Iranian of the Day

FYI/Ziba Kallam on Reza Shah's Accomplishments and Patriotism

Reza Shah's achievements According to Sadegh Zibakalam March 2010 :

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HmjqgtUs48

What's Going on with the IRI Intelligenstia these days ? Are they Doubting in the Very Foundations of the Islamic Republic and the Legitimacy of their Revolution ?

LOL

people hate IRI according to him then!

He talked about French intelectuals and how they made impressions to the Iranian counter parts because of the similarity in the power structure of their countries. What has changed in the power structure in Iran?

It is still the same as before, the state is still holder of religious power.  So according to him it is only natural that in these cases hate towards religion and religious power grows. So it will not matter how much they repress people and send basijis on them, it makes matters worse.

Enlightened creatures

With such and so many enlightened creatures,my only hope is to rely on empirical evidence and to stand under a tree and wait for Thor to strike and save me.

"Love consists of overestimating the difference between one wo{/}man and another. " George Bernard Shaw

No Wonder Prince Ali is against Social Sciences ...

The Iranian Intelligenstia including those closest to the regime like Ziba Kallam ( who called Reza Shah a patriot) are deeply questioning the Islamic Republic's ideological foundations and even the revolution itself in the face of the disastrous 30 years reign of this Turbaned Dynasty.

The French Gave the World the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiFIu_z4dM8

Bahram Moshiri historian on the French Revolution speaks about the British influence notably John Locke on the ideas that shaped the democratic ideas in France:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2opipY5UU

This Revolution only managed to give us The Tozihol Massael:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqXOLUz5U_M

Which Republic like the one we created for ourselves can be proud of such an achievement and still justify any glorious outcome to it's credit for the generations to come? ...

I wish this man well for he took a very brave stand for merely asking the right questions.

The Winds of Change are indeed Blowing ...

The Key now is to see in which direction in the years to come !

دست مریزاد!

دقیقاً بدلیل اشاعهء همین افکار نیست که آقایان مخالف تدریس علوم انسانی و اجتماعی در دانشگاهها هستند؟

اینهاست برداشت ها و تفکّراتی که موجودیّت حاکمیت ایدئولوژی را بزیر سؤال میبرد!

Mohammad Ala

I disagree. Religion doesn't make people do bad.  A true believer will not do bad. Problem is not the religion. It is what people decide to do with religion. It is what they decide to take from the book based on their interpretation, understanding and self interest.  If your logic was true, the communist countries would have been the heaven on earth and the Communists would do no bad. In fact, it is the opposite of your view.  Just as scientists read the same books, some save the world with their science and some destroy it.

I understand being an atheist is the style among some, but they should back it up with logic and not just some mumbo jumbo opinions.

Good people, bad people

Dr. Abdulkarimi poses the question whether or not Islam was inevitable in Iran.  Despite the restrictions that exist in Iran, he has been able to convey his message both in classrooms and on television.

I believe that good people do good things, and bad people do bad things; religion, however, can make good people do bad things.

Translation

I agree the intellectualism was not started naturally in Iran and it was imported.
But, these type of discussions fail to describe our history and if we dont accept that, we will face a lot problems in our political and social lives.
Was Islam a natural occurance for Iran and even Arabs?
It's correct that Iran didn't start Islam but it had the potential for accepting it.
We have to understand intellecutalism and there is not enough efforts in our society to undertand it especially in government.
Intellectualism showed itself in French revolution which was a violent one.
All french intellectuals are against religion.
One of them says i hope i can hang the last king with the last's priest's intestins.
Over there, there is a kind of hatred for power of church. Intellectualism is to deny religion and considering religion to be like a drug.
That type of intellecutalism was entered into Iran.
In England, you had the glorious English revolution.
They thought rights are with people and people's will have to prevail but they didn't stand in front of church.
the king became a protestant and they didn't kill him.
In America you have democracy. there is democray there and the church is formally accepted but the truth is that church is just one voice and
in addition to  that one voice you have other voices.
questioin. Why between all the four examples that i talked about only the French one was entered into Iran?
Because we had a common problem. why in france intellecutals where equal to being against religion?
Because over there the church had their hands in political power. to criticize the political powers they had to criticize the religion.
This same thing was in our history too.
From the Safivie times the religous powers were in the sides of political powers.
The power had two bases: one in monarchy and one in church.
If the mixture of power and religion in the safives and ghajars had not occured then, may be, intellecutalism and puluralim thinking had taken  a
different route in Iran.
And may be we would not be facing a big gap between church and intellectualism today.
Our religous people have not understood that the world has changed a lot. the source of power of religion and the source of modern powers are different.
I dont agree that in the golestan and turkemanchai treaties it wasn't our fault at all and it was all russia's conspiracy.
And the clergy in their fatwa of jihad (lack thereof) didn't set the stage for the influence of forigners.
You can't compare the 4th, 5th, and 6th century which was the climax of our civilization with the safavieh and ghajar dynasties.
Until we criticize ourselves we cant advance.
There is a difference between what we say about our current system and what others are saying about us (in response to the statement that Islamic
revolution is about Spirituality and not what the westerners want)
In all the history before the modern times i have not seen a difference between an Islam for the weak or an islam for the powerful. (again in response)
I dont believe what the religous people believe that we have a religous history and a secular history.
There is only one history and its sacred. The history has to be based on existance. We always say our history and their history.
One problem that we have which needs to be discussed seriously is that we mix the customary history and the sacred history.
We mix modern history and existantial history.
When you are talking about religion and Revelation you are talking about existantialism.
in no way you could show them in parts of the customary history.
I am sitting here and the fact that an angel is speaking to me or the devil is talking to me is an interpretation.
The customary history can only say that Abdolkarimi is sitting here.
You can not with the help of sacred concepts interpret historical concepts.
When there is a mixup of myth and history then we have all the problems with our history that you see.
Our society has a lot of problems and we are becoming weaker every day.
In a society where there is a gap between political power and intellectualism people will not have a good fate.
Political power without intellectualism will reach populism.
An intellictual that works outside the power will be isolated and his ideas can not take shape.
In my openion we have to reconsider our intellectual and our traditional histories.
We have to consider them a cultural fight and not a political or idealogical battle and there is no solution using physical violence.
I hope we can overcome the fight between intellectuals and traditionalists so that our people can have good days ahead of them.

M Dog

You wrote, "I am not sure I understood all what he said"

We are not surprised.

I loved it.  I don't find

I loved it.  I don't find him as anti-Islam, but a sincere intellectual.  Clerics should attend his classes and I think the cleric who was listening to him will. 

DK,  You keep flattering yourself.  You are so much of an intellectual that cannot even answer a simple question.

The question was,  How can anyone (you and your type) speak of democracy and yet defend dictators (Pahlavis) who were forced to Iranians by Foreigners? 

As I said before, some people take only what suits them from the book.  This professor made so many points and the British Monarchy was what you took from it.  What a waste Man/Woman whatever you are.

another thing

be ghole parazit

eeshoon ye jigar dare andazeye ye celul to Evin.

be har hal omidvaram etefaghi baraye in marde shoja bevojood nayad

In hope of a Free, Independent and Secular Iran

Wow

The true face of Mullah against today's modern Persian

"Dumb founded"

A job well done  by the Prof. he questioned the whole regime's survival in less than 9 minutes.

In hope of a Free, Independent and Secular Iran

not sure i understood all what he said

but he outsmarted that cock roach akhond and he could not utter a word.  Perhaps he is beesavad as it comes to all matters other than his worthless Islam.

Is he free now?

Or been imprisoned or threatened? That's all I can think of. 

Good guy

We need a few more people like him on the s&s.

Wow!

The white-wearing cleric was speechless. He could barely respond! His blood must have started boiling.

I hope nothing happens to this Bijan guy!

Wow

How did they let this guy speak in Sedaye Tazvir?

TRULY AMAZING this guy must have been following my blogs ;0))

THANK YOU DAVID STARKEY !! ;0) 

Did I misunderstand or did this guy mention the British Restoration of the Monarchy and it's Glorious Revolution of 1688 as having been a more favorable alternative to the French Secularist Revolution of 1789 ? :

HISTORY FORUM: David Starkey - Return Of The King (5 Parts)

RESTORATION: Britain's 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688 and the 'Bill of Rights'

VIRTUE IN TERROR: Maximilien Robespierre and the Reign of Terror (BBC)

Related Blog:

David Starkey's "Last Word" With Maryam Namazie about Iran and the Monarchy (More4 TV April 19th, 2006)

And Thank You Gormeh Sabzi for posting this interesting Debate !

This is Truly Incredible and Refreshing !

Wow

This is guy is fantastic. If I were in place of the other guy, I would quit my job and pick up drinking and smoking!

ضد قدسی بازی

چهره هاج و واج هم صنف فصل الخطاب دلیل اصلی دشمنی آنها با تدریس علوم انسانی در ایران  است.

ایندست استدلالات مخالف قدسی بازی شارلاتان علی شریعتی است و بدرد بقای نظام پر برکت نمیخورد.   

Islam

Visit this site to know the real Islam : Zandiq