An Investigation into the Conflict and Confrontation between the Revisionist Discourse and the Discourse of the Islamic Revolution

In this research, an attempt has been made to answer the following two questions using the descriptive-analytical research method Is there any conflict between the revisionist discourse and the discourse of the Islamic Revolution? If the answer is positive, what are the points of conflict between these two discourses? It appears that the main and peripheral concepts of the revisionist discourse are in conflict with the main and peripheral concepts of the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. The concept of "Divine sovereignty" is the main implication and such concepts as “fighting against the arrogance”, “the concomitance of religion and politics”, etc. are considered the peripheral implications of the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. In contrast, the concept of humanism is the main implication and pluralism, secularism, etc. are among the peripheral implications of the revisionist discourse. Following the strategy of transformation and weakening of the pure Islam as the main component of the discourse of the Islamic Revolution, the revisionist discourse has leveled insults against the religion, the Divine rules, welayat-e faqih, etc. Also, this discourse believes in the separation of religion from politics, secularism, the denial of religious democracy and the transition to Western democracy, etc. One of the most important points of conflict and opposition between the revisionist discourse and the discourse of the Islamic Revolution is the conflict and opposition in the way they view Islam, justice, fighting against the arrogance, etc.