|Political position||Left-wing (economic)|
Sattarism (Pardarian: سرمایه; Sattardaree), officially known as Seven Principles (Pardarian: هفتاصول; Haft-osul) is a Zorasani political ideology that has been prescribed as the state ideology of Zorasan since 1949. Primarily formulated by Mahrdad Ali Sattari and drawing on long-existing Pan-Zorasanism and anti-imperialism, it is an ideology that calls for a unified state encompassing the countries of the Zorasan region of Coius, a strong authoritarian government dedicated to modernisation, national liberty, sovereignty and equality. In particular, the Seven Principles demands a union of states, constructed through commonalities in language, culture, religion and united under a strong central state that uses non-revolutionary socialism to build economic prosperity, equality and security. It condemns liberalism, individualism, ethnic nationalism and private property, while promoting statism, collectivism and Zorasani nationalism.
Sattarism was officially followed by Zorasani governments between the Arduous Revolution in 1949 to 1979, with the formation of the Union of Zorasani Irfanic Republics. Since then a divergent form, known as Irfanic Sattarism has taken hold, with the adoption of Political Irfan, support for private property and the adoption of state capitalism and Neomercantilism.
The Seven Principles was formulated as a reaction and rejection of the failings of the Pardarian imperial government under Ardashir Reza Shah. The political instability, economic collapse and cultural nihilism that defined the early post-colonial period produced numerous competing ideologies, though the collapse of the monarchy in 1948 saw further evolution of the Seven Principles as a rejection to the quasi-aristocratic republic that replaced the Shah.
In face of the new republic's rising corruption, elitism and failings, many Pardarian intellectuals rejected the western ideals that formed the cornerstone of its existence. The most prominent, Ashkan Baranzadeh, saw western ideals such as liberalism, democracy and capitalism as both colonial imports and the causes of Zorasan's demise into colonial possessions of the Euclean powers. Baranzadeh would also argue that only through unification of Zorasan would imperialism be forever expelled from the region, while the necessity of a strong central government and a unique form of socialism, to unite the populace through economic development would be paramount in the defence against renewed foreign exploitation.
When Baranzadeh addressed the Revolutionary Command Cadre, a group of revolutionary officers led by Mahrdad Ali Sattari, they agreed to adopt many of Baranzadeh's positions, while Sattari argued for a greater focus on Pan-Zorasanism, anti-imperialism and what he called Zorasani Socialism. Another prominent influence for the RCC was National Principlism, which had been the state ideology of neighboring Xiaodong since 1934. The RCC formally adopted the ideology in 1946 and sought to use it as the antithesis to the Republic, while exporting it across Zorasan through radio and personal ties to former fellow guerillas from the Solarian War in neighboring states.
One principle of Sattarism is Pan-Zorasanism (احدیت, a-Hadiyyat), which translates simply as Unity. A-Hadiyyat had existed as a separate ideology throughout the early 20th century as the pro-independence movements of the Zorasani states coalesced during the Great War and Solarian War into a semi-unified transnational resistance movement. Numerous intellectuals in the Zorasan region had argued for a single federation to emerge post-independence, to avoid and resist any attempts by the imperial powers to restore colonial control or to exploit the peoples of Zorasan.
In 1945, Ashkan Baranzadeh said in a speech, "either the peoples of Zorasan arise from the grave of foreign domination as one united nation, or alone the peoples shall be consumed once more by the beast of exploitation and enslavement. His argument was shared by other prominent Arab intellectuals in Khazestan and Riyadha, Hussein Afshari wrote in 1946, that a unified Zorasani state would be the only means for Irfanic peoples to remain free from colonialism and argued that unity had been established in the "bloodletting of the two wars for independence."
Ali Sattari in a speech encapsulated the Seven Principle's position by arguing that the Pardarian, Arab, Samrinian and Turkic held commonalities in language, religion, culture, history and colonial suffering. Through unification, foreign exploitation would end and no imperial power would have the means to return, while unification would also provide the new "union state", the foundations to construct a modern, religious and industrial future, which was referred to as a renaissance or rebirth. This renaissance could only be reached by uniting the Zorasani state and it would transform the Irfanic world politically, economically, intellectually and morally.
The second principle is nationalism (اعتبار; E'tebar), which translates as Confidence. E'tebar is viewed as a natural partner or product of Unity, in that through Zorasani nationalism, strength in unity and community will be guaranteed, as well as fuelling the Pan-Zorasani pillar of its emotional basis. Ali Sattari wrote, A-Hadiyyat is the foundation of our great house, E'tebar is the bricks and mortar. Together, they hold up our great house."
In practice, what E'tebar would constitute is the veneration of the nation and state, the pursuit of national interests over all. E'tebar forms the basis for the anti-colonial, anti-imperialist struggle and the resistance to foreign influence or domination over Zorasan. Sattarism defines the "Zorasani Nation" (Mellat Zorasani) as a nation of Zorasani People who always love and seek to exalt their family, country and nation, who know their duties and responsibilities.
Two key aspects of E'tebar focused entirely on the abolition of ethno-nationalism and the class system. Sattari recognised that A-Hadiyyat would find resistance in Badawiyan nationalism and argued strongly for the destruction of both Badawiyan and Pardarian nationalism and identities. Sattari and numerous associates aruged that ethno-nationalism was a product of colonialism and an Euclean import designed to "divide and fragment the peoples of Irfan and Zorasan."
"If we permit the existance of a Pardarian and or Badawiyan identity, we risk seeing our Zorasani heritage destroyed before it has sprung to life. We must smash the false identities and idols, and through the ashes forge our Zorasani identity."— Mahrdad Ali Sattari
E'tebar also calls for the destruction of the class system, this would ensure national unity, a focus on individual responsibility and duty to the nation and deny a return of domination of one group over another.
Sattari and Baranzadeh deeply supported some collectivist and syndicalist tenets and he considered the Collectivist concept of the "importance of material economic conditions in life" to be one of modern humanity's greatest discoveries. However, both saw Collectivism ignorant and obstructionist toward humanity's spirituality.
For a people as spiritual as the Zorasani, the working class was just a group, albeit the most important group, in a much larger movement to free the Zorasani nation. Most Sattarists remain uncertain of what place the working class had in history. In contrast to Collectivism, Sattarism also believes in nationalism and believes that in the Zoransi world all classes and not just the working class were working against "capitalist domination of the foreign powers". What was a struggle between various classes in Euclea was in the Zorasani-Irfanic world a fight for political and economic independence.
For Sattari, socialism was a necessary means to accomplishing the goal of initiating an Zorasani "renaissance" period, in other words a period of modernisation. While unity brought Zorasan together and liberty provided the Zorasani people with freedom, socialism was the cornerstone which made unity and liberty possible as no socialism meant no revolution. In Sattari's view, a constitutional democratic system would not succeed in a country such as Zorasan that saw its Badawiyan regions be dominated by a "pseudo-feudalist" economic system in which the repression of the peasant nullified the people's political liberty. Liberty meant little to nothing to the general poverty-stricken populace of all Zorasan and Sattari saw socialism as the solution to their plight.
According to Sattari, the ultimate goal of socialism's not to answer the question of how much state control was necessary or economic equality, but instead socialism was "a means to satisfy the animal needs of man so he can be free to pursue his duties as a Zorasani citizen". In other words, socialism was a system which freed the population from enslavement and created independent individuals. However, economic equality is a major tenet of Sattarist ideology as the elimination of inequality would "eliminate all privilege, exploitation, and domination by one group over another". In short, if liberty was to succeed, the Zorasani people needed socialism.
The fourth principle is Collectivism (التصاق; Eltesagh), which translates as Cohesion. Eltesagh for Sattari was the complete domination of the "greater good" over individualism, and the superiority of the national interest over local ones. Sattari saw Eltesagh as the antidote to decades of colonial policies of divide and rule, in that through Eltesagh, society would be united as one cohesive force and as a result, would possess greater strength against foreign domination and exploitation.
"Through complete cohesion and unity, we shall unite Zorasani society, where sacrifice and strife for the greater good and greater whole is normal. Through this, we shall build up our country into a strong and independent force, able to resist foreign domination."
For some historians and commentators, the role of Eltesagh is one that provokes most criticism of its authoritarian nature. Sattari argued that Eltesagh would require the "complete unification of heart and mind", this in practice meant the repression of criticism and dissent, while offering an ideological justification for an oppressive single-party state. Baranzadeh also argued that Eltesagh made Badawiyan tribalism "incompatible with the reniassance of the Zorasani nation", as such both he and Sattari embraced a high degree of statism, in that tribalism would need to be abolished, to ensure a united and cohesive central state. This would lead to the Normalisation of the Al-Hizan, in which between 25,000-40,000 tribal Badawiyans would be killed between 1951 and 1970.
"If groups or movements exist outside the state, they are against the state. To be against the state is to undermine cohesion and collectiveness, therefore, no one or movement shall be permitted outside the state.— A letter to members of the Baz-Khast Mellee Party dated 1949
Eltesagh also supported E'tebar in that Cohesion would be further cemented with the abolition of ethnonationalism. Cohesion would be impossible if the nationalisms of the Pardarian and Badawiyan were permitted to continue. To achieve this he believed that Zorasan must develop a "national consciousness" so as to unite the the nation in the face of imperialist aggression. He argued that "omam", which can be translated as "people", "nationality" or "race", be redefined by sharing common blood, livelihood, religion, language and customs.
The fifth principle is republicanism (حریت; Horriyyat), which translates as Liberty. Fundamentally, Sattari had an authoritarian perspective on liberty. In contrast to the liberal democratic concept of liberty, in Sattari's vision, liberty would be ensured by a revolutionary party which was not elected by the populace because the party had the common good at heart and was the manifestation of the people.
"Liberty of the individual is irrelevant, but liberty of the nation and of the collective is the apex of politics".— Sattari in a speech dated 1956
Sattari saw liberty as one of the defining features of the Seven Principles. Articulation of thoughts and the interaction between individuals were a way of building a new society. According to Sattari, it was liberty which created new values and thoughts. Sattari believed that living under imperialism, colonialism, religious or a non-enlightened dictatorship weakened liberty as ideas came from above, not from below through human interaction. One of the Sattarist movement's main priorities according to Sattari was to disseminate new ideas and thoughts and to give individuals the liberty they needed to pursue ideas as the party would interpose itself between the Zorasani people and both their foreign imperialist oppressors and those forms of tyranny that arise within Badawiyan society.
One key aspect of Horriyyat was the commitment to republicanism, insofar, that Sattari viewed monarchy as the ultimate form of domestic oppression. He viewed the Pardarian Shah and the Badawiyan kings, emirs and princes equal in their transgressisons and oppression. The history of compliant monarchs toward Euclean colonial powers, was further proof of its nefarious role in Zorasani society. Sattari viewed monarchy as the ultimate foe in denying individuals the liberty to create ideas, as monarchs would be the only permitted thinkers and actors.
"Monarchy is the most debased form of government to inhabit both Zorasan and Coius, it is the chains of the Coian peoples, they must be broken".— Sattari in a speech dated 1955
While the notion of liberty was an important ideal to Sattari, he favored continuous revolutionary struggle and he did not develop concepts for a society in which liberty was protected by a set of institutions and rules. His vision of a one-party state ruled by a revolutionary party, which disseminated information to the public, was in many ways contrary to his view on individual interactions. The Party through its preeminence would establish "liberty". According to Sattari, liberty could not just come from nowhere as it needed an enlightened progressive group to create a truly free society.
Another contradiction over liberty was Sattari's later support for "greater liberty", of the nation and collective, rather than individuals. Though he argued that individual liberty would be key, it was not the ends, rather it was the means to the end of national liberty. He argued that true liberty would come through the liberation of the nation from imperialism and foreign domination, once independent a people and nation could truly enjoy liberty.
The sixth principle is the notion of strong central governance (تمر کز; Tamarkoz), which translates as centralisation. Both Sattari and Baranzadeh argued that the pursuit of the renaissance and unification would require a "government of absolute authority, strength and capability." Both saw the role of a vanguard party being essential in the establishment of a strong government. In practice, this justified an authoritarian central state as a vehicle for the reniassance, liberty and economic development.
Tamarkoz through speeches and writings also came to encompass state involvement and regulation of the economy, primarily through state-ownership and several acts of economic planning, however, its central focus on establishing a highly centralised, invasive and powerful state. Sattari was keen to justify Tamarkoz by referencing the collapse of the Gorsanid dynasty to Euclean colonialism. In 1945 he wrote, "the Shahs weakened themselves by devolving power not to just regional nobles, but to petty merchants, corrupt generals and sycophantic court members. Their abandonment of power gave our land to the Euclean."
To enjoy a strong central government, Tamarkoz meant stamping out dissent or criticism, insofar that any sign of disagreement was feared to be used by external foes to ferment division and restore foreign domination over Zorasan. In a speech to members of the Revolutionary Command in 1948, Sattari said, "dissent, criticism and argument are the best weapons of imperialists to destroy the Zorasani nation. We must be confident in ourselves to know that these weapons are being denied."