HRANA – On a cold morning, the city square is filled with people. A large crane stands in the middle of the square. The rope hanging from the crane sways in the wind. Everyone is in a hurry to find a good spot to watch. A mother gives her child a chocolate to calm them down. Above, a few people stand on a platform wearing masks. They are all waiting. Finally, a person is brought out and handed over to the masked figures. They cover the person with black cloth. Some push each other to get a better view. People raise their phones, not just to take pictures of death, but sometimes to capture a smile; the smile of someone standing with their back to the condemned. The camera captures the moment: “Selfie with death.”
The link between a smile and death here is something sinister and terrifying. But it is a reality. In Iran, execution is not just a public event, but also a spectacle for photography, including taking photos of oneself. “Ordinary” men and women, and even sometimes children, capture their faces in the last moments of another human life.
Why does someone smile in the face of death? Is this a translation of cruelty? Is death a form of empathy in the human psyche? Is apathy and moral numbness? Is submission and surrender to violence and oppression a sign of morality? Perhaps, but here is a very deep mystery of the heart of everyday life of Iranians depicted, something tangible and enduring that must be understood in order to be liberated from it.
Public violence celebration.
Nietzsche says in his genealogy of morals: “No celebration is held without indifference, the highest and oldest lines of human history read this to our ears, and in punishment, the celebration itself is hidden in joy and happiness.” [1] From the Aztec ritual of removing the victim’s heart, to releasing prisoners to be torn apart by animals in Greece and Rome, from stoning in public squares in ancient Iran to the death of gladiators in Rome, from the extravagant celebrations in medieval Europe to the postcards of American lynching with black people, the phenomenon of celebrating violence in public has a long history. In the birthplace of modern civilization, 17th and 18th century England, execution at “Tyburn” was so popular that vendors sold food and singers sang songs, and families, including children, attended.
Selfie with death is a continuation of ancient phenomena that have been blended in a strange way with the characteristics of the digital age. In taking a selfie, there is a hidden kind of celebration. The person is not only a witness to the execution, but also turns it into a personal memory. The government arranges the execution scene and the citizen, by posing for a selfie, becomes both a witness and a participant in this public celebration ceremony.
The logic of taking selfies in the digital age.
In our digital world, existence is tied to being seen. Nothing is complete unless it is captured by a camera and shared on social networks. This logic consumes our entire being, even moments that are inherently unpleasant. It is through being seen that we define our identity [2]. Regardless of how a person may feel during their execution, capturing that moment gives them an opportunity to exist, to be seen. Simply experiencing existence is not enough; it must be recorded and shared.
But selfie is not just a simple photo; it is a social statement that says, “I was here, I am part of this community.” [3] Whatever it may be, a selfie is not just capturing a moment; it is a scene where meaning, power, and identity are constructed and simultaneously transmitted. In a selfie with death, who is “I”? What kind of community is gathered there? And what does being a part of that community mean for him and for society? Such statements, regardless of personal experience, are very powerful: ultimately, what matters is not the experience itself, but the image that circulates from it. [4] In the digital age, any valuable experience is not found within itself, but in its image and reproduction; even if that experience is witnessing someone else’s death. The person taking a selfie with death is not just after capturing that moment, they are making statements about it. And these statements are more important than their actual experience. So to
Krokhti Psychology
Violence has a long history in human society. However, contrary to this, violence towards one’s own kind is incompatible with the fundamental structure of the human brain. Humans are repulsed by the suffering of others from a young age. The concept of empathy and compassion is ingrained in our brains from the beginning. We have “mirror neurons” in our brains, which is why we can recognize and even feel the pain of others. [5[ But this natural potential is completely trainable. Its cultivation is another potential in our genetics. When a child understands the boundaries between “us” and “others”, they develop the ability to empathize. Cruelty towards “others” does not activate the empathy nerves in the brain. [6] “Others” who are worthy of humanity are not capable of empathy.
Without empathy, “we” as a collective, cannot form a social group. This has been the greatest advantage of human evolution. However, in order to maintain this social group against other social groups, empathy must necessarily be selective. This requires mechanisms and special efforts within the group. Empathy does not easily disappear. One must throw away the other from humanity. Violence must be normalized with them. Public execution is one of these mechanisms.
In societies where there is a need to intensify their borders with the “enemy”, public execution is a necessity. At least the main supporters of bordering with the enemy must be exposed to violence repeatedly. Human empathy must be limited with this repetition. “Conscience” must be silenced in relation to the “other”. This is not an easy task and requires detailed rituals and ceremonies. Some of these ceremonies justify violence, while others normalize and tolerate it. This phenomenon is what some in Iran call “enemy recognition”. It is not surprising that children sometimes witness death in a selfie frame, on their father’s shoulder, in their mother’s arms, or next to their elders. Their eyes are fixed on scenes that should shake the soul of any human being. Parents may think they are teaching a lesson, but the truth is something else: the child is learning to silence their empathy. They learn that death can be a spectacle. Repeating violence silences the conscience. Children who should learn empathy,
Selfie with death is an announcement that I belong to this group. Declaring silence towards another human being is a sign of empathy. It means that I do not feel any pain from another person. It is a valid confirmation of killing someone. As we have said, in the digital society, this announcement of experiences is more important.
Fear in the mask of participation.
But announcing affiliation with the killers does not mean the absence of fear. On the contrary, sometimes it is a way to hide fear. Does the selfie-taker not know that social boundaries are very fluid? Does he not know how many groups that were once “us” are now “others”? Does he not know that by pushing and pulling these boundaries, he may end up on the platform? Is he not afraid of this? Smiling and taking selfies is not just a way to document presence, but also an attempt to prove loyalty: “I am with you too. I am part of the group too.”
Public displays of violence are tools for reproducing power. Public execution not only disciplines the body of the criminal, but also the bodies of the spectators: it forces them to comply in silence. They must show that they are in solidarity with power. They must show that solidarity is dead within them and that it will not rebel against power. [7].
Killing someone in front of people’s eyes is the action of the power system. Without a judicial power, without laws and punishments, without enforcement organizations, and without institutions that govern these institutions, such a thing would not have been possible. In Iran, even the terrifying forces of the Revolutionary Guards explicitly attend execution ceremonies. Here, power displays its naked violence. The citizen takes a selfie with the earthly god, meaning the power system and its agents, a god who is in the act of killing. What they truly believe, as we have said, is not so important. In a society of spectacle, the spectacle takes priority. Therefore, by placing themselves in the frame of the photo, the citizen emphasizes that they are not only opposed, but also impartial.
Imitation and blind collective behavior.
Necessarily, someone who takes a selfie is not aware of the meaning of their actions. Imitation and “mimicry” (in the language of Girard) play an important role in this phenomenon. The population is not just an observer. It reproduces itself in the behavior of others. When the first phone is raised to take a photo, others also become willing to do the same. In mass culture, actions originate not from within, but from imitation of others. [8] Individual desires are melted in the furnace of the crowd. Each person feels secure by repeating the behavior of others: “This is not wrong; look at others.”
In his book “Violence and the Sacred”, Girard explains that societies need to kill a common victim in order to control internal anger and violence, digest collective frustrations, redirect collective or governmental failures, and release accumulated emotions. [9] In our society, public execution serves as a means of this collective release, for a minority who identify with the execution: they become the “other” and the collective violence is directed towards them. With their death, a temporary unity is achieved within the minority, free from empathy. The root of the problems is found and eliminated. The public display of execution is not just an individual punishment, but a ritual for the reproduction of the collective “us” for this empathetic minority.
Selfie with execution, republishing the same ritual in virtual space. It shows others who could not attend that a life was punished. Someone paid for their shortfalls and mistakes. The debt was paid and order was restored. The selfie-taker in this act helps the power structure. Temporarily, it spreads the calming effect of execution to the virtual space.
Systematic discrimination and segregation.
Execution in public is a reflection of the system of discrimination and structural inequalities. Those sentenced to death in Iran are often from marginalized groups, ethnic and religious minorities, or lower economic classes. The choice of “victim” is not random; it stems from the same mechanisms of systematic discrimination. Certain social groups are always at risk of persecution and expulsion. Their presence on the execution platform, while others are below, is a reminder of social boundaries.
Every system comes with the production of “waste”, meaning things that do not fit into that system. For example, organizing a room always produces some trash, meaning things that used to have a place but no longer do. Social order is not exempt from this general rule. Society also constantly produces waste, waste that includes individuals, identities, and ways of life. [10] A “lawful” society requires the disposal of this waste: by killing some of them and intimidating and forcing others to deny their own identity and existence. Public execution is a ritual for perpetuating social discrimination.
Selfie with a rope is a reproduction of this marginal mechanism in Tehran. The audience, with a smile and taking pictures, confirms the discriminatory system. It declares that certain groups of society do not have the right to exist, express themselves, or demand equal rights for themselves. Selfie with a rope says, “The discriminatory system must remain untouched.”
Waste from the pre-modern era.
The modern world has considered open violence necessary, whether it be for the cultivation of human nature and instilling a sense of guilt and morality (Friedrich Nietzsche), or for instilling fear of authority (Thomas Hobbes), or for releasing the accumulated disgust and violence in society onto a victim (René Girard), or for establishing moral norms (Emile Durkheim), or for reconstructing and strengthening power structures (Michel Foucault), whatever the reason may be, the modern world has regulated social order through open violence.
But the modern world was able to reduce the intensity of displaying violence. The modern government took the monopoly of violence for itself. The process of power concentration led to the gradual elimination of public displays of violence. [11] The last public executions in Europe and America took place in the 1930s. To maintain social balance and regulate power, more cost-effective and “civilized” methods were found. Executions were sent from the fields to inside prisons. The frequency of executions sharply decreased in the world. The number of countries that still carry out executions in public has decreased to less than a handful. Iran is one of them.
Just as today, it is not necessary to pull out every damaged tooth and dental repairs do not have to be accompanied by pain and torture, the modern system has found less barbaric ways to maintain social order. Public executions show that these modern tools, which are supposed to maintain social order, are not in their proper place. They either do not work, or have never existed. Therefore, in order to compensate for the lost legitimacy, society must be given order in medieval ways. Public executions are a symptom of the backwardness of the system of order in Iranian society. Its rise and fall in different periods indicate the incomplete establishment and repeated destruction of this system. Public executions are a symbol of backwardness, ignorance, and incompetence.
The smile of the selfie taker is a testament to their ignorance. Their demeanor may have been considered normal centuries ago. They live in that past, unaware that what may have been acceptable in the past is now seen as barbaric and savage in the eyes of the modern world. Their unawareness of the logic of the modern world and their pride in belonging to the past is another message hidden in this selfie.
Path of liberation.
The path to breaking the cycle of violence, in the first step, is to see the wound. It must be deeply understood and understood that the scene of execution is not just the murder of a condemned person. Here, the lives of the spectators are also diminished: every glance takes away something from the human identity of the viewer. The eye must remain pure from seeing what is not worthy. The next step, of course, is to refuse. The desire for power only lasts as long as its rituals are repeated. If the crowd leaves the field, the ritual becomes meaningless. If the cameras don’t show up, this show will collapse.
Despite the presence of social networks, even if you do not participate in execution ceremonies, you are virtually present. Execution news is among the most frequent news. Whether you agree or disagree, this is a poison that affects us all. With news of every execution, we are at risk of losing a part of our humanity. The dissemination of news of each execution strikes at the ability of citizens to empathize with each other. Hatred, enmity, and violence are thus spread throughout society and even encompass opponents of the government. Resistance against this poison requires a strong antidote. It is not enough to simply understand and reject the culture of violence in order to resist it.
Non-violent resistance is the rebuilding of empathy in society. A society of execution makes the meaning of humanity exclusive and ambiguous. Resistance against violence is a reminder of the meaning of being human and empathy towards oneself and others. It is a reminder of the connection that binds us all together. Non-violent resistance promotes an understanding of humanity that encompasses all humans. It is a reminder that the unity of humankind is a reality and all social boundaries are temporary constructions. We must recognize and let go of these boundaries and biases that give them strength.
Rebuilding empathy may be the most important thing we should teach the next generation. In societies where public institutions, even schools and media, are trying to teach children hatred and violence, families and neighborhoods are the last havens of compassion. Parents can be role models through their behavior and words, teaching that no human is garbage and no one can turn into a background for someone else’s smile.
Empathy, even when constant promotion of violence is silenced, can be awakened again in individuals. [12] The path to stopping executions in society is not through repeating violence. It is not through hatred and “death to this and that”. Rather, it is through moral awakening. A great river of resistance and perseverance against violence must be started. But every river begins with small streams. From the actions that you and I can do. Resistance against execution may begin with a conversation with family or friends about empathy. It begins with friendly behavior towards strangers. It begins with defending the rights of the oppressed. It begins with showing in action that there is no difference between us as humans. It is in these small actions that a movement for resistance against violence can begin.
Notes:
1. Nietzsche, F. (2011). On the genealogy of morals (W. A. Kaufmann, Trans.; Nachdr.). Vintage Books.
2. Rettberg, J. W. (2014). Seeing ourselves through technology. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
3. Senft, T. M., & Baym, N. K. (2015). Selfies introduction: What does the selfie say? Investigating a global phenomenon. International Journal of Communication, 9, 19.
4. Debord, G. (2014). The society of the spectacle (K. Knabb, Trans.). Bureau of Public Secrets.
5. Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27(1), 169–192.
6. Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst. Penguin Press.
7. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (1st American ed.). Pantheon Books.
8. Girard, R. (1998). Deceit, desire, and the novel: Self and other in literary structure (Y. Freccero, Trans.; Nachdr.). Johns Hopkins University Press.
9. Girard, R. (1979). Violence and the sacred (P. Gregory, Trans.; Johns Hopkins paperbacks ed.; [Nachdr.]). Johns Hopkins University Press.
10. Bauman, Z. (2011). Wasted lives: Modernity and its outcasts (Reprint). Polity.
11. Elias, N. (2010). The civilizing process: Sociogenetic and psychogenetic investigations (E. F. N. Jephcott, Trans.; Rev. ed.). Blackwell.
12. Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. Oxford University Press.
Written by Pouya Movahed
Originally published in Khat-e Solh (Peace Mark) monthly magazine on September 23, 2025.