Dr. Freiborz Raeisdana, born in 1327, is a renowned Iranian economist, a professor of economics at the University of Tehran, and a member of the Iranian Writers Association. He, who holds a PhD in economics from the London School of Economics and Political Science, has been arrested and imprisoned several times for expressing his critical economic views.

In an interview with the magazine Khat-e-Solh, he says that the current government’s economic plans cannot benefit the hardworking people; “Even if inflation decreases, the wages of workers are still lower than the inflation rate and they are struggling to keep up.”

Fereydoun Raeesdana also believes: “Just as we should not play the role of God for workers at the beginning of a labor movement, remaining impartial for intellectuals and advocates of the working class under the pretext of being a trade union activity, claiming that it only serves its own limited interests is also wrong.”

Mr. Dana, Is’haq Jahangiri, the first deputy of Mr. Rouhani, in a meeting with Alireza Mahjoub, the secretary general of the Workers’ House, emphasized that the era of economic records is detrimental to workers and the government is striving to pull the country’s economy out of recession with its plans. What is your opinion on this matter? It seems that the eleventh government should have a special support program for workers and strengthen this group.

No, Mr. Rouhani’s government cannot have such special programs. It may be a facade or superficial and temporary benefits, for example in some strikes or similar cases. But fundamentally, a government that is moving towards structural adjustment policies with all its power and force, and its plan to get out of the crisis and recession, has fallen into an economic bubble and discriminatory policies, and its structural adjustment policy has failed in many countries and has also been rejected in Iran. However, this government, due to its class commitments, is in conflict with the right-wing government of Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad was a new conservative and he is also a new liberal; therefore, this government cannot in any way benefit the working class.

The government goes to someone who has been the head of the workers’ house for 35 years and is also one of the wealthy, with a long history of collaborating in suppressing workers; all while the workers’ house is not even a representative of the workers in the country. Currently, we only have five and seven-tenths million unemployed, none of whom are members of the workers’ house. Since the beginning of the revolution, 2700 representatives have gone to the parliament, none of whom were workers or socialists, none were farmers, and none were hardworking female nurses. But the government never criticizes this and does not bring up these issues, and then plays with numbers and statistics and says that the inflation rate has decreased; as if when the inflation rate decreases, the workers should be content. Even if the inflation rate decreases, the wages of workers are still lower than the inflation rate of a galloping horse, and they are limping forward. These workers are losing

Dear Doctor, the government has announced that 280 trillion tomans will be allocated as facilities this year and in this regard, providing capital for factories and production units will be a priority. Do you think these kinds of statements are not just slogans of the ninth and tenth governments and can workers be encouraged by such statements?

The similarity of this government to the Ahmadinejad government is very high; more than we would like to discuss point by point, and it is not right to discuss point by point at all. However, the most important issue is that both governments are moving towards using government resources in the economy, which are oil resources, to secure capital and support a part of the capital that is incompetent and inefficient; now, if the capital were correct and proper, the issue would have been different. In countries where capital is weak, governments mostly give direction to this capital, and because there is no democracy, independent organizations, people’s parties, women’s movements, youth, students, and the like, this direction does not move towards the interests of consumers and the interests of workers and fulfilling their needs. Unless there is someone with a compassionate heart who shows mercy to the poor and prays for them. Or, for example, we can say that if the capitalists prosper, God willing, they will employ the

In my opinion, the similarities in the nature of capitalist performance in the Third World are weak, which sometimes leads to the desire to show initiatives against competitors and foreign domination, which does not necessarily mean independence, anti-imperialist struggle, or the same perspective that existed gloriously in our history, like the vision of Mr. Dr. Mosaddegh. The old initiatives meant salvation and a benefit for this salvation, but now this salvation is fading away and other interests are emerging. You can see that the struggles between factions are not about serving the people. The struggles are about how to manage resources and which sectors to give them to.

These resources, which are the oil resources, are supposed to come with the resolution of the problem with America and the lifting of sanctions. I can assure you that the amount you mentioned will not be achieved. Even if it does, a large portion of it will be in the form of financial investments that will create a bubble. Therefore, the sad song “Spring is not coming, only weeds are coming!” is being repeated.

Has Mr. Rouhani been able to fulfill his election promises regarding improving the economic conditions, or at least is he on the path to improving this situation? Can we consider his economic record in this one year period to be more acceptable than the previous government?

See, fundamentally, describing any phenomenon requires comparison. That means if you say something is bad, there must also be something good there. Apart from this, in every comparison, a criterion is also necessary. The criterion is not perfect reason, because perfect reason does not exist; it is current reason, practical reason for living. When I want to make a comparison, I see the economy as a fruit that only Fariborz the wise leader did not invent…

Therefore, in comparison, if we say a little better, a little worse, it is useless and from what perspective is it better!? Now it is possible that some yellow newspapers write that there has been a lot of employment, which is not a reason, and we have the right to doubt such statistics and not be entertained by such toys. As a result, choosing between a little better and a little worse follows a philosophy that wants to keep humans in the captivity of submission and shameful submissiveness. At least I should not think like this. Economics is my specialty and unfortunately it is the field through which I make a living and if it does not serve reality, it becomes acting; I can say that nurturing can have the illusion of the sky of Mars, but the reality is life itself. There is also an ideal called saving the people of this land; of course, when I speak like this, I never claim that the people of this land are at the level of the people of Somalia

In general, these words and pleasing statistics that we will reduce the 40% inflation to 20% in the next six months are like me putting food behind a glass for a week and telling you to rub your stomach to feel full.

Dear Dr. Dana, let me talk a little about labor unions; there are two approaches to labor unions: in your opinion as an economist, can labor unions help improve the economy of a country or, as its opponents say, do they only protect the professional rights of individuals and sacrifice the economic interests of a society in some cases?

No, I do not believe that labor unions should compromise their economic and professional demands in order to seize historical opportunities and betray themselves…

I am not one of those intellectuals who think that as soon as a workers’ movement begins, we must rush to play the role of God for the workers as the owner of a socialist idea. But I also know and believe that remaining impartial for radical intellectuals and claiming justice, claiming to support the working class, allowing them to sit in their place and say let them do whatever they want, these are trade union movements and they secure their own limited interests; which is also wrong. Therefore, in my final conclusion, I believe that unions and workers’ organizations should become political and political parties should be formed alongside them. But this does not mean that one should go and make themselves the substitute for that movement through self-promotion.

In my opinion, the victory of the workers in Bafgh was partly due to the fact that, in any case, a number of self-proclaimed workers or labor organizations, whose echo is much louder than reality, for whatever reason, possibly due to the supervision of the city by security forces, were unable to enter the movement. If this had happened, it would have diverted the movement; although this does not mean that the people of Bafgh should have been left alone. Why? Because what they had achieved was one of the best achievements of the labor movement in Iran; they went beyond the legal limits and their individual and trade demands, and did not go on strike to increase their wages. They took the people to the streets, talked about privatization, and said they would not allow it to happen, and pushed for this demand so much that they reached a higher level of labor demands, and this is a great lesson. I was very happy about this and realized that both myself

These achievements, as I mentioned, were partly due to its immunity from unnecessary and misleading interventions, and partly due to the awareness that the workers had gained, and now it is time to transfer these demands; now in Saveh and in the Alborz coal mine, these demands are being raised.

The most important issue is that these benefits that governments provide to workers under certain conditions are being taken away one by one, and if the working class does not have a party, they will be left with nothing.

Is it possible for you to explain what you mean by self-reliant individuals and organizations?

See, some of the supporting organizations and organizations of workers, women, etc. did not pass their exams well. This was happening while they had raised high hopes outside the country, to the extent that everyone was trying to take that organization away from them or provide help. Although these helps were not in their favor and mostly tore these organizations apart and did not let them stand on their own feet. Help, cooperation, and friendship are all good, but it should not come as a sudden invasion and spread and burn. For example, the Iranian Writers’ Association has never gone under the burden of any kind of internal or external help or dependence, but we have used and thanked the non-governmental support of dear people and intellectuals in Europe, America, and Asia with all our interest; without creating any official or organizational dependence. My experience says that these helps are poison…

In your opinion, to what extent can it be said that the Iranian government supports labor unions or at least is not opposed to them?

In any case, there is concern that the interests of the ruling class may be jeopardized. If they tolerate any activity, it is because they have come to the realization that they should give some space and let others come forward. If our interests, especially the interests of our own faction, are at risk somewhere, we identify it and act differently. So the methods may be different, but ultimately they show a common goal.

For example, Bafq could have found a solution by suppressing and using the traditional methods of the Islamic Republic. We must be realistic; it is not the case that if Bafq was suppressed, the flames of rebellion and dissatisfaction would spread to all cities like Morocco and the self-immolation of that young man. The fact that there was no severe suppression in Bafq was not due to the government or law enforcement, but rather local authorities and the city council went to defend Bafq and released some of the workers from prison and now they have put heavy guarantees that these are all control tools that are in their place. Or there have been other strikes where the employer has withdrawn their complaint or forced them to take out a loan and pay the workers’ wages.

Some people say it is related to the nuclear negotiations and human rights should not be used as an excuse by America…

As a final question, it would be good to inquire about your opinion on the priority between the two principles of “human rights” and “workers’ rights”, which is a long-standing and controversial issue. Which one do you prioritize and why?

See, human rights organizations are successful achievements of humanity, even if they belong to the bourgeoisie. Just as the bourgeoisie has had progress in its own history compared to the past, it is not that we should ignore all of this society that is full of relevant issues, let alone human rights and the 1946 declaration that was about the inevitabilities of capitalism that emerged from a great war. In my opinion, the issue of human rights is an evolutionary discussion, and now we need to review the 1946 declaration. Governments can no longer and do not have the ability to do so, so people must take action. One of these reviews is about economic rights. We cannot remain indifferent to ownership, we must consider ownership as part of human rights and then this ownership will lead to unemployment, poverty, and neglect of workers’ rights.

Human rights in the current situation are not necessarily in line with workers’ rights; while some of them, such as freedom of thought and expression and their organizations, are compatible, if workers’ rights are exempt from the bad experiences and violence that unfortunately have been recorded in the name of socialism in the past, these workers’ rights are not contrary to human rights. Especially in their more advanced form. Therefore, I believe that we should not put these two in conflict with each other. Supporters of workers’ rights should defend all democratic struggles such as women’s rights, human rights, and with a critical perspective, children’s rights, press rights, and the rights of political prisoners. In fact, the labor movement, which claims that it bears a great responsibility in the historical passage, must – with its own critical perspective, of course – support and support human rights. Of course, I should also say that the right and rights that exist under the name of human rights are not enough and cannot meet the

Thank you for the time you have given us in the Khatt-e-Solh magazine…