The Purpose of Political Order: The State or the People?

Abstract

The discourse on power and authority in the late Qajar and Pahlavi eras was preoccupied predominantly with the conduct of the state: what should its form be in order to be most effective? To what extent should power and authority be focused in the person of a ruler? How far should checks and balances be institutionalized to prevent the temptations of despotism? Many of the key players in the public life of Iran—statesmen, politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, thinkers, et cetera—took their positions on the manner in which political order should take shape. The urge to think in terms of institutions became especially meaningful after the mashruteh movement, as the possibilities of restricting or regulating executive authority began to be realized. During the Pahlavi era, Reza Shah and his son alike explored an additional dimension within this discursive tradition. By testing the limits of executive authority staying within the bounds of the institutional logic of constitutionalism, the Pahlavis subverted the mashruteh tradition quite successfully, reducing the restrictions on executive authority effectively to a notional level.