Understanding Resistance in the Mirror of Two Histories
An article by Mehdi Jamshidi, a member of the Faculty of Cultural Studies at the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought
One of the most significant intellectual sources of awareness regarding the notion that the birth of the “Islamic Revolution” overturned the wheel of history and social transformations, setting them in a reverse trajectory, is our esteemed professor, Dr. Kachouyan. He articulated and analyzed this concept within the framework of social science, ultimately arriving at a distinctive interpretation of the philosophy of history (see Exploration of the Mysterious Nature of Iran, p. 8).
It was here that we realized the necessity of developing a unique “philosophy of history” for this revolution. The Islamic Revolution has brought about a monumental shift in humanity and the world, rendering it impossible to understand or predict its realities and concealed truths within the confines of conventional theoretical perspectives.
Before him, Allameh Motahhari (may God’s mercy be upon him) had successfully expressed and analyzed this epistemological awareness, revealing highly pivotal aspects that marked the starting point for a sacred understanding of the Islamic Revolution and the post-revolutionary history.
Meanwhile, secular forces have never acknowledged this theoretical truth, which had manifested itself in the mirror of reality. They remained bound to modernist calculations and paradigms, refusing to break free from them.
Thus, over the past decades, we have continually faced two distinct understandings of the revolution and its transformations. The political and intellectual realms have become arenas for conflict and confrontation between these two opposing interpretations.
Determining who is revolutionary or non-revolutionary must be assessed based on their level of adherence to either of these two understandings. This perspective allows for an identification of their position and context, rather than relying on political criteria or boundaries crafted by superficial and power-driven forces within the realm of politics.
It is not uncommon to find individuals within the principlist movement who consider themselves revolutionary but remain alien to this understanding, interpreting the revolution within modernist frameworks.
Secondly, the statements of the Supreme Leader regarding Syria, resistance, and Iran have astonished some, as he speaks with such “certainty” and “determinism” about regional and global developments, perceiving the chain of future events as inevitable and preordained.
What is the source of these prophetic judgments? Why does he assert with such certainty about a future that is highly fragile, complex, and subject to numerous variables? To comprehend this, we must refer to the philosophy of history previously mentioned and view these statements as justified within its framework.
This philosophy of history portrays modernist history as reaching its endpoint, while it envisions religious history as dominant and prevailing. It regards the Islamic Revolution as the starting point of a new historical chapter. Modernist history, once dominant, is now being overthrown, losing its capacity for resistance, colonization, expansion, and dominance—it is nearing its conclusion.
The theory of the Easternization of power echoes this notion, pointing to a historical shift. This transition is undoubtedly arduous, but the events of the past century within the Islamic world indicate the stabilization of this shift.
We are currently situated within a historical juncture, where every direction we turn reveals pieces of this unfolding narrative. These elements find their meaning within the framework of the sacred philosophy of history, outlining a distinct perspective.
Thirdly, opposing forces cannot alter this historical trajectory or prevent this turning point from occurring. We have already moved beyond a state of impossibility and entered a period of opportunities and openings. Any contradictory historical elements are merely attempts to hinder the realization of this turning point, but in practice and over the long term, they fail and falter—they cannot overturn this historical juncture.
Delays may occur, or historical forces may be replaced, granting greater power and agency to actors within the Islamic world. However, no fundamental change will affect the overall trajectory of this history. While this history is eventful and oscillatory, these realities are episodic and specific, incapable of altering the broader historical destiny.
At the macro-historical level, in terms of outcomes and overarching horizons, one must speak of a “history with no return.” Modernity is on the verge of decline and dissolution, and the sacred era is rising on a global scale. Those captivated by the daily details, turbulence, and unstable fragments cannot grasp the inevitability of this movement, rooted in the philosophy of religious history.
