No need for another revolution

Revolutions that espouse social justice have the tendency to lead to more injustice


No need for another revolution
by Ben Madadi

Revolution seems a good thing, theoretically speaking, but historically speaking it has usually been a not-so-rosy moment in time when injustices took place, lives and relations got shattered, and societies were shaken to their cores, very often taking them a very long time to recover from the trauma.

Revolutions in Russia, China, France, Iran and about anywhere else hardly brought anything extraordinary. Their peers who missed the revolutions did quite well, and usually much better. It is complicated to evaluate what would have happened if there was no revolution but one thing is certain that neither the French revolution nor Communist revolutions of Russia, China and other places, nor the Islamic revolution of Iran brought anything to be proud of.

Although the French revolution is very often given credit for some extraordinary ideals that further flourished in Europe, let's not forget about the beheadings and of course the 'democracy' that ensued the revolution, and Napoleon, though usually admired by the French public (just as Cyrus, the great, is admired among Iranians, Peter, the great, among Russians, or Alexander, the great, among Macedonians), was not exactly the democrat the world needed at that time, who caused the death of millions of Europeans, especially of his own French nationals.

The British did not go through such a dramatic and bloody change, and they still have their monarchy, and one can arguably say that Britain is not only a more advanced country from an economic perspective but also from a social and political point of view, with better and more stable laws and various systems in place. Japan did not go through a revolution and they still do have their royal family and one cannot compare the Japanese society to that of China or other larger ancient countries in Asia.

Iran had two modern revolutions, one in the beginning of the 20th century and the other which succeeded in 1979. Both of them brought huge changes to the Iranian society, and Iran still is not a democracy. Turkey had some sort of a constitutional movement of its own that started much earlier than that of Iran which was also called 'mashrutiat' (or 'mesrutiyet' as the Turkish word is known), that had of course been an inspiration for Iran's constitutionalist movement too, but theirs did not turn into a full-fledged revolution. And their political system is just about a pretty good and relatively solid democracy Muslims can afford these days, having progressed over time from sort-of-military-democracy.

Revolutions are not basically flawed in their ideals, as they all present themselves as movements that oppose unjust systems, almost unanimously promising social equity, equality, even sometimes freedom and democracy. The problem with revolutions often lies in the leading revolutionaries rather than the revolutionary ideals.

Leading revolutionaries may actually be of good faith in the pursuit of their ideals but the simple fact that they manipulate and organise people toward violence automatically creates the right atmosphere for vengeance, which is nothing idealistic. And as the result successful uprisings lead to a complete annihilation of the previous power structure.

The power vacuum usually leads to even worse elements to replace the previous ones who were outrageously corrupt and unjust. Hence the ideals of justice that may have inspired the revolution turn into nothing more than a war of retribution that befalls the nation into chaos, from which true democracy has no chance of emerging any time soon.

What is to do with unjust systems then? First it is required to define what is unjust, and what isn't unjust. Isn't it unjust that one is born with huge physical and mental deficiencies while another is born perfectly normal into a well-off and educated family? Who is to blame for this, and what is to do about this 'injustice'? Is God to blame for the injustice of giving one huge potential just by his birth while giving another huge deficiencies?

People are born different, in an astonishingly unjust pattern of distributive abilities and potentials. While one child is born to no known mother and father in Bangladesh, being raised in extremely precarious conditions of an orphanage, having the least chances of ever reaching any significant local or global social stance, another child is born in Manhattan to an educated and wealthy family, having all the chances of pursuing and accomplishing what can unanimously be described as a fulfilling and beautiful life. So, the pursuit of justice as such is not just impractical, but fundamentally unnatural.

We are not made to live in perfectly just societies or systems. Perfect justice does not exist and it will never do. While God (or whoever or whatever who/that decides who is born and raised with what) himself creates mankind in a system that can be interpreted as wholly unjust, it must be unnatural and abnormal for mankind to even ponder about creating their won system to pretend to be a just one on the same earth that the same God created. Hence all the man-made systems that ever pretend to promote and spread justice are fundamentally flawed and destined to fail. Studying Communism it can easily be noticed the good intentions of the system in order to create social justice.

However it is already history and we have all seen the miserable and catastrophic results of the perceived just system that succeeded in surpassing in injustice, corruption, and dysfunctionality most other systems (including the major opposing one, Western Capitalism) that did not even officially pretend to bring social justice.

Revolutions that espouse social justice have the tendency to lead to more injustice simply because of our inherent nature of misunderstanding and not conceiving, or deserving, justice. And history has shown that violent uprisings that lead to revolutions are not the best ways of bringing about positive and durable social change for the betterment of the society.

Then the question comes, what is to do with regimes that are unjust? First we need to understand that all regimes are unjust, some more than others. Is the Iranian regime, the IRI, one that is right for the Iranian people? Is the American regime one that is right for the American people? The latter phrase in itself is an odd one simply because of the usage of the word 'regime'. People do not use the word 'regime' for the United States because it changes so often, so dramatically, that the usage has never been an appropriate one.

While in Iran it is a different matter. Changes in Iran have usually been rare but dramatic, bloody or revolutionary. One regime has usually replaced another after a traumatic social and political upheaval that completely eradicated the previous political, or even social, structure. As history is so clearly showing to us, societies that have chosen steady, evolutionary, progress, have faired far better than societies that have chosen the path of revolution, even if the cause of the revolution has been a noble one.

As long as justice does not exist in its entirety on the face of earth, its revolutionary pursuit in itself is a flawed idea. This does not mean that we shall not pursue justice. The pursuit of social justice, or justice in any sense, is indeed a noble task, but the belief that one system can bring justice is nothing but a dream that can turn catastrophic, and definitely nothing worth turning toward violence.

The best way to bring about positive change is to have the right system to allow peaceful periodic change, according to the will of the social constituents, the people. But even this system, which is normally called democracy, is not a just, or a perfect one. It is simply a way of acknowledging that perfection or justice does not exist in reality, but it is worth letting all participants having a shot for it. And everybody deserves to have their shot as long as they can attract enough supporters. The American system does allow this, while the Iranian one, the Iranian regime, does not. The Iranian system needs to be changed in order to have one which allows all parties to try their luck.

How can we create the right atmosphere for Iran to achieve this goal, the goal of reaching a democratic system, or at least a relatively and reasonably open and democratic one? The best way is to work within the present structure, in a social and political sense. And the best ones to pursue this would be Iranians themselves rather than anybody else. This is no simple task, as it is no simple task to decide what to do with any corrupt and unrepresentative regime that holds on to power.

What is to do with the North Korean regime which is far worse than the Iranian one? What is to do with Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe who for his incredibly foolish ideas of justice has turned his country into a starving wasteland? What is to do with clan Assad in Syria? There are so many thuggish regimes in the world who show no desire of letting their peoples decide about their country's faith. What is to do with them?

It is of course more than just a political issue. It is also a social one. You cannot impose such thuggish regimes in societies that have long progressed toward popular democracies. Societies where non-democratic regimes do well have all the potential to have other non-democratic regimes replacing the previous ones in case they were removed. It is not just the duty of the citizens of those countries, but that of the world's democratic countries, to promote social progress and steady change rather than bloody revolutions. It is indeed a fight that must be waged but in an intelligent and fruitful manner rather than blindly and hatefully.�


Recently by Ben MadadiCommentsDate
Moving forward
Nov 06, 2008
Testing democracy
Nov 02, 2008
Playing dumb?
Sep 29, 2008
more from Ben Madadi

This Regime is Going Nowhere.

by mehdi Mazloom (not verified) on

despite the common misconception about "Iran's rising power in the region". There are too many obstacles working against this regime, to become the dominent force in the region. Just in brief.

1. Farsi population in Iran, make up only 60% of total population in Iran.

2. Shi'ites make up only 11% of Muslim population in the region.

3. The perenial Shi'ite - Sunni 1300 years dance of death, and still going strong.

4. Farsis are known to loath the Arabs and look down at their nose. A factor known to Arabs, and their lingering distrust of the Iranian Mullahs.

5. It is reported that, 80-85% of the young population despises this regime, and wants more freedom of expression.

6. Due to these mullahs stance on Nuclear program, Iran has become a pariah state - shunned and ostracized by the west- Particularly by the largest economy on earth - US

7. Due to wrong and outright backward policies by the Mullahs, and the UNSC economic sanctions on Iran, Iran's economic is one step closer to collapse.

8. Their little midget's denial of Holocaust and outrageous comments about receiving some lunatic messianic massage from an illusive clerics, have not earned this regime much credit in the eyes of the world.

9. Militarily Iran is surrounded by some of the most powerful nations on earth. US, GBR, Israel, etc. With third rate indegenious military infrastructure, one can imagine how a head-to-head confrantation would end up.

10. With few genuine and true friends, this regime literally buys them, with hard cash. Hizbollah, Hamas, and Syria (Iran underwrites most of Syria's military procurements). All otrher so-called friends (Russia, China, and Venezuela) have their own selfish agenda to cozy up with Iran.

Now, with all these odds against them, does this regime have much of chance to remain in power for much longer.?. Judge it for yourself.

In my view, the only ones who will bring about their downfall, it will be by the hand of the same group which brought them into power in the first place - The students. Or more correctly, the female students who make up the majority at the universities. They are well educated, and aware of world affair. They are the most affected by these Mullah's backward policies. All they will have to do is one day some 3 million of them throughout Iran just walk the streets w/o the headscarf, and expose their arms, shouting enough (Bass) with theocracy, After which it will galvanize the rest of the population to raise against these Mullahs. The West will waste no time to feed the fire.
They will bring these Tarboosh down.

Stay tuned.


Ben you are right.

by Anonymouse on

Good luck hammering these obvious "phenomenon" into some people's heads.  Can't think of a better word now, but some people never realize something even if it were to hit them in the head.  Keep hammering their heads and some day some how some spark may go off in their head and they realize there is another world and people actually LIVE in it with all the shortcomings.

One day they rose and we all know what happened.  They will rise again but chances are we won't be here to witness it. We may witness something else in return.


A lot of factors were involved!

by Anonymous??? (not verified) on

I believe a lot of factors contributed to the revolution! The revolution was the result of a combination of factors!

Yes I admit that foreign forces were involved to a great extent (e.g. BBC farsi broadcast into Iran, funded by the British Foreign Ministry, was one of the very useful tools through which Khomeini could send his messages to the revolutionaries inside) but they were not the only factor!

Medhi jaan, people do not revolt not because they love mullahs; Foreign forced do not help not because they adore mullahs even though they exploited Iran quite well on account of the regime during the last 29 years; they don't because none of them see a tangible realistic alternative to this regime before them!
You hear a lot of voices, a lot of ballyhoo and commotion, a lot of disagreement, labelling, accusation and name-calling and the end result is always zero. They look at Afghanistan, they look at Iraq, they compare and then they thank God that their country is still in one piece.


Wanna get ultra rich!

by Why not? (not verified) on

Well a lot of people are trying to join these nouveau riches people mentioned in the article at the bottom! What's wrong with that?

Everybody, regardless of nationality, political beliefs, race, gender, etc. wants to live in ultimate luxury, driving extraordinarily expensive cars, wearing the best designer clothes, piling up money, real estate and material possessions, but not
everybody is born a natural crook or with a sharp devious mind in business. Some have gone into "politics" and since Mullahs have got billions at their disposal to spare, these folks suck up to them to get a piece of the pie and are wrongfully called apologists, opportunists, etc. etc.! Can you blame them?


Private Pilot

How much did they pay you

by Private Pilot on

So, be honest.  How much do you get paid from your MULLAH cousins to promote your "peaceful co-existance" and "path of non-violent social progress" for Iran?

Private Pilot


To: ???

by Mehdi on

Well, what do you think? Can you describe how exactly "people" came to realize that they were supposedly being screwed by Shah's regime? How did they manage to topple Shah? How did they take over the established "tyrany?" If taking over was so easy then why was it not done years ago? And if people were so great and so much better than what Shah gave them, how come they haven't moved an inch since then? How come situation is many times worse in iran today than it was in 1979? There are people who say "Iranians became angry at the Shah's regime and revolted and established a new regime." But the same people say that "Iranians were tricked by mullahs and since then have not been able to get what they want." How is that possible? How could the new regime be far more sophisticated than the old one? If mullahs were so cunning, how come they didn't do jack in the many years before this so-called revolution? If you look into it, there are too many unanswered questions like these.


"If the oppression has been

by ??? (not verified) on

"If the oppression has been going on for too long and a revolution does in fact take place, we have to look at foreign forces outside of that country that "staged" that "revolution."

So you are saying that the Iranian revolution of 1979 was staged by foreign forces?!


Is revolution even possible?

by Mehdi on

How is a revolution possible? If the people revolting are weak, then they must not be much better than the government in charge. Good people are not weak. If the people are slightly stronger then the revolution will turn into reform because of the balance of powers. If people are significantly stronger than the regime, then why are they oppressed in the first place? If this oppression is a temporary thing that just happened, meaning the regime just started to become anti-people, then the revolution will simply be a light correction. But if the corruption of the regime has been going on for long, then people must have somehow contributed to its existence and stability. If the oppression has been going on for too long and a revolution does in fact take place, we have to look at foreign forces outside of that country that "staged" that "revolution." We look at Russia's "revolution" which was held up as THE way a revolution should take place and 60-70 years later we find out that Communism which was determined to be a useless and destructive system was "exported" from germany into Russia under the guise of "revolution" only to weaken that country and cause its eventual demise so that germany could get ahead. If you think about it, it is really not possible for a revolution to happen the way most people consider what a revolution should be, or is.


Ben: your prescription to

by Anonymousll (not verified) on

Ben: your prescription to rescue Iran from the yoke of Iron turbans is to bend over backward so they can continue raping and plundering Iran's oil revenue and wealth until there is nothing else left???

Iran is being held hostage by of powerful network of religious fundamentalist mafia or Islamists gang of terrorists who use religion as tool to keep stealing and lining their own pockets. It's all about money and who has access to the national wealth. The mullahs are not going to let stupid things like democracy get in their way. It would be suicidal for them to allow Iran to prosper economically and socially. Democracy and prosperity will render the mullahs and their "jobs" irrelevant and useless in such a democratic society...You're only fooling yourself.


Ben, here is your

by vaise (not verified) on


Azmoodeh ra azmoodeh nemoodan khataast!

by Loser finder (not verified) on

I guess according to losers who openly kiss muallahtariat's arse and/or their closeted supporters, dysfunctional impotent Khatami is again all we need and should be happy with forever for as long as we live in Iran: headscarves a few inches pushed back, and I guess more Mohammad Reza Golzar/Mahnaz Afshar romantic movies ... lol


Darius Kadivar


by Darius Kadivar on




(Ah Ooh Ah Ooh Ah Ooh Ah Ooh)

Now get down people and listen to me
Gonna tell you how I made history
You can call me Louis, I'm the king of France
Check out my story while you do your dance
Now in seventeen hundred and eighty-nine
The peasants were starving, but I was fine
We were hanging out, down in old Versailles
That's the week end pad of my Queen and I
In the alleys of Paris they was eating rats
But it was fillet and ????? for the aristocrats
There were Dukes and Counts and Barons and Earls
I gave them the titles but I kept the girls
Blondes, red heads, wild brunettes
Ladies-in-waitin', I didn't wait to get
There was truffles for breakfast, toast for brunch
The line of the Follies Bergères for lunch

(Ooh yes, it's good to be the King)
(Ooh La La)
(Gee, but it's good to be the King)
Say it girls
(You can be sure about one thing)
(Ooh La La)
(Mais oui, it's good to be the king)
It's good to be the king

(Ah Ooh Ah Ooh)

Well if Paris was rioting, they were doing it good
When we heard there was some trouble in the neighborhood
I wasn't too worried, no big deal
You step out the line, Jack, you're in the Bastille
The party kept swinging all day and all night
The champagne was flowing, we was feeling all right
They were screaming for bread, things started to shake
But Marie-Antoinette said (Well let 'em eat cake!)
Now the rabble wouldn't have it, they was angry with me
They built a big old razor called the guillotine
Then the people all shouted, "We'll have our day"
"Down with dirty water, give us Perrier!"
I said the more you want, things might get screwy
But they'll never lay a finger on good King Louis
Just keep your cool, don't fret, don't freak
I say Hey!
(Say what?)
C'est magnifique!

(Ooh yes, it's good to be the king)
(Ooh La La)
(Gee, but it's good to be the king)
Your fantasy is my reality
(You can be sure about one thing)
(Ooh La La)
(Mais oui, it's good to be the king)
It's good to be the king

(Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria)
(Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria Pappu Paria)

Night and day comme vous voulez

Well they broke down the gate in one massive assault
And the party came to a grinding halt
They took the midgets and the freakies with the girls and all
And the boys said, "Louis, it's time to go"
They put my neck on the block, they took off my wig
And It occurred to me this was the end of the gig
They asked me did I have any last words to say
Well, I raised my head and I hollered "Hey!"

(Ooh yes, it's good to be the king)
(Ooh La La)
(Gee, but it's good to be the king)
Well c'est la vie, make that la mort
(You can be sure about one thing)
(Ooh La La)
(Ooh yes it's good to be the king)
Well it was good while it lasted
(We can be sure about one thing)
(Ooh La La)
(Mais oui, it's good to be the king)
It's good to be the king!

Darius Kadivar

A Better Idea Benny ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

You Nailed it Ben, Revolutions Suck.

That's Why I suggest a Restoration ... ;0)






Best article by Ben ;)

by Mehdi on

I think a good question to ask ourselves is why does it ever become necessary to change a regime with the use of force? If a regime was installed to serve its people then what happened that now all of a sudden the people need to resort to force in order to correct that regime? And if that regime was not installed to serve its people, then why did people install such a regime in the first place? Or, maybe we should wonder who installed that regime, if it wasn't the people. And then when we consider foreful removal or modification of a regime, why should it be difficult? A regime usually is supported by its people and that's where it draws its power from. If people don't support it, then why is it so powerful that makes it very hard to remove/correct? If the people are so "righteous" then how come they are not in control? If the "regime" is so bad, then how could it have any power? Anyway, I can come up with many of such questions. :-)


iteresting article Ben

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

interesting article Ben, unlike past few times I can't give you a hard time! well said Ben:
"How can we create the right atmosphere for Iran to achieve this goal ... It is indeed a fight that must be waged but in an intelligent and fruitful manner rather than blindly and hatefully."


Correction ...

by Medaad Taraash (not verified) on

Ben Madadi


by Ben Madadi on

Interesting ;) Something slightly similar to Eliot Spitzer's case!



by Pissed Off (not verified) on

Dear Ben,

Please read the following and tell me if this is Revolutionary or Evolutionary!


Orgymen and Women of the World Unite!