Against Discrimination
The first question about the uprising of the people in Bangladesh in the past three weeks and the root of their protests, which left hundreds dead, is what their main protest was in these 20 days, and what actually happened on the twenty-first day that led to the escape of Ms. Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister, who is said to have left Dhaka for a city in India and the Prime Minister’s building was also occupied by the protesters.
The protests escalated thereafter, and the government of Bangladesh passed resolutions that mandated that half of the national government positions be reserved for certain specific groups. Accordingly, nearly 30% of these jobs were allocated to the relatives of those affected and veterans who were present during the Bangladesh independence war against Pakistan in 1971.
The protesters considered this resolution as an example of discrimination, a form of monopoly, and deprivation from competent and merit-based management, leading them to revolt.
The protests, however, faced bloody suppression, and although the government later retreated and canceled most of the quotas through decrees and intervention by the Supreme Court, the protesters, especially the students, demanded justice for the families of the deceased.
The situation has reached a point where after three weeks of street protests, Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, resigned yesterday, Tuesday, and left for India.
In fact, it’s like a woman leaving home to go back to her father’s or mother’s house because the formation of the country of Bangladesh is the result of the independence movement of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent, which led to the creation of Pakistan. However, even in this new land, they faced discrimination.
If in India they were subjected to systematic discrimination because of being Muslim, this time East Pakistan did not accept the language of the Bengali-speaking people, and if the initial separation was based on religion and the capital was named Islamabad and impurities were seen from the perspective of Hindus, now the country of Pakistan was established, this time a new land was formed named Bangladesh, based on the Bengali language, although its geographical distance from the original land had no impact.
The purpose of this reminder is that Pakistan and Bangladesh themselves protested against religious and language discrimination. Bangladeshis, with experience of language discrimination, could not bear the burden of discrimination. The scope of the protests was so extensive that even 13 police officers were killed in various ranks, and the situation escalated to the point where garment factories, which had greatly transformed the economy of Bangladesh, were often voluntarily closed to show solidarity with the protesters.
Among Iranian journalists and analysts, Engineer Abbas Abdi, more than others, has consistently focused on the two issues of discrimination and humiliation and considered the actions of these two as the root of protests against governments. Six years ago, in a note about these two, he wrote that discrimination is a more important factor in the formation of crises in governments, while discrimination in a way also entails humiliation and creates a sense of degradation in the individual who is discriminated against. Humiliation and discrimination are two destructive factors in society and their stability.
When the 2nd of Khordad appeared as a new social movement, I introduced and analyzed it in a note called ‘Revolution Against Humiliation’ because the humiliation against the elites of the people and intellectuals had become so severe that it prompted people to react in that way.
Although the revolution against the Shah regime can or should be analyzed and understood through structural and economic factors, alongside them, the Shah’s contemptuous behavior towards all sectors of society was the most significant socio-psychological factor in people’s inclination towards the revolution.
The main reason for the positive and celebratory reaction of the people to the fall of Reza Shah was his contemptuous behavior towards all sectors of society, even the administrative system under his command.
The fate of humiliating others is clear and should be learned from, but discrimination is a more important factor in the formation of crises in governments. Discrimination, in a way, includes contempt and creates a sense of being belittled in the individual who is discriminated against.
Discrimination is such that it initially tastes sweet to the perpetrator but eventually traps the discriminator in its own snare.
Tocqueville, a classic sociologist about two centuries ago, embarked on a journey to America in his youth and provided a brilliant analysis of the issue of slavery in the United States. Slavery, which is the pinnacle of discrimination and contempt for humanity, established for the purpose of exploiting one human by another, but he demonstrates how both the slaveholder and the master are at a loss.
He compares the two states of Ohio and Kentucky, which are on either side of the Ohio River and are similar in every aspect except that Ohio did not have slavery while Kentucky had slavery prevalent.
Tocqueville says that judging whether slavery or freedom is more beneficial for humanity is an easy task.
Just hop on a boat and cruise down the Ohio River, glancing at the left bank and then the right bank from time to time.
On the left bank of Ohio, we see a vibrant, developed, lively, and beautiful community, while in Kentucky, we witness a dead, soulless, underdeveloped society.
He clearly explains the reason for this difference, how slaveholders become enslaved by their slaves and suffer decline both morally and economically.
Another brilliant analysis of the issue of discrimination was presented by the American economist and sociologist, Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker.
He challenges the view that discrimination benefits the discriminator and demonstrates that if an employer does not hire workers based solely on skin color or other non-professional criteria, they have missed out on a valuable opportunity.
In fact, his theory and analysis have been widely accepted among various industries and companies as a principle that discrimination leads to decline and ultimately bankruptcy of the company.
Bangladesh, however, is a vivid and extensive example that shows discrimination can challenge a political structure with serious and sometimes new challenges. According to Mr. Daier’s two slogans on rights and justice, achieving justice in his government can be measured by the absence of discrimination.
If Iranian radical principles fall into the current situation and the call for justice expansion is challenged and even ridiculed, it is because justice is the opposite of discrimination, and justice cannot be called for with discriminatory decisions and resolutions.
Look at how in recent days the current government managers are shamelessly favoring themselves in appointments and discriminatory decisions, and the most ridiculous of all is appointing the weakest Minister in the history of education to a position in the country’s educational assessment organization, which shows that the justice claimed by these gentlemen is actually just a pseudonym for some who are seeking positions. The vice president emphasized during the election struggles that the officials’ table should not be separate from the people’s table, rather than repeating empty promises or lies like land, gold, and loans.
The disaster that has befallen Mrs. Sheikh Hasina, despite belonging to a respected family in Bangladesh, is because she separated her table, her relatives, appointees, and affiliates from the ordinary people and believed that the economic growth of this country, which is astonishing in some areas such as clothing production and conquering global markets, sometimes surpasses Turkey, has detained people from opposing discrimination and has discredited the coin of justice.
Due to the sensitivities surrounding the word equality, one cannot simply ignore equality, and the reason for opposing many international conventions or rejecting resolutions in the Guardian Council is not considered legitimate, but when it comes to justice, these sensitivities do not exist. It is possible and appropriate for the new government to pursue the elimination of discrimination, nepotism, and unfair quotas as examples of fighting discrimination.
We have seen and heard that even positive discrimination has been mentioned to achieve justice in some areas, especially in the employment of minorities and women. With this perspective, any discriminatory action is a step towards justice.
Quotas and nepotism for specific individuals, which actually take place with the aim of fostering support and increasing the number of loyalists or as a reward to them or elevating a class or group above others, have no relation to justice and are only justified when compensation for a missed opportunity is provided.
During my high school years in Alborz, which coincided with the early years of the war, a friend rushed to the war front in his youth and naturally lost a school year and remained behind.
Later, he was able to obtain his diploma with precautions and support, benefited from reserved quotas in the university entrance exam, and is now a dentist who has returned to his hometown in Arak. Instead of opening a private practice, he is currently providing services in a government clinic and possibly a charity one.
It is obvious that granting him a reserved quota was just and fair, and it is still possible and necessary to defend the reserved quotas for universities or those who sacrificed for this land. However, extending it to future generations, while more than 36 years have passed since the end of the Iran-Iraq war, shows more signs of favoritism and discrimination rather than justice.
The problem, however, is not limited to educational quotas. The purification project in the past three years, which failed with the arrival of Mr. Physicians, is still struggling for monopoly in management. Moreover, in cultural universities and new recruitments, the term teacher or professor had been depersonalized and leveled for self and non-self.
Although purification and discriminatory pricing may be initially justified for certain individuals and classes based on security justifications, as we have seen in Bangladesh, ultimately it threatens national security. The big mistake of Ms. Sheikh Hasina was to assume that because she is the daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founder of Bangladesh and has been Prime Minister four times before, she is legitimate and immune to any criticism or scrutiny. However, discrimination and belittlement do not recognize exceptions, and people will eventually rebel against them. Today, for the people of Bangladesh, it was the midsummer of 1403 solar.
We said that the slogan of physicians and among the most frequent words to him is justice and fairness. In Plato’s view, justice is a virtue by which everyone should be given what they deserve.
This deservingness cannot be determined by standards and criteria, but in political positions, they give weight to social and political status.
In this view, instead of insisting on equality, one can speak of justice and bestowal based on deservingness. Any rule that disrupts this balance is unjust, except in cases of positive discrimination or compensating for lost opportunities, as I mentioned above, is not acceptable and acceptable.
It is a pleasant place where the prompt uprising of the people of Bangladesh against discrimination and unfair quotas has not been interpreted by the domestic mainstream media as a color revolution or a conspiracy by the United States, and the opportunity to address it from the perspective that I have outlined in this text has not been overlooked.
Persian
مشاهده این مقاله به زبان فارسی
