Historical Studies

Historical Studies

The crisis of government inefficiency and the issue of the fall of the Pahlavi government

Document Type : ..

Authors
1 PhD student of Revolutionary History, Imam Khomeini International University , Qazvin, Iran
2 Professor of History, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
3 Associate Professor of History, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
Abstract
Efficiency is a concept that, although it is connected with economic and management fields, but due to its stronger connection with the concept of power, it also has clear and important examples in political science. The efficiency of political systems is the main factor of their stability and resilience, and the key factor for governments to overcome political crises around them. When a political structure collapses, the first step of that system is a set of inefficiencies, and the main cause of its downfall, before any other factor, is this issue. The collapse of the Pahlavi regime is one of the interesting subjects that can be studied from this point of view and the political crises of this era can be analyzed from this angle. In this article, an attempt will be made to obtain reliable indicators for evaluating the efficiency of the government and the political system in the Pahlavi era, with the help of systems theory, within the framework of structural-functional approaches, and the six capacities. The one that has been mentioned in order to measure the efficiency of the governments (monopoly on the use of force, extractive, shaping the national identity, regulatory, maintaining internal cohesion and redistribution) adapted it to the political structure of this era. And finally, he analyzed the fall of the Pahlavi government according to the results of this comparison.
Keywords

Albertus, M. and V. Menaldo (2012), “Coercive Capacity and the Prospects for Democratization”, Comparative Politics January, vol. 44, no. 2, 151-169.
Easton, D. (1965), A System Analysis of Political Life, New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Fearon, J. D. and D. D. Laitin (2003), “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War”, American Political Science Review, vol. 97, no. 1, 75-80.
Kocher, M. A. (2010), “State Capacity as a Conceptual Variable”, Yale Journal of International Affairs, vol. 5, no. 2, 137-145.
Mann, M. (1986), “The Autonomous Power of the State: Its Origins, Mechanisms and Results”, in: States in History, John A. Hall (ed.), London: Basic Blackwell.
Mann, M. (1993), The Sources of Social Power, The Rise of Classes and Nation-States, 1760-1914, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Poggi, G. (1990), The State, Its Nature, Development and Prospects, Cambridge, Polity Press
Slater, D. (2008), “Can Leviathan Be Democratic?, Competitive Elections, Robust.
Shaoguang, W. (2012), “Why is State Effectiveness Essential for Democracy? Asian Examples”, in: Contemporary Chinese Political Thought, Debates and Perspectives, Fred Reinhard Dallmayr and Tingyang Zhao (eds.), Kentucky, The University Press of Kentucky.
Sorensen, G. (2002), State Transformation and New Security Dilemmas, Ankara, Centre for Eurasian Strategic Studies.
Weiss, L. (1998), The Myth of the Powerless State, Governing the Economy in a Global Era, Cambridge, Polity.
Volume 14, Issue 2 - Serial Number 28
Autumn and Winter 2023-2024
October 2023
Pages 29-52

  • Receive Date 19 June 2023
  • Revise Date 09 August 2023
  • Accept Date 02 September 2023