The 12th propagating Scientific Chair of the Art School of Jurisprudence was held in collaboration with the Research Institute of Contemporary Jurisprudence with the theme “Criticism of the Squid game film based on the theory of social contract in public law” on the 7th of Shahrivar, 1403 / 28 August 2024.

In this meeting chaired by Mr. Nawab Hazrati, Dr. Husayn Khaliq Parast, a university lecturer and judge and the author of the article “The Squid game movie from the perspective of social contract theory in public law” presented his material.

It represents the true nature of the social contract!

Dr. Husayn Khaliq Parast continued by referring to the story of this mini-series and added: In fact, these people who enter the game sign a contract so that they can enter this game, and it is insisted that this contract is due to their discretion and they are completely free to enter and as a result, they have to accept the results.

He went on to explain the movie about the nature of the social contract and said: This movie says that just having a social contract cannot meet our social needs. We considered the social contract as a container that can contain anything. Now, its container can be the bottom of an unjust system, which apparently everyone entered this system based on a contract, and this container can be the difference between a legal government and a entity government, a completely legal but completely illegal container and against the justice system.

The word is from the privileged class!

He added: Here there are some elites or the privileged class of the society who are controlling them and even you see the role of an old man in this series who is pushing the choices of this game and in the situations that they can choose and from he is the one who continues this game. Thus, we come to the conclusion that this social contract is not necessarily a fair and just contract, but this game is being guided and it is just a part of the guidance caused by not informing the players of this game.

The article is brief and useful

Next, Dr. Vahid Aghaz, a member of Allameh University’s academic faculty, as the first critic, first pointed out the positive features of this article and said: I enjoyed this article a lot, because I am a fan of concise and useful, and if someone can speak big words and tell the deep contents in a simple language so that we can say at the end, well, we knew this, this is a great work and a great art that the authors of this article did. In my opinion, straightforward writing and simple writing is a profound art that the authors of this article had.

He further mentioned the other positive features of this article and said: The article conveys its concepts well, regardless of whether I agree with it or not, and the short volume shows that there is no delay, and the next point is the large number of footnotes. These footnotes and subtitles are very helpful and they are used patiently, accurately, correctly and without nonsense.

It smells like regulation!

In criticizing the content of this article, Dr. Vahid Agah said: The authors discussed that we have a sacred concept called social contract and this social contract seems to be formed from afar by will, but this series says that the content of this contract may not necessarily be moral and fair.This article smells like regulation. This article says that the squid game showed that this justice, this freedom of will, this social contract that Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau are now knocking on and stressing on this concept is nothing more than a mirage, it is a deception of the capitalist system and although we come to the conclusion that there is freedom of will and we enter it whenever we want and we go out whenever we want and the rules of the game are democratic, but the reality is not like that, so it is said that this social contract is a container and needs a container.

He further added: In public law, we say that we take care of the majority in the tyranny of the majority with human rights. The question is, what must we do next? The article did not pay attention to this and of course he said that I will end here. Here, they had no duty to tell the continuation, but the work remains to be done. It means that one part is over and we are looking for the next part and we have to wait, hey, we think, but this is the end of this dramatic article. In my opinion, this article smells of leftism, this article smells of “welfare government”, it smells of regulation. If the outcome of this article is that we cannot put any nonsense in the container of the law and say that the rule of law is the rule of law, it is a very correct statement. So next to the rule of law, human rights, citizenship, and democracy must be present, and this golden triangle cannot be avoided. If the output of the article says this, then he is right.

This window is new and pristine!

In the continuation of the meeting of Hujjat al-Islam wa al-Muslimin, Dr. Sayyid Muhsen Qa’emi, the teacher of the Huzah and Allameh University, firstly expressed the positive features of this article and stated: Maybe there is a complaint that this movie was at the peak of reception for this movie at the time and it was very popular, why wasn’t it criticized at that time, and we have been delayed for several years since the release of the film and the reception of the film, but it must be said that in the last two or three years, this film has been analyzed from every possible angle and almost all the words in what is special about this movie is the words of public rights that remain and written by Dr. Hadavand. In fact, it is enlightening to write about the concepts of public law.

Movie introduction blank space

Dr. Sayyid Muhsen Qa’emi went on to count the reviews on this article and stated: The pattern that we have seen so far, which usually exists in articles that review movies, is that firstly, in the introduction part, in the number part that article provided a brief description of the film, which is missing in this scientific and heavy work.

He stated another point about the formal problems of this article: there was no reference to the details and dialogues of the film anywhere in the article, unlike other articles where the authors usually did this. I think on a case-by-case basis, if the dialogues of the films, for instance, we had very specific dialogues such as the father’s dialogues about women’s rights or in the field of racial rights in this film, maybe if you document those dialogues and analyze them. This article could be really good. The purpose of bringing dialogues is that the text is alive and can establish a connection between the text and the film.

This movie was a perspective of Korean society, not necessarily world society!