The Triumph of Reason over Rhetoric: A New Horizon for Civil Society

The shift of the government from slogan-centric policies to rationality in Iran's foreign diplomacy, although done out of necessity, has opened a new window for the country's civil society. Recognizing the costs of the government's irrational policies and introducing statistics into the political and domestic discourse has provided critics with a strong tool to critique the government's behavior through the lens of national interests and present it for citizen judgment. From this perspective, the concept of 'win-win,' which was also raised in negotiations, gains special significance. The government successfully garnered support from a large segment of society in the nuclear talks by utilizing this perspective; now it is up to civil society and intellectuals to take the initiative and raise civil demands based on this view. In other words, the dialogue between intellectuals and critics with the government should not be perceived as a zero-sum game, but rather it should be accepted that valuable achievements can also be obtained through reaching middle-ground solutions. An important point is that the spectrum of power and its critics should base their dialogue not on rejecting the other but on accepting differences. The goal is not uniformity but acceptance and ultimately valuing differences. The necessity of a demand-oriented approach from critics of power is evident. Just as the international community, despite the clear discord of its members' interests, managed to align its demands to avoid war and forced the government to shift from slogans to the negotiation table, critics of power and government can also represent a broad spectrum of civil society by aligning their discourse with civil demands, despite ideological and value differences. They can convince the government that the best way to avoid revolution and the chaos that comes with it is to accept the existence of opponents and find non-violent mechanisms for reaching middle-ground solutions and creating change. The ability to engage in dialogue and bring the government to the negotiation table is one of the most effective methods available for non-violent change. The prerequisite for persuading the government to negotiate is to create energy in civil society and guide it by bringing together civil demands and the groups advocating for those demands. In other words, it is essential to accept the reality that civil demands are not only not uniform in level and form, but no single group can represent them alone. What is currently valuable is the recognition of society's support for the achievements of the pragmatic faction of the government. If the presence of people at the ballot boxes, due to promises made by the current government, was an asset for advancing negotiations, complying with civil demands will double that asset and enhance the country's position in regional and global relations. In fact, one could argue that the strategy of turning towards citizens and moving towards fulfilling their civil demands is much more effective than the strategy of looking East (which has so far resulted in nothing but the plundering and bargaining away of the country's interests). The approach towards citizens will undoubtedly breathe new life into the frail and wounded body of the chaotic Middle East. Relying on civil values and avoiding sectarianism and fascistic slogans (stemming from religion or extreme nationalism) is the best strategy for reducing tensions and disputes with regional countries. What makes a country a model and increases its spiritual influence is the improvement of its citizens' human, civil, and economic indicators, not the implementation of populist policies and the distribution of money among its supporting groups. In the short term, by strengthening a rational approach, the costs of the government on civil society and the country can be reduced, and by exposing the costs imposed on the country by non-elective and security centers, their influence can be diminished. The ability to bring civil demands to the electoral scene and, if necessary, to the public arena is a strong tool in the hands of critics of power. Such a presence should not be perceived as a threat and social mobilization; rather, such a mechanism is the best way to reduce violence and increase the moral capital of civil society. Therefore, recognizing and respecting plurality should replace the claim of unity and party cohesion. In this context, the art of politics and intellectuals lies in creating structures and methods of action that, despite distinctions and differences, create the groundwork for finding middle-ground solutions and opening channels for intellectual exchange. Here, the true role of politicians as leaders of civil society is realized through enhancing their status via their impact on accelerating the exchange of ideas and reducing barriers to dialogue. An important point is that so far, politicians and intellectuals, whether in power or in opposition, have avoided recognizing and presenting the political and ideological spectrum of pluralism that reflects the reality of Iranian society. In fact, instead of promoting a culture of tolerance and creating civil structures that facilitate communication among citizens, the main concern of many intellectuals has been to impose ideology or engineer society, whether by steering society towards the gates of civilization or forcibly relocating it to paradise. The initiation of dialogue aimed at achieving civil demands through negotiation is an opportunity that this agreement has presented to civil society as a model for changing the behavior and demeanor of the government and its critics. Emphasizing civil and professional demands is the best way to draw the government into a rational game. In this regard, the role of intellectuals in emphasizing these demands and reflecting them loudly, not just in words but in action, is of great importance. Perhaps reviewing the experience of England and the formation of parliamentary democracy in that country would be beneficial for Iranians. In Britain, the initial and significant steps towards a long path of democracy were achieved through negotiation and the actions of intellectuals with the existing government. Accordingly, relying on dialogue and insisting on civil demands is the best and least costly way to enhance civil values and improve the status of citizens.