خلاصة:
As a consequence of increasing literature on multiculturalism, cultural identity and cultural
self-rule during the past four decades or so, the concept of nation-state and the realm of
national government have been subject to dramatic changes. In a similar trend, due to the
development of globalization, revising the classical functions of the state machinery looks
more urgent than ever. Different accounts of national and cultural identity, widespread
demands of recognizing cultural difference through arguing for the rights of cultural
communities living within the boundaries of a country, and the changing nature of concepts
like national security and interests, suggest that political theorists should look for a more
adequate conception of national integrity which consists with such changes as variety of
alternatives to the classical interpretation. Having John Rawls’s overlapping consensus in
mind, I shall offer a similar model among cultural communities in Iran by employing the
historically situated and shared Iranian-religious identity and granting cultural autonomy.
ملخص الجهاز:
Solidarity in Iran:In Search of a Conceptual Framework Seyed Alireza Hosseini Beheshti-Assistant Professor of Political Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Received:02/10/2018 Accepted:01/12/2018 _____________________________________________________ Abstract As a consequence of increasing literature on multiculturalism, cultural identity and culturalself-rule during the past four decades or so, the concept of nation-state and the realm ofnational government have been subject to dramatic changes.
As will be discussed below, demands of multiculturalism have gone far beyond claims of equality of rights to questions concerning how and to which extend different cultural minorities, which are among the most salient and vexing on the political agenda of many democratic societies, are to be recognized.
For this very reason, his neutrality of concern which he views as the most likely political principle to secure public assent in societies like ours (Kymlicka, 1989:95), turns to be not as neutral as it seems at first, because the criterion by which the state policies would be judged as neutral or otherwise is grounded on an account of autonomy- based freedom of choice for citizens which is by its very nature liberal.
The liberal claim (at least in its Kantian form) was initially to provide a political, legal and economic framework in which those who hold different and incompatible conceptions of the good life would be able to appeal to neutral standards so they could live altogether in peace: “Every individual is to be equally free to propose and to live by whatever conception of the good he or she pleases, derived from whatever theory or tradition he or she may adhere to, unless that conception of the good involves reshaping the life of the rest of the community in accordance with it”(Ibid:336).