed to enter the knowledge economy, resulting in the loss of their industrial workforce and an increase in unstable, low-income jobs. Then they claim to have created employment. What kind of employment have you created? We should ask, what have you done for development? The answer is that you have not created employment. The result is that skilled labor that is not employed migrates. This has created a very large income gap between countries that have failed to enter the knowledge economy – like Iran – and advanced countries. This income gap and disparity did not exist before. That is why there has been an increase in waves of migration from those who have failed to enter the knowledge economy. Those with less education are the ones who migrate by sea and we hear news of their

یک جمله آزمایشی است

This is a sample sentence.“بهترین روزهای زندگیتان را با هم سپری کنید”

“Spend the best days of your life together”

“They are human capital themselves.”

Yes, their existence is necessary for development. Development in countries like Iran is not based on capital, but on knowledge work. Our research also shows that companies that have been successful have done so through their knowledge work. Knowledge capital means buying a license or increasing investment to move forward. However, knowledge work means having skilled labor. They can take initiative, maintain industry, and combat issues like smuggling. Unfortunately, in Iran, even this knowledge work is not supported when the individual does not have suitable housing and cannot even afford to buy a car.

At the global level, companies that are based on knowledge are called university companies. They support them. If they succeed here, which they mostly don’t, they can’t come and work in the real environment. Because the real environment is anti-production. This person has no support and cannot provide any of their basic needs (because they don’t have rent and don’t have access to rent, for example). I also said at the beginning that the fundamental problem is not having a development model. The question is, where is that development model? There is no thinking about development in the government of Iran. A little news is necessary. But analyzing the development model is more important than a little news, and you media people and others should not replace analysis with quantitative discussions.

“In the past two decades, as you mentioned in your comparison of the beginning and end statistics, our higher education institutions and universities have increased, and as a result, the number of our graduates has also increased. There is a discussion about the fact that with the increase in people’s qualifications, their expectations also increase, but due to the economic capacity of Iran and their expectations, they are not able to enter the job market.”

“You are forced to enter the knowledge economy. Part of society, even the middle class, understands this and says, ‘I want to become a skilled and specialized workforce so I can have a good job and income.’ They also see that this is the case globally. That means if you don’t know computers, you have to push a cart! Or if you want to migrate, you have to get on a boat and disasters like drowning at sea can happen. The result is that the individual goes and studies. This is one of the advantages. It is well-known since before the revolution that Iranian and Korean families have the highest inclination towards education.”

On the other hand, the current educational system is anti-knowledge and its final direction is towards rent. This rent begins with selections and cultural revolutions and leads to the current situation. Years ago, the late Dr. Mohammad Amin Ghanei-Fard (sociologist) showed in a research why universities decline over time; because that current does not care about individual knowledge and wants to create a self-made individual. As a result, the level of knowledge decreases day by day.

Another aspect of our development model is the relationship we have with the triple helix matrix. This matrix represents the relationship between government, private sector, and university. However, this relationship is not always maintained. The government expects obedience from the university, so the relationship cannot be established. They also do not want the private sector to become too large and become a problem for the government, so they hinder its growth. As a result, the triple helix relationship cannot be established. Then, in order to have the appearance of knowledge, a knowledge-based company is formed. This knowledge-based company is a university company with a university staff. This knowledge-based company, for example, wants to create a proper foundation to establish a relationship with the private sector and knowledge production. However, because the real knowledge-based sector does not exist and is not allowed to exist, this does not happen. Another principle of the triple helix matrix is the independence of the university. Another principle is the independence of the private sector

The level of education is low. The triple matrix – according to what has been said – does not exist. Universities also do not have independence and the system also blocks the private sector and no one can go anywhere to learn something.

The society of knowledge is a society in which knowledge is transformed into individual and social wisdom for development. This process must be pursued. When this does not happen, people say that their expectations have risen! The mayor of New York says that my goal as a global city is to create affordable housing to attract the best minds in the world. My goal is clean air to attract brains and investors. An investor prefers to live in a healthy environment. What is the goal of the Tehran municipality? More density and traffic! That it cannot attract investment. When the government cannot do anything right and provide the right conditions, it says that I want to sell government property. Well, you can’t! The civil law says that the government cannot sell properties entrusted to it by the people for development. But it goes and takes the authority to sell. And then the government and the authorities talk about how educated people have high expectations!

Regarding artificial intelligence and automation, you mentioned that they lead to an increase in unemployment. The question here is, what needs to happen for this artificial intelligence and automation to create employment and prevent an increase in unemployment?

The solution is the formation of a development government; if they leave the right-wing and traditional right-wing behind. The concept of a development government is an economic development system that has been achieved in Scandinavia, South Korea, Japan, and China. The Scandinavian governments – which are development governments – are based on knowledge. Their government is also a cohesive government that has created a connection between employers, employees, and workers. Their direction is towards a knowledge-based society. Unlike, for example, America, which we see what happens to it. Because they have not yet adopted the neoliberal tradition for knowledge development. But Scandinavian countries have moved away from this tradition.

Of course, this term of neoliberalism has also created a kind of oversimplification. Some have reduced the world to the equation of neoliberalism, which is also a form of reductionism.

Countries like Scandinavian countries strive to become part of the global value chain. European countries also rely on developing their domestic skilled workforce. In contrast, for example, America relies on attracting runaway brains. Because the basis of knowledge development in America is based on capital. But in these developing countries, knowledge development is done through work.

In South Korea, Japan, and China, we are faced with a knowledge-based government; meaning that in these countries, a combination of knowledge-based government and knowledge-based work creates the development of a knowledge-based economy. They have also come to the realization that they must have a comprehensive welfare system, which is essentially a knowledge-based society.

In European countries, they prioritize the cultivation of knowledge. Their various social security systems aim to enhance human potential and empower individuals with knowledge. They have been successful in this endeavor and carry out this work democratically.

The government plays a more prominent role in countries like Japan, China, and South Korea; although China still does not have the same political democracy. However, they support economic and knowledge-based democracy, meaning their direction and principles are the same but the implementation differs. They create various economic systems. For example, South Korea creates various community-based enterprises. China does the same. These continuous issues increase motivation and help turn knowledge into ability. The role of the government is significant in this regard. Their development programs are very strong. In Scandinavia, development programs are not as decisive.

In the East Asian countries that I mentioned, in the free zones, they attract advanced capital to help with innovation. For example, imagine someone who wants to produce an electric car. If they want to conduct research and development that takes a hundred years, they come and attract multinational companies that want to become active in the free zones. Because they are forced to export capital. Multinational companies are forced to invest in order to survive, which is called direct investment. So they come to the free zones. Skilled labor also goes to the free zones and produces electric cars or cell phones. Then they have plans for transferring them to the inside. For example, at the beginning of their economic reforms, the Chinese had about 70 to 80 percent of their exports from the free zones. Now 30 percent of it is from the free zones, because they have been able to bring technology into the country. This is at the national level. They also come at the neighborhood and small levels and

Given the existing mindset towards technology in the government of Iran, what is the seriousness of the issue of automation and artificial intelligence in the economic sphere in Iran, considering the state of the internet and the closure of platforms such as Instagram and similar approaches?

See, if political elites and bureaucratic elites in the country do not have the right development model and direction, these kinds of actions with technology that you mentioned will continue and backward talks about it will be made. The problem is not that I convince an individual who has an exclusive position due to rent-seeking. The fundamental problem in the media and networks is that this development model must be transformed into the people’s goal. Then that rent-seeker must also respond to this goal for rent-seeking. Capitalists in countries that have developed and are not angels. They are forced to work according to the development model that the people want and, for example, say that we will make cars electric until a certain year. Because people will no longer buy them. I do not want to put the burden on the people. The problem is the neck of the country’s elites. I have always given an example. Constitutional elites presented a development model in that period and illiterate population and knew what to do to make it

Gerald says that the rarest factor in development is knowledge. Unfortunately, this knowledge has either been taken away from our politicians, intellectuals, and judges, or it has been lost. This is a joke that Peter Evans says. He says that dictators, if they are not stupid, become stupid. But over time, they also make their opponents stupid. They do this to appear simple, and it is so bad that their holy words escape their minds.

For years, I have been saying that instead of simplistic statements like leaving everything to the market, we must transform the public space into a space for consensus on development.

Thank you for the time you have given to the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh”.

Note:

1- The latest unemployment rate in Iran / Is the unemployment rate higher for young women or men?, Tadaol newspaper, 7 Bahman 1401.