Brirf introduction of the Book, Iranian Political Ration And Kurdish Identity search

 

 

.

Iranian Political Ration and Kurdish identity search

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08QW5RCQV/ref=cm_sw_r_wa_awdb_imm_t1_k1Z3Fb20B5MQK

Who are the Kurds? What do they want?Are the Kurds a nation without history or the forgotten nation of the history?Are the Kurds Iranian or non- Iranian?

     This book consists of three parts and eight chapters with an introduction and conclusion. The first chapter that includes theoretical framework consists of two sections: the first section which is about the relationship between ration and politics attempts to provide a systematic model of criticism of Iran's political intellect. Further, the process of philosophical transition from theories of metaphysical truth and metaphysics to human life and body and intellect has been reviewed to criticize Iranian political ration which uses the mega-concepts of ethics, religion and the truth to suppress Kurd movements. The second section, using certain concepts such as tragedy, ... tries to present a theoretical framework for the development of the problem. The second chapter is a historical general introduction to the descriptive and transient history of Kurdistan. In this chapter, it is attempted to examine movements such as Mede, Gaumata, Mazdak, Khoramadinan, and it also investigates the theory of Kurds being indigenous inhabitant of the region versus the theory of being Aryan and being Azerbaijanian and its governments such as Shadadian and Rawadian to provide an introduction to analyze and conceptualize them in future chapters.

The third chapter, which is the most important part of this office, attempts to test the hypothesis and concept of Kurd identity seeking. In the first chapter of the fourth chapter, it is stated that the Iranian empire was not an ally of the Median state, and it was not essentially formed except through the rejection of the Medes. Iranian empire was a Persian-oriented system that developed only in opposition to the Medes. I have challenged common but baseless theories of the shared domination of Mede and Pars and the satisfaction of the Medes from the domination of Pars with the help of valid sources. In this section, we have inferred concepts such as socialist and equality justice, tribal democracy, earthly/Dionysus culture, contractual/territorial legitimacy and proletariat spirit from political Kurdish movements using authoritative sources. We have stated that Kurds are not Iranian racially and culturally/politically but also Iran's political intellect has evolved with the stated components in contradiction and negation of the Kurds. Each section examines one of the compone. The second discussion examines the social and economic structure of the Medes and Persians/Achaemenids, and I have argued that there is not only any compromise between them, but Iranian system has been essentially developed in opposition to Median system. In the third discussion, I have examined the Median government in contrast to Iranian government i.e. one is based on agreement democracy and the other is based on the divine right of the kings which are in complete opposition with each other. In the fourth discussion, the Zoroastrian religion has been investigated versus the Median religion of Mithra. As the result, it has been proven that the foundation of the emergence of Zoroastrianism, which later became the ideology of the Iranian Empire, was developed in confrontation with and against the Mithra religion of Medians. In the fifth discussion, I have reviewed and compared the national totems and anthems of these two nations. Sixth discussion is devoted to “the other” or Aniran of Iranian mythology claiming that the Aniran of Iranian mythology, that is, Zahak and Turanians, demons and devils are the same Kurds and their Mithraism religion.

     In the fourth chapter, we have investigated the historical period of Darius, along with Gaumata Kurdish movements, Frewartish and Chiserma, which like the second section, I have tested some hypothesis and concepts. The fifth chapter deals with the historical period of the Sassanian and Anoshirvan in confrontation with Kurdish movements of Mazdakian through which there have been reproduced the concepts of Iran's political ration and the Kurds identity seeking. The sixth chapter examined the concept of Iranvij and Kurd, action and reaction to that concept with the arrival of Iranians, Mede becoming Kurd that means Kurd becoming slave. Whatsoever known as Iran was the land of the Kurds captured by the Persians and then was called Iran through their military/religious authority. Thereafter, I presented a theory of government in the Middle East (Persian, Kurdish, and Arabic). In Chapter 7, I briefly outline the antagonism and reaction of the Greek and Semitic political ration towards Kurdish quest for identity in order to abstract the theory of the contradictions of the historical ethnic groups with the Kurd up to the level of a general theory. In the next chapter, i.e. Chapter 8, I have presented the general theory of the confrontation/continuation of history with Kurd. History, while contradicting and breaking, is the continuation of the Mithra/Mede; therefore, I have presented a general theory concerning the classification of Kurd history and finally we come to the summary and conclusion.

Contrary to the common belief but misguided, Iranian and orientalist scholars,who define the Kurds as part of Iranian civilization and culture, this book indicates that the Kurds are not Iranian/Aryan ethnic group, but they are aboriginals of their land before the Aryans/Persians, and the political intellect of Iran has evolved based on negation and “the other” making of Kurdish identity. "Iranvij" and Iranian religion and government have evolved in confrontation and rejection of the Kurds. Iran is referred to the land of the settled Medes which Iranians seized by force and called it Iran, i.e. their lost paradise. The Iranian religion of Zoroastrians developed against the median religion of Mithra. The basis of the Iranian government has been the tool of ethnic domination of Pars on Kurd.

     The Achaemenids/Persian Empire was formed through the military defeat, suppression, and marginalization of the Median/Kurdish empire. Even the Iranian symbols and works such as Persepolis and the inscription of Bistoun are reminiscent of their victories over the Kurds. Furthermore, the Persian language did not come into existence through internal evolution, but Darius overnight ordered Elamite and Babylonian scribers to write it on the inscription of Behistun to preserve the memory of the victory of the Persians on the Medes. Kurds and their rituals were entitled as Ahriman, Daoi Mazina, Div, Ajidahak/Zahak, Afrasiab, and Turanians, Zandiq, pagan, Jin or goblin and the alien agent in Iranian mythology and culture. The controversy over totem symbols like bull and lion, and snake and eagle is the abstraction of the ethnic struggles of Persians and Medians. Even the ethical notions of goodness against evil, light versus darkness, represent the ethnic domination of Pars on Mede that have shown their victorious-self as positive and the other defeated one, in the form of evil and dark concepts.  The Aniran or ‘the other’ of Iranvij are the same Kurds. It does not mean that Iran has not defined other “the others” for itself, such as Arabs or Turks, etc. However, the era of the advent of Iranian intellect was not shaped except in the face of the Kurds, their identity and land, and the philosophical development of Iran political intellect was not formulated only via the military crackdown on Turks and Mongols and ... but with the help of the ritualistic/ideological struggle against the anti-metaphysical bio-Dionysus life of the Kurds. Since the basis of Iranian rationality has been formed based on the denial and rejection of the Kurdish identity, the possibility of any dialogue is not possible in the framework of Iranian intellect. It is worthy of reflection that they not only denied and rejected Kurds politically/ideologically but also, they confiscated the whole culture and identity of Medes and imparted Iranian/Zoroastrian sense on it. They dismantled Medes/Kurds via confiscating their culture, changing the meaning of its elements, and owning their culture and civilization as well. Iranian ration confiscated Medes identity at the same time that it was in opposition to it. Iran's intellect is a breakdown in the continuation of the Kurdish identity. this book shows that the pivotal or axial period with the advent of philosophy and religion has been developed in contrast to the Kurdish Identity. The relationship is of suppression and confiscation. Along with the historical severe suppression of the Kurds, the Kurdish-Mithraism symbols and concepts have been confiscated and their meanings have been transformed by the metaphysical religions (Jewish, Christianity and Zoroastrian) and by philosophers (Plato and sophists). If, based on Hegel and Nietzsche, history and metaphysics were developed with Iran and Zoroaster, we will find out in the current book that the Kurds were "the other" of the history and metaphysics Because Zoroastrian and Iran were not developed except through the suppression and confiscation of the Mithra and Mede.

 

 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08QW5RCQV/ref=cm_sw_r_wa_awdb_imm_t1_k1Z3Fb20B5MQK.