The fourteenth presidential election, regardless of its outcome, had another characteristic that sparked many debates and controversies in society. The low participation of people in both stages of the election and the boycott of it by the majority of the society, has been defined as the beginning of a new era of political action by the people.

It is possible that every individual, group, and political movement can have their own interpretation and narrative of this lack of participation. What is important and what this conversation aims to explore is the understanding of the rational authority or power of the political system from the existing reality. To further examine this issue and delve deeper into the participation and boycott of the recent elections, we sat down for a conversation with Dr. Mostafa Mehrayin, a sociology professor at Tarbiat Modares University.

In all the years that have passed since the establishment of the ballot boxes in the Islamic Republic, what stages have generally been passed that have brought people’s political participation and activism in elections to a level that we have witnessed? What is the most important reason for political obstruction in the Islamic Republic?

Political sociology of the past 45 years – which has been my intellectual project – is still ongoing. The problem with politics in our society lies in the text of the constitution. We are faced with two forces in the constitution: the force of the people and the force beyond the people or beyond history. These two forces are represented by the presidency, which represents the people, and the guardianship, which represents a position beyond the people. In this constitution, a role has been designed and a political position defined that will essentially absorb and subdue everything, and that is the position of the Supreme Leader. If we look at the constitution in a romantic way, it is an attractive law in which two forces are placed side by side, able to control each other. The goal of the writers of this text and the goal of the revolution’s ideologues was to make despotism impossible by placing these two forces together; because if the religious aspect tries to dominate, the people’s aspect will control

In the midst of economic, cultural and social blockade, political action is essentially meaningless and will not bring about any change or transformation. The duality that exists in our constitution and was also mentioned in the definition of the revolution’s founders, which sought to unite the people and the divine, has over time been overtaken by the dominance of the divine over the people, and the president is no longer a representative of the people. In other words, we cannot expect any change from this aspect.

What message can the lack of participation by the majority of people in the first round of presidential elections convey for the government?

The lack of participation of the majority of people in the first round of presidential elections has sent important messages for the government. One of the most significant messages of non-participation has been dissatisfaction with the current system. Widespread non-participation of the people can indicate general dissatisfaction with the economic, social, and political conditions of the country. This dissatisfaction may be due to economic problems, unemployment, corruption, or social and political restrictions.

If people feel that the elections are not fair and transparent and the results are predetermined, they may refrain from participating in the elections. This lack of trust can lead to a decrease in the legitimacy of the government and ruling institutions. If people feel that participating in the elections will not bring about positive changes, they may refrain from participating due to fatigue and despair from political reforms.

Not participating in elections can be seen as a silent and indirect protest against the government and its policies. This protest can be a way of expressing people’s opposition to current decisions and policies.

This lack of participation can indicate the need for fundamental reforms in the political and social structure of the country. The government may receive the message that in order to gain trust and participation from the people, serious changes and reforms are necessary.

Reducing participation can also provide a suitable opportunity for opponents and critics of the government to increase their efforts in gaining public support and pressuring the government to implement reforms.

In general, the lack of participation of the majority of people in elections can be a warning sign for the government, indicating the need for a review of its policies and approaches.

In the second stage of the Iranian presidential election, some of the dissatisfied were convinced to go to the ballot boxes. What were the reasons for changing people’s attitudes towards participating in the second stage of the election?

The change in people’s attitudes and perspectives towards participating in the second round of presidential elections can have multiple reasons. These reasons can have political, social, and psychological dimensions. In the second round of elections, the competition between the two final candidates reaches its peak. This intense competition can motivate people to participate in the elections, as they feel that their vote has a more direct impact on determining the final outcome. Additionally, the media’s focus on the two final candidates increases and election campaigns and discussions intensify. This extensive media coverage can further encourage people to participate in the elections.

In addition, between the first and second rounds, candidates and their supporters make more efforts to gain public support, including holding rallies, public meetings, and using social networks. These efforts can lead to increased participation of the people.

Some of the candidates may feel a greater sense of responsibility towards the outcome of the election; especially if their preferred candidate has made it to the second round. This sense of responsibility can serve as motivation for participating in the elections.

It is possible that some voters may be concerned about the victory of a candidate whose views and policies they oppose. This concern may lead them to participate in the election in order to prevent the victory of the opposing candidate.

Changes in political dynamics, such as new alliances or declared support from influential political figures, can have a significant impact on people’s decision to participate in the second round of elections.

The experience and results of the first round of elections can change people’s perspectives and expectations. This experience may cause those who did not participate in the first round to become more active in the second round.

In the second stage, the distance between the number of candidates is usually less and each person’s vote has a greater impact on the final result. This feeling of greater influence can encourage people to participate in the elections.

Dear Dr. Barakhi.–

That their number is not small.—

It is believed that the reformists always seize the opportunity for power in order to rebuild themselves and in return, benefit from the privileges of power. If the result of the election had been in favor of Mr. Jalili, what positive or negative changes could have occurred in favor of the election’s sanctioners?

If the result of the election had been in favor of Jalili, the election sanctioners would have faced a series of positive and negative developments. One of the positive consequences of Jalili’s election could have been strengthening the motivation of reformists to continue their struggle. Additionally, Jalili’s election could have created more motivation and unity among the election sanctioners and opponents of the ruling government, as they could clearly see the need for more efforts towards change. This result could have led to an increase in political awareness among the people and more attention to important issues in the country, as the sanctioners could have shown the people that the political system needs serious reforms. The sanctioners could have also focused on strengthening and expanding civil society organizations and groups to pursue their goals, which could have been beneficial for the development of democracy and human rights. A result in favor of the ruling candidate could have also increased international pressure on the government, as the global community could have been seeking to ensure the protection of human

However, choosing a candidate supported by the majority of the government can also have negative consequences, especially for reformists who are one of the targets of increased suppression and restrictions. Choosing Jalili could lead to increased suppression and further restrictions on opponents and sanctions. These suppressions could include arrests, media restrictions, and more control over civil activities. A closed political space could lead to a decrease in civil liberties and human rights, which would have a negative impact on people’s daily lives. The result could lead to increased despair and apathy among some of the sanctions, as they may feel that their efforts are futile and refrain from political participation. This despair could potentially lead to a decrease in political participation in the future, as people gradually lose trust in the electoral processes. Additionally, choosing Jalili could potentially lead to the continuation of ineffective economic policies, which would exacerbate economic problems and increase public dissatisfaction.

Political and social instability resulting from the election results could lead to a decrease in domestic and foreign investments, which would have a negative impact on economic growth and job creation.

In what way can the victory of reformists and specifically the election of physicians as president lead to a change in the approach of governance in favor of the demands of the people?

Choosing physicians as the president of Iran can lead to a change in the approach of governance in favor of the demands of the people under certain circumstances.

If the selection of physicians is accompanied by extensive support and high participation of the people, he can use this popular support to pressure governing institutions to implement necessary changes.

If doctors can form a strong coalition with reformist and moderate institutions and groups, this coalition can provide the necessary force to advance reforms and necessary changes. Success in cooperation and positive interaction with other powers, such as the Islamic Consultative Assembly and the judiciary, can help better implement policies and reform programs.

Doctors, based on their medical and managerial background, may be able to address the country’s issues with a scientific and practical approach and implement effective reform programs that lead to improvements in health, education, and economy.

If doctors can create and implement programs to reduce social and economic inequalities, create employment opportunities, and improve the living conditions of the lower classes, these changes can increase public satisfaction and put more pressure on the government to pay attention to the demands of the people. Commitment to transparency and fighting corruption can rebuild public trust and gain more support from the marginalized members of society.

In addition, having a balanced and diplomatic approach in foreign policy can help reduce tensions and improve international relations, which can ultimately lead to improving domestic economic conditions and increasing public welfare. Commitment to expanding citizenship rights and civil liberties can play an important role in garnering public support and creating positive changes in society. If a team of independent experts and specialists in various fields is employed, the likelihood of success in implementing reform programs and responding to the demands of the people increases.

In general, choosing physicians as the president can be an opportunity to create positive changes for the benefit of the people; provided that he/she can utilize popular support, positive interaction with other powers, and a scientific and practical approach to implement their reform programs.

Thank you for the opportunity you have provided us with to use the peace line.