IRAN

The propaganda issue

I think the observers who have talked about the prevailing poverty in those pictures have a good point. I don't think it's a coincidence that these pictures were not published.

In fact, no major coverage of Iran's poverty appeared in any major press right up to the Revolution. Yet, it would have been more than obvious to any traveler or reporter in Iran that serious poverty existed and the wealth gap (induced by an oil embargo ironically opposed by the Shah) in the 70's was corrupting and unsustainable.

One of the many shortcomings of the Pahlavi regime was its wholesale western induced "image management". If Life magazine readers didn't get to see Iranian poverty, neither did the literate classes in Iran. Shah was so single-mindedly concerned about "zaherat" (appearances) that no other voices were tolerated. It created a culture where real information, about real suffering was spread through mosques and secret leftist meetings, which of course gave these institutions credibility and alienated people from the Pahlavi regime even further.

Meanwhile shah spent millions on promotion of himself and Iran as a perfect modern paradise where everyone was happy, nothing was wrong and everything was being fixed. The IRI couldn't hope to reach that level of control today and I'm sure they would want to.

Shah's American advisers, including those in the Iranian Television and SAVAK so OVER-DID the propaganda operations that even today 30 years later we still have brainwashed individuals running around thinking no poverty or social unrest existed under the Shah, a clearly counterfactual claim.

Ultimately, it's useless to "blame" the Shah. The puppet government's existence was owed entirely to the Americans who exiled his father and put him in charge, and then again crushed the opposition and took down Mossadegh and put him in charge. In fact, I argue the American advisors did this a third time when they had the Shah cancel political parties and create the "Rastakhiz", as a pre-emptive move to neutralize the next Mossadegh. They must have believed their own propaganda if they thought that clown show going to pass for "democracy" with the people.

Shah grew up in a cacoon of wealth and privilege. The question isn't "what should he have done", it's clear that a man like that was not capable of understanding his own people or what independence really means. Even if he thought he had noble intentions, which I believe he did, he was too far removed to understand how to act on them. So he relied on Americans and the yes-men corrupt upper class.

I do enjoy the historic nature of these photos. As we mature as a nation and a culture, we will have less and less "feelings" of any kind toward the Pahlavi regime. The sign of progress would be to remember the Pahlavi dynasty as a matter of history, not politics, akin to how the Ghajars are now treated by most Iranian intellectuals.

I am speechless..

It's by far The best photo album I've ever seen on IC!

This image of an old Iran where I wasn't born yet, or too young to remember.

I was born in Shahi, and I still have memories of my childhood in the 60's/70's, but honestly I don't remember at all such a deep poverty.

 I'm speechless...and I am so remorseful, as I remember my late father always telling me about the huge progress that Iran made during the Pahlavis, and I (like any normal teen) never believed him back then. I guess it shows the power of image over memory/word.

Dear SM, Thanks a lot for posting this piece of our history...

Azarin

Keep your political views to yourselves ...

and enjoy the pictures. I personally love the one of the Shah and Soraya in color.

big nerd

Ever noticed the "medals" on Mammali's uniform? For a man who was never a soldier, didn't serve his country's army one day, never shot a gun defending his country, where did he get those medals? In fact there were gun shots twice in his life time in Iran, he fled his "mother land" both times. So, where did the medals come from? For what bravery or heroic action? For what service to his country? Can anyone explain this? Maybe it was for the ability to own ceramic with his own picture on it while kids of Iran were in the streets without shoes, ha?

My dear same ol' Killjoy

You and I agree on a lot of issues, that's why I was surprised to see that my comment was taken the wrong way by no other than my dearest Killjoy!

You said it well. Free thinking is the way. No more justifying the old regime despite the new one. We deserve better.  

IRANdokht

Jamshid jan

I do remember "taghzieh raayegaan" and I also remember that it was given to the kids who didn't need it too. I remember the principal of the private school I went to had to beg kids not to throw the milk boxes on the ground and not to step on them for the thrill of seeing them explode...  what the country needed was more than free snacks.  

Do you remember that our university students couldn't finish a 4 yr degree in less than 7? What was wrong with giving people a little room to voice their opinions? if the students and the intellectuals had been given the space and the freedom to assemble and if the country was not claimed a "single-party" system, the political atmosphere would not have amounted to the chaotic scene of the late 70's.

When I said I was unaware of the reality of our society, I meant it. The first time I ever heard the slogans against Shah, I was horrified and surprised: Why were they wishing him death? Why are these people so "hagh-nashnaas"? I learned about the political issues later when people started speaking up. He let the steam build up to a point of explosion, maybe he didn't know what was done under his name, but that is not an excuse.

Shah could have done better. He could have reached out to the intellectual figures of the time and asked for all the people to help him govern in a better way by involving them in different government branches and offices instead all those big jobs were given to the selected loyals and members of the royal family...  he finally decided to do that at the end when it was too late, costing us a great figure like Dr Bakhtiar.

Shah knew he owed his reign to the West. He lost a gamble when he stood up to those powers and headed the OPEC while fighting to raise the price of oil. He might be seen as a hero for taking such "maverick" actions, but in reality, he did that because he was buying into the illusion of his own might. He risked all our lives and the future generations of Iran and he lost.

He started that crusade while he was losing popularity amongst his own people, he was blind to the human rights violations he was being accused of. He was out of touch: instead of becoming a popular figure and showing his people that he cared, he threw the most elegant and elaborate party and did not even allow one iranian to participate. What kind of message you send to your own people when you look oblivious to the losses of the farmers due to the drought, when you have started industrializing the country but all the factories are assembly lines for foreign goods?

The emphasis on glorifying his own reign as the King of the Kings was wrong when the people needed him to support the country. What was the point of such jewel crusted "taaj-gozaari" when you are the head of a struggling country?  what was the glamor of being the "shahanshah" of the people who didn't even have plumbing in their homes?  You say the plans for the villages were drawn during his time, why not put a priority on the people instead of all the glamour?

Our Shah-banoo was an artist. She was a sweet lady who had the best intentions and was kind to people, but our artists were suffering. The financial support of the royal family was going abroad. Our film making was a joke. Nobody could make a movie that had substance without fearing persecution. We have great artists who are fighting the IRI regime now and making world class movies. If you watch anything from back then, you feel bored and embarrassed.  That's not a big point in an argument but it's an indication of how things were.

I am not trying to change your mind, only explaining what I found out about the way things were. It would have been nice if the modernization and all the advances were taking place at the same rate and speed as in Reza khan's time. Maybe then we wouldn't have had to deal with these criminals now!

So please allow me to say that he could have done better! Sorry this one became way too lengthy (oops)

IRANdokht

NAMAK NASHNAS

Jamshid thank you for your whole heartedly questions; as simples as it gets. we can not exept from our leaders to bring us cheloo kabab every day on our tables.

Yes, your're unfortunately right :)

Have to go through this ...

we did not deserve prosperity

by Anonymous xyz (not verified) on Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:37 PM PST

IRI has little to show on its own for 30 years of domination and colonization of iran. Islam has far less to show for 1400 years of colonization and cultural insult of iranians.

That is why, islamists hang on to legacies and achievements of pahlavis or its natural growth to muddy the waters. They have nothing else to show.

Isn't that ironic that the top three universities in iran were founded by pahlavis.

Isn't that ironic the participation of girls in education and job market originated by pahlavis, when they required girls to attend school despite clergy opposition -- remember throwing acid on the face of hejab-less girls during shah's regime.

The film industry established during pahlavis. Obtaining prizes (like that of film Gaav) is also a legacy of pahlavis.

Airport, roads, railroads, banking system, modern army, ... and on and on, are all legacies of pahlavis that we then did not care about but today the iranians within see everyday in front of their eyes.

IRI has nothing to show, except for destructions, raping of young girls, torture of the yout, executions, legalized prostitution, rampant bribery, and looting of the country. Nothing, zilch, zero.

That is why islamists want to take credit for what pahlavis did. Those IRI incompetent idiots could not even finish the half-finished reactor in 30 years, or drill an oil well, or build a tiny refinery for internal gasoline use. They are leeches riding on legacies of the previous regime, sucking iranian blood and getting fatter and fatter day by day.

I would add plumbing, swere system, electricity, transportation and so many other infrastuctures that were non-existant before the Pahlavis.

A friend's grandmother used to tell us how people used to wash their dishes in the howz and drink water from the same howz, there was also no sewege system, or asphalt roads. If it weren't for the Pahalvis, most of these so-called intellectuals will be living in mud brickhouses working as farmers to make ends meet instead of being able to go abroad and become "revolutionaries" who turn against him
by Anonymous Misha (not verified) on Thu Nov 20, 2008 03:48 PM PST

You said:

A friend's grandmother used to tell us how people used to wash their dishes in the howz and drink water from the same howz, there was also no sewege system, or asphalt roads.

Ohhhhh! Your friend's grandmother did NOT tell you the full story my friend. Washing dishes and drinking from the same Howz was for chic ones! In towns with religious mentality, they would bathe (islamic "ghosl") in the "same" howz before saying the daily prayers. And for ultra-religious, men and women would rinse their bottoms in the howz after a major toilet job. I am serious about this although it is so unbelievable for us, and this was only a generation ago, the generation of your and my grand parents.

Yes, these were the types of people the shah had at his disposal to educate and progress the country, only to bite his hands the minute that they could.

The Reason!

The only reason for the ruthless mullaahs to become rulers was that their masters knew they could manuplate them more easily than any other alternative force in Iran.

Hajminator

Absolutely. I blame Shah for not doing whatever to stop the madness. I otherwise would be living in my own country today!

We were played with as a nation. I believe the only way out is for our society to advance, regardless of the government. I believe that we are far from understanding civility and modernity. We need to solve our social issues by ourselves otherwise we would continue to loop and fall behind.

مرگ بر دزد الله،

همه ش تقصیر این جمهوری نکبت باره

جمهوری ولایت وقیح وزنه رذالت رو اونچنون سنگین بر داشت که کسانی‌ که خودشون تا بیخ خر خره حقشون از دست رفته بود امروز به برکت این رژیم منحوس سینه سپر می‌کنن و میگن " اگه شاه دزدید نوش جونش.... حقش بود"

میگن در جهنم مار‌های یی هست که آدم از ترس اونها به اژدها پناه میبره !

شما بین دو تا دزد دارین اون رو حمایت می‌کنین که ازتون "کمتر" دزدید ؟  شما میگین "نصیری" بهتر از "خلخالی" بود؟ خرج جشن‌های ....... یا بذل و بخشش به گدا گودوله‌های عرب؟ با این حساب تا قیامت  درگیریم!  

من میگم نه ظل الله  نه آیت الله ....مرگ بر دزد الله، هر لباسی میخواد تنش باشه، حرف آخر با مردم ایرانه، بدون ترس از چکمه یا نعلین.

Abamard you’re right,

... And I’m not monarchist but when you see the former Shah beside this martikeh meimoon, you can just become sad.

Anyway thanks for sharing

If time could return

1979 should have happened in 1906 and 1953 should have happened in 1979. We would have been great that way, but things are the way they are and there is a reason for that!

Dear IRANdokht,

I DID NOT and would not call you a supporter of the current regime or tell you not to criticize the former regime. That's a misunderstanding of my real intentions.

Be my guest and criticize the former regime all you want. I have, in the past, criticized the former regime and will do so whenever I get a chance. There's no love lost between me and supporters of the former regime.

Maybe I should not have addressed my comment to you, but since you had talked about "valid reasons," I took the liberty of building it around your idea. That's all.

If you do follow my comments, as I do yours, you'll know that I DO NOT support any particular group or party in its entirety. One never knows who one may run into in such organizations.

As a free thinker, I only support organizations which are seeking to establish a "genuine" democracy in Iran where respect for human rights and the democratic freedoms of ALL Iranians are guaranteed and protected by law.

To me, a free and democratic Iran means all the things you said you want for our country and more.

Except for when it comes to those I love and respect, I hardly ever allow my emotions to get the best of me in any given situation.

Respectfully,

The Same Old Killjoy!

Dear Irandokth

First, I want to say that I know you are not pro-IRI! You don't owe an explanation to anyone.

You wrote about being unaware of many problems during the previous regime. But I think today you are unaware of where Iran stood in the mid 50s when the Shah took complete control over Iran's affairs. This is about the same time frame when these pictures were taken.

Do the math. There are 25 years between 1953 and 1978. Do you deny that there were many improvements during these 26 years? Do you remember your taghzieh raayegaan? Why so much ungratefulness to a man that did so much for you?

You wrote that the IRI provided electricy and water to remote villages. Did you know that those were the previous regime's plans that the IRI simply took over? Did you know that if the previous regime had remained in power, even more remote villages would have received electricity and water, and sooner too?

You wrote, "We were a rich nation." No, we were not a rich nation. We became a rich nation only after 1972 with the increase in price of oil and increased returns in industrial productivity which were layed in the 60s.

Again do the math. We were a rich nation only for 6 years. Do you in all honesty really think that Iran was a rich nation in the 50s, or even in the 60s?

I don't deny that there weren't any problems during the previous regime. There were plenty. But there would be plenty of problems had Mosadegh for example, or anyone else been in power too.

I agree that he could have done better with land distribution. But then if he focused on land and agriculture, today you would be telling that he abandoned our industries and focused only on agriculture, that instead of building cities, he built mere villages and he kept us a backward agricutlural based country.

It seems that no matter what he had done, he would still be criticized.

By the way, you did not answer what would you have done different that would have made things better in terms of economy or poverty. What you wrote on land reform and white revolution would have hardly made any differences.

Let's say that you were at helm instead of the Shah and you had done exactly as you prescribed in the early 60s regarding land. Do you think that in a mere 15 years, or even 25 years you could have vanquished poverty in all of Iran?

In such hypotethical scenario, you would have found yourself being subjected to the same harsh ciritisim that you are giving him.

Majid jan

The fact that the other guy doesn't have a leg makes you appreciate that you do, but doesn't magically remove the hole from the bottom of your shoe. It's there and it will aggrievate you if you keep walking in it...

IRANdokht

Dear Killjoy

Why is it that when someone says Shah's time wasn't "beheshteh bareen" for everyone, it gets translated into some sort of support for the IRI??

As a nation, are we so resigned that we should wish for the imperfect now?

When I wish, I go all the way!  I wish people in my country peace and prosperity. I wish the politicians in my country to become role models of humanity and justice. I wish every Iranian can live in comfort and free.

Why should I not criticize what was wrong with Shah's regime? just because IRI is worse?  Do we even need to establish that again? Do I need to explain to everyone, every single time, that I am not supporting IRI? 

It seems like you are asking me to speak of Khamenei/Ahmadinejad/Kordan/Zare/Rezai/Rafsanjani and several thousands of their goons who became rich overnight and all that they are doing wrong every time I am voicing an opinion about Shah's regime? 

OK:  IRI is criminal, is brutal, is corrupt, and IRI is a zillion times worse than Shah's regime. 

Now

May I also add that Shah could have done better too?

IRANdokht

Jamshid jan part deux :0)

I just realized that your emphasis was on "an answer" and I only mentioned it in simple terms. Here it goes:

When Iran was being westernized at a maximum rate and you could spot bikini wearing city girls walking through the caspian sea's little towns as if they're on the mediterranean shores of southern France, Shah could have worked on his "Enghelab Sefid"  agenda in a positive way and advance the rest of the country too.

When he destroyed the feodalism in Iran, he had no real plan to keep those lands cultivated. The peasants had no way of making a living off those small lands anymore. Just sending a few young high school and college graduate Sepahis to help them read/write and provide pennicillin was not enough. He took out a system and had no real plans to advance the productivity in farming and agriculture. Then just like the Europe where he grew up in, the small villages would prosper and become livable and not every one would need to leave their village and go to Tehran just to find a way to survive.

I think I might have explained myself clearler this time

IRANdokht

Dear IRANdokht,

The issue shouldn't be whether there were valid reasons for the revolution or not. Many people thought they had good reasons and there was a revolution.

Today, the problem Iranians should deal with is what has happened since '79.

It is the brutalities of the tyrannical regime towards Iranians and the rampant poverty which has been brought about by a bunch of theives in the name of God.

Such calamities don't seem to bother regime's passionate supporters visiting this site.

The new minister who has replaced "Dr." Kordan, the rapist, and was approved by the Iranian parliament a few days ago, is a former revolutionary guard who is rumored to have amassed hundreds of millions of dollars and owns villas in several countries.

The question should be how it was possible for an individual from a poor family to get so rich overnight.

Well

All I'm seeing in these pictures are two sides of a coin.

YES.....there was poverty and.....YES there was corruption like any other place on earth, it's all relative, isn't it?

Has anyone seen a one sided coin? it's called "Madine ye Faazeleh" and world is FAR from it.

" I was worried about the hole in the sole of my shoes, then I saw some one with no leg" 

Jamshid jan

Unlike you I never hated the old regime. I was not aware of the problems that people outside my little circles had. I was not aware of the injustices, of the poverty and lack of basics in remote areas.

Since the IRI took over, granted it was for their own authoritarian reasons, but they still provided water and electricity to remote villages. The same thing could have been done in Shah's time, but the emphasis was put on bigger cities namely Tehran, and even in Tehran we had "halabi abaad".

The villagers were coming to the cities and had no place to stay and not a whole lot of work available for them either. There was not enough emphasis on keeping the villagers comfortable in their farms to avoid homelessness in the big cities.

We were a rich nation. 100 tomans in Shah time was over US $14, now it's 10 cents!! The money was just not trickling down to the less privileged.

Jamshid jan 

Go ahead and call me ignorant if it makes you feel better, but to me it's not black and white and when I say there were a lot of problems in shah's time, I am not supporting IRI or making an excuse for their crimes and atrocities. 

Shah could have done better. His father brought the country ahead but Shah drifted from the ways of his father.  That does not mean that I like what happened to Iran after he left. I made that clear in my comment. 

IRANdokht

خاک بر سرت شاه این همه ابادانی کردی بی غیرت بودی نگه اش داری . ز

خاک بر سرت شاه این همه ابادانی کردی بی غیرت بودی نگه اش داری . زدی فرار کردی . شاه که فرار نمی کنه .

Grrrrrrreat pictures

They are clear, beautiful and historic I am glad there are pictures like these, I guess thanks to LIFE and who ever put them on line for us to see. Shah look great who cares about his people they didn't care about him after all he did for them.

Abarmard and Irandokth

With the exception of a few photos, the rest of these pictures were taken in the early 50s, about 30 years after the last ghajar king.

Abarmard, you complain about barefoot kids in those days. I'd like to ask you what would YOU have done differently in those 30 years (50s-70s) that would have made things better for those kids?

I hate to say this, but iff you don't have an answer, then you must be an ignorant. I don't mean to be rude, but let's set aside taarof and be realistic here. However, if you have a good answer, then I'll take my words back and I would even learn something from you.

Irandokth, you wrote, "there were a lot of valid reasons for the people of Iran to ask for a change, but what they received in return was even more poverty..."

If you are referring to the proverty depicted in these pictures as valid reasons, then I'd like to ask you, didn't that change come in the next 25 years between the early 50s and the late 70s? Could you even begin to compare the difference in proverty between these two time periods?

What would YOU have done differently in those 25 years between 1950s and 1970s that would make things even better with respect to proverty? I'd like to hear your answer.

As much as I hated the previous regime in the past, today I credit it for greatly improving Iran's economy, considering where Iran was in the 1920s, and where it stood in the late 70s, in a time span of only 50 years, or two generations.

And were would Iran be today, if that same rate of growth had continued for another 30 years after 1979?

If there were any valid reasons for people of Iran wanting a change, it would be in the political arena and lack of freedom, not in the arena of economy and poverty.

I urge both of you to initimately learn about where Iran stood in the 1920s in terms of its economy, and at what amazing pace it improved in the next few decades, despite suffering from lack of material and human resources.

Also, ask yourselves what would you have done that could have improved things even better, not just a bit better but significantly better in the arena of economy and poverty?

I would appreciate a direct answer by either of you or others to these questions. And I am not asking for an answer to defend the previous regime. Honestly, this is not my intention. I have always asked myself and others the same questions, and I am still to come up with a good answer.

from another by lona (not

from another
by lona (not verified) on Thu Nov 20, 2008 03:41 PM PST

from another blog:

بالاخره از نظر تاریخی بعد از 30 سال می توان

درباره انقلاب ایران در سال 57 بهتر قضاوت کرد. نالازم ترین انقلاب تاریخی، که طی آن 36 میلیون نفر دست به خودکشی

اجتماعی زدند و عده ای اراذل و اوباش از لایه های پست اجتماع را به سرکردگی فردی متحجر و بی رحم بر مسند قدرتی نشاندند که دیگر پایین آوردن این افراد کاری بس ناممکن خواهد بود. ایران رو به ویرانی محتومی است. تنها با نگاهی به سه وزیر کشور متوالی در دولت ایران و سوابق هریک بهترین شاخص از احوال حکومت و سقوط اجتماعی به دست می آید. اولی (پورمحمدی) متهم به شرکت در قتل عام 67 و قتل های زنجیره ای (قاتل). دومی (کردان) متهم به جرایم اخلاقی، اختلاس و جعل (ازاله بکارت، حیف و میل در صدا و سیما، جعل مدرک!) و آخری محصولی متهم به زد و بند مالی و دزدی از بیت المال (درآمد صدها میلیارد تومان طی سالهای بعد از جنگ با قراردادهای رانتی)!
این است سرنوشت مردمی که چراغ عقل را خاموش کنند، و اراذل را به رهبری خویش برگزینند. در خصوص آزادی اندیشه در این حکومت از سردار صفار هرندی که جزیی از دسیسه گران کیهانی است و در زمینه چینی حذف روشنفکران و هنرمندان ید طولایی دارد چه می توان انتظار داشت؟ آدمی که می گوید "تامین باور و اعتقاد مردم از نان شب آنها مهمتر است" و عملا به تفتیش عقاید صورت رسمی می دهد. چه انتظاری از انقلابی که امام آن "خمینی" بود و رهبر معظم فرزانه اش "خامنه ای" است، می توان داشت؟

The Past is a Foreign Country ...

Splendid Collection of Photos. Some by the way are in the Iranian.com Pictory section I helped create.

"The Past is a Foreign Country People Do Things Differently there"

- L.P Hartley The Go Between 

Mozhdeh Ey Del Keh Maasihaa Nafasi Miaayad!

از بنده خدا ميپرسن: وقتي امام زمان بياد چي ميشه؟ بنده خدا ميگه: همه چيز خوب ميشه، همه نمازخون ميشن، همه مهربون ميشن، همه پولدار ميشن، ميشه مثل زمان شاه

An Open Letter to The Poor ( Nammeh Sar Goshaddeh be Geda)

...ask not what your country can do for you ...ask what you can do for your country...

Let’s face our ignorance.

Before, during and after Shah’s era, Mullahs have been ransacking Iranians through all mosques and foundation managements in Iran for last, you fill in the blank, years. Every mosque is and has been a mafia and non-Iranian nest. They steal poor Iranian people’s savings and offer no amenities in return to them.

Bow 5 times to another country and "Ann Shah Allah" Iran will prosper. Let’s face our ignorance first.