A comparative study of basic concepts in resistance theory and realist, structuralist, and post-structuralist theories.

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Scientific Vice President of the Supreme Council for Theory, Criticism and Debate, Faculty Member of the Supreme National Defense University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Doctoral student of National Security, Supreme National Defense University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Law, Theology and Islamic Studies, Faculty of Humanities, Golestan University, Golestan, Iran

Abstract

In Shiite political jurisprudence, following the example of the uprising of Imam Hussein, resistance is considered an active strategy in confronting obstacles and threats, the application of which in the Islamic Revolution of Iran had at least two major and fundamental results: One is in the victory of the revolution and its successes in various fields, and the other is in developing discursive and strategic power in the region and the world, by creating a transnational alliance called the "Axis of Resistance", with the aim of confronting the oppression and exploitation of hegemonic powers. With these events, the world's major security schools, such as the realist tradition, were challenged. From this perspective, explaining the dimensions and angles of resistance theory as a theoretical framework, especially in comparison with other prominent security schools, is an inevitable necessity Just as it has changed the balance of power in hard and semi-hard campaigns, it has also replaced other strategies and theories in the field of science and theoretical foundations of security and soft power, and has gained the persuasion and consensus of elites and politicians in its superiority. In this study, the library method was used to collect data and the descriptive-explanatory method was used for analysis.

Keywords

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics