The ability of people is scattered all over Iran.
Yosef Madzhikian.
In his meeting two weeks ago, the president held talks with the governors and mayors of the big cities, which received a sharp response from some of them. What were the talks and what were the reactions?
1 The President's speech.
In order for governors and district administrators to have self-confidence and work with motivation and accept responsibility, the president mentioned the self-evident principles from the perspective of faith. that people have no inherent superiority over each other. Anyone who tries can grow and reach high positions and do great things.
As an example, they mentioned some neighboring countries whose population may be a million or two, but from the heart of that million, a king, an emir and a minister come out to run the country. When there are a million people in our neighboring countries who are capable of being president and minister, it is natural that in Iran's population of 80 million inhabitants, there is the ability to have tens of people at the level of the president and hundreds of people at the ministry level.
2 What were the responses to the conversations?
Meshed Zahorian, a representative of Mashhad, considered the president's speech meaningless and said that he should be encouraged to speak less and if he does speak, the distribution of his speech should be controlled.
Mehdi Rabati, who holds a doctorate in public policy and political economy and is active in the media, found the talks alarming and playful and added that these talks go beyond division and federalism.
Ahsan Mohedian, a doctor of international relations, who worked as an expert on the Caucasus in the media, and one of the most frequent words in his lists and materials is "pan-Turkism", said that the president promotes the idea of dividing Iran.
A few more people joined and uploaded more irrelevant things, I haven't seen them all and there is no need to list them all.
3 When I think about why my countrymen react this way to the president's words, I see no exceptions:
1- They did not listen carefully to the content and spoke against something that was not mentioned at all.
If this is the case, their work is imprudence in the first step and uncharity in the next.
2- They listened to the material and did not understand it.