Persian Empire 1845

Chapter 339 Kemal's Sights and Hearings (Part Two)
“A monarch who keeps pace with the times can do more through the government, but only if the monarch is enlightened and focused and the government is incorruptible. Clearly, the current empire does not meet either of these criteria.”

Kemal wrote this in his notebook: "I used to think that we should implement a parliamentary system right away. But now the example of Iran has shown that an enlightened monarch can also lead a country to development, which is what is known as enlightened despotism."

However, for a monarchical state lacking the foundation and history of a British parliament, directly applying the parliamentary system would likely be counterproductive. The example of Iran, on the other hand, demonstrates that enlightened despotism may not be a bad choice.

Tabriz experiences a high volume of daily population movement. With the expansion of Iranian territory, Tabriz has gradually become the central city of northwestern Iran, connecting the Caucasus, Tehran, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and other regions. The expansion of the railway has spurred urban economic development, resulting in significant changes to the city's landscape over time.

There's a café right next to the government building, and this drink has become popular throughout the Middle East. More importantly, you can discuss politics in the café.

Kemal entered the café and ordered a coffee and a pastry. Inside, a debate was taking place, with members of the Liberal and Progressive parties discussing various issues, the most important being whether political reforms should be implemented quickly or gradually.

"The country has made great progress, but nothing can be accomplished overnight. The most important thing is to increase the army and build a defensive line in the north to resist the Russian attack."

On the central debate stage, a person was eloquently expressing their views. In summary: focus on defense and industry; political reform can wait.

"You're so wrong. Now is the time to implement parliamentary politics. Domestic industry is booming, and the international situation is favorable. As for Russia in the north, it's nothing to fear; we just need to hold our ground."

The most urgent task now is to establish a parliament as soon as possible, as a parliament represents the will of all the people. Only through a parliamentary system can we ensure the long-term stability of the country and the fairness and justice of society.

Both sides in the debate were leading figures from the Liberal Party and the Progressive Party in the area, and the audience members began talking to those next to them. Kemal noticed that the Liberal Party supporters were mostly young, energetic, and idealistic. They longed to achieve social justice and democracy through rapid political reforms.

In contrast, supporters of the Progressive Party are more pragmatic. They emphasize national security and stability, advocating for gradual political reforms while ensuring national defense and industrial development.

"But Britain has grown and prospered because of Parliament. Starting with Mary II, Parliament has dominated a series of British policies. Whether it is the military, industry or foreign policy, Parliament has always been at the center of power. It can be said that without Parliament, there would be no Britain as it is today."

As soon as he finished speaking, the Liberal Party supporters applauded. "That's right," they said, "Britain became powerful because of Parliament. It was the first to establish a constitutional system, allowing it to focus its energy on other things. This led to the Industrial Revolution and ultimately made it the most powerful nation in the world." "You're wrong," he continued. "The British Parliament is stable because it has had its rudiments since 700 years ago. From the Angevin Parliament to Cromwell's time, Parliament underwent a long period of refinement and was nearing maturity. This is the foundation upon which Britain established its Parliament."

However, in our country, not only is there no basis for a parliament, but it has also historically been a monarchical autocracy. How easy would it be to suddenly transform into a parliamentary system? Moreover, apart from Britain, other countries are all examples of enlightened autocracy: Prussia, Austria, Napoleon I's France, and Peter the Great's Russia. These countries all had powerful monarchs and functioned well without parliaments. This is the path suitable for our country.”

Supporters of the Progressive Party immediately cheered, believing the Liberal Party was being delusional and shouldn't think a parliament could solve all problems. No matter what, it still requires people to do it. In Iran's case, it will take a long time to guide the process before a parliament can be established.

Besides, we already have a parliament, and isn't the expert conference a prototype of a parliament? Why go all the way to a parliament?
Kemal wrote down his thoughts in his notebook: "National security and stability are prerequisites for political reform. Parliamentary politics can only be gradually advanced on the basis of ensuring national defense and industrial development."

Although the government did not directly intervene in the debates in the cafes, Kemal noted that government officials and intellectuals frequented these places, which may be one of the ways the government controls public opinion.

Neither side could win an argument, and it looked like they were about to tear the roof off. The café owner came over and asked them to stop arguing. This wasn't meant to suppress them, but to prevent the debate from escalating to something inappropriate.

Although the debate was forced to stop, the audience was still reluctant to leave. Many people gathered in small groups, continuing to whisper their views on political reform. However, they found that no one could convince anyone else, and ultimately they had to rely on their own efforts to achieve their goals. After summarizing many key points of the debate, Kemal also left the café. He felt that the people here had a deeper understanding of politics than those in the Ottoman Empire. This made Kemal think that settling here might be a good option; perhaps the Ottoman Empire and Iran would one day be one family.

There were many cafes like this in Tabriz, where intellectuals and the middle class would often discuss the country's future. Kemal experienced an unprecedented clash of ideas there. Both the radical propositions of the Liberal Party and the pragmatic approach of the Progressive Party gave him a deeper understanding of political reform.

Walking down the street, Kemal saw citizens coming and going. A considerable number of them were struggling to find work; in Ottoman cities, these people would sit by the roadside, begging for money.

Construction sites were everywhere, with horse-drawn carts bringing in large quantities of materials. After being built by the workers, they became brand new buildings. The Ottoman Empire had virtually no industrialization, and its government was inefficient; don't expect them to do anything about infrastructure.

Kemal continued to write in his notebook: "Everything here is developing rapidly, even the capital is not as fast as Tabriz. Our government needs a major reform, just like Ali in Egypt killed hundreds of nobles for the government, and the Shah in Iran launched a civil war because of the government. Perhaps the Ottomans will also need a civil war."

(End of this chapter)