پژوهش نامه انتقادی متون و برنامه های علوم انسانی
پیاپی 39 (خرداد و تیر 1395)

Spread of information and communication in modern times provides areas for study of the media as the main communication tool. New media has the central role so that every day the scope of their impact on various regional and international developments and crises will increase. This paper seeks to review the paper "The Transformation of Politics or Anti-Politics?" from Barrie Axford in “New Media and Politics” (2001) has been published. This article in the Proceedings of book in 2008 (1387) returned to Persian. Accordingly, both of the original language and translated version by the authors is discussed. The present paper is in two parts, Review the in structure and output structure, review this article.
It must be acknowledged the dramatic developments in the Influence media on policy has been created and today, new media and virtual has important role in promoting democracy and also limitation the government's and various institutions in various fields. Developments in recent years show that the policy has largely been influenced by environment-virtual media and new media every day new definitions are included.

By focusing on the contemporary Arab discourse, the present paper argues that the Arab unity in the form of a united territorial and political entity has been the central Arab discourse in the last one a half century. International and domestic developments, however, have made such ideal a difficult one to be realized. Moreover, the internal socio-political and economic difficulties in the last century brought about a state of confusion and multiplicity for the Arab discourse. On the other hand, the post-Cold war situations and the outcome of the weakness of Arab nationalist discourse, led to the emergence of two secular and fundamentalist discourses around which all Arab social and political forces have gathered. Taking the Kamal Abdul Latif and Mohammad Aref's The Challenges of the Contemporary Arab Discourse as a case study, the author has explained how such vagueness and multiplicities has encompassed the contemporary Arab discourse.

International Relations theory has been the site of intense debate in recent years.
A decade ago it was still possible to divide the field between three main perspectives –Realism, Liberalism and Marxism. Not only have these approaches evolved in new directions ,they have been joined by a number of new ‘isms’ vying for attention, including feminism and constructivism.
“International Relations Theory for the Twenty-First Century” is one of the comprehensive books to provide an overview of all the most important theories within international relations.
Written by an international team of experts in the field, the book covers both traditional approaches, such as realism and liberal internationalism, as well as new developments such as constructivism, poststructuralism and postcolonialism.
Through our critical review, we have tried to evaluate the presented topics in each article. As our major question we try to discuss whether the arguments are able to efficiently provide comprehensive coverage of the relevant theory?
This Griffiths`s Book, unlike his previous work, the "Encyclopedia of International Relations", could not cover the whole spectrum of international relations. It could be considered as a source, of course with a relative coverage, for M.A and Ph.D students but not for B.A students.

The American Neo-Conservative Journalist, Fareed Zakaria got famous in President Bush era, wrote in his book: “the future of freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad”. His approach to the “end of history” shows in the book, looking at the globalizing liberal democracy but he criticizes this idea. His critics deny American political system but praise its history because Zakaria believe the historical process of the system was elitist and more efficient. This paper criticizes the discussion of his book. So the structure of book about neoliberalism and neodemocracy compare with the liberal and democratice ideas to show special view of Zakaria. Also neoconservativist view of Zakaria revised and compared with Islamic international relations.

This paper reviews and criticizes the “Incomplete Modernity of Iranian Intellectuals”, written by Gholamreza Goodarzi (2008). The book includes four chapters and the author intends to offer a historical trend of the role of Iranian intellectuals in the incomplete modernity in Iran. The most criticism consists of: the lack of theoretical framework for the research, offering the variant approaches without reviewing and criticizing them, criticizing with no grounds and documents, saying again the repeated claims, using the concepts without understandable explaining, and the lack of innovation.

The present article intends to critique and analyze one of the central works of Foucault; “Society must be defended”. At first, general thoughts, methods, and works of Foucault have been introduced. Furthermore, we have analyzed the external elements which affected Foucault theories like the social and political events of his life and theories of Marx, Weber, and Nietzsche. Moreover, we have paid attention to internal analysis of abovementioned book and recognized its critical points so concepts like racist discourse, governmental racism, and bio-power have been analyzed. At last, we have critiqued the form, structure, and content of the book. For instance, in some cases, we face inconsistency between different sections of the book.

The Ejtema,eeyun Amyun was one of the active groups in Iranian Constitutional Movement. This group was the first political party with social democratic orientation in Iran. The activities of this group included a spectrum from violence and assassination to compromise and cooperation with government. There is no consensus among the documents and books analyzing the formation and activities of the Ejtema,eeyun Amyun on the degree of their independence from the Russian Social Democrat Party.
Sohrab Yazdani, the author of this book, emphasie on independence of Ejtema,eeyun Amyun. In this article, Yazdany,s analysis and his new documents areconsidered

Re-reading original texts of Classic Thinkers is one of the necessities of transforming Iranian discourses of humanities. There are controversies in the approach over what distinguishes a `great book` from `lesser works` of a thinker. In a Straussian perspective, Great Books are held to be written by authors/philosophers of such sovereign critical self-knowledge and intellectual power that they can in no way be reduced to the general thought of their time. Academic as well as ex-academic circles of thought ought to go far beyond the commentaries and commentators to reach more contemplative confrontation with critical theory heritage achieving a critical reading of the very classic texts. Having this insights in mind, here the author tries to re-read Gramsci`s political realism based on Quaderni del Carcere, specially The Modern Prince. The relation between Gramsci`s The Modern Prince with two conflicting heritages of radical modernity has been reviewed: Machiavelli as Republican one, and Marx as Revolutionary one. Sorel and power of the myth and the violence as respected by Gramsci is other side of this seemingly contradictory radical heritage, as here called as Revolutionary Political Realism.

This paper is an attempt to review the ninth edition of the book entitled “International Organizations” written by Seyed Dawood Aqhaee, a valuable academic source on international organizations. Although the book is one of the first comprehensive sources dealing generally with both historical and structural perspectives, it failed to analyse the history of the League of Nations. To him, both the League of Nations and the United Nations have been puppets in the hands of great powers and thus insists to its readers on a pessimistic view for all international organizations. Information presented in the book, is not only up to dated but also with no clear reference to its origins. Almost on third of the book is on Iran and its role in the UNO while contradicts the title. This paper is to discover and reveal the shortcomings, strengths and weaknesses of the book in different textual and contextual fields of the book and to suggest some recommendations for the next edition of the book.