Social reform requires collective agreement
“We need your guidance. You can help outline pathways for the country to overcome its challenges and difficulties.” These are the words of President Masoud Pezeshkian, addressing a group of sociology experts on Tuesday. The Iranian president emphasized that social and cultural changes require time, often measured in decades. Therefore, expecting substantial changes within the short period since he assumed office, especially given the complexity and diversity of issues, is unrealistic.
Pezeshkian urged the experts present, as well as specialists across the country, to provide the government with actionable recommendations and support in problem-solving. He added, “I firmly believe that without consensus, societal progress is unattainable. Our goal is to achieve change through unity, inclusive participation, and the establishment of justice and fairness. When we uphold people’s rights, they will join us in mutual understanding.”
He emphasized the significance of concepts like organizational unity, teamwork, and justice, which are fundamental in today’s companies and institutions. He explained that for achieving consensus, change is necessary, but it is not a simple matter. This process must begin with clear communication. When inequality arises, the government must present these issues transparently to the public and explain the necessity of change.
Referring to criticisms from some faculty members regarding universities, Pezeshkian noted that reforms are indeed being pursued and that some ideas are already in place. However, these must be examined with experts like those present. Universities should equip students with skills that will be valuable in addressing societal issues, as knowledge should evolve based on societal needs. Implement changes in universities requires a common language for dialogue among all parties involved, and after establishing this common language, we must define the path for change. The government follows “the same path in selecting governors and ministers, which is, of course, a challenging process”.
Dialogue versus revolutionary change
On the topic of rapid government reforms, the president observed, “Immediate and revolutionary changes can create conflicts, while dialogue can resolve many issues. I believe that those on the opposite side of the spectrum are also seeking justice and fairness, and we need to speak their language to get through to them. In a state of polarization and conflict, the only outcome is destruction for nations, and the net result is zero, which is why even taking one step forward with understanding and unity is preferable to a polarized environment”.
Referring to the theme of unity, Pezeshkian stated, “I have adopted the slogan of unity based on my beliefs and convictions. I am confident that by respecting each group’s rights and acting justly, we can achieve consensus. If we reach a fair resolution for each segment of society, differences in ethnicity, party, or background should no longer be a source of division.”
The president then addressed concerns raised by sociologists regarding the national education system. He noted that weekly discussions are held to address the educational challenges, especially the issue of inequality. “What kind of justice is it that students from a province with the bare minimum of educational resources are expected to compete on an equal footing with students from, say, Tehran, who have access to the best facilities? Why shouldn’t we create an environment where our talented individuals can grow and thrive, regardless of where they are in the country? Solving these problems is no easy feat, but we’re working to address them, and we’ve already had discussions on this topic at the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.”
Pezeshkian further emphasized the importance of equitable job opportunities and criticized workforce excess in certain government sectors and ineffective personnel management. “In a fair system, compensation is based on effort and work. It is unjust that some work hard in society while others in certain offices receive equal pay with minimal effort.”
He pointed out the issue of [energy] deficits in the country, urging economists to provide practical solutions to resolve these issues without harming vulnerable populations. “It’s irrational for some people to receive the lion’s share of subsidies and resources, while others are excluded. I ask economists to propose actionable steps to address this problem.”
Pezeshkian turned to the different perspectives on the issue of the Islamic dress codes and the criticisms expressed by some of the attendees regarding the current policies in this area, saying, “In terms of hijab, consider the other side of the story as well; development requires respect for the culture of society. If we mock the culture of society, there will be no possibility for change and understanding. Those who advocate for reform and change must also respect other cultural perspectives; otherwise, conflict arises. We must honor the culture of our society.”
At the start of the meeting, several sociology professors shared their perspectives.
Rafiei, a sociologist, presented the latest survey data on various political, social, economic, and international issues, stating that contrary to popular belief, Iranians are not inherently political. He emphasized that citizens evaluate governments based on their performance rather than political affiliations, and called for reducing political confrontation and avoiding creating divisions between the public and the authorities.
Challenges of development and need to restore
social trust
Taqi Azad Armaki, another sociologist, identified a fundamental issue in the lack of emphasis on development. He noted that although most governments prioritize development, they do not make it a central focus of their operations. He argued that genuine development requires cohesion, social belonging, and trust, and that the current critical issue facing Iranian society is a lack of these cohesive forces, which are essential drivers of development.
Azad Armaki observed that Iran is built around three pillars: politics, religion, and family. He suggested that progress in the political system requires an accountable bureaucracy, as effective development is unattainable without a well-structured bureaucratic system. He also noted that the separation of religious and intellectual figures has left a void in the country’s spiritual domain, causing a sense of meaninglessness among the people. He urged collaboration between religious and intellectual leaders to restore values, ethics, and culture to society, with the family as its focal point.
Jabar Rahmani remarked, “Despite its potential, our society suffers from a type of exhaustion due to the excessive demands placed on it by politics and economics. At the same time, the state faces immediate social challenges, yet the country’s infrastructure has become worn and deficient. Education is severely depleted, and civil institutions have systematically weakened. The government must address these issues urgently.”
The sociologist continued by addressing the deteriorating relationship between people and the environment, noting that neglect and exploitation of natural resources have endangered societal infrastructure, calling for prompt action in this area.
Self-awareness and societal solidarity
Mo’ayedfar commented on the critical importance of self-awareness in current circumstances. “The country faces multiple crises, and fostering solidarity between the government and society is essential to overcome them. Since our entry into the modern world, idealism has persisted due to our historical background, but gradually we have moved toward self-awareness. However, certain elites remain entrenched in idealistic thinking, distancing themselves from society.”
This sociologist added that “some elites seek to play a role in society by preserving the historical identity foundations, but the governance limits their influence, though their participation remains essential for society”. He called on the government to help enable these elites “to become active and provide opportunities for them to make a meaningful contribution in various institutions.”
During the meeting, Shahli-Bar emphasized that ideas like “giving a voice to the voiceless” need to become social movements within society. He highlighted the critical issue of housing, explaining that the high cost of housing is straining family budgets and has led to structural poverty in many households. He warned that if left unaddressed, the situation would worsen.
The sociologist added that the dominant discourse for addressing the housing crisis has so far been the production of private housing, which has proven ineffective. Despite having 27 million housing units for 24 million households, many people still live in rental properties. He suggested extending rental contracts from a minimum of one to two years and implementing large-scale projects to build affordable or free public housing.
The sociology professor further recommended incorporating social perspectives into housing projects, observing a lack of sociologists’ presence in national planning. He proposed establishing specialized social sciences organizations for this purpose.
Inclusive unity and addressing social inequities
Janadeleh, a socialist, expressed hope that the government’s approach to unity would be inclusive, not limited to specific political groups. He suggested that one way to achieve this inclusivity is by listening to the voices of marginalized groups, advocating for mechanisms to enable these voices to be heard, including democratizing the selection process for appointments.
Janadeleh also advised that the social impacts of each government decision should be assessed in advance to avoid disruptions and negative consequences. Concluding his remarks, he urged the president to focus on educational equity and address the detrimental impact of the “entrance exam mafia” on the education system.
Zhaleh Shaditalab emphasized the importance of engaging all members of society, particularly those who did not participate in the presidential election, and reiterated that the government’s most important responsibility is to ensure public satisfaction. She stressed the need for economic and social stability to provide citizens with a positive outlook for the future.
The socialist highlighted the role of civil institutions in national development and called for the Ministry of Interior to streamline and expedite the licensing process for such activities. She also noted the importance of realism and addressing current social and cultural needs, especially in matters concerning women and families.
Mousavi also shared concerns about whether these issues would receive adequate attention and preventive action. She pointed out that sociologists have warned about social fragmentation since the last decade, and such warnings have previously been communicated to presidents. She stressed that governance must foster mutual trust and reduce restrictions, particularly for scientific and student associations.
Mousavi continued by emphasizing that attention to the rights of neglected groups is reflected in your slogans, and people are waiting to see what developments will occur in this regard.
Strengthening social organizations
Addressing the meeting, Maqsoud Farastkhah said that Pezeshkian’s social behavior is accompanied by a certain type of social narrative, but it alone cannot drive development and other actions must also be taken.
He encouraged the president to prioritize both political and social stability, ensuring the resilience of the government.
Farastkhah suggested that the president should seek proposals from society on addressing social issues, noting that Iran has significant human capital, which could be an asset. He acknowledged the low quality of social services but suggested leveraging local and even expatriate expertise to improve it through innovation and changes in administrative processes.
He concluded by asking Pezeshkian to support the growth of social organizations, arguing that by strengthening these groups, substantial progress could be achieved over two presidential terms.
Ghaffari, another socialist, discussed the resilience of Iranian society and the role of the Islamic Republic in national development. He noted that while this strength enables the society to resist unacceptable measures, the importance of social issues has been overlooked. He argued that social challenges cannot be resolved through political and economic decisions alone; addressing social issues is a prerequisite for success in other areas.
Ghaffari highlighted the low voter turnout in recent elections and the need to engage various social classes, including those with fewer economic struggles, such as academics and students, who seek involvement in national decision-making. He emphasized that the president’s slogan of unity should encompass this group, as they are key to achieving the government’s goals.
He also criticized the selection process for university faculty, noting that excessive restrictions hinder academic processes, including hiring and departmental appointments. He urged the president to review these limitations.
Mohammad Taqi Karami argued that the government must protect its political integrity and authority; otherwise, social issues could become problematic. “The government needs to be able to shape its social narrative through mechanisms that foster participation and innovation, and this process requires diverse contributions and creative solutions.”
He emphasized the importance of university autonomy and the need for the government to strengthen its authority in the organizational processes of universities.
Another sociologist, Serajzadeh, noted that one of the president’s promises was to seek expert opinions, stressing that this should become an institutional practice, not just a symbolic gesture. He remarked that Iranian society is currently highly polarized, which hampers consensus-building—a serious issue requiring attention.
He also highlighted potential areas for success, such as combating corruption in government institutions, which could boost governmental efficiency by gaining the support of other governing bodies. Concluding his remarks, Serajzadeh criticized the three-year delay in approving elections for the Union of Social Sciences Associations by the Ministry of Science, citing communication issues he hopes will be resolved under the current administration.
Call for engaging specialists
Continuing the discussion, Vahid Shalchi stated, “Contrary to those who claim that our society is polarized, I believe that there are currently three poles in our society.”
Vahid Shalchi argued against the notion that “our society is merely polarized”, he believed that “there are currently three poles in our society.” Shalchi identified a third group comprising “specialists that you can tap into for help. Despite their criticisms, they entered the fray and participated in the elections.”
He suggested that the government’s science-centered discourse could involve the scientific community in decision-making processes, including expert advisors without formal positions in the government.
Restoring media’s credibility
The sociologist stressed the need for the government to provide a vision for the country’s economic future to ensure social stability. He also urged that the media’s credibility be restored within the country, warning that unresolved issues would persist otherwise.
Yaqoub Ahmadi noted that many social and cultural problems stem from government interventions lacking expert insight. He cautioned that in some cases, political interventions exacerbate tensions rather than alleviate them, potentially leading to radical shifts among the affected groups.
This Kurdish sociologist expressed concerns over the disadvantaged status of border provinces like Kordestan, Ilam, and Sistan-Baluchestan in poverty metrics, highlighting that Kordestan has consistently ranked low in these indicators for years.
Falahati criticized the current governance structures in cultural and social domains, noting the urgent need for broader consultative circles to ensure more inclusive and realistic decisions. She also voiced disappointment over the stalled legislation on women’s protection.
Kazemi presented five recommendations to the president: prioritize meaningful change, provide more support to middle- and lower-class women as they are the driving force of society, overhaul the education system, address rent-seeking opportunities in the field of employment and ultimately bring job instability to a close.
Hadi Khaniki, the final speaker, commended Pezeshkian for taking on responsibility during difficult times. He underscored the importance of paradigm shifts and utilizing the full potential of society through open dialogues to inform the public of societal challenges.
Khaniki also stressed the need to improve the government’s communication with the public and increase transparency in media policies to reduce tensions, encouraging continued dialogue with experts.
In closing, Elias Hazrati, head of the government’s Information Council, praised the president’s unity slogan. He remarked on the significance of this approach, recalling efforts in the Sixth Parliament to appoint a Sunni representative to the presiding board, which ultimately failed. He contrasted this with today’s administration, which includes a female minister, a Sunni deputy, and a Sunni governor.