It resembles everything except the law
It resembles everything except the law
Unfortunately, we are in a situation where members of the parliament’s cultural commission do not know artists, do not watch films, and as a rule, everything we have should match everything else we have. It is probably a futile and excessive expectation to ask these gentlemen to practice politics a little and accept that governance, like physics, chemistry, medicine, and engineering, is a science that must be learned.
I think the publication of the text of the so-called chastity and hijab bill and its possible announcement in the coming days will more than anything serve as a basis for restoring the dignity of political science. Reading this bill shows that unfortunately, some officials do not have a proper understanding of the basics of political science and, based on their own imaginations, think they can turn any text into a binding law simply by standing up and sitting down, or worse, by approving it in closed sessions.
This is while, for example, if officials had leafed through a little of Nicomachean Ethics and Aristotle’s Politics, they would have acknowledged this obvious point that firstly, not all matters can be regulated by law because it is impossible to legislate on certain matters, and secondly, the more the law, the more the deception and harm. Aristotle pointed out this point 2300 years ago, and today in political science faculties, this is one of the first lessons taught to students.
Yet unfortunately, we are in a situation where members of the parliament’s cultural commission do not know artists, do not watch films, and as a rule, everything we have should match everything else we have. It is probably a futile and excessive expectation to ask these gentlemen to practice politics a little and accept that governance, like physics, chemistry, medicine, and engineering, is a science that must be learned.
Of course, fairness dictates that the error of extreme disregard for political science does not only arise from the rulers but also many people, in their daily conversations, have often criticized and mocked this humble student of politics by asking what good is politics, or worse, questioning whether politics requires studying. The simple answer is yes, politics is a science and requires research and education.
Incidentally, here again, we must keep in mind Aristotle’s point that called politics the master science because today the deadly consequences of governance errors in drafting such texts or decisions like filtering have been exposed to all economic and cultural aspects of citizens’ lives. Perhaps this will prompt us to recognize the importance of politics as the management of administrations and realize that we cannot naively think that by avoiding politics, we can create islands in other areas of society and be at ease. No, it is not so, as every political decision affects all aspects of business, leisure, and even people’s breathing.
I read recently that a poet said people think their children should only study medicine and engineering and that literature is not important. Now, politics should be added to literature, and efforts should be made to first make the rulers aware of this meaning. The late Dr. Abdolali Ghavam recounted that before the revolution, he was in charge of a department where anyone who wanted to take a position like governorship or provincial administration outside the central province was required to undergo training there.
He said that after the revolution, with the support of Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani, this work continued for a while, but interventions and pressures ultimately led to the closure of that department. Now, this is our current story, where we see that our legislators, for example, do not pay attention to the simple difference between law and legislation and think it is enough to decide to write a law and impose their intentions and opinions on society under the pretext of being a member of parliament, even though these representatives have not even secured the votes of seven percent of eligible voters.
Law is different from legislation. Hayek explained this in his book ‘Law, Legislation, and Liberty.’ In short, not every order and command can be called a law. Hayek called the act of consciously designing and imposing orders by government officials legislation, while he considered law to be those social norms that have gained widespread acceptance through long-term interactions among people without anyone having designed them or forced others to follow them.
For example, think of the law of queues. If someone breaks the queue, social norms will automatically and without government intervention consider them a lawbreaker. You remember the law mandating seatbelt use while driving; the first enforcers of it were the children who today, in their adulthood, this bill seeks to discipline.
To summarize, if the parliament issues an unjust order that the general understanding of society considers contrary to public welfare, not only will that order not be enforced, but it will also not gain legitimacy, and violating it will not be a cause for shame. Aristotle also taught us this. In other words, a law is either just, meaning people consider it fair, or it is not a law at all.