Analysis of political themes in the textbooks of the Azerbaijan Democratic Party (1945-1946): Based on Gramsci's theory of hegemony

 
Introduction: The one-year rule of the Azerbaijan Democrat Party (ADP) in Iran (1945–1946) represents a critical juncture characterized by significant cultural initiatives, most notably the introduction of new Azerbaijani-language textbooks aimed at fostering a distinct regional identity. Despite the acknowledged importance of this educational campaign, the political and ideological content embedded within these textbooks has remained largely under-analyzed. This study seeks to address this gap by examining how the ADP government strategically articulated and disseminated its political perspectives through these official educational materials. The central research question explores the extent to which these textbooks functioned as instruments of political socialization and ideological consolidation, with particular attention to their role in constructing identity, legitimizing a preferred political order, and systematically discrediting the pre-existing Iranian socio-political system.
Methods: This research is situated within Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, employing concepts such as passive revolution and organic intellectuals as analytical tools. Gramsci’s framework emphasizes the pivotal role of civil society institutions—especially education—in cultivating consent and establishing legitimacy for ruling powers. The methodological approach adopted here is qualitative thematic analysis, applied rigorously to the content of six elementary school textbooks (Vətən Dili) published by the ADP government in 1946. The data were subjected to a multi-stage coding process (open, axial, and selective coding), with the aim of identifying recurring patterns and extracting basic, organizing, and ultimately overarching themes present in the texts.
Results and Discussion: The thematic analysis revealed that the ADP textbooks operated as central instruments within a deliberate hegemonic project. Six principal organizing themes emerged from the analysis: 1) A distinct Azerbaijani identity was systematically constructed, with strong emphasis on the Azerbaijani language and the selective reinterpretation of history around local figures and narratives that underscored Azerbaijan’s cultural and historical separateness from the dominant Persian-centric Iranian identity. 2) The ADP and its institutions were actively legitimized as the authentic voice of the people and the rightful heirs to historical struggles for autonomy. 3) The pre-existing order—particularly the monarchy and the clergy—was systematically discredited as a source of tyranny and backwardness, thereby reinforcing the justification for the new regime. 4) Revolutionary socialist ideals and leftist terminology were pervasive throughout the texts, celebrating class consciousness, solidarity, and revolutionary action. 5) Soviet Azerbaijan and the USSR were consistently idealized as models of progress, justice, and socialist achievement, offering a blueprint for Azerbaijan’s future. 6) Iran was depicted in an ambiguous manner, with Azerbaijan frequently portrayed as the true “homeland” in contrast to an often antagonistic and oppressive “Tehran.” The overarching theme unifying these findings can be summarized as: “Engineering a Distinct Socialist Azerbaijani Identity: Establishing the Hegemony of the Democratic Party in Opposition to Traditional Iran.” This theme highlights the methodical attempt to construct a new, socialist-aligned Azerbaijani identity, one fundamentally distinct from and in opposition to the established Iranian identity and socio-political order.
Conclusions: Viewed through a Gramscian lens, the findings underscore the ADP’s strategic deployment of education and textbooks as core instruments of a passive revolution—an attempt to transform society from above in order to secure cultural and political hegemony. The party’s organic intellectuals played a decisive role in shaping and disseminating this narrative. Despite these sophisticated efforts to engineer identity and manufacture consent, the hegemonic project ultimately collapsed. Its failure stemmed primarily from the absence of a deeply rooted and independent social base within Azerbaijan, coupled with the regime’s critical dependence on external Soviet support. This reliance undermined its ability to secure broad and sustainable popular consensus, leaving the project vulnerable and short-lived.