User:Planita13/Sandbox1
Principles
Modernity
Modernism or Modernity is what Sattari described as the “central pillar of the great process.” It is an all-encompassing term that covers the rollback and destruction of traditionalism, certain cultural and social norms and what Sattari further described as “reactionary sentimentalities.” Sattarists believe that traditions and antiquated thought undermined the Gorsanid attempts at modernisation and northernisation during the 19th and 18th centuries, ultimately resulting its collapse and the partition of the empire between Euclean colonial powers. In order to ensure the continued survival of a reunified Zorasan, it must adopt the ideals of “modernity”, science, innovation, industrialisation and urbanisation.
The pursuit of Modernity according to Sattarism should come at any cost, including the destruction of cultures, traditions, norms, the environment and even social harmony if it leads to the emergence of a modern, dynamic and industrial Zorasan. This was the primary justification for the Modernisation and Harmony Campaign during Zorasani Unification. The specific targeting of nomadic ethnic minorities or communities and forcing them into sedentary urban living is one such example. Sattarism also notes that traditions and sentimentalities lead to the fossilisation of society and ultimately moral and social decay, decadence and immobility. The only traditions to be upheld are those of the political, artistic, musical and poetic varieties. This also requires the repeated elimination of “old thinking” so that the “nation may forever be in lockstep with the innovations of the day.” In 1928, Sattari wrote, “either we proceed from this day in mind of science, innovation, technology and industry, or we shall forever languish in feudalistic farms under the boot and banner of the Euclean.”
Collectivism and Ettehâd
Sattarism embraces and advocates a totalitarian state in order to foster what Sattari termed Ettehâd (meaning unity and or union) and to fully mobilise the potential for achieving modernity. Ettehâd as a concept also embraced the ideal of a “new Zorasani society and citizen”, in which the nascent ethno-cultural identities established during the colonial period and during Zorasani Unification would be repressed and abolished, and in their place would be a shared citizenship and national identity. Sattarists therefore reject the existence of Rahelia, Togotistan or any historic homeland of its constituent peoples, rather there has only ever been Zorasan and to say otherwise, is to promote “society dividing Eucleanisms.”
Sattarism denounces individualism and self-interest and advocates through Ettehâd, the establishment of a harmonious and singular society bound together by the state within the boundaries of the state. This collectivism is justified through the belief that unquestionable loyalty to one another and to the state, would best permit Zorasan to mobilise its population into pursuing modernity and protecting itself from a possible return of Euclean domination. Ettehâd posits that the state exists beyond the physical realm and reaches into the “emotional, psychological and spiritual realms of human existence” and that any group, action or individual outside the state is “worthless and a threat to the whole.” Erkin Dostum a prominent author of Sattarism said, “the new citizen of the Union must think the Union, live the Union and feel the Union, there can be no instance where his existence does not interact with the boundaries of the Union.”
As Sattarism views the world and human existence through the prism of “eternal struggle”, it also seeks a politically homogenous and harmonious society to ease the “prosecution of the Union’s struggles against the rest.” As such, Sattarism continues to advocate to this day, a society bound by Ettehâd structured like an armed force; hierarchical, ranked in which command and obey permeate throughout. This lends into Ettehâd’s description of society as comprised of three parts, the “worker, cleric and soldier”, with the soldier at the top commanding those below. Just as in the army, in society there would be no class conflict, nor selfish individualism or desires, no one’s individual contributions are greater than any other as everyone is but a singular piece of a greater machine. As such, Sattarism aims to balance competition between individuals and group solidarity, to a degree that individual success is seen as the benefit to all and the state.
Militarism and the Eternal Struggle
As stated above, Sattarists view the world as a “eternal struggle between peoples and nations”, ostensibly viewing the period of Euclean imperialism and colonialism as the “age of defeat for one half of humanity and victory for the other.” While this worldview justifies the establishment of a collectivist society, it also justifies the embrace of militarism. According to Sattarism, the military is the “manifestation of nation’s soul and capacity for violent struggle.” The military is furthermore, the embodiment of Ettehâd, as it abolishes class, ethnicity or culture. Inherent to Sattarist militarism is a Machismo, a veneration of the male as the “martial, strong and fearless soul, who’d prefer martyrdom over defeat, martyrdom over the death of his nation.” The embrace of militarism is also rooted in the origins of the ideology. It was developed concurrent to the establishment of the Pardarian Revolutionary Resistance Command, an armed insurgent group that sought to expel the Etrurians from Pardaran during the Great War and Solarian War and is intrinsically rooted within that group’s ethos.
The role of the Eternal Struggle (Peykâr-e Jâvid) according to Samir Shafawi is key to understanding the unbridled militarism of Zorasani society and state, according to him, "the simplicity of Peykâr-e Jâvid in reducing the entire universe to good versus evil, a near incessant struggle for air by human beings and nations and the apocolyptic belief in a final battle against perceived enemies permeates every strata and ediface of Zorasani life. It justifies all, from totalitarian control, statism in the extreme and the adoration of the military and all things martial to the point of cult-like supplication.
As Sattari stated in a speech in 1952, “we must strive to become the apex predator of this continent. We must strive to build a state of the military and by the military so that never again do Euclean boots step on our blessed land.” This call for a “military with a state attached” was eventually enforced in the Union and Khazestan and Pardaran and later, Zorasan following unification. In practice, this militarism takes a different form in which society as a whole is expected to show deference, loyalty and obedience to the military, which “by virtue of its success in achieving unification lays claim to greater power and influence than any other institution.” The military is the ultimate political authority and arbiter of the state in Zorasan today, seen through the powers afforded to the Central Command Council.
Today, Zorasani militarism maintains its view of every dispute through a militaristic lens, in which every dispute must be met with “bastions”, “barricades”, “trenches” and “mass mobilisation.” The military is deified as bother protector and leader of the nation. The veneration of the soldier and martial affairs ostensibly leads to a societal deference to officers and commanders who possess a national public profile. The Marshals of the Union, the eight most senior officers of the armed forces are "heads of the nation in their own right" and their words, statements or pronouncements are at times treated in a manner similar to the "gospels of the prophets" according to some commentators.
Liberty
Sattarism holds a distinctively statist and authoritarian view of liberty, insofar that liberty is only enjoyed and exercised by a collective whole (a society or nation), rather than the individual. The statist view was encapsulated by the Sattarist belief that nations required liberty before their citizens, which Sattari described as a "freedom from foreign control, domination and exploitation." If a nation is free from external control, liberty for its citizens would be guaranteed. By conflating liberty with national sovereignty, the Sattarist view subtracts the accompanying liberal democratic provisions of personal liberty and freedom. The authoritarian and collectivist approach to liberty is defined by the Sattarist rejection of individual liberty in relation to the concept of the eternal struggle of human existence.
Mahrdad Ali Sattari, 1950
The authoritarian basis is rooted in the Sattarist view that liberty would be guaranteed "post-national liberty" by the vanguard party (Revolutionary Masses Party and later the National Renovation Front) which would not be elected by the populace because the party would have at its heart the common good, collective interest and be the embodiment of the people. Sattari further viewed the Party as the manifestation of the state, therefore, the Party's binding of the populace into a singular harmonious united society (Ettehâd) would in of itself, constitute the guarantee of liberty.
As a result, Sattarist liberty is seen as reductivist and an extreme reaction to Euclean colonialisation and imperialism, by both conflating and limiting liberty to national sovereignty, it purposefully abandons and rejects individual liberty and freedom. The justification of a police state was anchored by Sattari in his vision of liberty by saying, "liberty within the realms of the eternal struggle requires a perpetual mobilisation of the masses, such a demand of the state will forever require a merciless approach to security. Security against the eternal enemy and their agents within the Union is the paramount duty of the state in defence of its own liberty."
Totalitarianism
Under Sattarism, the concept of individualism is denounced and rejected as the "degredation of human nature and the manner in which we were created by God." Sattarism argues that while humans were created to be naturally social and communal creatures, centuries of Euclean falsehoods and heresies of nature had fostered a culture of limitless selfishness and the adoration of self-interest over the community and nation. Just as see with Ettehâd, Sattarism seeks to abolish any limit to the state's involvement or control over the lives of its citizens and to foster a sense of communalistic "oneness." Sattari saw the establishment of Ettehâd within society as the key to a successful totalitarian state, while rejecting criticisms of such following the Great War and Solarian War. Sattari argued for a totalitarian state on the basis that only a "complete state" (Dowlāt-e Basānd) could create a new Zorasani man, society, nation and guarantee the liberty of the nation.
Mahrdad Ali Sattari, 1930
As the pursuit of a reunified Zorasani state within Sattarism did not constitute the physical reconstruction of historic borders, it also required the creation of a new society post-unification. While the New Zorasani Society (Tâze Jâme'e Zorasāni) concept was not utopian, it was viewed as a "rebirth into a state of harmony, peace and tranquility." To achieve the establishment of a new society, the state would be required to regulate and be present in all aspects of life. This meant the regulation of culture, art, music, poetry, sport and social interaction toward a new normal, the ever presence of a watchful state through mass surveillance and data gathering to ensure cooperation of citizens in embracing this new society. While such demands would naturally lead to a police state, this would also be necessary in view of the wider eternal struggle between Zorasan and the nations of the world. While Sattarist totalitarianism lacks the notion of a "leader", a singular individual in which the state and populace or dedicated to in executing their will, Sattarist totalitarianism supplants the "leader" with the collective state, in which even the individuals who hold the levers of power are subject to the same notion of subordination to the state which they operate.
An integral element of Sattarist totalitarianism is the notion of "perpetual mass mobilisation", mostly through the use of Government-organized demonstrations and rallies. The Zorasani public holiday calendar is marked by numerous events dedicated to celebrating labour, motherhood, ingenuitiy, scientific innovation and national unity. The Zorasani state controls every means of mass media in the country, which is mostly geared toward perpetuating the notion of national unity and harmony and the achievments, real or imagined, of the Zorasani nation, including its predecessors as far back as antiquity. Samir Shafawi wrote in 1999, "Zorasani totalitarianism differs in many ways to historic examples, Functionalist Gaullica, the Greater Solarian Republic, or perhaps even the Soravian Second Republic, it lacks a singular charismatic figurehead who wealds untold power and authority, but instead coalesces the populace around a near mythical-collective government, which is comprised of the most talented and loyal revolutionaries, it seeks to coalesce through mass mobilisation, endless provocation and incitement and an esoteric vision of unity that consumes any notion of individualistic life."
According to Hans Daluege, the apparent success (by longevity) of Sattarist totalitarianism (with its subsequent mobilisation of the national population) resides within its construction as a means to helping society overcome the cognitive dissonance and emotional trauma stemming from Euclean imperialism and its corresponding physical, economic and material suffering. Its allure in providing a clear socio-cultural-political route from a humilitating past to a near utopian future defined by economic, technological and cultural successes by fostering a togetherness and "solidarity in achievement" results in verifiable support of the populace. Sattarist totalitarianism, according to Daluege further detracts from historic cases of total power and control for one individual, to the benefit of a totalitarianism that seemingly seeks to maintain the fantasy of this bountiful, harmonious future, while also seizing upon the inherent collectivist nature of Irfan.
Socialism and private property
Sattari himself supported some elements of socialism, while rejecting others outright as intrinsically "anti-Zorasani in practice." Sattari approached socialism from were near exclusive economic point, arguing that "socialism proposes a series of economic methods that are key for the development of a society yet to reach to a point in economic capability." To Sattari, socialism specifically provided the means to assist the future unified Zorasan industrialise, urbanise and economically development toward the goal of "mobilising the nation to stand strong in the eternal struggle." The adoption of socialism within Sattarism and its subsequent contradiction of the ideology's rejection of class conflict and struggle was rectified by Sattari defining socialism within Sattarism as a "most accurate term to describe the approach to economic matters, an approach that provides for the people, rather than simply consuming from them. It is an economic method that is social in its production and social in its ends", more specifically, Sattari described socialism as the "equitable sharing of national resources from labour among its citizens." Sattarism claims that socialism can exist without a class struggle, especially if the state can mediate grievences between the worker and industrialist in its execution.
At the 1949 Party Congress of the Revolutionary Masses Party, the leadership under Sattari's direction,called for a future Zorasani economy to operate "just redistribution of wealth" (through universal health care, education and welfare), state ownership of public utilities, natural resources, large industries, transport, and state control over foreign and domestic trade, limiting agricultural holdings to the amount the owner could cultivate, workers' participation in management and profit sharing, respect for inheritance and the rights of private property. Following the establishment of the Union of Khazestan and Pardaran in 1953, the 1949 Congress' proposals were implemented across the newly formed state. In 1954, Ali Sayyad Gharazi, the successor to Mahrdad Ali Sattari attempted to further reconcile the socialism of Sattarism with its desire for a classless society by describing socialism as a "our socialism shall be a means to close the gap between Zorasan and its former oppressors economically, while ensuring that the working class does not find itself exploited, rather unified in endeavour with the business owners and capitalists." The lack of any certifiably capitalist middle class in the UKP assisted the government in claiming that it was not engaging in class struggle or a proletarian seizure of the means of production, as class differences did not exist, no group in society would be detrimentally effected.
On matters relating to private property, Sattari was a vocal defender, however, he aruged for an equitable approach that would serve to combat materialism, which he saw as the catalyst for indiviudalism and the breakdown of society. Sattari saw private property as a means of "calming the masses" and fostering Ettehâd, by giving every citizen a degree of dignity and purpose beyond serving the nation. Sattarism's vision of private property has been described as austere and rooted in Irfanic Asceticism. Sattari wrote, "to combat materialism and its spawn, individualism, the state must promote austerity in life. Never should the state take from the citizen what is theirs by result of their labours, but urge them to limit what is they pursue. Luxuries and ostenciousness in objects is the mindless pursuit of the dim and selfish. Own the basics and the minimum and you shall be set free from petty desires." Throughout the existence of the Union of Khazestan and Pardaran, the Sattarist government notably banned the import of certain fabrics to prohibit the production of luxury clothing, it also prohibited the import of luxury cars from Euclea and mandated a limit on the purchase of radios, television sets and even jewelry. Samir Shafawi described the Sattarist approach to private property as the "state-enforcement of austerity in service to the slogan, you may own property, you just do not need much of it."
Anti-imperialism
Owing to the fact that the early authors of Sattarism all emerged from the Pardarian nationalist movement, anti-imperialism features prominently within the ideology and Sattarist rhetoric. While Sattari wrote extensively about the need of all Zorasanis to "raise their hands and clenched fists against the colonial", it was not until after his victory in the Pardarian Civil War that Sattari began to write anti-imperialism into the wider ideological framework. In keeping with Sattarism's embrace of militarism, Sattari saw a reunited Zorasan as a "central command for resistance against all forms of imperialism." He advocated for "perpetual resistance against any and all forms of foreign domination", within the Irfanic World and beyond.
Ideologically speaking, the Sattarist focus on anti-imperialism speaks to the need of vigilance against "Euclean influences" and underpins the above sections. A totalitarian-militarist state is required to preserve and protect Zorasani sovereignty and liberty and that a united Zorasan is required by virtue of its own success to assist the weak "in the eternal struggle." Sattari saw the world as one of perpetual warfare, if not constant military action, warfare in economics, science, medicine and education, to assist smaller and weaker nations against perceived Euclean domination would weaken their position and in turn empower Zorasan's, improving its chances of winning the final battle of the struggle.
Nationalism
During the period of Zorasani Unification (1950-1980), Sattarism emphasised Pan-Zorasanism, the reunification of all territories of the former Gorsanid Empire prior to the Etrurian conquest during the 19th century. Sattarism posists that rather than being a multi-ethnic society, the Gorsanid Empire and its predecessors since antiquity had by virtue of the near static borders, had established a unique and distinct group. Sattarist Zorasani nationalism is predicated around the rejection and opposition to ethnic and cultural identity outside of Zorasani, particularly Pardarian and Rahelian, it depicts the linguistic differences as superficial and rather sees them as complimentary to the "inclusive" nature of the Zorasani people. Sattarism and Sattari himself rarely utilised racial terminology in identifying the Zorasani people, having rejected race-based politics as inherently "Euclean" and a "tool of colonialisation" in the vein of divide and rule, however, during the 1950s, Sattarism saw repeated instances of the "Zorasani race" emerging in publications and rhetoric by senior ideologues.
Ali Sayyad Gharazi, 1973
The 1950s also saw the emergence of "civilisational greatness", by wedding the Zorasani identity to past dynasties, empires and the Irfanic Heavenly Dominions, Sattarists promoted the ideal that "within Zorasan rests a restless and immortal capacity for greatness and grand civilisation." As part of the wider effort to dismiss the existence of Pardarians, Rahelians and other ethnic groups within Zorasan, Sattarists posit that "Zorasan exists beyond what petty races and peoples are claimed to be, it is a product of a unique people. Zorasan is superior to any example of Rahelia, by virtue of its past. As exampled Rahelians travelled on camels from watering hole to watering hole, the people of Zorasan in classical times constructed canals, roads and great cities and forged a rival to the Solarian Empire. What were the camel herders doing?" However, the Sattarist's wedding of Zorasani society with historic Pardarian-led empires and states, they have claimed that these historic entities existed in equal measure due to the contributions of its constituent peoples, dismissing any Pardarian exceptionalism or leadership, though this has been used as evidence that Sattarism and the entire ediface of the Zorasani nation exists as a cover for Pardarian chauvinism and irredentism (See below).
This notion of civilisational greatness was further developed in the 1960s, with Ali Sayyad Gharazi's "Cycles of the Eternal Struggle", in which nations and peoples go through history ebbing and flowing in relation to Peykâr-e Jâvid, for a period they thrive and look set to break out of the eternal struggle and achieve perpetual peace, then fail and fall into "depsair." Gharazi sought to promote civilisational greatness with Sattarism's embrace of "modernity", in that pursuing economic and technological progress at all costs, Zorasan would defeat its enemies in the Eternal Struggle, this has led claims to an embrace of palingenesis, a great national rebirth that would lead to a near uptopian future. Gharazi also promoted the ideal of a divinely mandated destiny for Zorasan as the birthplace and leader of the Irfanic World. Following unification in 1980, Sattarism' version of nationalism changed dramatically, having established its unified state, nationalism changed to focus on national greatness and a notional superiority to other Irfanic states. Following the Turfan (2005-2006) specifically, nationalism has taken to ideologically promoting Zorasani leadership within the Irfanic World and a dominant position in northern Coius. In 2011, it was proclaimed a national objective to "further expand and widen the military, economic and diplomatic gap between the Union and its immediate neighbours of the North."
Richard Fontaine claims that Zorasani nationalism is rooted in the Sattarist moral code, which he described as procedural virtue ethics, as it demands obedience to a set of absolute virtues focused on social engineering and replaces basic common sense with a srict dogma of ideological virtues and commands. The ideal Zorasani citizen is to be a nation-conscious (conscious of their Zorasani identity) and a ideologically dedicated martial specimen that would work and commit acts for the sake of the Zorasani Ettehâd and do so, being convinced of that they're righteous and morally correct for doing so. As a result, those who reject their Zorasani consciousness are both morally flawed and virtuously crippled, outside the Ettehâd and ostensibly, an enemy of the Ettehâd.