Comparative Study of the Modernization Process in Iran and Turkey: During the Period of Atatürk and Reza Shah

The two neighboring countries of Iran and Turkey have witnessed significant developments historically and politically over a nearly identical period of time. Reza Shah and Ataturk, after coming to power and considering their country's internal and external conditions, sought to reform their westernization and secularization. The similarities and differences between the two countries' societies and the way in which different forces and social classes interact and oppose them have made a different fate. Both political leaders sought to push people toward modernization in a grammatical and orderly process. A comparative study of the modernization efforts of Reza Shah and Ataturk reveals many similarities, but given these similar aspects from a theoretical point of view, we see a different conclusion and conclusion. The present article seeks to compare the modernization process in Iran and Turkey from the point of view of empirical modernization or modernization from above. Therefore, this article seeks to answer the question: Why, despite the many similarities, did the fate of modernization in Reza Shah's Pahlavi era differ from that of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk? The findings of this article indicate that the difference between the function of the institution of religion and its relationship with the government along with other factors has led to the failure of modernization in the reign of Pahlavi during the reign of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk. In this article we use the " comparative-historical" method.

Introduction

Reforms and modernization in Iran and Turkey had a history before Reza Shah and Atatürk came to power, and it can be said that modernization before these two political leaders in these two societies with acceptance and various oppositions with their own intensity and weaknesses. Especially from the clergy and religious groups and the common people in these two countries. Reza Shah Pahlavi and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk both in the same period of time after coming to power for the mental background and later with a serious confrontation with the concept of modernity and innovative progress of the West in order to take fast and pragmatic actions with behaviors They became more radical in order to reach their ultimate goal, which was to bring their country to progress. According to the historical evidence and documents, it can be stated that Atatürk was more serious and stricter in dealing with the tradition and institution of religion than Reza Shah, and of course, the different function of the institution of religion in both countries led to a different result in the emergence of religion. Real modernization in two countries in that period of history. Changing men's clothing, discovering women's hijab, creating a customary and modern legal and educational system, rewriting history, road building and industrialism, weakening traditional classes and creating and strengthening modern classes should be listed as the most important aspects of Reza Shah's and Ataturk's modernization.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of this article will be basically based on the theory of authoritarian modernization or modernization and modernization from above. Therefore, we will seek help from Barrington Moore's theory in this field. In the book "Social Roots of Dictatorship and Democracy", Moore examines the modernization methods of England, France, America, China, Japan and India with his sociological and comparative explanation and points to three types of modernization. Kond: The democratic modernization method that took place in America, England and France. The communist and totalitarian modernization method that happened in China and Russia. and the method of modernization from above that was implemented in Japan and Germany. The method that Reza Shah Pahlavi and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk took was mainly in the form of authoritarianism and statism. Atatism or statism is one of the known types of authoritarian modernization from above. In this method, the movement towards modernization is done from above and guided by the ruling classes. In such a way, intellectuals are always present who are in sync with the policies of the Board of Trustees and take steps to encourage, strengthen and help the realization of these policies.

Methodology

The method adopted by Moore is a comparative historical method and not a comparative method. Deductive method includes determining a theory to explain a certain phenomenon and then deducing appropriate hypotheses that are basically falsifiable and testing these hypotheses in order to determine the validity of the initial theory. In contrast to the comparative historical method, it is an inductive method in which a chain of historical cases related to the desired study is examined in detail and through comparison, the distinction between cause-and-effect mechanisms is determined and explanations are deduced based on this.

Results & Discussion

In this paper, an attempt was made to discuss and study the process of modernization during the era of Reza Shah Pahlavi and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, taking into account the social and cultural conditions and using the theoretical framework of modernization or modernization from above. In the modernization method from the top of Barrington Moore, the occurrence of a popular and violent revolution to remove the obstacles to development is meaningless. And the political results resulting from the destruction of the past social system, through the revolution from above, are different from the results of the revolution from below.

Conclusions & Suggestions

During their conservative modernization, semi-parliamentary regimes try to preserve their old social structures as much as possible and, as much as possible, place major parts of that system within the new social structure. give While in the process of modernization, Reza Shah and Ataturk sought to erase their old social structures because they considered them to be the cause of backwardness. And since the development of Iran and Turkey was exogenous, not much attention was paid to the internal conditions of the society, but to achieve economic development, what had happened in the western countries should be modeled in order for them to progress. would be and by imposing modernization programs from top to bottom and relying on foreign or domestic capital, such as increasing tariffs and collecting huge taxes from farmers in Iran and Turkey, or selling oil in Iran, They provided changes that led to heterogeneous economic growth, especially in Iran. The concept of modernization implies the complete transformation of the traditional society into a modern society, with various types of technology and social organization related to it, which is a developed and stable economic-political feature. How the process of modernization in Iran was accompanied by the systematic oppositions and resistances of the guided society, which became one of the main reasons for the failure of Reza Shah in the modernization measures. Of course, another main reason for the lack of success of Reza Shah compared to Ataturk was the difference in the relationship between religion and government in the two countries