IRAN: REPRESSION AND THE CRISIS OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT - Roberto Cerulli - ETHICA SOCIETAS-Rivista di scienze umane e sociali

State Violence, Crisis of Consent, Generational Conflict, and Mature Authoritarianism

Abstract: This article examines the ongoing crisis in Iran as an expression of a broader fracture between the State and society, moving beyond a reductive reading of events in terms of public order. Through a sociological and political science approach, the analysis interprets the repression of protests as a manifestation of a crisis of power legitimacy and of the breakdown of the social contract that has sustained the Islamic Republic. The article explores the role of younger generations, the symbolic dimension of the conflict, the control of information, and the transformation of authoritarian stability into systemic coercion. Drawing on the theoretical contributions of Weber, Arendt, Durkheim, Honneth, Foucault, Linz, and Habermas, the study highlights how state violence, far from containing dissent, radicalizes its meaning and amplifies its political and moral implications. The article concludes by reflecting on the responsibilities of the international community and on the possibility of transforming the relationship between power and citizens as a prerequisite for lasting peace.

Keywords: #Iran #LegitimacyCrisis #Repression #SocialContract #Protests #Authoritarianism #StateViolence #GenerationalConflict #InformationControl #HumanRights #PoliticalSociology #PoliticalAnalysis #RobertoCerulli #ethicasocietas #ethicasocietasjournal #scientificjournal #pointslicense #law #ethicasocietasupli

Roberto Cerulli (1971), da oltre 25 anni nella Polizia Locale, attualmente comandante di Capalbio (GR), giurista specializzato nel settore amministrativo e delle risorse umane, autore di diversi testi, attivo nel volontariato in ambito civile e religioso, è vice presidente Regionale della Federazione delle Misericordie Toscane e membro del Consiglio dei Saggi della Confederazione Nazionale Misericordie d’Italia.

versione italiana

A Consolidated Narrative and an Unresolved Question

For decades, the name of Iran has been associated in Western public discourse with images of conflict, ideological rigidity, and permanent tension. In news coverage, the country has often appeared as a distant and opaque space, marked by chronic confrontation. This representation has frequently oversimplified a complex reality, reducing the Iranian crisis to a sequence of emergency events. Today, in the face of systematic violence exercised against protesters, that narrative is no longer sufficient. The question therefore becomes inevitable: what historical phase is the Islamic Republic currently experiencing?

From Public Order to a Crisis of Legitimacy

The events of recent weeks cannot be interpreted merely as a matter of public order. The massive and lethal use of force against citizens signals a deeper fracture, one that can be traced back to what Max Weber defined as a crisis of the legitimacy of power—that is, the loss of recognition of authority as just and acceptable¹. When consent dissolves, the State is forced to replace it with coercion.

As Hannah Arendt observed, violence does not generate durable power but is often the symptom of a structural weakening of authority². The systemic repression carried out in Iran appears to move precisely in this direction, transforming a political crisis into a moral one.

The Breakdown of the Social Contract

From a sociological perspective, what emerges is the dissolution of the implicit social contract that sustained the Islamic Republic for decades, based on a fragile balance between ideological control, selective redistribution of resources, and targeted repression. Today, this equilibrium appears compromised.

According to Émile Durkheim’s analytical categories, Iranian society seems to be experiencing a phase of anomie, in which norms no longer provide integration, meaning, or orientation³. The result is a widespread malaise that manifests itself as a crisis of belonging and a delegitimation of the existing order.

Generations, Identity, and Recognition

The core of the protest is not exclusively economic. Younger generations, raised in a globalized and digital context, perceive the regime as incapable of offering a future, social mobility, or recognition. Here, Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition resonates strongly: when individuals and groups do not feel recognized in their dignity and aspirations, conflict becomes inevitable⁴.

Repression does not extinguish protest; rather, it transforms it into a radical contestation of the entire system of power.

Information Control and Fear of Coordination

The blackout of digital communications and the control of information networks represent a defensive strategy typical of regimes in crisis. Michel Foucault demonstrated how modern power operates also through the control of discourse and informational flows⁵. In a hyperconnected society, however, silencing the network risks intensifying alienation and accelerating the delegitimation of power.

Mature Authoritarianism and Apparent Stability

From a political science perspective, Iran appears to be situated in the phase of mature authoritarian regimes described by Juan J. Linz, in which stability is ensured not by consent but by systemic repression⁶. This is a fragile form of stability, prone to generating increasingly intense cycles of violence and an irreversible rupture between State and society.

Geopolitical Dimension and Endogenous Crisis

Tensions with the United States and Israel feed an external narrative of permanent siege, used to justify internal repression. However, as political sociology teaches, external pressures become destabilizing only when internal fragility already exists. The Iranian crisis is therefore first and foremost endogenous, rooted in the political system’s inability to renew itself.

Repression or Transformation: A Historical Choice

Iran now stands at a crucial crossroads: to continue along the path of repression or to initiate a radical rethinking of the relationship between State and citizens. Jürgen Habermas argued that legitimacy in modern societies rests on the capacity to integrate conflict through dialogue and institutions⁷. Without such integration, power loses its normative foundation.

A Question That Concerns Everyone

The Iranian crisis does not concern Iran alone. It challenges the international community’s ability to move beyond realpolitik and to defend fundamental rights. It also challenges contemporary societies on a central question: how long can a political order based on fear endure?

In this context, peace is not a rhetorical aspiration but a political and moral necessity—reconciliation between State and society, recognition of citizens’ dignity, and the overcoming of a model founded on repression.

NOTES:

M. Weber, Economia e società, Edizioni di Comunità, Milano, 1961.
H. Arendt, Sulla violenza, Guanda, Parma, 2001.
É. Durkheim, La divisione del lavoro sociale, Edizioni di Comunità, Milano, 1962.
A. Honneth, Lotta per il riconoscimento, Il Saggiatore, Milano, 2002.
M. Foucault, Sorvegliare e punire, Einaudi, Torino, 1976.
J. J. Linz, Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes, Lynne Rienner, Boulder, 2000.
J. Habermas, Crisi di legittimazione, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1975.