30 YEARS
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Revolution is not dead
13-Feb-2009
Thirty years ago, during the several months past, my generation was restructuring social life in Iran, breaking down government doors previously impervious to people's demands, evicting a dictatorial bunch of idiots who had been imposed on us in 1953, in a coup inspired in the U.K. and carried out by the CIA.
And so it was, thirty years ago, during these very months past, that we stormed ministries, prisons and government buildings, sat down in school yards, refused to go to or teach classes, went on strike in factories, oil refineries and petrochemical plants, marched in the streets in hundreds, then thousands, and soon in hundreds of thousands.
The revolution had such a force that even in the most laidback towns, like Shiraz, people started taking to the streets in the tens and hundreds of thousands. In the famously mellow town of our beloved poets Sadi and Haafez, where martial law was declared last and lifted first, I saw hundreds of thousands in the streets and it was a sight to behold.
Back in those days thirty years ago, we were storming SAVAK buildings after pitch battles, some lasting hours some days, finding instruments of torture and files, files and more files. All those files that our rulers had indeed been keeping: on us, on our friends and classmates, our fathers, brothers, sisters, cousins and more. Those files, the cumulative result of diligent work, of years of training by the Israeli Mossad agents bringing the Shah's ability for secret information gathering up to par.
All those files that, just as swiftly as they were being unearthed, were trucked away to the mosques. For safe keeping they said. But, some knew better. Soon, those files would be added to. Soon, those files would be swallowed up by a far greater secret service that the theocrats had in mind.
Yes, truckloads of those files were quickly hurried to the mosques. A regime we did not see clearly -- or rather, a state of affairs we refused to believe was forming right in front of our very eyes -- was creeping slowly into formation, moving steady, gleeful and quietly smirking, ready to make the final leap, which it did soon enough.
Must hand it to them; the mullahs, these ruling class ideologues with a resume of sharing power running longer than a thousand years, successfully blind-sighted much of the left.
In Iran, we have a very telling and popular expression for 'being cheated' or 'burned', in cases where something honestly and deservedly belonging to someone gets stolen or taken away in an unfair fashion. The expression is: it [the stolen item] was 'eaten by the mullah' ('mollah-khor shod'). Popular street language that has traveled through the ages and generations more often than not carries lessons bitterly learned.
Our generation, by force of necessity, came to learn this socio-linguistic lesson bitterly, painfully and at a huge cost. No shame in saying it. We carried out a revolution with everybody else in the country. We became humans just like everybody else. We did our fighting and got our butts kicked. The fight is not over, though, and will not be any time soon. We are still here and still doing what we can, and the next generation of socialists inside the country has picked up beautifully where we got beat, imprisoned, executed or driven out of the country.
But, we learned and proved something that cannot be taken away. It is a lesson that puts the deepest fears in any dictatorial regime. We proved that it is possible to get rid of tyrants. Sure, it's easy when the armed forces step aside. True, but there is a lesson there, too: befriend the armed forces and make them your own! We proved how hollow Government was without the armed forces standing on its side to back up its lies, its bullying and irrationalities.
Thirty years ago right around these past months and the months to come, we didn't just take to the street. We took the street.
We turned the sidewalks into abundant libraries of literature previously banned. No longer were we bound by dictatorial rules banning books, a form of stupidity verging on insanity, dictating that reading a book like Bread and Wine (by Ignazio Silone) should land you in jail, served up with harsh interrogation methods available for the imbibers of such an extreme revolutionary manual.
I finally read the book in English when I was a student in England, not quite getting its full significance since I didn't know the historical background (a condition shared by all those millions who were banned from reading the same book during the Shah's dictatorship). I did not see all the fuss. Surely, a dictator should have been far more worried by really significant problems shaking the foundations of his little 'kingdom'!
* * *
After shaking off the Shah, we the Iranian people, everybody, had the streets. For a while.
It started to be take away soon enough, though, and by large chunks. First attacks targeted minority nationalities in Turkmenistan and particularly in Kurdistan. Then came the attacks on women, in the form of introduction of mandatory hejab (Islamic cover) and the backward 'reform' (legal regression to early 20th century Iranian laws) of family laws that eradicated a whole host of rights previously granted to women; social rights such as voting, and rights as married spouses and mothers in cases of divorce. These regressive reforms by the new regime set the women's rights back many decades, and were naturally opposed by a majority of women especially in urban areas. Their fight continues to this day, and will do so for a long time to come.
After the overthrow of the monarchy, there was naturally a public arena opened up by the revolutionary leap made by the people. The old-timers knew and warned that a fiercer dictatorship was in the offing, and perhaps had foreseen hints of it in more detailed horror, I am sure, but somewhere in the back of everybody's mind there were suspicions that what we were experiencing in that one-year between the overthrow of the Shah and the total consolidation of the new regime -- a period of what I would call absolute political freedom -- was just too good to last long.
The attacks started to widen in scope. At the time the attacks started picking up, I was a first year university student in Shiraz, and was a supporter of the Marxist left organization, Fedayeen Khalq. Soon, we faced a situation where our demonstrations were disrupted and attacked by Hezbollahi vigilantes, already in formation. Whereas previously, in the forward leap to overthrow the monarchy, people had indulged greedily and joyously in absolute unity of purpose and will, the deep abyss and walls separating the secularists and the religionists were being chiseled out in front of us, and, as our demonstrations would witness, those attacks would become more frequent, more violent.
This war of beating back the left and dispersing our forces, and not letting us gain any deep roots, started early, only a few months into the new revolutionary government, a wide coalition of religionists, nationalists and religious-oriented liberals. Leftists like myself can surely remember many an occasion, when peddling leftist papers in working class neighborhoods, while setting up sidewalk shop, being shown the way out of the neighborhood after being relieved of our newspapers, not to be read but all torn up or burned right in front of us. The beating was optional and dependent mostly on how cooperative we were in leaving.
As leftist demonstrators, we soon found that along our rally routes, we should expect to face well organized contingents of very energetic, very hard looking, mostly lumpen proletarian vigilantes, backed with deliveries of truck loads of bricks to be thrown at us and at our banners for nationality rights, women's rights, workers' rights, freedom of expression and against new laws banning one after another of our newly gained rights.
These skirmishes would widen and broaden until there was the final assault, which was inaugurated by the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, an event whose importance in the consolidation of the theocracy cannot be over-emphasized.
Some months after that, in March of 1980, about two weeks after I, pushed persistently by parental foresight, had left the country, the new regime shut down all universities, strongholds of leftist organizing. They would remain closed for two years, during which all leftists were systematically pursued and silenced one way or another. The arrests, tortures and summary executions followed.
The final plank in the consolidation of the new regime came as a gift from Saddam Hussain, whose armies invaded Iran in September 1980. Imam Khomeini, the Supreme Leader of the religionists, in fact, declared the war as a gift from god. The Iran-Iraq war was on, and any opposition to the new regime could be branded as treason. More arrests, tortures and summary executions would follow.
The circle of the new religious state's intrusive authorities kept widening until every form of a civil society's daily and hourly behavior had a sanctioned manual issued for it. In the words of Shamloo (1925-2000), our greatest contemporary poet, writer and journalist, in a poem on the intrusiveness of the religionists' rules of conduct, which look into every private space they shouldn't: "They smell your breath, lest you have said, 'I love you!'"
* * *
The crimes committed by the Islamic Republic against the people of Iran started from the earliest stages of the regime's life. It started with the graveyard-shift kangaroo 'courts' that tried, and executed by the next morning, the civilian and military leaders of the previous regime. This was a crime since it is the people (not just a posse of religious vigilantes headed by a mullah) who had the right, the fundamental right in any revolution, to try previous leaders for accountability.
People, not a posse deputized by the neighborhood mullah or Imam, had the sovereign right to try the leaders of Shah's regime, overthrown by the people. The real and meaningful objective of any such trial is not, and must not be, revenge. The objective is to get a detailed account of all the crimes committed by the previous regime, so as to make sure no future government can repeat those crimes. But, the way the new regime dealt with those 'trials', no enlightenment came of them. Only blood.
The Islamic Republic's crimes against the people continued when it started its campaign of terror against all opposition in all spheres, imprisoning thousands based purely on political affiliations; torturing people with impunity, executing hundreds after phony 'trials', in which no right of attorney was ever considered. Those imprisoned and executed included people who did not even directly oppose the new religious state. The Tudeh Pary, for example, the most rightwing of the leftist parties, stayed loyal to the new state and even collaborated with its security forces, identifying other leftists. But, even they, after their services were no longer needed, came under the blade.
The persecuted thoughts were not limited to the realm of politics. Members of the Bahai faith, a minority sect of Islam created in the 19th century in Iran, were likewise pursued.
Other crimes of the regime includes the constant and systematic attack on women's rights and freedoms, including the suspension of their right to initiate divorce or have child custody, the suspension of their right to travel (regardless of their father, husband or some other male relative having given them permission), halving of the worth of women's court testimony, halving of damages permitted in a law suit, halving of a woman's inheritance, and the barbaric introduction of stoning to death in cases of adultery.
The Islamic Republic's crimes against our people includes also a most ghastly case of an en-masse execution of hundreds of political prisoners in the summer of 1988, and the mass burial of the bodies in Khavaran grave site, in south Tehran. Ever since the summer of 1988, the families of political prisoners who were summarily killed extra-judicially have been demanding to be given exact details of the executions and places of burial of their loved ones. To no avail.
Not only has the Iranian government not pursued any legal actions against those involved in the mass killings of the political prisoners in the summer of 1988, starting in January of this year, the government has started a project even more ominous and sinister. According to Iranian human rights activists inside and outside Iran, and according to Amnesty International (see: www.amnesty.org), starting in early-to-mid-January 2009, the government began moving tons of earth onto the Khavaran grave site, covering the graves with a thick layer of earth, with trees being planted every two or three meters. In other words, the Iranian government is now attempting to literally cover up a key site (evidence) of one of its most heinous crimes. This is the mullahs' gift, on this thirtieth anniversary of the revolution, to the families of all political prisoners.
That is sadly one of the legacies of the national uprising that took place in Iran thirty years ago, the legacy of how a revolution was stolen, and how a new dictatorship has been attempting to bury the gains of a popular revolution.
Thirty years ago these past months and for several more to come, we were free. We were free to read whatever we wanted. We were free to write and say whatever we wanted. We freely printed and handed out fliers with whatever message or information about a gathering we wished to announce to the world, unafraid of a secretive police that would snatch us in the middle of the night to dark dungeons to torture us. In the aftermath of the overthrow of the Shah, we held impromptu street discussions on social subjects that mattered to us, we deliberated on social forces affecting us. We held street parliaments, debating those willing to give us an argument.
In those days, we did not feel fearful facing the religionists, because, unlike now, back then we were equals, both equally human, equally rightful to have our opinions and political thoughts, both equally justified to have a say in the political matters of our lives. Certain religious-minded thugs would attack our demonstrations, but in presenting our ideas and thoughts and in an argument we were unafraid. We had just carried out a revolution and kicked out a most arrogant state, exactly to assert our right to free speech, to freedom of assembly and to form our political organizations, to freedom from state harassment based purely on our political ideas. Who was anybody to want to drive us back to the same fearful corner, just because of our political thoughts? We were righteous and we were free.
Thirty years ago we had a moment. An opening. Universities were used by political organizations to hold free classes, in which we learned about any ideas we had been denied the right to even study. We were learning. We were growing.
Building democracy and democratic institutions requires not only the absolute freedoms we had just gained. But such an immense social task requires time, too. Time that we thought we would have plenty of. Or, rather, time that we wished we had plenty of.
To a lot of Iranians it became clear soon that we were not to be given much time to develop much of anything resembling democracy.
A vote-producing machinery, a purely perfunctory facade, was soon erected by the new regime, one in which the public would be given vote-casting opportunities, with tightly narrow political range limited to the religious right; but absolutely no real democracy. The parliament (or, majlis) may pass laws, but those laws are subject to review by two other extra-parliamentary bodies (Guardian Council and Expediency Council), and finally by the Supreme Leader (the faqhih), rendering the parliament a farce. To make parliament a further farce, numerous ideological requirements, including explicitly stated requirements for holding a very narrow definition of Islam as your guiding ideology, are applied to determine eligibility and the right to run as the representative of a community. And this fraud is sold internationally as holding 'elections'.
So, we had a moment, but the moment was stolen. The thieves are still in possession of our jewels. We, however, have not died out. Worse for the mullahs, those who hate their rule constitute an absolute majority of the Iranian population. Yes, indeed, we have not gone away. The thieves may be in power, but everybody knows they are thieves. They have no credibility, and that is why they have to employ vast networks of terror against any existing or potential opposition, even if the opposition is merely in thought.
As Iranians, we have had strands of socialist thinking in our own local, historical consciousness in the form of Mazdak (died c. 525), a popular and true maverick leader of old who advocated for the equality of all and for fair distribution of all wealth. This is simply a positive affirmation that socialist desires are historically just and have existed in different forms and expressions throughout the ages in different regions of the world, expressed by people wishing to establish societies without the horrible destructions associated with class-based societies.
And so, on this thirtieth anniversary of an immense uprising that was suppressed, we look forward to a future when we the Iranian people will be free from all forms of dictatorship, when we have gender equality, when we have social justice, when our thoughts will not be subject to persecution, when our mouths will not be smelled by religious police in search of evidence of sin. And we look forward to a time when clerical tyranny can be looked back at, with rejoicing sighs of relief at the passing of that horror.
The Iranian Revolution of 1978 is not dead. Long Live the Revolution!
Reza Fiyouzat can be reached at: rfiyouzat@yahoo.com
He keeps a blog at: revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com
| Recently by Reza Fiyouzat | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Kayvan Sabeghi: War Vet Seriously Injured | 5 | Nov 06, 2011 |
| Nuke Plants? Please! | 41 | Mar 16, 2011 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Good Article
by MiNeum71 on Thu Mar 26, 2009 05:37 AM PDTThanks for writing this piece.
To anonym7: what a lot of bull
by Ignorant finder (not verified) on Wed Feb 18, 2009 07:05 AM PSTI bet those Iranians you've talked to either have a pro-regime agenda like yourself or have absolutely no idea what a nuke is, let alone a nuke in the hand of criminal mullahs.
Besides, IRI does not need any external help, since it is doing a wonderful job of destroying Iran all by itself.
Anonym 7 joon
by BK (not verified) on Tue Feb 17, 2009 01:16 PM PSTIRI doesn't need to "allow American and Israeli extremists and war criminals (AIPAC, neocons, etc.) destroy Iran" because it is doing that pretty well all by itself.
Fortunately for us
by ads (not verified) on Mon Feb 16, 2009 02:06 PM PSTFortunately for us infidels, we don't live in a world defined by Darl-harb vs. darl-Islam. Your hollow arguments may sound plausible in a vaccum of your Islamic world view but it won't wash in the reality-based scheme of things.
The IRI is not a sovereign entity per se. It is there to further a religious/political cause against the current world order. It does not accept hte current world order and has officially declared its intention as such in many ways.
Don't fool yourself or others by repetitive and biased arguments if you truly don't want war upon Iran unless you agree with the Islamic Republic's manifest destiny.
I wish Iran total success fred!
by Anonym7 (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 07:13 PM PSTFred says: "you intentionally left out the most important party from your list of those that cannot tolerate a nuke packing Islamist republic."
Fred, the only "Iranians" I know of that "cannot tolerate" a nuclear Iran are in this site! I have talked to Iranians that are indifferent to this or they don't think it is worth the suffering, but I haven't yet seen an actual Iranian who says he can't tolerate a nuclear Iran!
Sorry to disappoint you Fred, but the main reason I personally support Iran is because it has so far deterred U.S and Israel and has prevented them from destroying Iran. I neither agree with IRI's management of economy nor do I care about its ideology! I however wish IRI total success in implementing deterrence in any way possible.
Nuke brand Viagra
by Fred on Sun Feb 15, 2009 06:09 PM PST“The crux of the issue about Iran's nuclear program is, in my opinion, as follows: If Iran has the ability to make the bomb on a short notice, it becomes unattackable. That is not something that the US and Israel can tolerate. They want to be the hegemone(SIC) of the Middle East. “
So the survival of the Islamist republic, in the jargon of the Islamists “Iran”, and its hegemonic ambitions are the crux of the matter and not all that jazz about scientific progress and the rest of the nonsense the Islamists push all the time.
Haji you intentionally left out the most important party from your list of those that cannot tolerate a nuke packing Islamist republic. The Iranians, for if your dream becomes reality, their dream of emancipating themselves from the yoke of your Islamist brethren will remain a dream unfulfilled.
The crux of the issue bluntly put is, you want to provide a serial rapist with lifetime supply of Viagra to use against shackled victims.
ads
by Mammad on Sun Feb 15, 2009 05:11 PM PSTNo, I do not agree with Panetta. In addition to the fact that Panetta did not say what he had "seen," the reason is what Mohammed ElBaradei has said many time:
"We cannot measure the intent of a country. What we can measure and monitor and inspect are facts on the ground."
There is not a shred of evidence that Iran is making a bomb. There is not a shred of evidence that it is going to make a bomb.
Does that mean that Iran will absolutely positively not try to make the bomb? No, of course.
Does that mean that the enrichment program in Natanz does not have a security dimension? Of course not. Any time a nation has such a program, there is a security dimension to it. Examples:
1. Japan. In the early 1960s, Japan decided to set up full enrichment program, to supply fuel for its nuclear reactors, but also give it the possibility of making the bomb on short notice. Japan was worried about China and North Korea.
2. South Africa: With Israel's help, the apartheid regime of SA not only set up the full nuclear cycle, but also made 6 bombs. The bombs were dismantled later on, when it became clear that the bombs do not bring internal security to a nation, but the technology and know-how are there.
3. South Korea: SK even experimented making the bomb, in full violations of its NPT obligations. No protest by the US, of course.
4. Taiwan: Same as South Korea. No protest by the US, of course!
5. Argentina: It was worried about Brazil. So, it set up full nuclear research and development.
6. Brazil, same as in (3), but in reverse. Note that Brazil's enrichment program is run by its NAVY, i.e., its military. So, there is no doubt about its military aspect. Note also that Brazil has limited the IAEA access to its nuclear sites, in violation of its NPT obligations. But, there is no noise by the US about it.
7. Two European consortia, each consisting of several European nations. They enrich uranium, but they can, on a very short notice, make the bomb.
The crux of the issue about Iran's nuclear program is, in my opinion, as follows: If Iran has the ability to make the bomb on a short notice, it becomes unattackable. That is not something that the US and Israel can tolerate. They want to be the hegemone of the Middle East.
Mammad
Sorry to disappoint you Rokgoo!
by Anonym7 (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 05:02 PM PSTRokgoo, although I believe IRI has done a very good job in not allowing American and Israeli extremists and war criminals (AIPAC, neocons, etc.) destroy Iran, I disagree strongly with IRI's neglect of poor and I am not a Muslim. .... your assumptions are therefore very invalid. Sorry to disappoint you!
Mammad: Do you disagree with
by ads (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 04:19 PM PSTMammad: Do you disagree with Panetta?
U.S. now sees Iran as pursuing nuclear bomb
In a reversal since a 2007 report, U.S. officials expect the Islamic Republic to reach development milestones this year.
"Obama's nominee to serve as CIA director, Leon E. Panetta, left little doubt about his view last week when he testified on Capitol Hill. "From all the information I've seen," Panetta said, "I think there is no question that they are seeking that capability."
The language reflects the extent to which senior U.S. officials now discount a National Intelligence Estimate issued in November 2007 that was instrumental in derailing U.S. and European efforts to pressure Iran to shut down its nuclear program.
As the administration moves toward talks with Iran, Obama appears to be sending a signal that the United States will not be drawn into a debate over Iran's intent.
"When you're talking about negotiations in Iran, it is dangerous to appear weak or naive," said Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear weapons expert and president of the Ploughshares Fund, an anti-proliferation organization based in Washington.
Cirincione said the unequivocal language also worked to Obama's political advantage. "It guards against criticism from the right that the administration is underestimating Iran," he said."
//www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/mide...
Tele-Haji
by Fred on Sun Feb 15, 2009 04:01 PM PSTYou have every right to think about me and my motive(s) as you wish. Rest assured your opinion in this regard is of least importance to me.
You defend the Islamist republic’s illegal pursuit of full cycle nuclear activity knowing that it gives your Islamist brethren the leg up to get their bloody hands on nuke.
Yes I’ve read your latest article as I read many articles, what you simply refuse to get is not everyone is as gullible as you want them to be. Iran and Iranians most certainly are entitled to all that there is in the world plus some, lord knows they have paid for it. But that entitlement does not mean handing your Islamist republic, their tormentor, a life insurance in the form of nuclear arm.
You keep talking about Iran’s rights under NPT, you could not be more correct. But I’m not talking about Iran, rather the Islamist republic. And as much as you try to camouflage it they are two separate entities with conflicting interests.
The Islamist republic that does not abide by the human rights convention which it is a signatory to has forfeited its right to benefit from other international treaties.
BTW do you think beforehand about what you are going to say, because it came across as a Khamenei-toxicated basiji brute's defense of the Islamist republic, the guy from Europe was spot on!
Fredo
by Mammad on Sun Feb 15, 2009 03:03 PM PSTYou responded EXACTLY as I thought you would. Hiding behind some bogus name, ranting, attacking, discharging your venom, and manifesting hatred of Muslims. You simply do not have either the B word or the G word.
But, just to test your depth of knowledge, and sincerity: Let's take another approach. Take my latest article on Iran's nuclear program (you should know it, because you constantly brag about knowing everything about me!!), critique it, and post here as an article under your bogus name, Fredo. Expose me, and demonstrate not only your depth of knowledge about the nuclear issue (a big 0), but also your bogus claim that you attack me only for my stands on Iran's nuclear program.
IranDokht: I am beginning to think that there is actually something about what you said about Fredo!
Mammad
No Benjamin
by Anonym7 (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 02:26 PM PSTNo he didn't answer my question! He just asked a number of irrelevant questions. I simply asked him why he thinks Fred and Mammad have much in common? ...... anyhow my question is as much unrelated to the topic as Fred's original rant about Iran's nuclear program!
Very well said WSJ
by Benyamin on Sun Feb 15, 2009 02:01 PM PSTI like your comment in response to Anonym 7 no offence Anonym 7but it was a good response!
Revolution eats his own children
by not not anonymous (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:30 PM PST""According to the Islamic Republic's Islamic Assembley website, the war veteran seen in this picture set himself alight outside the Majlis building earlier today, after his Majlis representative repeatedly refused to see him.
The website did not even say what the war veteran's name was, because of the extents of his injuries he is not expected to live.
A son of Iran who risked it all to defend against the aggression of Saddam's forces, could no longer put up with the officials who benefited from his courage and sacrifice.
تفو بر تو اي چرخ گردون تفو
//parlemannews.com/?n=68
Anonymous 7
by Rokgoo (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:43 AM PSTWhatever your real name, real motives, real background, you are a full-job propagandist of Mullahs'regime on this site. Out of shame or arrangement with your mentors, you attempt to introduce yourself as neutral Iranian, sorry for you, you canot fool us anymore. We have seen many comments from tou and your likes on this site to recognize your mentors. You are a part of IRI's propaganda machinery.
Civil society
by Ajam (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 09:47 AM PSTA democratic revolution, in addition to convictions and zeal, requires political awareness of the masses involved as well as accountability of its leadership. Unfortunately, that was not the case in 1979. In a climate where having political ideas was considered sabotage and punishable by jail terms and torture. At s time when Shah couldn’t even tolerate monarchist parties (e.g. Iran-e Novin) that did not entirely share his every view, hence shut them down. A time when political dissent either came in the form of guerilla warfare or in religious sermons, the only political alternative was for the two to combine. Indeed, it was the Shah who laid the groundwork for the 1979 revolution.
When push came to shove, Iranians rallied around the lowest common denominator (religious leadership) to overthrow Shah’s dictatorship. This was as far as our people's political experience (or lack thereof) could allow them to go. Naturally, a nation kept in the dark for 37 years not only could not steer the revolution on its path to democracy, but couldn’t hold the religious leadership accountable toward the realization of its primary goals.
A move toward democracy requires political awareness and knowledge, but it also flourishes through grass roots movements, NGOs, social organizations... which practically did not exist in pre-1979 Iran. Similarly, in Iran of today, political zeal and public rage alone could not bring about democracy on their own. Until the foundations of a civil society are laid in Iran, the path to democracy will remain an arduous one. In other words the more political and social openings there are, the better the chances are of moving towards democracy. Violent attempts at a regime change would only prolong such a process!
anonym7: I did elaborate but
by wsj (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 09:25 AM PSTanonym7: I did elaborate but somehow the moderators did not post my response.
Here's my second attempt:
As I said before, I have no evidence that Fred is part of AIPAC. Fred can easily accuse you of being on the payroll of the IRI's VEVAK or SAVAMA, or NIAC or CASMII or on the payroll of toudeh party funded by Russia.
Who determines which one is worse?
I hate the commies but I can't stand REZA2 and his idiotic gibberish.
Does loving or not loving commies or Reza a pre-requisite to determine your love for your country?
Do you think being Jewish Iranian automatically translate into "hating" Iran?
Do I need to love the lefties in order to be considered a patriot?
Does loving Reza Pahlavi automatically makes you a traitor or a non-patriot?
Does loving IRI translates into a love for Iran?
Does not loving IRI translate into loving Iran?
Revo is not dead
by Lucifercus (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 02:55 AM PSTand Velvet Revolution impossible in Iran
our demonstrations were disrupted and attacked by Hezbollahi vig
by Luciferous (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:37 AM PSTour demonstrations were disrupted and attacked by Hezbollahi vigilantes.........and now we as deserteurs can not participate in the achievements of the honorable Iranian Nation and the blessing of their Islamic Revolution. How sad.
The coming revolution will be by democratic patriots who will..
by Faribors Maleknasri M.D. (not verified) on Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:31 AM PST..manage the action from LA; WDC; NY; with a little help of their freinds the imperialists living in those areas.
Good Luck. However the Islamic Revolution which was made by the honorable Iranian nation 1978/79 will be stil alive. Over many centuries. Lokk it up in jame jam. Try to realize the realities.
Greeting
There’s no reason for hostility
by Bijan A M on Sat Feb 14, 2009 06:12 PM PSTFacts are facts and should be accepted as such. If there is ever going to be a revolution (which I believe there will be), Islam (or any other religion) will have no role in it. You don’t have to belong to a specific faith before your cries for freedom becomes legitimate.
State of Israel makes things a little more complicated and unorthodox. The cry of the Jews for freedom and escape from persecution, prejudices and discriminations and the Palestinian’s yearning for independence and self determination.
There has to be a common ground to come to terms with co-existence. After all, both sides, ideologically are after the same objective, i.e. “SURVIVAL”.
Again, IMHO, IRI is concealing this common ground (for co-existence). Therefore, it is my conclusion that: there will be no peace in ME until the coming of Iranian revolution (within the next century and beyond, hopefully much earlier).
wsj, can you elaborate?
by Anonym7 (not verified) on Sat Feb 14, 2009 05:46 PM PSTI am not sure what Fred stands for or where he is from. My guess is that Fred is either from Israel (Jewish Iranian) or works for AIPAC or works for AIPAC through the Monarchist camp (Reza2 camp), ...., something along those lines...., hates Muslims, hates leftists, ...
Can you elaborate why Mammad and Fred have much in common?
BTW, I have been around a long time and I have read most of the comments written by the two of them...
Fred, Mammad: What is going
by wsj (not verified) on Sat Feb 14, 2009 04:47 PM PSTFred, Mammad:
What is going on tomorrow?
Why are the two of you acting like teenagers? Why so hostile toward each other?
I'm sure both of you can re-direct your energies toward more constructive ways of doing whats best for Iran. Despite your disagreements on many issues you both have one thing in common: Both of you love your country in your own peculiar way. Stop only seeing the differences in each other. you share much more than you think.
it takes a lot of courage
by IRANdokht on Sat Feb 14, 2009 04:47 PM PSTto challenge someone anonymously! yes that was sarcastic, sorry...
Dear Fred,
did you sign the letter? did you use your own name or even Fred@iranian.com?
I am just curious as to what extend you are fighting the IRI to sound so righteous and point the blame finger at people who have spoken against IRI many times and even signed such letters with their own names.
mashalla roo keh nist
IRANdokht
Bijan & Mohammad
by Mehrnaz (not verified) on Sat Feb 14, 2009 04:29 PM PSTMany thank to both and good wishes.
Dream on
by Fred on Sat Feb 14, 2009 04:28 PM PSTNice try doc but no cigar. You are challenged in every venue that you attempt to ply your pro-Islamist republic wares. It does not have to be by the same person, as it will not be tomorrow and has not been on numerous other occasions. But that never ending attempt to connect your detractors to being against Muslims or Islam has not and will not work. Even dummies know what the penalty for such irresponsible behavior is. As to my real identity, dream on, your Islamist republic has too much blood on its hands and too many have fallen for such trap. Sorry!
Fredo
by Mammad on Sat Feb 14, 2009 04:10 PM PSTYoure challenge is most welcome.
Write your response to my articles about Iran's nuclear program under your full name, try to publish it in the same places as I do, and then we will have a debate in the open. That is a true challenge, if your sole concern is about my support of Iran's getting its hand on nuclear weapon (which I have never done).
I do not believe even for a second that you are capable of doing it. I do not believe you have the knowledge or the ability to write even a coherent short response to what I write about Iran's nuclear program, good enough to publish it where I do. But, prove me wrong. I would love to see that. I would love to see your arguments. I would love to believe that you are who you claim you are, namely, someone who is solely concerned about Iran.
Otherwise, hiding behind a pseudo name in a site where I do not even publish anything other than commenting reveals what your so-called challenge really is: attacks on someone purely because he is a practicing Muslim and proud of it. I can stop coming to this site, and continue doing what I do. Then, your bogus challenge will disappear in thin air.
So: put up or shut up.
Mammad
Dr. No
by Fred on Sat Feb 14, 2009 03:15 PM PSTYou are challenged and will be challenged for the sole reason of your activities in furtherance of the Islamist republic’s chance of getting its murderous hands on nuke. Your sob story is a clumsy effort to shut your detractors up. Not going to work.
To Anonym7
by Benyamin on Sat Feb 14, 2009 02:51 PM PSTI appriciate you read my comment, and as I said communism is faild. And I can accept your position on the LEFTISTS at the time, but it doesn`t take away anything from Mullah capitalizing on the oppositions mistekaes. And as you stated(and I have never heard of that so that was a news to me) They did some name calling prehaps out of frustration or else but still Mullahs capitalized on that and won the game so far. BTW, I am extremely agitated by MKO when they took part in Iraq-Iran war and I was/am very disappointed in them for what they did.
They have played their cards wrong in so many levels.
Regards
Benyamin
Bijan
by Mammad on Sat Feb 14, 2009 02:51 PM PSTI have been saying exactly the same thing as you say to Mehrnaz. But, because I have said I am a practicing Muslim, I am always attacked by a tiny minority here. You are a Jew and, therefore, will not be attacked for saying what you said.
Yes, a revolution will and must come from within. Yes, people should be educated about it. Yes, non-governmental organizations, true political parties, and other elements of a true civil society should grow from within. Yes, the threat of, or actual military attacks, on Iran will postpone everything. Yes, the leadership should emerge from within. It is then, and only then, that we will have a true democratic revolution.
My only difference with you is: I am not sure when such a revolution comes, it will be peaceful or bloody.
Mammad