Ehsan Lashgari
Abstract
Social identity is a historical phenomenon and is influenced by political and social processes at any given time, resulting in a distinct form of homogeneous social identity. In other words, social common identity refers to the creation of a belonging sense to a specific political-social territory and ...
Read More
Social identity is a historical phenomenon and is influenced by political and social processes at any given time, resulting in a distinct form of homogeneous social identity. In other words, social common identity refers to the creation of a belonging sense to a specific political-social territory and it is the result of the deliberate efforts of a political class to create a tool that facilitates the preservation of power and the exercise of governance. In the Afsharid era between 1736 – 1796, militarism has played an important role in uniting scattered tribal-ethnic components in Iran. Since there are few studies on the functioning of the Afsharid regime's militarism and its role in creating a sense of belonging to the territory of the people, this article attempts to formulate the concept of common social identity in Iran during the era of Nader Shah Afshar relying on the interpretive method. In this regard, the components affecting the concept of common social identity in the land of Iran through Nader Shah's military approach in creating a sense of territorial belonging in Iran are examined by analyzing the socio-political text of this period. The results of the research show that the direction of building a common social identity in this period was deeply influenced by the military approaches of the government. And the factors such as geopolitical alienation with the eastern neighbors, especially the Gurkans of India, the political military compulsion to bring the teachings of Shi’a and Sunni closer to building a great Islamic empire and validating the military forces of the tribes were the most important components of creating a common social identity during this period.
Mohsen Azizzadehtasouj; zahra Ahmady; Mohammad Reza Hafeznia; Seyyed Mohammad Kazem Sajad Pour
Abstract
Geopolitics, throughout its history, has been associated with concepts such as war, competition and power; according to the traditional geopolitics, governments in the past were seeking territory; land management and gaining power. So the traditional geopolitics expressed the views of the powerful states ...
Read More
Geopolitics, throughout its history, has been associated with concepts such as war, competition and power; according to the traditional geopolitics, governments in the past were seeking territory; land management and gaining power. So the traditional geopolitics expressed the views of the powerful states about the world. However, the developments in different fields gave rise to new topics in the field of geopolitical study. The dominant thought on the structures and international system in contemporary times with the emergence and manifestation of new material and spiritual priorities such as: humanity's need to live in an atmosphere of peace, the importance of taking steps towards development and human dignity has prevailed over the prevention of armed conflicts and the reduction of violence caused by war. The scientific study and investigation of the method of establishing objectification methods for such a purpose is one of the basic foundations of the concept of geopolitics today. This article tries to explain the geopolitical process of peace. This research is descriptive-analytical in terms of nature and method. The findings of the research show the formation of new regional identities, the regional security, social development, the structures and functions of international institutions, the dominance of the global peace and justice discourse, the global fight against terrorism, humanitarian interventions, the observance of human rights and international law, the expansion of international dialogues, de-escalation and confidence-building between countries, regions and the world are increasing in such a way that in a humanistic approach, the reduction of human suffering is considered as one of the most important benefits of geopolitics of peace in the geographical space.
Yashar Zaki; Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf; Marjan Badiee Azandahi; Seyed Rahmatallah Mousavifar; Seyyed Mohammad Moghimi
Abstract
Introduction: Geographic factors make the political organization of space geographically. Each factor at any geographical scale, due to the level of power and to the extent that it utilizes various instruments appropriate to the level of sovereignty and power, leads to the political organization of space. ...
Read More
Introduction: Geographic factors make the political organization of space geographically. Each factor at any geographical scale, due to the level of power and to the extent that it utilizes various instruments appropriate to the level of sovereignty and power, leads to the political organization of space. The global action circle represents the world's largest geographic scale. The question raised is how the global system, through which mechanisms and processes at the global level, makes political organization of space.Methodology: The research methodology of the present paper is based on the qualitative method and on the principles of analysis-explanation.Result and discussion: The global system, through structural and non-structural elements, leads to the political organization of space. Power is the driving force behind the global system for achieving its goals. The global system creates and strengthens the structural power of institutions and organizations. Institutions and organizations produce the rules and norms they need globally. All political units are required to observe the laws and regulations of the world system and, in the event of non-compliance of political units and countries, these rules are faced with the violent power of global powers. Through discourse, global powers differentiate themselves from countries that they dislike for the global order and punish them through violent power or sanctions.Conclusion: In the end, global powers, with the backing of institutions, laws, regulations, norms and production discourses, legitimize their actions on the global stage.
Rouhollah Asadi; Mojtaba Sadeghi
Abstract
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Given that the geographic space is a social production/reproduction, it is known as a social phenomena that is made by the society. We can call it a text or a spatial text because the humans - as the logical being - are authors of spatial text, so this ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Given that the geographic space is a social production/reproduction, it is known as a social phenomena that is made by the society. We can call it a text or a spatial text because the humans - as the logical being - are authors of spatial text, so this spatial text (geographic space) is a significant and complex phenomena. The transition of geographic space of one status to another is a sign that shows geographic spaces are the dynamic phenomenon. All of geographic spaces are driving toward new status and conditions because they are not a fixed and static phenomenon but they are a social production. All of the social texts are dynamic because “society” as their base is a dynamic phenomenon. So, geographic space is a dynamic text as well. The spatial text of those geographic spaces which have been made by wider and more varied societies, are also more varied.
On the one hand, geographic space is the outcome of social, political, cultural, economic processes, while on the other hand, discourses on geographic space try to intertwine this process toward their regimes of truth, structures, visions, and purposes. So the“discourses” play an important role in the processes of writing spatial text or geographic spaces. Each of the agriculture, industrial, and information era has created its own special geographic spaces. In the network society and the information era, worldwide information and communication technology has provided a context to create the micro-discourses. Cosequently, it has provided a context for their shifts. The moving toward ‘network society’, has to be accompanied by changes in the text of geographic spaces. Communication of varied micro-discourses is one of the characters of ‘network society’. This micro-discourse can affect the geographical texts. This article intends to answer this question: What drives geographic spaces from ‘oriented mono-textual’ space to ‘oriented multi-textual’ and then ‘oriented inter-textual? And how?
Review of Literature
Based on the Foucaultian notion of "power" and "discourse," it can be said that the micro-discourses derive geographical spaces from ‘oriented mono-textual’ space to ‘oriented multi-textual’ and then ‘oriented inter-textual'. Foucault considers discourse as the social and historical state of society, and believes that we are dealing with major prohibitions and types of discourse that condemn one aspect of the meaning and give the priority to another (Sajjadi & Dashti, 2009, 86). “Each type of discourse creates a special space for action, which is what Foucault calls" areas of possible choices" (Dreyfus & Rabynv, 1997, 156). The networked society - by its uncontrollable nature - not only provides the areas of possible choices, but also enables the micro-discourses to become more powerful and influential discourses.
The network society’s space has provided a more globalized and dynamic communication platform for the flowing of information, wealth, and power among social networking levels; by making a link among 1- places, where activities (and the people who execute them) are located in, 2- communication networks that link these activities and 3. The theme and geometry of the information flows that form the activities with the certain purpose and function. (Castells, 2004). A networke society is a society of unequal and incompatible languages whose common criteria are abandoned in favor of pluralism (Tajik, 2008: 134). In the Foucault's concept of power, power is deeply rooted which is based on the understanding of the productive form of power, its regulation, and its decentralized or networked and dispersed nature throughout the society ”(Nazari, 2011, 345) and the notion of power. It has a social network and can be found in all areas of society and human relations (Ibid 346). It reflects and generates the power and displacement at any level. The space of flows has provided the "possibility" that micro-discourses change and create spatial texts which can switch geographical spaces into ‘oriented multi-textual’ and then ‘oriented inter-textual' ones.
Method
The methodology of this paper is a logical–analytical one. At first, the basic concepts of discussion (space, discourse, network society, dialogue, and monologue) are described. Then, relationships among basic concepts have been determined in many theories including Manuel Castells’s network society theory and Michel Foucault’s power theory.
Results and Discussion
The network society is the society that is made by networks, communications, and media. So, in this society, the monopolization and control of governments on information and communications is fading. In fact, the network society provides a context for the formation, presentation, and the spread of discourses. These discourses enter to the monologue-mono-discursive circle and they break this circle. The breaking of this circle allows varied discourses to participate in the processes of the product of geographic space. Because any discourses have their special “regimes of truth” and structures, so being of varied discourses in ‘oriented mono-textual’ geographic spaces will drive them toward ‘oriented inter-textual’. The ‘discourse’ converges political, social, economic, and cultural processes toward its purposes and visions by producing essential organizations, systems, structures, and necessary spaces. Discourses on geographic space show their symbols in the geographic space, so the operating diverse discourses on space can make its spatial text more varied and can derive them toward a space that has the ‘inter-textual’ characteristic. Effects of diverse discourses on geographic spaces are different because the power of discourse in geographic space is dependent on political, social, cultural, information, and the communication conditions of that space.
This paper showed that the monologue-mono-discourse circle creates a mono-text geographic space; the multilogue-multidiscursive circle creates a multi-textual geographic space; and dialogue- interdiscourse circle creates an oriented inter-textual geographic space. The basis of these creations is the pluralism of information, civilization, and the network media nature of the network society.
Conclusion
Using global information and communication technologies form “network society” (Castells’s theory) provides contexts to dialogue for varied and numerous discourses and micro-discourses. With the increasing varied and numerous discourses and micro-discourses and the number of power centers, this process shifts oriented mono-text spaces to oriented multi-text spaces and finally oriented inter-text spaces. (Of homogeneity, to heterogeneity, of mono to multi). In the network society, the hard boundaries (red lines) of micro-discourses have been faded by the shifting micro-discourses; The prosess which is providing combined discourses has soft and orange lines instead of hard and red lines. These discourses can be known as the “inter-discourses”. Thus, the changing hard boundaries of discourses to soft boundaries drive pure and local geographic spaces toward inter-textual and global geographic spaces that have soft and orange boundaries.
Ehsan Lashgari Tafreshi
Abstract
Cognition the political effects on the production of geographic space, is one of the topics that has different interpretation in distinct cognitive schools, including relativism epistemic. In the Epistemic relativism, in the framework of mental ontology, there is no obligation to achieve absolute ideal ...
Read More
Cognition the political effects on the production of geographic space, is one of the topics that has different interpretation in distinct cognitive schools, including relativism epistemic. In the Epistemic relativism, in the framework of mental ontology, there is no obligation to achieve absolute ideal and value. In this cognitive system, there is assumption that the cognition of the political-historical discourses function in the production of various dimensions of geographical space It is not possible to rely on positivist approach. in this research, with rely on descriptive-analytic method in the first phase, for definition of geographical space has been considered a special place for political-ideological discourses. Then, with paying attention to the features of political-historical discourses, is achieved This recognition that there is greater possibility for relativism epistemic for understanding who production of geographic space. Research findings indicate that the changes in the phenomena and processes in the geographic space are largely due to the political-historical discourses changes. Therefore, Geographic space has dedicated features and is non-extensible. In recognizing who production and rebuild the geographic space cannot be use necessarily from inductive and empirical epistemology.
Mohammad Hassan Razavi; Mozaffar Sarrafi; Jamile Tavakoli-nia; Mohammad Taghi Razavian
Abstract
Extended Abstract
1- INTRODUCTION
Globalization as a meta-process or a set of processes is largely accepted as free movement of capitals, goods, people, technologies, ideas, etc., all over the world. This “time-space compression” and formation of “space of flow” is changing our understanding ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
1- INTRODUCTION
Globalization as a meta-process or a set of processes is largely accepted as free movement of capitals, goods, people, technologies, ideas, etc., all over the world. This “time-space compression” and formation of “space of flow” is changing our understanding of contemporary world, or in a better word, it compels us to think seriously about new ontology of space. At the same time, it is a fact that we are living in an urban era. Nowadays we can speak about “planetary urbanization”, and we can ask if there is any space which is not urban. No matter what we name them; concept, phenomenon, historical event or [meta]process, cities become the place of globaliztion. This leads to creat a body of studies in the urban domain. It is proclaimed that Iran, as a so-called developing oil-exporting country, with adherence to ideological government, is not part of this global space of flows or “Actually Existing Neoliberalism”. But it is possible to say that a process which compels us with a new ontology to space does not affect Iranian cities. We say NO. Hence, in this paper, the relationship between the globalization and Iranian cities raises a question. Then, the main question of this paper is as follows:
Q: How does globalization affect Iranian cities?
2-METHODOLOGY
This paper is a theoretical one. We used discourse analysis in order to answer the research question. On the other hand, we used the spatial distribution of urban mega-project in Mashhad as the second most populated city of Iran to show the theoretical framework in an actual existing policy in an Iranian city. For the spatial analysis, we used Spatial Autocorrelation in software such as ArcGIS and GeoDa.
3- RESULTS & DISCUSSION
It’s a belief that Iran is not part of the global space of flows. The minimum share of global capital circulation (Foreign Direct Investment is only 2 percent of Gross Fixed Capital formation in Iran) and the fact that Iran was ranked among the lowest countries in globalization indexes indicates its present position. Hence, Iranian cities are not considered as an actor in the global scale; none of the Iranian cities are in the world city network. Rennie Short named Tehran as a ‘Black Hole’; it is among eleven cities which met three criteria: they had a population of over 3 million, were not identified by GAWC as a world city and did not share their national territory with a world city.
There is a body of studies related to the globalization and cities in Iran. Most of them are dedicated to the dominant literature. They study the position of the Iranian cities in different rankings. They, generally, persist in the necessity of improving the position of Iranian cities in the global ladder of global cities. As a result, we can see ‘urban reconstruction for globalization’ as the key agenda for urban planners and city authorities in Iran. Some others conclude the fact that Iranian cities are not part of space of flows is rooted in the Constitution, because it represents specific geo-political code which limits the capacity of cities to play an active role in space of flow and it is why Short put Tehran amongst “Resisting Cities”.
This conception of globalization, which itself is discursive, based on some statements. It is necessary to reconstruct the city for globalization and it is one of the most important statements in today’s urban planning in Iran. We can claim that this statement is the “planning habitus” amongst Iranian planners and city authorities in Iran.
4- CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS
The dominant discourse of globalization, which is called as globalization of neoliberalism discourse, presents a linear-scalar interpretation. This discourse of globalization is shaping planning habitus amongst Iranian city authorities and planners. Iranian cities reconstructing based on globalization flow is a key statement for this discourse. Based on this common sense or habitus, cities compete to attract different form of capitals. On the mentioned statement, it is reasonable to accept that building “high-tech global trade zones” and “investing urban mega-projects” could help the process. This process will result in raising the position of Iranian cities among global cities. In this atmosphere, Islamic ideology and oil revenue are important issues in urban network of Iranian cities, for instance latter one play a major role in financing urban mega-projects.
All we have discussed here was about globalization and global scale. But local scale is also important. It is clearl that local communities continue to obtain political potential in the age of globalized power. Hence, the distinction between the “local” and the “global” as separate scalar fields remains problematic, as matters of the shifting boundary between a territorial inside and a territorial outside or as “in here” and “out there”.
Globalization and new communicational networks offer the potential of “action at a distance” and therefore we can suggest new type of community titled “distanciated community” in the “open source neighborhoods”. We could, thus, see localities as the sites of intersection and juxtaposition of new spatio-temporalities with older ones. Then we can speak about globalization in Iran Cities in different way (beyond studying Iranian cities in hierarchy of globalized city or studying APS spatial distribution).
abdolvahab khojamli; Zahra Ahmadypour; Mohammadreza Hafeznia; Mohammadreza Pourjafar
Abstract
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
The current paper is intended to explain geopolitics of urban landscape, and also to present a theoretical model. The relation between politics and power and urban semiotics system in geographic spaces and in particular in urban spaces forms geopolitics of urban landscape. ...
Read More
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
The current paper is intended to explain geopolitics of urban landscape, and also to present a theoretical model. The relation between politics and power and urban semiotics system in geographic spaces and in particular in urban spaces forms geopolitics of urban landscape. The paper presents new approaches to the scholars of urban geopolitics and urban political geography.
2. Theoretical Framework
The paper is intended to present a theoretical framework to study geopolitics of landscape regarding the relation between politics and power and urban semiotic system and dominant political, social and economic discourses. When a landscape would be called a geopolitical urban landscape? What kind of processes and factors has geopolitics of urban landscape? What are the levels of formation of urban semiotic system and how they are affected by different factors? What are the general and political functions of urban semiotic system, and what kind of criteria forms them? What are the benefits and deficiencies of the symbols? And finally what is the impact of these relations on urban semiotic system and urban space discourses?
3. Methodology
The research is basic in terms of its goal, and casual and descriptive- analytic in terms of method and nature. The data gathering procedure is based on the library findings. Data analysis and conclusion will be done using the qualitative research method.
4. Results & Discussion
Landscape, similarly to language, can operate as a representational system – signs, places and icons can be read and interpreted as geosymbols or icons. Power over landscape is usually visualized in the most picturesque, stable, perceptible and spectacular ways. Ruling over landscape, both forms, function, and particularly meanings, becomes one of the priorities of power, especially of those, whose legitimacy is or can be somehow challenged. The need to show his or her rights, authority, control, as well as supermacy and prerogatives is tremendous and typically materialized in grand culttural landscape projects. Those project usually expound not only political and economic powers, but also, and often above any other, the cultueral dominance of new leaders and discourses. The messages coded in cultural landscape are typically very clearly readable for most of society, and are frequently enhanced by heavily marketed texts.
The function of power and politics in urban semiotic system paves the way to expalin geopolitics of landscape. Policies of different groups in urban spaces are affected by their power. Their power in urban spaces is emanated from different urban semiotics systems that gained from local, national and supra-national levels and has political, social, economic and historical facets. Different groups haves different potentials to take the advanteges of the levels and facets regarding their ideologic background and the level of mitigation of their interests with the dominant ideology. Also, their freedom in using the symbols and change in urban semiotics systems depends on players of power and their respected institutions.
Urban icons and symbols are a part of urban players tools to create discources in accordance with their interests. Urban players act in the frame of their discources and the stronger discources, the effective functions. Hisorical and ideologic background, institutions, social and cutural characteristics, groups’ interests and their discourses set the criteria to change in urban semiotic system and urban symbols; the changes that are realized in the froms of destructions or construction of symbols, omition or disclusion of symbols and relocation and change in their functions. All of the processes are done in order to improve the function of urban semiotic system and urban symbols or to reform their functions and alleviate abnormalities.
5. Conclusions & Suggestions
Actions and reactions, factors and structures in urban spaces create an area of power relations such as cooperation, interaction, rivalry and disputation that the occupation of desired spaces to settle the respected icons or display the symbols of their discources are claimed in urban spaces that results in “the war of icons” between different players who have contradictory interests. This causes an area of power relations which is the result of mutual relation between urban semiotics systems and the political actors that forms geopolitics of landscape.
So, geopolitics of landscape is a process that based on it the dominant discourse creates different landscapes to control and manage urban spaces in line with its political and geopolitical order, and competition to control urban spaces is subordinated to relation between power, politics and space. Geopolitics of landscape studies the process of image making by urban players, the management of urban relations, urban space bordering, the relation between the state and non-governmental institutions.
