Speech [The difference between popular governments and the regimes that are against the people]

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

If a country wants to be a sound one, there should be rapport between the ruling establishment and the people. Unfortunately, the case was to the contrary in the monarchial regimes, especially the last one. That is, the governing body, all the governing bodies, and the nation were polarized. That ruling establishment would resort to intimidation, pressure, persecution, torture, imprisonment, etc in dealing with the people. The people, if powerless, would try not to pay their taxes, refuse to undertake anything and hinder the government as much as they could. This would always result in rifts between the people and the government. The government had no support, and the ruling class imagined itself to be a separate entity that had no connection with the nation. The nation, too, had no confidence in it and considered it to be its enemy. Whenever the army would appear among the people, it seemed as if an enemy had come. Everybody would run away; they hated it. This was why the government could not last. Not having a base among the people, it had to go and it did go. Let this be a lesson to the governments.

The most important feature of an Islamic government is this rapport between the government and the nation. That is, the government does not consider itself as being separate. It neither wants to impose on, threaten, intimidate and persecute the people, nor do the people want to weaken it and evade governmental regulations. Islam has been such from the beginning that its ruler, who was at the head (of affairs), was lower than the people in his (way of) life, his dealings and such things, or of the same level.

The best ruler in Islam after the Apostle of God was Hadrat Amir (`a) whose government, unfortunately, lasted for a short time. We know about his conduct from history and his sayings from his sermons and letters, and also his behavior toward his subjects and their behavior toward him, as well as the behavior of the governors whom he would send to all parts of the country. It was a very big domain including the Hijaz, «2» Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and a part of Europe, all of which were under his control. We also know about the recommendations he would make to the governors as to how they ought to conduct themselves, and how they would do so, and also the attitude of the people toward them. All of this is mentioned in history. The life of the Commander of the Faithful is well known to all. An ordinary person cannot live like him. The people had even questioned him that if his life was such, why, then, was he so strong. It has been stated by him somewhere that the wood of the trees that are to be found in the desert is stronger, and its fire (when kindled) more intense as these trees need just a small quantity of water. It is not so that whoever eats a lot and eats fat and sweet things, becomes a strong person. Rather, many of these foods, especially the ones that are unconventional perhaps cause weakness, lethargy and such things. In any case, when one takes a look at his way of life, he finds that there was- as recorded- a skin (of an animal) which he would spread out at night and, along with Hadrat Fatimah (`a), used to sleep on it. And, at daytime, he would put fodder on it for his camels. There was nobody like him even in the matter of food; nobody! Such was his life. He, himself, said that nobody could live like him. However, where piety and self-restraint were concerned, he asked the people to strive like him and be in conformity with him. The governor was like this and yet so humble vis-a-vis the law. The head of a nation, the extent of whose suzerainty was so great and the might of his army like that, was so humble before the law that when a judge, appointed by himself, summoned him to answer a Jew's claim against him, or he had a claim concerning a coat of mail, he went to answer the summons of his own appointed judge- according to the narrations- in the presence of the Jew. When the judge addressed him as" O Abou'l-Hasan," he told the judge to treat them as equals and to view them on the basis of equality. He asked the judge not to address him by an honorific title out of respect; he ought to say," O `Ali." When the judge investigated the matter and gave a verdict against Hadrat Amir, he accepted it. The Jew, however, became a believer and embraced Islam when he saw what Islam was. His associating with the people, his way of living, his sense of justice and his consideration for the poor are well known. History has it that there were houses whose inmates were not aware of who it was that was bringing them things. He was the one used to bring things for them. Whenever he would leave a place, the children would cry. He used to go there with food and show them kindness, etc. He would then begin to imitate the sound of a camel to make the children laugh! He said that on entering the house, he would find the children crying and that he wanted them to laugh when he was leaving. This was a ruler whose suzerainty extended from the Hijaz to Egypt, to Iran, to Africa; to all these places. Well, not everybody can be like him of course; nobody can.

The governments, however, should not think that they are apart from the people. It should not be so that everybody goes to the place he manages and wants to exercise his authority, boss over the people and consider them as inferiors. He should not behave with the people as a very powerful somebody behaving with others. Such behavior alienates the people from him and is the reason for their not paying taxes, for evading taxes and maintaining two ledgers! I am now being repeatedly asked as to what they ought to do now, considering that in the days of the taghout, they used to keep two ledgers- well, now that they have told me two ledgers- one of them being placed at the disposal of the taxation officials, and was different from the one they had. We said no, and that the matter now rests with them. This was because of the coercion, intimidation and pressure from one side, and the people's inability to accept (to pay) so much on the other. It is for this reason that they commit offenses as much as they can and do it openly, as they recently did. If they cannot do so- well, they are like this- they commit the offense stealthily. They take as much as they can from what belongs to the government. This should serve as an example to the governments, the offices and every place so that they do not alienate the people. They should look upon the people as belonging to them, and the people, too, should consider them as their own. They should consider the government as belonging to themselves. Should such an understanding arise between the nation and the government, the government then, would lean on the nation and never fall. It cannot collapse in such a case.

I hope that it happens, God willing, that it( the government )will acquire an Islamic color; that it will have a similarity, some resemblance to an Islamic government. And if it is to be so- we hope that it would be in all respects- we should try as much as we can if it turns out to have a peaceful country in which nobody harbors any thought of transgressing against anybody else: neither the government against the people; nor the people against the government. And the people, too, pay up their taxes- which is for their own protection, for the protection of their borders, for themselves- eagerly and with pleasure; every single one of them. Suppose that somebody owns a herd of sheep; ten thousand sheep. If a person came to him offering to look after the sheep, and well, if he knew the person to be trustworthy and that he would look after the sheep, he would, then, gladly and willingly pay him his wages. He would give him something to look after them. Someone who cannot tend his flock himself will gladly and willingly pay those people who come up and offer to do so. Well, it is a country that the people cannot manage on their own. Now that they cannot do so, a group should do it; it should guard the frontiers. The country ought to be set right in other respects. Well, the country belongs to the people themselves. The government desires to protect it, to bring order to it. The municipalities want to develop the cities; the government wants to construct highways. All these things belong to the people themselves and are at their disposal. The government is doing all this for the sake of the people. When the case is such, the people will gladly and eagerly pay their taxes for the amelioration of their own affairs. They will not, then, keep two ledgers! And even if any fraudsters are to be found, they would be few. It is not that all are fraudsters. Their numbers will decrease.

If one day, God willing, we are able, and you are able, to obtain the Islamic taxes that are not much- the zakat [the poor rate], «3» of course, is not much, but suffices for the poor- then there will be no more poor people to be found. The khums [one-fifth], «4» however, is a very substantial tax that takes care of everything. That is, its nature is such that one should not be under the impression that it is for the poor. The khums is the yearly income of the whole country. It is a very big amount that can cater to everything. And if, God willing, you are able, and we are able to implement this Islamic system (of taxation), there would be no need to impose something in addition to it in the taxes. This one-fifth of all the assets; that is, the incomes, is a very fair system because the neighborhood grocer will pay the tax to the extent he must and that person who is the owner of such-and-such factories will also pay the tax to the extent he should. This is a system that treats everyone in a sort of equitable manner, and if, God willing, it is put into effect, there will be no need whatsoever for people to pay anything in addition to it. Of course, it has not yet been put into effect; it is hoped that it would be so. If it does take effect, it will constitute very substantial revenues that may administer all our affairs, and make the country sound and secure, God willing, with you managing it.

What I mean to say is that even the heads of the( provincial )finance department, in the place I used to live as a child, was avaricious when dealing with the people. What things he would do to the people, and for instance, with the gendarmerie. He used to extort something from the people; he would take it by force! It was not only the tax itself; it was the tax plus quluq (bribe), «5» a term used at that time by the tax collectors. And the gendarme would also demand it. He also had to go there, and when he would arrive, what things the village headman, who arrived with him, would do for him and bring for him. What miseries the people suffered on account, of these officials who would go on their missions, whether they were tax officials or government officials; whatever they were. When they used to go on their missions, they would trouble the people. It was not like Hadrat Amir giving orders to call the people who were there; to call them for paying zakat; to ask them- according to the narrations- whether or not they had paid the poor rate. If they said that they had paid it, they would be told to return. And they, for their part, would not commit any offense. When a government was like that and the people were responsible to God and knew that God was a witness, they would not commit offenses and would pay their taxes. They would pay the zakat and khums.

In any case, the essential thing is for us to realize that we are responsible to God, the Blessed and Exalted. Everybody ought to know, and common sense dictates, that the people be dealt with just as Islam has ordained. The governments should behave likewise. When, in early Islam officials would be sent on assignment, the same person who was the commander or governor would also act as the congregational prayer leader. That is, he was trusted so much by the people. The people knew him for his justice. They would follow his example and say their prayers with him. The same person would lead them in war and would be obeyed by them. If such a thing happens and we are able to set up a government, it should be one that is Islamic and at the service of the people. Prasie be to God that you have now taken this matter forward to some extent.

You are aware that the army was so distant from the people as to not mingle with them. The reason was that if it did come, the people would scatter as soon as it appeared as if the army of the Mongols had attacked them. And if the people wanted to go among the soldiers, they would be removed by force. Such were the conditions! It is not so with us now. Some army personnel come here every few days; some from the gendarmerie; other people; a motley crowd; all of them intermingled; all of them together and united in expressing their desire for Islam, and in showing their obedience to Islamic injunctions. What a nice thing this is. I would tell them that it was now better for them in that they were sitting here with peace of mind, without any fear of the people troubling them or they troubling the people. Is their conscience clearer now or at the time when they would use force against the people? It distresses the person who uses force, and also disturbs his conscience. A human being cannot be like this. Yes, it is possible that, sometimes, a person commits so many crimes that it becomes an ordinary matter for him. But, ordinarily, people cannot do such things. The terror they used to create was because they feared the people. The basic reason for intimidating, frightening and- I should say- distancing the people from themselves was that they had transgressed so much against the people as to become afraid of them. Being afraid of the people, what would they do in order to be safe? They would terrorize the people; they would- for example- do something to make the people afraid of them; for these people to fear them. It was for their own safety. They, themselves, had done the people wrong; now they were doing all this to make them scared. The ex-Shah did not have the courage to appear in public. There was no possibility of his coming among the people. It was with de Gaulle «6» that he had come here. They had gone in the vicinity of the bazaar amid all those security arrangements, etc. De Gaulle got down and went among the crowd of people as he was not afraid of the Iranian people. Perhaps he did not even fear going among his own people.

When the king of a country, for instance, or the prime minister of a country, can go among the people and be with them, talk with the, converse with them and do such things, then- when it is like this- the basis exists for the people to respect his rule and governorship. Moreover, the people support him and look upon him as their policeman. They support him. But when it is said that policeman is a scorpion stinging the people, and, in the name of policing them, extorts money from them and robs them, well, it is clear that the people will become cynical about him. When the people see that the heads of the provincial finance departments- those who collect the taxes- take something more than the tax for their own selves, and their functioning also does something. Then the people will, as far as possible, not pay their taxes. They will evade them as much as they can. But when they see that the person who has come (to collect the tax), has come in order to protect them, their country, their possessions and lives, and that these persons are toiling for this purpose; when they notice that they are being kind to them, it is natural that they will pay their taxes eagerly, willingly and gladly to these tax collectors. Try to behave nicely with the people; they are God's creatures. Your behavior toward them ought to be good. All the people, everywhere, should strive to be good toward one another. A brotherly atmosphere should be created, one in which all the believers- as mentioned in the Qur'an- are brothers; all the believers are brothers unto one another. When such a brotherly atmosphere is created and peace and calm reigns, the troubles and the things that take place will then not occur.

May God assist all of you. May you be successful. With the movement now at the halfway stage, may He assist us in taking it to the very end.

Whoever has any views to give regarding this assembly that is to be set up and the study of the Constitution, should present them. After giving their opinions about this assembly that is to be set up, the people, themselves, should install it. The people there (in the assembly) should review the Constitution and endorse it; and then the people themselves (vote on it). I do not think that there is a better way in the world than the one now proposed. It is the best in the world, being placed at the disposal of the people on two occasions. Nowhere is there a democracy- in their own terminology- above this that an issue is placed before the people on two occasions. When they used to form the Constituents' Assembly, the matter would be put before the people once, and it was to appoint that gentleman! If referendum was to be held, the matter would be put to the people once for another to write its rules and regulations, as in the case of France and its Fifth Republic where some other people in the government and the ministries, etc. wrote the Constitution- there were a few people from the Consultative Assembly and other places as well- and then put it to a referendum. But now this Constitution is to be put before the public twice: once the people to appoint the individuals who have knowledge of the laws and of Islam; they have such knowledge, they stand by the people they are concerned about them and trustworthy. The public should appoint such individuals to study the Constitution, amend it and such things concerning it. The public should not be content with this. The matter will brought before them a second time after it has been endorsed or confirmed by their representatives. Though the Constitution is very good, correct and in conformity with Islam and the interests of the country, the authorities should approach the people a second time and tell them that now that the individuals they had appointed have confirmed it, they, themselves, should now vote on it, too. This arrangement is unique in the world.

The people that are grumbling, as you can see, are the same ones who do not want the country to calm down. To whatever place you turn your attention, you will find them raising objections; whatever the place. Such things will enable you to know who these people are. You must see on what grounds they are making these statements. «7» You have determined what the Constitution should be; they should also do the same. After that, you, yourselves, have to vote on it. The words of the people, who are now making a din and noise, are, well, nothing that merit mentioning. But we have to find what kind of people are grumbling over this matter that is the best procedure over in the world, and is to be carried out. Some people are creating trouble because they want to show their knowledge. Well, these people want their names to appear in the newspapers and- I should say- to show their knowledge; their intelligence. We have no objection to the gentlemen displaying their learning. But it should not so happen that it leads to a delay of two or three years in the approval of the Constitution and the Constituents' Assembly- a matter that we want to be completed soon- and in the meantime, the plots being hatched against the country accumulate and, God forbid, cause trouble for us sometime.

It is the best method that has no precedent at all in the world. That is, with the exception of that aspect of which the people appoint their deputies, the referendum has a precedent; and also the review of the constitution that is carried out by the experts- those who are experts in the matter- has a precedent in France which, according to you and all the intellectuals, is the cradle of freedom and democracy. But this (ours) is better than that because, over there, the ministries, the prime minister and others not elected by the people, as well as some elected representatives, gather together (for this purpose). Even these elected representatives were not elected for this purpose as such. The elected members of the Consultative Assembly and the Senate were not elected to review the constitution. The people did elect them, but not for (studying) the constitution. Their elected representatives, who had to choose the constitution, were not elected for this specific purpose. A group of ministers and such people got together and drafted the constitution which was then put to the public votes. And after the people had cast their votes, the matter was over. Is this better which, as you say, the world's best democracy and the cradle of freedom has devised, or as it is now in Iran which you believe to be a country whose people do not understand anything! Let me say that you so insult the people and have so lost your self-reliance with respect to the West as to think that we have nothing and they have everything. Now, is that better or this? Is this( the method )better in France, in the sense of its being the cradle of freedom and the base of democracy, or one in which the individuals that are to review the constitution are chosen by the people; and even for the people themselves to vote on it after it has been approved. Certain people think that the best way is for some other individuals that have not been delegated by the people to review the Constitution after which they should vote on it. But we reject this. The persons who are to study it should be delegated by the people. And then the people, themselves, must give their votes. There is absolutely nothing better than this. All this grumbling is either for the sake of showing off one's learning- this does not matter- or it is to help them in preventing its formalization, so that this Palizban «8» and this Oveysi «9» who are doing mischief in the border regions are able to carry out their schemes. But the gentlemen should know that the time for this has passed. Such a thing cannot be done and cannot happen. May you all be successful and triumphant, God willing.