Statements of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with professors and students of universities in Semnan Province

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

What I observe in this enthusiastic, talented, and eager gathering serves as a significant indication for me. Student gatherings in most places where we have the opportunity to participate among these dear ones are similar. You are also one of the large student bodies of the country; of course, in the capacity of this hall, you represent a part of the vast student community of the province, and I ask you to convey my greetings to the other students and professors - who are our dear ones. What is observed in this assembly is truly a movement, a pulse, enthusiasm, hope, and readiness to traverse difficult paths and reach the summit. It is true that it has been said:

"The pulse of my heart is my entire being, like a drop of unspilled water."

Some individuals possess such a vibrant and dynamic existence that it seems all their limbs and organs are hearts; these individuals can reach the summit. Reaching the summit has a stage of "desire." When you look out the window of your home at the mountain scenery - which is frequently seen in Tehran - you see people who have ascended to those heights and are walking at high altitudes; you wish you could reach there too. This is one stage; however, it is not enough. The next stage is to get out of bed, come outside, wear appropriate clothing, put on suitable shoes, and set off towards the mountain. When a person reaches the foothills, some become tired due to the ups and downs, the hardships, and the dirt and mud they encounter along the way; they become weary, lose patience, and imagine that reaching the summit is like a bird taking off, simply placing their feet and flying there, without considering the journey in between; these individuals become easily discouraged. Some ascend a few twists and turns but become tired. Others do not even feel tired, but they lose patience; they hurry; they think that after walking for half an hour or an hour, they should reach there. These are the pitfalls of this journey. The one who patiently, eagerly, using all their strength and energy, and with the hope of reaching there, moves forward, does not fear the length of time, the long path, the successive hills, or the fact that some companions may remain halfway; this person must be confident that they will reach that summit.

Some refer to individuals who are spiritual and ask them to give a remembrance so that they can become a radiant and good person! They think it is like a pill that they can swallow and immediately experience a change in their state; no. If a person is to become radiant and their heart is to become familiar with the realms of the unseen, if a person wants to hear the voices of angels, if a person wants to enter the realm of divine majesty, if a person wants their spiritual sense to be perfumed with the fragrance of monotheism, they must work; they must walk the path. The summit is ahead, and along the way, some will fall behind; some will become regretful; some will lose patience; some will turn back; and some will even deny the summit itself! These issues exist on the path of spirituality; the same issues exist on the path of materialism.

In one of these meetings, I told the students to plan for the next fifty years; that is our expectation. I mean in the field of science. Let us set the goal that fifty years from now, your country will be one of the major and top scientific references in the world; so that if someone wants to become acquainted with the latest knowledge, they will have to learn your national language; just as this dear girl said that we must learn the international language; she is right. The English have cleverly made their language the language of science and the international language, and whatever you want to learn and read, you must learn their language. You should work so that in fifty years, the same need arises for your Persian language. This is a wish; a summit; like the summit of Damavand, like the summit of Tochal, which is exciting to look at; the desire to reach it arises in everyone's heart; but who will reach it? You must prepare your shoes and hats; more than that, you must prepare your determination and set off.

I see this talent in our youth. I do not want to exaggerate; it is not a slogan; no one has expected us to come and say these things; these are realities. The Iranian youth possesses a high-level capacity in various talents. If we, the officials, do not recognize it, it is our fault; if they themselves do not recognize this capacity, it is their fault. The fault also has its consequences; it leads to being left behind and not reaching the goal. However, if we open our eyes, find the path, exert effort, and do not lose sight of the goal, we will undoubtedly reach it.

Those who are at the summit of knowledge today were not always so. The same America that is scientifically ahead of all scientific centers and countries today was, a hundred years ago, dependent on England, France, and Italy for its ordinary military tools. Read history! In the American Civil Wars - known as the Wars of Secession; the war between the North and South of America. The Southerners wanted to separate; however, the Northerners fought to prevent them from separating; a four-year war that occurred around the years eighteen sixty, about one hundred and fifty years ago - both sides considered their success to be the ability to buy, for example, a warship or a cannon of a certain type from England, transport it across the Atlantic Ocean, and bring it to this side. At that time, they had no facilities; but today they are at the summit of knowledge; because they made efforts. Efforts have no connection to faith or disbelief; the Quran says this. I have repeatedly mentioned and recited this verse: "We extend to all these and those"; we help everyone; this is a divine tradition. Anyone who strives for a purpose, God Almighty has established this tradition that this effort will yield results. The problem of someone who is devoid of spirituality lies elsewhere; their problem is one-dimensionality, being deprived of another necessary wealth, and focusing their determination only on one aspect, which then leads to seeing their losses. Today, American society is deeply mired in the quagmire of these losses and it will get worse; these will also come back to haunt them. These historical events do not occur within a year, five years, or ten years; rather, they occur over a hundred years, a hundred and fifty years; they have reached the end of that period and have serious problems, which is not the subject of our discussion now. Therefore, we must work and strive. I see this talent in you.

The points that our dear ones mentioned here - whether the respected president and some professors, or several students - are scientific and professional requests and are completely correct. These demands are the same issues I have in mind. When I face the officials, I say these things. Of course, now that you have mentioned it, it has been emphasized; the respected ministers are also present. All these areas related to science and research, and the emphasis on basic sciences, are among the things I have repeatedly emphasized. Every country that has reached any point has done so through basic sciences.

The issue of managing research is one of the very fundamental things that I noted during Ramadan when I had a meeting with students or professors; I had noted that I would say - now I do not remember which of these two meetings it was - but there was no time; now I will say: Research must be managed. We always say that the research budget should increase from forty-seven hundredths of a percent to three percent; we discuss its material and quantitative aspects, which is certainly necessary; but there is also a qualitative aspect; unnecessary and parallel research should not exist; the important research is fundamental research, functional research, and experimental research - we have three types of research - each of which has a share and weight in the overall research of the country. Not observing and considering this share is one of our problems. A center for managing research is necessary in the country that, God willing, should be realized through the efforts of these dear ones and this active and ready government.

As for the problems of students and professors and, ultimately, the justice-seeking movement - the statements they made - all of these are points we approve of. Whatever I can do and is within my area of work, I will take action; whatever I should recommend, I will recommend, and we hope, God willing, that our dear ones will pursue it.

The point I want to convey to you revolves around a famous verse of the Quran: "Indeed, God does not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves." Changes are in your hands. The key to social transformations and great changes is in your hands; this is the essence of the verse. In another place, in a more limited circle, it says: "This is because God does not change a blessing He has bestowed upon a people until they change what is within themselves." This verse speaks of regression. God Almighty does not inflict regression upon any country unless they bring it upon themselves. The change that leads to regression is brought about by the people themselves. And a similar essence is found in many other verses that refer back to this. What is the summary of all this? The summary is that you, individuals, are the key to societal transformations; it is you who create change and transformation. The determination of a person is decisive.

Some may ask what is meant by the determination of a person? The will of whom? The will of one person, in one person, the will of whom is effective? This is, of course, part of a broader discussion, but I want to state that the determination of each individual has its impact; not only in personal matters - where it has a complete effect - but also in social matters. If our desires, whims, and carnal inclinations dominate our actions and our behavior, reason is sidelined and proper calculation is disregarded, this will have a negative impact on creating a series of negative transformations in society. Now let me give you a small example: You go to the market to buy something - a piece of clothing, or suppose a household item; there is a domestic type, and there is also an imported type; partly due to foreign advertisements, partly due to the pretense that this is foreign, and partly due to previous cultural residues that domestic products are of no use, and perhaps also due to the better quality of the foreign product - this better quality may be one of the factors, but in any case, it is not decisive - you choose it. What you are doing is: you are making an Iranian worker unemployed and forcing a non-Iranian worker to work. Well, is unemployment not a major problem in our society today? When you do this, I do this, that other brother does this, that sister does this, and one by one we follow this method, what is the result? The result is the bankruptcy of the domestic factory, the unemployment of the domestic worker, and ultimately leading to the despair of the domestic investor. Unemployment also brings along addiction, corruption, and family disputes, and subsequently, numerous political and social incidents arise. Therefore, it starts from something small; from a personal will of you and me. Thus, the personal will of individuals can even have an impact on social transformations. And there are many such issues. Someone desires to smoke a cigarette from their friend; the inclination towards smoking, the inclination towards drugs, fleeting desires; these are the very things that lead to a massive, long-lasting, and unending flow of social transformations - which is regression. The opposite is also true.

Sometimes I go to the heights of Tehran in the mornings. When we move, the air is dark; that is, after the morning prayer, the streets are empty; when we reach the red light, we stop. That is our principle. No one is in the street; that is, no car is coming from the other side; we stop until the light turns green, then we cross. I have seen that when we are standing on this side of the intersection - for example, three or four cars are with us - a car is coming from the other side of the intersection and intends to pass the red light; it moves a little, but when it sees three or four lights on that side are on and the cars are stopped, it also slowly brakes and sometimes even moves back a little. That is, the social discipline of one person influences the sense of the necessity of social discipline in the individuals opposite. Our individual behaviors are influential, even in cultural formation and many other things. In any case, human determination is the axis and criterion.

Now what does transformation mean? Why transformation? Is change supposed to happen? Yes. Transformation in human societies and for humanity is a divine, unchanging tradition. No one can stand against human transformation; it is impossible. Sooner or later, one after another, human transformations will occur. This is the secret of humanity's endurance and the secret of its elevation. God has created humanity in such a way that stagnation is not in human nature. Perhaps one of the differences between humans and other objects is this. Of course, in other objects, there are also a type of changes, transformations, and conversions, which I am not dealing with now; we are neither qualified to judge nor does it relate to our discussion; but in humanity, transformation is inevitable. One should not resist transformation; transformation should not be denied. And one should move towards transformation - in the sense that I will explain - in the correct manner.

What is opposite to transformation? Stagnation. The opposite point of transformation is stagnation. Some misunderstand these and misinterpret them. Some confuse stagnation with social stability. Stagnation is bad; social stability is good. Some think that stagnation means social stability. Transformation is also confused by some with anarchism and chaos and everything being in disarray. These misunderstandings have led some who advocate social stability to oppose any transformation, thinking that this transformation disrupts stability. On the other hand, those who think that any transformation means structural breakdown and undermining all authenticity, also destroy social stability to create transformation and put it in danger. These two mistakes exist from both sides. Transformation is one thing, anarchism is another; and chaos is another; just as social stability is one thing and social stagnation and inertia is another; these should not be confused. What is good and correct is a stable society, but not stagnant and possessing transformation; a society that even brings about correct transformations quickly within itself.

How can this characteristic be achieved? By preserving roots and authenticity and not undermining them; by placing great importance on national identity and valuing it. The collective identity of a nation is one of those things that should remain untouched in transformations. Alongside national identity, we must greatly value and emphasize dynamism, vitality, the enjoyment of freedom of movement, and the spirit of competition among ourselves. The necessity of this vitality and dynamism is that we must be both critical and receptive to criticism; each of which, if absent, is bad. Some are critical; criticism is appropriate; you can look at anything carefully and with a little curiosity, you can find a flaw in it, and it can be criticized, and there is nothing wrong with that; as long as the criticism is aimed at correcting the flaw, it is very good; but these individuals are not receptive to criticism themselves! If someone says why do you talk so much and why do you only see the flaws, why do you only sit on the wounds like a fly, see the positive points too, they get upset! Of course, the criterion and standard is the balance of positive points to negative points. We have weaknesses, we have problems, we have bad things; we also have strengths, we have good things; we have beauties. Look at the balance of these two with each other, what will the outcome be; that will be the criterion. If our bad things are more, it is bad; if our good things are more, it is good. Therefore, both criticism is good, and being receptive to criticism. These are the necessities of that transformation and the desired state of society; accompanied by hope, accompanied by hard work, accompanied by planning, and accompanied by having a correct line of conduct and a model for transformation.

Now what do we want to do? What does this transformation we want to create mean? What do we want to place in the place of what we want to transform? These are important. And in this path, work and effort are the first condition. Thus, social stability remains; because the roots and authenticity and the main structures and national identity are preserved. When we say national identity, nationality is not in opposition to religion, but rather the national identity of every nation is the collection of its cultures, beliefs, desires, aspirations, and behaviors. A religious nation, a monotheistic nation, a believing nation, and a nation that believes in the pure ones at the divine threshold and the household of the Prophet; this is part of their culture and identity; the national identity we speak of includes all of these; we must preserve these. Now, for changing the wrong sections, the wrong actions, and the wrong paths, effort and dynamism are necessary.

The opposite point is that behavioral and political chaos and structural breakdown and nihilism and the neglect of national identity dominate us; this is the opposite of what is desirable; that is, creating a movement, but in the direction of destroying what we have and deem necessary. This is wrong. Some in our youth - at the time when the Western architectural movement had just taken over our country - wanted to destroy the old buildings and convert them into buildings with a new style. This style of buildings with large windows and glass started from that time. Most of these would destroy a solid old house, which I found surprising. In our Mashhad, it was like this. A solid and good house, but old - coincidentally, now architects, engineers, and our informed ones say that the old method is correct for our country and these large glass windows and sun-catching structures are European; because they long for sunlight and do not see it, but our country is a sunny country; especially some of its regions. Therefore, what necessity is there; those small windows and good wooden doors were good - they would destroy them and use iron beams and cement and large glass windows and...

These are foolish and wrong actions; they are not wise actions. In fundamental transformations of society, we may sometimes act like this; instead of preserving the foundations and insisting on what we need, we forget our independent national identity! Unfortunately, this issue has a very sad history in our country and many Islamic countries, which I may refer to later.

More dangerously, it is that the reins of these negative transformations on the international level are in the hands of those who want to achieve their own goals through these transformations - whether it is wealth or power - and for them, the identity of nations has no value at all; unfortunately, this has happened in the last hundred, hundred and fifty years in the world; that is, the transformations of Asian, African, and Latin American countries have fallen into the trap of the designs of international power gangs, and the designers of these are Zionists and international capitalists. For them, what is important is to gain political power so that they can influence countries and governments in Europe and elsewhere and seize political power and acquire wealth and create huge companies, cartels, and trusts. This has been the goal; at that time, if it was necessary to corrupt the sexual ethics of nations, they would easily do it; if it was necessary to promote consumerism among them, they would easily do it; if it was necessary to promote disregard for national identities and cultural foundations among them, they would do it. These have been their grand objectives that they have envisioned. At that time, there was always an army of cultural and media resources and numerous newspapers and various advertising issues in their hands, which today is gradually being disseminated, and I read an article in the newspaper a few days ago - of course, three or four months before this, I had seen its article - reporting the formation of a "cultural NATO." That is, in contrast to the NATO treaty that the Americans established in Europe as a powerful military group to counter the former Soviet Union; but for suppressing any opposing voice against themselves in the Middle East and Asia, they used it, now they have created a cultural NATO as well. This is a very dangerous thing. Of course, it is not new; this has been happening for years. The interconnected chain of various media - which now includes the internet and satellites and televisions and radios - moves in a specific direction to take control of the transformations of societies; now it has become very easy and straightforward.

In Georgia, when a political transformation occurred and a power shift took place, an American capitalist and Jewish Zionist - of course, his name is well-known, I do not want to mention his name - announced that I spent ten million dollars in Georgia and created a political transformation; very easily. They spend ten million dollars, remove one government, and bring another government to power! They must influence the people; they must create gatherings. They did the same in Ukraine; they did the same in other places. Sometimes their influences are in another form and are decisive; perhaps I have mentioned this in another student gathering that Mahathir Mohamad, the former Prime Minister of Malaysia - who was very hardworking, precise, serious, and committed - came to Tehran, and he also visited me; it was around the time when various transformations were occurring in East Asia; in Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand, and an economic earthquake occurred. This same Zionist capitalist and then other capitalists were able to bring several countries to bankruptcy through banking and monetary games. At that time, Mahathir Mohamad told me: I can only tell you that we became beggars overnight! Of course, when a country becomes economically dependent and wants to implement the economic prescriptions of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, it will be just like that.

This World Bank and International Monetary Fund are also one of the parts and pieces of this big puzzle. It is very dangerous that the reins of global transformations are in the hands of international power gangs; which today they are. These are Zionists and capitalists and are mainly in America and Europe. These two or three points were about transformation. Therefore, one should not flee from transformation; one should not be afraid and should not confuse it with chaos and anarchism. Transformation is good and necessary.

Our main point today is that neither by stopping in the past and suppressing innovation can we reach anywhere, nor by letting go and breaking down structures and economic, ideological, and cultural chaos can we reach anywhere; both are wrong. Freedom of thought; the same movement of free thought that we raised two or three years ago and, of course, the students welcomed it; but practically, the work I mentioned has not been done; neither in the seminary nor in the university. I said to establish free-thinking forums. Of course, now I just remembered that in the reports related to the universities of Semnan, I read that fortunately, the active student groups in Semnan have free debates with each other. If this report given to me is accurate, it is a very positive and good thing. The issue of free thinking that we mentioned is related to this. We must open the way for free thinking, innovation, and transformation, but it must be managed so that it does not lead to structural breakdown and undermining the foundations of national identity. This work requires proper management. Who should manage it? Eyes immediately turn to the government and the Ministry of Science and...; no, the management is with the elites; it is with you; it is with active professors, active students, and active student groups. Be attentive! Seek new ideas and find new thoughts; but be careful about which direction this new thought is moving; whether it is towards destruction or towards repair and completion; these are different. This responsibility lies with you. Those of us who are responsible; of course, we have responsibilities and there is no doubt in this regard; but the work is yours. Do not think that the movement of free thinking and the movement of transformation and courage in various works can be done by government officials or by me instead of you who are students or researchers or professors; no, my role is to come and say that it is good to do this work. We have raised the software movement and the movement of software production and the movement of producing knowledge; now about ten years have passed and today a commotion has arisen. Who started this? I did not say a word more. You did this; our researcher, our youth, and our professor; transformation is of this kind.

The duty of the intellectual and cultural elites of society and the seminary and university is to manage this transformation. We should neither suppress transformations nor should we surrender to every transformation. Well, what is this transformation for? For progress. What is progress? We must define it.

First, we must ask ourselves: What is progress? If we do not ask what progress is, it is clear that we are not thinking about progress. Therefore, we must first ask this question of ourselves and move towards finding its answer.

The question of "What is progress?" has various answers at the global level. There are all kinds of statements; counterfeit versions, contradictory, strange, and sometimes treasonous recommendations, which was a calamity that befell us Iranians at the beginning of the modernization of the country. When the signs of European progress became apparent to Iranians, they gradually began to think about what was happening in Europe, on the other side of the world; before that, they had no idea what was happening in the world! The Qajar kings were so preoccupied with their harems and dining halls and their personal trivialities that they were completely unaware of what was happening in the world. What was the Renaissance? How did it come about? Why did it come about? What was its outcome? They were not aware of these matters until the time of Fath Ali Shah and after that! After the Iran-Russia war, when the Qajar regime suffered a severe blow due to the advanced weapons of the Russians - who at that time utilized the new weapons they had developed for themselves - they finally sent some people to Europe, and the European ambassadors who lived in Iran also gained some freedom of movement. The first people who faced the so-called modernity wave were who? The princes, influential political figures of the Qajar court. The general public had no news, the clergy had no information, and others knew nothing. These, except for a very few individuals, generally - it can be said almost without exception - were astonished and bewildered in the face of this culture and the Western advancements; they lost their footing and could not use their minds and intellect to think about their own progress in light of the progress of the other side. What was the result? The result was that during the Constitutional Revolution and after its establishment, our first-rate intellectuals believed that if Iran wanted to progress, it had to become completely Westernized from head to toe! This means sheer imitation. And they acted accordingly, and this trend continued until the Pahlavi regime.

The Pahlavi regime came and planned to carry out this work at an even faster pace. They were not satisfied with the amount that was in the Qajar era. The Pahlavi was brought to power for this reason; they placed a few trusted Western-influenced intellectuals among the Iranians as cultural elements around him to do this work. The issue of unveiling, the issue of changing clothing, and the issue of eliminating Iranian identity markers: Mirza, Seyyed, Khan, Aqa, granting numerous concessions in the oil sector, and bringing in foreign advisors - which increased day by day - are among these. Then, when the English removed Reza Khan, in the subsequent period, the Americans became the masters of the country from 1953 onwards; this is the history of our transformations during the tyrannical regime, which, with the same dangerous management I mentioned, moved towards the destruction of authenticity. I wish they had gained something in return! No, they gained nothing. That is, the Iranians over many years - more than sixty, seventy years - under the control of the English and Westerners did not gain the power to establish even a scientific research center in the country that could produce two inventions in fifty years; to train scientists who could make two or three new scientific discoveries; that is, they did not utilize the West to that extent. What did they want? They wanted an economic consumer; a consumer who naturally also comes with cultural consumption and political submission. They wanted this; and they easily surrendered and gave it. All the tensions, conflicts, and challenges you see during the Qajar era from the time of tobacco to the time of Reza Khan and beyond, which occurred between a front of believers led by the clergy on one side and tyrannical rulers on the other side, stemmed from this issue. In the case of the "Reji" concession, Mirza Shirazi opposed granting a large source of income in the country to the Westerners and foreigners for free. In the case of the "Reuter" concession, it was the same, and in the case of the 99-year contract - the contract famously known as the "Votuq al-Dawlah contract" which essentially handed over the entire country to the English - it was the same, where Modarres, that prominent cleric, opposed it.

In the case of the nationalization of the oil industry, the late Mr. Kashani (may God be pleased with him) intervened, and it was the same. These challenges that the clergy had with the rulers of various eras - which the people and many intellectuals also accompanied - all lie at this border; the border of national interests, and on the other side, the transformation stemming from the will and decision-making of foreign powers. Therefore, the versions of progress and the Western and foreign versions are sometimes even treasonous.

In order for us to find the correct version of progress, what do we need? Theoretical discussion. This is one of the tasks you must undertake. What is the progress of a country? Of course, I do not mean that we should get lost in theoretical discussions and waste our time on theoretical debates; no, I do not want these, this is wrong. Just as we once said that cultural invasion is taking place. This statement was made twelve or thirteen years ago. If someone asked me to show the cultural invasion, I could show the instances as if I were seeing the cultural invasion with my own eyes; I demonstrated it in several speeches; but some began to deny the cultural invasion! And they said: No, there is no such thing!

I remember Bani Sadr. At the beginning of the imposed war with Iraq, local well-wishers would come and say that the Iraqis attacked our land; they infiltrated our borders. We would tell Bani Sadr: Mr. President! What do you know? They say the Iraqis have attacked; he would say they are lying; this army is saying these things to create its own capabilities! They accused them. Then he went to Dehloran - at that time, the Iraqis had not yet taken Dehloran - he stood and gave an interview; he said: I am now in Dehloran; they say the Iraqis have come; where are the Iraqis?! He left Dehloran, and two hours later, Dehloran was captured by the Iraqis. One cannot deny realities by closing their eyes.

The contemporary king of Hafiz, Shah Sheikh Abul-Sakhaq - who was a king, but not a sheikh; his name is Sheikh Abul-Sakhaq - was a young, pleasure-seeking, good-looking man, and from Hafiz's poems, it is understood that he was very fond of him; when Amir Mobarez al-Din had camped around the deserts of Shiraz and was preparing for an attack on Shiraz, this unfortunate governor of Shiraz, who was immersed in his own pleasures, was unaware; his minister did not dare to tell him anything. If they said anything, he would say you are talking nonsense. One day, the minister devised a plan and said: Your Excellency, would you like to go up to the roof this spring and take a look at this desert and make use of this greenery? He, being such a person, said: Yes; let’s go. He went up to the roof of the palace, looked, and saw that an army had camped in the desert. He said: What are these? He said: This is the army of Mobarez al-Din; they have come to take your father and all your court down. By this pretext and plan, he showed the existence of the enemy to him. Some are like this; they close their eyes; they said there is no cultural invasion. After they accepted that there is a cultural invasion, they went after theoretical discussions! "What does invasion mean?", "What does culture mean?", "What does culture include and what does it not include?" What do we care about these?! It is said that in the past, when a cinema was built in a city; a group went to the scholar of the city - who was a reclusive person - to persuade him to oppose this cinema. They said: Sir! A cinema has been built in this city, you should take some action. The scholar thought for a moment and said: Now let’s see if this is thirty-nama or thirty-nama or thirty-nama! Which one is correct?! They began to discuss theoretically to find the correct pronunciation of the word cinema! I am not in favor of such theoretical discussions that we get lost in them; but in any case, theoretical discussions must be conducted to clarify what progress is.

"Determining the model of progress" is also necessary. What is the model of progress? We must specify this. If we specify this, then it will affect our planning, priorities, advancements, programs, timelines, and investments; it will lead to cultural formation; it will manifest itself in the dialogue of elites and overflow into the public mindset; it will even affect the exports and imports of the country; what to import from where? What to export to where?

Now we want to specify what progress is? There are various definitions for progress and a developed country that are commonly accepted in the world; we generally accept these and do not reject them; for example, industrialization and post-industrialization of the country; these are indicators of progress. Self-sufficiency; a country must be self-sufficient in vital and essential matters. Not that it should be completely independent of others, no; but if it needs something from someone or a country, it should arrange its relations in such a way that if it wants to obtain it, it does not face problems; it should also have something that is needed by that country; self-sufficiency means this. Abundance of production, abundance of exports, increased productivity, elevated literacy levels, improved general knowledge of the public, enhanced citizen services, providing services to citizens, increased average life expectancy - in recent terms, hope for life - these are among the indicators of progress and are correct. Reducing child mortality, eradicating various diseases in the country, growing communications, and the like are indicators that are mentioned in the world for a developed country, and we do not reject these indicators and accept them. However, be aware that when these indicators are handed to us - to us who are not the creators of these indicators - amidst them, there are things that are no longer indicators of progress and development; they introduce things that export a culture contrary to national identity and character and a desire to subordinate countries. Those who prepare and present these indicators, if they are mostly scholars, many of them are not independent people; that is, the same network and the same cultural NATO has many of these scholars, thinkers, artists, and writers within its fold. Despite all this, the foundation of transformation must be based on "considering the essential elements of national identity," which the fundamental ideals and principles are the most important of them. I say this that industrialization, post-industrialization, scientific progress, service advancements, and health and medical advancements should exist; but the foundation of these must be the preservation of national identity. If a country has all these, but is a nation without identity, its culture is dependent on others, it has no benefit from its past and history, or if it has a past, it has been kept away from its eyes or has been belittled in its view, this country will not progress at all; because national identity is the foundation of all progress.

What we have in transformation, a transformation that is accompanied by progress, is what we should consider as our ideals - that fighting poverty, fighting discrimination, fighting disease, fighting ignorance, fighting insecurity, elevating management to a more scientific level, raising the behavior of citizens to disciplined levels, and social discipline, increasing security, increasing national wealth, increasing knowledge, increasing national power, increasing ethics, and increasing national dignity; all of these are involved in this transformation and progress, and we consider these to be the main foundations. Alongside these, love for spirituality and connection with God is the most important factor that guarantees the true progress of a nation; if this does not happen, all that is considered achievements in the common and prevalent sense of the advanced world may be consumed in wrong ways. That is, a country may be disciplined, polite, and ethical in its social behaviors, may acquire wealth and knowledge, but at the same time, this wealth and knowledge, and this public discipline may be used to destroy another nation. This is wrong; this is not correct in our logic. Worship of God, love for spirituality, human compassion in every transformation, and emotions and affection among humans must be strengthened, and we must move in this direction. The social or economic transformation that makes people indifferent and unloving towards each other is not commendable; it is condemned. If you hear that in some Western countries, a child and a father live in the same city, but the child does not ask about his father year after year, families do not gather together, children do not receive paternal and maternal affections, and husbands and wives only sit together due to a temporary contract - a legal contract - the wife works somewhere, the husband works somewhere else, and at the end of the day, this one has an appointment with a friend, that one has an appointment with a colleague; if you hear that these things exist somewhere and if these are realities, these are signs of regression. The transformation that leads to these things is not approved by us. We want a transformation that creates more affection and love between fathers, mothers, families, children, friends, and neighbors; so that you consider the house forty houses away as your neighbor; this is good. The environment should be one of compassion and mutual support; all individuals in society should feel responsible for each other: "All of you are shepherds and all of you are responsible for your flock"; all of you are caretakers; that is, those who must be taken care of. The transformation that leads to such truths in social ties and systems is the progress; the progress desired by Islam and the Islamic Republic is this. Progress that is based on individualism and the permissiveness of desires that a person loves absolutely is not progress. The industrial world of the West today is based on this foundation: permissiveness of desires; any desire that is only conditioned on not transgressing against others. Anything you love is permissible; indulge in pleasure. For this reason, you see that the shameful expressions that exist today have even reached the level of their churches! The homosexualities and the ugly acts they commit, the illicit and obscene sexual interactions that are prevalent among them, were once hidden, but gradually it has become something common today. Two or three years ago, a priest of a church in America announced that I am willing to marry two homosexuals who want to live together! This is the same desire-seeking. He says I like this, so I must do it. This is forbidden and rejected. We do not consider this progress. Power that is based on oppression of other nations and at the expense of the regression of other nations is not progress; a transformation that serves a specific class - the capitalist class - which is how it is in Western countries today, is not what we desire. The wealth of these countries, which is abundant, means their public income is high - in the common expression, gross national income - how is it distributed? How much does each person receive and in exchange for how much work? Usually, they leave these unspoken. For earning a living, a husband and wife work day and night and cannot manage to sustain their lives, but in contrast, large capitalists - the Rockefellers and the Fords and those who have recently entered this field - have mountains of wealth that they cannot even calculate; this is not what we desire. Progress that serves the capitalist class is regression. Progress that is accompanied by losing independent national identity and losing oneself is not progress.

Imitation, the prevalence of imitation, and the progress of imitation is not progress. Subordinating the economy, making science imitative, and translating in universities; that whatever they say across the borders, the Western borders and European countries, we translate it, and if someone speaks, they say they are speaking against science; this is not progress and we do not consider this progress. Not that we reject translation; I have said this many times in academic circles; no, translation is very good; learning from others is good; but let us translate so that we can create ourselves. Let us understand the words of others so that new thoughts can come to our minds; not that we always remain at the feet of the old words of others. A statement made by a certain writer or philosopher or quasi-philosopher in social matters fifty or sixty years ago, now a person comes to the university, fills their mouth with pride, and repeats it as a new statement for the students! This is not progress; this is regression. Distorting the language and national identity, stripping the Islamic national identity, and playing models instead of modeling is not progress. We do not consider becoming dependent and Westernized as progress.

What is progress is that we learn from everyone and everything, acquire all the knowledge we need; bring this knowledge to the stage of action and application, conduct various research, to expand the scope of knowledge, conduct fundamental research, applied and experimental research, to create technology or to create new technology or to improve technology; correct and implement it; in the field of managerial education, learn from the advancements of the world, analyze and understand it according to our needs and customs and culture, and adapt it to our society; investigate the social problems that exist in the country, find ways to root them out, and pursue the path of combating waste. Waste is a social disease. What is the way to combat consumerism? What is the way to combat the preference for foreign goods over domestically produced goods? These require research. In universities, take research projects, professors and students work together, and provide the results of the research to the country's officials; give it to the media so that it overflows and leads to cultural formation. This is progress.

What is the way to combat the spread of Western moral laxity? What is the way to combat social indiscipline? This issue of the red light is a small example. What can we do so that our motorcycle, our taxi, our personal car, our general manager's car does not pass the red light at the intersection? What can we do so that our pedestrian does not cross when the pedestrian light is red? These are very good actions; they reduce casualties, make life easier, and calm human nerves.

Now that there is a problem, how do we solve this problem? How do we untie this knot? This work is yours. What is the way to combat divorce? What is the way to combat drugs? What is the way to combat disrespect towards elders - which fortunately, this flaw does not exist much in our society, but it may be seen here and there - what is the way to combat neglect towards mothers, neglect towards fathers, and the fight against lying and impatience? Why do we not tolerate each other and criticize each other? In a single environment, with a single orientation, a small point and blemish causes this group to stand against that group and that group to stand against this group.

Let me tell you - with the experience I have from the beginning of the revolution until now - that most of the political classifications in our country were of this kind, which unfortunately later led to deeper classifications. In those years of my presidency, there were two groups in the country: left and right. Some said left, some said right. I conducted a detailed analytical discussion - it was in the years 1983, 1984; I do not remember exactly - and proved that these differences were like the differences of ancient Arab tribes. One tribe was at odds with another tribe; its origin was neither an economic basis nor a belief basis. Suppose at one time, the horse of this tribe grazed in the pasture of one of the individuals of that tribe, and he said something like "above your eye is your eyebrow"; this one gave a response, and perhaps blood was shed between them or not, but these two tribes must remain enemies forever! I proved that the differences of the left and right in our country at that time were of this kind; and they were. Emotional and moral differences had turned into political classifications. Of course, today it is not like that. Today, some are deeply opposed to the Islamic Republic; now with various slogans and under different banners, they oppose the very essence of the system. The opposition is not because they have a better alternative. With the same slogans that the Islamic Republic was established to combat, they want to oppose the Islamic Republic. The Islamic Republic came to power based on the negation of Western and American domination; but these are supporters of Western domination. The Islamic Republic was established for the promotion of religion and spirituality and Islamic concepts; while these are completely opposed to the promotion of these concepts. The Islamic Republic set its slogan as the unity of religion and politics; while these are enemies of the unity of religion and politics. Some are like this; now they are few, many, who they are and what they are, we do not care, but still within the same groups that are like-minded and aligned, one sees that there are still some differences that are again of the kind of those tribal differences.

What is the way to combat this intolerance? This requires theoretical research; as you say, do theoretical work and then operationalize it. This becomes progress. Part of progress is these and of this kind.

Our message is this: One; we should not confront transformation. Two; we should welcome transformation. Three; not only should we not oppose transformation, but we should also welcome it. Four; transformation must be managed; in transformation, the change towards progress and elevation must be considered. A transformation that leads to regression is a bad transformation. Five; transformation should not be confused with anarchism and structural breakdown and chaos. And finally, the foundation of transformation should be other than what today is considered the criteria for progress in the world - which we have mostly counted - and the special criteria of the Islamic Republic and the new words of Islam in the fields of ethics, spirituality, divine knowledge, human friendship, and human emotions should also be considered as part of the criteria for progress. And whoever is responsible for these tasks are the collection of the elites of the university and the seminary. You young people and those who are ready, enter this field. However, do not wait for me and people like me. We have at least fifty years of age difference with you; you are young; you are the center of energy and vitality; the work is yours; just as the future is yours. Therefore, do not wait; take action yourselves; your professors should take action. The officials of the country should also be aware and attentive. However, be aware that if you are also pursuing these works, you must manage them. Monitor those indicators. It is like a minefield; on both sides, it is a minefield. Move along the safe and correct line.

O Lord! Place these young hearts and lively spirits under Your mercy and grace. O Lord! What we have heard and said, make it for You, in Your way, and acceptable and pleasing to You. O Lord! Make us act according to what we believe and what we say; align our actions with knowledge and our knowledge with action. O Lord! Day by day, illuminate the hearts of these dear and faithful young people with the light of Your love, knowledge, and grace. O Lord! Bring these young people in their lives to the great goal and aspiration of visiting the Master of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for him).

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings.