تحليل جامعه‌شناختي از وقوع جنبش مشروطه در ايران با استفاده از نظريه "فشار ساختاري" اسملسر

A Sociological Analysis of the Outbreak of the Constitutional Movement in Iran: The Application of Smleserʹʹs Theory of Structural Strain

در اين مقاله كوشيده‌ايم تا با استفاده از نظريه "فشار ساختاري" اسملسر، به تبييني جامعه‌شناختي از جنبش مشروطه دست يابيم و ضمناً با اين محك تجربي، نظريه مذكور را ارزيابي نماييم. بدين منظور و در اين چهارچوب نظري، زمينه‌هاي مساعد ساختاري براي بروز جنبش مشروطه؛ فشارهاي ساختاري (اقتصادي، سياسي و ايديولوژيك) ناشي از اين زمينه‌ها بر سه قشر اصلي دخيل در جنبش(يعني بازاريان، روشنفكران و روحانيان)؛ نشانگان شكل‌گيري باورهاي همگاني‌شده نزد مشروطه‌خواهان حول چيستي، چرايي و چگونگي برون‌رفت از بحران‌هاي ساختاري موجود؛ حدوث برخي رخدادهاي تحريك‌كننده (شتاب‌زا)؛ بالفعل شدن پتانسيل بسيج با مولفه‌هاي سه‌گانه رهبري، منابع و ارتباطات؛ و مآلاً ساختار دستگاه سركوب و عملكرد آن در كنترل مشروطه‌خواهان بسيج شده مورد بررسي تاريخي قرار گرفته‌اند. در نهايت و با تكيه بر دستاوردهاي اين تحقيق، با رويكردي انتقادي، نظريه فشار ساختاري را ارزيابي نموده‌ايم.

The present article attempts to offer a sociological analysis of the Constitutional Movement of Iran by applying Smelserʹs theory of Structural Strain and, hence, to evaluate the theory. The analysis of the movement reveals that the Iranian society in the late Nasseri era and early stages of the rule of Muzafarudin Shah lacked any functional equilibrium in its political and economic structure. However, once these objective crises were situated in specific subjective grounds, that is, Shia-Iranian political culture, it led to the collapse of the foundations of legitimacy of political system preparing the third conducive ground for collective uprising against the status quo. The trio crisis structurally led to material and evaluative contradictions between the society and the government, exerting economic, political and ideological strains on the three main strata of the society, that is, the bazaaris, the intellectuals, and the clergy. In a short period, these structural stains spilled over from the objective level to the subjective level, leading to the formation of generalized beliefs among these leading strata of the Constitutionalsʹ Movement about the nature, origin, and quality of an outlet from the existing crises. These strata did not agree on what and why of the strain, but agreed on how to get out of the structural strains. Under these circumstances, the occurrence of some provocative events which were the objective examples acknowledging the aforementioned beliefs strongly provoked the bazaaris, ulama and intellectuals and led to the materialization of collective mobilization potentials. The leadership of this mobilization was with the Ulama and intellectuals while its logistic sources ( i.e. financial, monetary and support ) was with the bazaaris. Meanwhile mosques and pulpits served as the communication channels of the movement for the promotion of the generalized beliefs and establishing contacts between the leadership and the mobilized body. Such a mobilization materialized through sit-ins, public strikes and meaningful migrations. Finally, the unconvincing structural adjustment and insufficient suppression by the government plus inefficiency of the suppressive system due to internal rifts on the one hand and within the suppressive forces on the other hand led to the ineffectiveness of the suppressive system and victory of the movement. In the concluding part of the paper, relying on the findings of the present research, the theory of structural strain has been evaluated in such areas as Ignorance of the cultural context, intra-systemic factors, unwanted factors, dynamism and volatility of the movement, and, finally, the composite ideology of the leaders of the movement in distinguishing the problem and its causes.