The 1979 Devolution Was The Perfect Fit For Iranians

Share/Save/Bookmark

The 1979 Devolution Was The Perfect Fit For Iranians
by Anonymous Observer
24-Nov-2012
 

We—I—always fret about how the 1979 devolution destroyed us… and how we wanted freedom and that the Devolution was hijacked, etc.  But if you really think about it, deep down inside---somewhere in the deep, dark recesses of the Iranian collective psyche---the Devolution—and its macabre outcome--were EXACTLY what the Iranian masses were looking for.  The fiasco allowed Iranians to let it all out: it allowed them to exercise, and to put on display, their suppressed, yet ever present cultural absurdities.  Here are a few—yet by no means an exhaustive list—of examples. 

1.  Modernity vs. backwards religious fundamentalism: seriously folks, look at the photos at the bottom of this link.  Shah and his wife on the beach, in bathing suits and with their dog?!!! Are you kidding me?  Seriously…do you think that this is image Iranians wanted to see?  Give me a break!  This is what Iranians want to see of their leader and his wife: with the woman wrapped in a sheet and walking five steps behind his man.  A leader in a bathing suit and his wife in a bikini might as well be from planet Mars as far as Iranians are concerned.

2.  Iranians just loooooove anyone in a turban who spews Arabic verses and makes them cry.  It’s a fact. We have twelve official dead ones and thousands of little dead ones one whom we spend billions each year, and in return, we ask them to provide us with everything from a cure to paralysis to a better sex life.  So, it’s natural that would pledge allegiance to an actual live version of a turbaned guy who could spew Arabic in his speeches and promise them heaven. Remember: Shah spoke English, the language of the imperialists, Zionists, capitalists, etc.  So, it was just natural for Iranians to hate him.

3.  Iranians are frustrated imperialist wannabes

.  They’re bitter about losing their empire and all that glory, and are very envious of nations who have taken what they believe to be their rightful place in managing the world.  So, the Devolution allowed them an endless, and ever lasting opportunity, to display their feelings in that regard in the form of nonstop “arbadeh keshi” and flag burning.

4.  Iranians looooove attacking embassies and killing diplomatic staff.  Seriously, no other nation in modern history has attacked so many embassies and killed so many embassy staff.  And it didn’t start with the Islamic Republic.  Oh no, it started in the Qajar era, when they attacked the Russian embassy, killed the ambassador and put his head on a stick on a kabab stand.  The poor Shah and his father were the only barriers between Iranians and their natural instinct to attack diplomats.  Then came the IR, which lifted the barrier and made attacking embassies an Iranian national sport

5.  Iranians are deep down anti-Semites, and believe in Jewish conspiracy theories.  Don’t believe me?  Just read some of the blogs on this site and you will see.  The Devolution has made anti-Semitism a cornerstone of its existence and openly advertises it, thereby allowing the masses to follow suit and let that dark secret to also “all hang out.”  Seriously, what do you expect from a culture that instructs you not to touch a Jew (or a Baha’i for that matter) after rain so that you don’t become “najes?”

So please, next time you hear someone say that the 1979 Devolution was “hijacked” and mullahs “took advantage of the people,” tell him/her to go screw himself/herself.  The Devolution and its results fit the Iranian society and culture like a glove!

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from Anonymous Observer
 
Anonymous Observer

Kingpillar

by Anonymous Observer on

I have never said there's no opposition to the IR in Iran (read the comments below).  What I do believe is that the opposition is too small and insignificant, and that the majority of the population is either a tacit (by virtue of complacency and inaction) or an active supporter of the regime.  That's what I believe.

I will consider Iranians' opposition to the IR significant when I see --or hear--one call of boycott (or an actual boycott) of soccer matches in protest of IR's gender apartheid. 


kingpillaroffaith

AO, You say that nobody

by kingpillaroffaith on

AO,

You say that nobody is seriously fighting the IR, but then you write this:

And these were groups who called for an end to the monarchial system.  Islamist terrorists like Cahmran and Ahmad Khomeini openly trained with PLO terrorists in South Lebanon.  How many political opposition organizations do we currently have in Iran?   The IR has even jailed and killed its own groups who believe in the IR system, but differ with it slightly on certain issues.   

Therefore, you agree that people are fighting this system, including people who used to be part of it, but the IR is so violent that it has killed many of them.

 


Shazde Asdola Mirza

Responsibility versus Reflectivity

by Shazde Asdola Mirza on

Yes, I agree that leaders are the reflection of a dominant part of their society. However, the dominant part need not be the majority. For example in most fractured societies, a dictator just needs to be reflective of that 10%-20% that can dominate over others.

In any case, the reflective origins of a leader (especially absolute leader) does not absolve him of responsibility. The buck stops with the leader!

For example, Hilter, Stalin and Khomeini were reflective of a dominant fraction of their societies; but in final accounting, they bear full responsibility for what they did after they came to power.

Finally, it is easy for you and I to "anonymously" muse about the ability of nations to overthrow their brutal dictators. But the fact of the matter is much different. With due respect, that is a lot of full-stomach, soft-bed, safe-home ... empty talk. History shows that most dictatorships can successfully bind their people for one or two generations.


Anonymous Observer

Zendanian and APSM

by Anonymous Observer on

Z: I will look at the sources that you mentioned.  Hopefully my Persian will be good enough for me to comprehend the Persian books.  Unfortunately, my ability to understand complicated Farsi writing is rapidly fading, although I can still read and write basic Persian.  It's shame, but it's also a consequence of being away from the homeland for a long time.  Is this Fardid guy a follower of the same line of "logic" and "thought" as Jalal Al Ahamd?

And as far as the story, like I said, it's not something that I read online.  It comes from a close friend, a simple and very nice guy whose family still collects "shahid" benefits for their loss at Zhaleh Square that day.

APSM: although I believe that Shah had created a vaccum which contributed to the rise of the mullahs, I also believe, and have mentioned before on IC, that there was vast political freedom under Shah's rule.  Not because he wanted to, but because he was incapable of controlling it.  Savak was, for the most parts, a totally inept, poorly trained and corrupt organization that was comprised of opportunist with little loyalty to the regime.  Look at it this way: under the Shah, we had many well organized and well funded political organizations with members who, aside from a few temporary jail vistis, remained psuedo openly active.  We had the MEK, Jebheyeh Melli, Cherik Fadaii, Toudeh and many others, and that's not even mentioning the various Islamic groups.  And these were groups who called for an end to the monarchial system.  Islamist terrorists like Cahmran and Ahmad Khomeini openly trained with PLO terrorists in South Lebanon.  How many political opposition organizations do we currently have in Iran?   The IR has even jailed and killed its own groups who believe in the IR system, but differ with it slightly on certain issues.  

____________________________

Z, since you like international music, this one is for you:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJztXj2GPfk


Anonymous Observer

Totally disagree SAM

by Anonymous Observer on

with all due respect, this is the exact type of mentality that has paralyzed us for...well, ever: delegating our reponsibility to accept or reject our rulers.  Leaders are reflections of the nations they rule in more ways than one.  This is not a simple black / white linear equation where existence of dictator = powerless masses who have to go along for the ride.  Nations can bring dictators to their knees by various means, non-violent ones included.  For example, what happens if oil workers in Iran decide not to go to wrok one day?  Is the IR going to kill everyone of them?  No.  Can the IR replace everyone of them with illetrate Basijis?  Highly unlikely.  So, why have't they done so already?

And what about violent means?  The main excuse that I have heard on this thread is that people dislike the IR but are afraid to pour onto the streets because the IR may kill them.  How many can the IR kill and still remain in power?  Thousands?  Tens of thousands?  Let's look at it this way: how come fighting, and dying, for one's country on the battlefield is justified, glorified, encouraged and is deemed  encouraged without reagard to the consequences, but when it comes to opposition to an evil regime that may cause (has, in fact caused in the past and is itching for another) it should be handled with kid gloves?  Look at this example: my firend Mammad once said on this site that of there's aan American war with Iran, he will not hesitate in going back to Iran to fight for his homeland.  But when it comes to getting rid f IR's tyranny, he believes that it should come through reforms so that no one gets hurt!  Isn't getting a rid of the IR a patriotic duty for all Iranians, even if it costs them their lives?

No dictator or tyrant ever has survived the wrath of the masses.  Look at the American Revolution, the French Revolution, Ghaddafi, and many other examples, even a perceived wimp of a dictatorship like the Shah.  Dictators remain in power when people appease them, ACCEPT their rule and SUBMIT to them.  

It's actually good that you used the company example.  In a company, the employees get PAID.  That's how they just follow the company's course of action: because they don't want to get fired and mess up their livelihood by voicing an objection.  The same is true for populations that have submitted to a dictator's rule: they don't want to ruffle feathers and mess up their comfortable lives by voicing an objection.  They become apathetic appeasers.   


Shazde Asdola Mirza

But still, the ultimate responsibility lies with the LEADER !!!

by Shazde Asdola Mirza on

And that's especially true in absolute dictatorship situations, where almost everyone else is powerless.

If a company goes down the tube, law does not hold the employees responsible, even if their culture is wrong and rotten. In any tightly ruled long-standing system (like the 37 years of Shah), even the poeple's cultural and mental weaknesses can be largely attributed to the leader.

Leadership means many things, but above all, it means responsibility!


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Oh the Shah being his own worst enemy, WOW, NOT GOOD AO

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

I disagree with this, worse than the communists and extremist mullahs, the cia and usa republican/democrat were the late shahs worst enemy as their actions proved, more so than the shahs actions proved.  The impact of betrayal can not be stressed enough and likely happened at the hands of Iranians and others because he was too good to be taken down in any other way. 

At the end of the day, because betrayal occured, Iranians failed him, not the other way around and we are in the mess we are in as a result of Iranians character flaws in coping with the successes he was bringing about.  Instead of be happy our parents generation would unreasonably blame.  And in the shahs case he did not betray anybody.

The problem with where Iranians are today is "the most important Issue" & your blog brings it up. 

Our behavior of always blaming the late Shah when it is clearly not fair or helpful, ensures we create a future leader that is a masochist.  After a Leader knows how Iranians act, knows how little they like to appreciate and prefer to blame unjustly, who knows how little credit people wish to give a person that does immense good for them and my view is the people of iran (of which Zendanian is a common example) are not going to be happy with what they choose at this rate.  They are tragically and sadly unlikely to get a person 1/100th as good as the late shah or his son now, Reza Pahlavi.

The Masochists Anti-intellectuals are unconsciously seeking to lead iran are not good leaders and that is what too many are desperately aiming for.  I would not apply for such a leadership position.  If all the money and power in the world were present, I'd rather say no than to serve an unprepared and unready people wanting a leader to harm and to bully.

And so Iran declines, because of the way iranians are showing up unconcerned of their impact on their future.

 


Zendanian

...

by Zendanian on

When you start swapping stories back and forth like this, you know you'r wasting too much time on the net. Yes, I have heard a version of that story before. The great Iranian novelist Ms. Mahshid Amirshahi also has a narrative very close to that story on her majestic, anti-revolutionary novel Dar Hazzar. I think you might really enjoy reading that, because of its similarity to your assessment of Iranian people (Needless to say it will also improve your Persian and show you how to write well).

But as you also mentioned yourself people are just one side of the equation and you also have social structures, within which these people have to interact and live.

Creepy part of the story is that it wasn't just shah that went into this deep end, the gargantuan idea of "great civilization." Our intellectuals also went into their own deep end with ideas of Nativisim, Gharb Zadegi, and all that crap.

There is a character in Iranian "intellectual" history called Prof. Fardid: supposedly a world guru and a member of philosophy faculty of Tehran University. He was the ORIGINAL inventor of Gharb Zadegi. Almost every single living writer, from Daryioush Ashury to Aramesh Dostar,to... testifies that Fardid was nothing but an ignorant charlatan. There are surreal moments about some of his stories.

-------------------------------------------

Thanks for the music, watched Aghay two quarters for fiftenn seconds. Mitt was cute for a half a minute. I practically listen to everything. A good day would  start  with a little Ave Maria or Jesu joy of.... Right now I was escuchame, listening to : La Murga de Panam, enjoy amigo,

 

Hector Lavoe La Murga

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhU6pbqteNw


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

AO one of the problems with the CIA installed and secured IRI

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

is that the highest officer in the Iranian Military was traitor and agent of France that was involved on the USA side of the operation, Gharabagi was later given the medal of honor by france for doing his job, people like him helped armed PLO killers participate in killing people and soldiers in Iranian Army Uniforms he had arranged the supply of, that none of these thousands of PLO spoke a word of farsi was their main weakness and why ultimately word got out about their existance by mullahs and families that lost their relatives.  Also Savak knew of the hundreds of millions of dollars being paid to the PLO to prepare for 1979 in Libya and the late shah even discusses know that "Huge sums of Money were paid by organizers to create this."

//iranian.com/main/blog/amirparvizforsecularm...

 


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

AO the people knew that human rights were massively improving

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

with the late shah, they knew his character, that he was a gentle, honest, generous, fair person who was candid to the point of it being a fault (foot in mouth statements frequent) yet they were hood-winked their own anti-intellectuals, like Zendanian. 

The reason the Zendanians were deceiving and back stabbing their own people was because they themselves had been deceived and back stabbed by the west, which had perfected how to fool its own people using the media.  This comment by you is very true "the notion that Iranian people are willing to get rid of this regime,
but the only obstacle is their fear of death, torture and imprisonment
at the ands of the IR, actually proves that the Shah was not a mass
murderer or torturer, and that Iranians knew that fact all along;
otherwise, they wouldn't have poured onto the streets by the millions to
depose him." 

They are now actually facing a real dictatorship, according to the definition and a real torturing tyranny (which incidentally the rafsanjanis and all mullahs were saying the shah tortured though they knew the truth was otherwise because many had experienced custody and even today among themselves in fights between one another that they are in power they say, like karoubi and mousavi say the shahs team never mistreated people like this) its the truth!!!! Ironically 33 years too late.  When before they were facing a leadershi that solely cared about their welfare, schools, hospitals, industry, freedom and justice for all.  But the Zendanians are not going to be honest or truthful, they are the anti-intellectual democrats Iran has sufferred as a result of.

The details are here //iranian.com/main/blog/amirparvizforsecularm... and unlike the commenter on the bottom of my blog, what i have discussed while concealed is not hear say but documented in many books 20 years after the fact (at the time people did honestly not know details, except for a few, today with the volume of evidence, the US CIA is not capable of covering its tracks to help the foreign secretary implement the USA's policies) 


Anonymous Observer

I actually have a story about that day Z jaan

by Anonymous Observer on

I know the son of one a man who was shot and killed that day.  He (the son) is from South Tehran, comes from a religious family and is usually non-political.  If he talks about Iranian politics, he can be described a s a "reformer."  This is what he told me:

His family knew either a shopkeeper (or someone who lived in the area around Zhaleh Square).  After the death of his father, the person (let's call him the shopkeeper)--who was himself a revolutionary, and not a supporter of the Shah--told him and his older brother and sisters this: "I'm sorry to hear about your father's death.  But also remember this: there weren't just soldiers shooting at people in that square.  I saw with my own eyes people in plain clothes, with their faces wrapped in checkered Arabic chafiyehs carrying guns and shooting at the soldiers and into the crowd as well.  No one really knows who really shot those people."

You can take that account for whatever it's worth.  BTW, I also have another eye witness account of professional snipers with their faces covered in chafiyehs on those days (not Zhaleh Square, but elsewhere).  It comes from the father of a friend of mine who was a conscript stationed in Tehran during that time.  But even assuming that the soldiers shot everyone on that day, there are mixed accounts of the number of casualties, some of them as few as 80.  Not that killing even one person is justified, but in the grand scheme of things, and considering Iran's often violent political history, the extent of Shah's fire power against the demonstrators, and what the Shah's regime was replaced with, Zhaleh Square seems like a day at the park!

I do agree with you that Shah's biggest enemy was himself.  You are correct in pointing out the political vacuum that he created, which ultimately gave rise to religious groups power grab.  But still, the ultimate responsibility lies with the people.  Shah also made a critical error by waiting to appoint Bakhtiar and a very late stage in the uprising.  He should have created a coalition government of all opposition political groups early on and nipped this whole thing in the bud. 

_____________________________

I thought you liked Alt Rock?  No?  That's the genre that I mainly listen to (and to some extent instrumentals and "modern classical" music).  But if I had to chose a song from the rap / hip hop genre, I would pick this one.  And I am positive that you'll like this one. 


Zendanian

...

by Zendanian on

Of course I could be wrong, BUT they actually tried that on 17th of Shahrivar (The Bloody Friday) in Tehran,...

This is not about shah's personal dispositon and character, but rather the structres he built, and the networks and the Iranian civil society he destroyed.

 

You could ask yourself why was it that a national netwrok of religious institutions (Masjids, Hossanieh, Mehdieh, Tekieh,...) were able to effectively take a ledership position? Because very other independent organziation or network were destroyed and replaced by a state sponsered one: from workers union to....

--------------------------------------------------------------

Your music is getting a bit too white bread! Here's some Aghay Biggie Smalls, enjoy

 

It Was All A Dream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMeWQXE38dA

 


Anonymous Observer

An interesting conclusion - especially for Zendanian

by Anonymous Observer on

the notion that Iranian people are willing to get rid of this regime, but the only obstacle is their fear of death, torture and imprisonment at the ands of the IR, actually proves that the Shah was not a mass murderer or torturer, and that Iranians knew that fact all along; otherwise, they wouldn't have poured onto the streets by the millions to depose him.  No, Z jaan? 


Anonymous Observer

I hope you're right and I'm wrong kingpillar

by Anonymous Observer on

because that could be good news for our people.  


kingpillaroffaith

No it's not necessarily a

by kingpillaroffaith on

No it's not necessarily a cultural trait. It's a sign that they MUST be screened before being selected ad ONLY those loyal to the system, its rules and values are taken. There are many good players in Iran who do not get selected.

There are also many Iranian players raised abroad who do NOT want to play for the I.R. The players have to stand in front of the I.R. flag and listen to the anthem, so they MUST agree to the all of this.  

 Think about it: the I.R. screens people for all of its positions, why would it be different for the soccer team, which is highly visible during international tournaments? 

 


Anonymous Observer

That's the whole point kingpillar

by Anonymous Observer on

Even Iranians born abroad MUST to some extent agree with the I.R. rules and practices in order to play. I am sure that they are screened and many conditions are put in front of them before they agree to play for the national team. 

No political change in history has ever come with people "agreeing" to rules.  It's the disagreement, objection and protest that change systems.  If these players had any principles they would have stood up to the unjust rules and, would have make a small sacrifice for the greater good.  But none of them has shown such courage.  Considering that fact, and also considering the number of players in the last three decades, the inescapable conclusion is that their lack of protest must be a cultural trait.   Coming to think of it, I cannot think of a single Iranian athlete that has defected the IR in protest since the Islamic Republic has come to power.  That is quite unusaul in light of the fact that defection of athletes has taken place in almost every other dictatorship in the world.


kingpillaroffaith

yes, the soccer team and

by kingpillaroffaith on

yes, the soccer team and the entire soccer apparatus should be held accountable for not allowing women to enter stadia.

 Again, not sure why they are not doing anything, but let's face it: to play in Iran's national team, you MUST have some sort of connection to be selected. Even Iranians born abroad MUST to some extent agree with the I.R. rules and practices in order to play. I am sure that they are screened and many conditions are put in front of them before they agree to play for the national team. 

Look at Zandi: he was born in Germany and is half-German. Yet he went on to play for Iran and next thing you know, he ended up in the Iranian league, somewhere in Qom! Come on, from Germany to Qom, you gotta really like something about the I.R. 

I also noticed the new player Dejageh, who grew up in Germany. In clubs, he shows his tattoos on his arms but in the national team, he wears jerseys with long sleeves so as to hide the tattoos. Isn't it a condition from the I.R.? For sure, but he agreed to it! So therefore, they DO put conditions on players if they are to join the national team and the players AGREE to them. 


Zendanian

Official Iran Uprising Trailer HD - تریلر قیام مردم ایران

Zendanian


Official Iran Uprising Trailer HD - تریلر قیام مردم ایران

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=BczTVI99gnI


Anonymous Observer

You're still dodging Z jaan

by Anonymous Observer on

I will repeat the question:

'why shouldn't Iran's national soccer team be blamed for not protesting IR's gender apartheid?

___________________________________

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


kingpillaroffaith

You can certainly write

by kingpillaroffaith on

You can certainly write whatever you want. I am not stopping and it's not my intention. I respect your right to say whatever you want. Don;t use a patronizing tone with me because you don't me. I respect everyone and do not need lessons from you, thanks. 

 I simply question your need to repeat 100 times what you have already said in numerous other blogs and I think we all got the message. I read your blog hoping to learn something new, but was disappointed, hence the comment. 

 If your blogs were supported by at least some real-life experiences, some trips to Iran, some encounters with people, not what you read in a few books or heard here and there, maybe it would help.

 As for my blog on TO Iranians, if you read it properly, you would notice that I was complaining about a certain type of new immigrants, coming here with questionable funds... 

 As for the soccer team, I have no answer as to why they are not doing anything in support of women. I do not follow soccer to give a judgment. All I know is that most of them play in the national team to get visibility and get transferred abroad. Certainly, soccer players are not the brightest people in Iran and those who go to stadium are not the brightest either. 


Zendanian

You THINK my friend! Just follow the trajectory of protests from

by Zendanian on

June 2008 to Februaury2009. Every single month the extent and the depth of opposition in social terms expanded. The one that really put the fire under their fundament was the Ashura protest. In that protest you had the introduction of mass working class folks, from south of Tehran; Khani Abad, Rah Ahan, Javadieh,..though religious and conservative, yet opposed to the crack down. Make a long story short, after Ashura Green's "leadership" pulled back, thus destroying what was going to be a real challenge for IR.

I just love those chants people have, ON THE STREETS OF TEHRAN. Enjoy

-----------------------------------------------------

 

Iran Protests Chants, December 31 2009

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfPrN-1SHa8

-----------------------------------------

The Clash - Clampdown

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=psB0cidB5bg&playnex...

 


Anonymous Observer

Sorry Z - almost forgot

by Anonymous Observer on


Anonymous Observer

Those protests were limited in size and duration

by Anonymous Observer on

and were not supported by the majority of the population.  Even the brave  few (few as in comparatively few) protesters who were on the streets realized this lack of support.  That's why they were chanting "natarseed, natarseed, ma hameh ba ham hasteem," and "irani-ye ba gheiyrat, hemayat, hemayat."  Those chants went unanswered, unfortunately. 

PS- you still haven't answered the question of why Iran's national soccer team shouldn't be blamed for not protesting IR's gender apartheid. 


Zendanian

Just three years ago there were mass unrest and uprising in Iran

by Zendanian on

One must be REALLY obtuse, to deny lack of mass discontent with IR.

You could rule by bayonets, but you can't rule on bayonets.

It's would be a bit amusing if it wasn't so sad that an anonymouse blogger, who has no cost to pay for any activism, accuses 75 million Iranians of lack of activism and courage! And did you do a countrywide field study to reach your "anthropological" conclusions. Cheers

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Portugal.The Man - Got It All

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J8d18ZkXE8


Anonymous Observer

kingpillaroffaith

by Anonymous Observer on

"...and if anyone presents some kind of counter-argument to you, you quickly dismiss them with your facts and anecdotes."

You're right.  I shouldn't use "facts" in responding to the other side's arguments.  Facts are just soooo annoying. :-)

Anyway, to respond to your argument, I'm sure that there are Iranians who stand up to tyranny, people like Nasreen Sotoudeh and Sattar Beheshti.  I'm also sure that there are those who may not attend soccer matches in protest of gender apartheid in Iran.  But judging by the lack of real opposition in Iran, and full to the capacity soccer stadiums, those folks appear to be a statistical anomaly compared to the general Iranian population.  And that's not saying anything about Iran's national team which could have brought attention to this issue a long time ago by a simple protest, which they have utterly failed to do so far.  Incidentally, Ali Karimi wore a green wristband on the field during the 2009 protests.  Nothing happened to him.  Why hasn't he worn a different color wristband to protest the banning of women from stadiums?!!  All evidence points to the notion that the overwhelming majority of Iranians are either active or tacit supporters of the regime, or that they simply don't care about IR's three and a half decade long injustice.  

Lastly, it's called free speech.  I post whatever I want.  It's a free forum, and it's time for Iranians such as yourself to learn and respect that concept.  If you don't like my blogs, don't read them.  And please feel free to post blogs of your own and talk about whatever you wish. 

PS-It's kind of funny that you have posted this comment, when the only blog that you have posted in your almost three years of membership on IC is one that complains and nags about Iranians in Toronto :-)):

//iranian.com/main/blog/kingpillaroffaith/new-face-iranian-community-toronto

 


kingpillaroffaith

AO, I have a question

by kingpillaroffaith on

AO,

I have a question for you: if you are so disappointed by Iranians in general and think they are a lost cause, why are you active on a website dedicated to everything and anything about Iran, nagging about how Iranians are superstitious, Anti-Semites and undeserving of democracy?

It is not the first time you post such articles, and it seems your only goal is to vent out your anger and frustration and if anyone presents some kind of counter-argument to you, you quickly dismiss them with your facts and anecdotes.

What is your point? I think we already got your point, so what else are you trying to prove here?

In every blog, you post the same pictures of men hitting themselves with mud as evidence that Iranians are backwards.

Have you recently been to Iran? Have you been to universities? Have you talked to young people on the streets, in parties, on campuses, at work, in theatres, at coffee shops? Do you know their opinions on their government, the international developments, on birth control, on homosexuality, etc.?

You talk of people who attend soccer matches as representatives of an entire society. How about those who don’t want to attend because they can’t take their girlfriends, their sisters, their mothers, their friends?

You want to see people demonstrating every day against the injustices of the I.R.? Do you think it’s easy when what is awaiting you is jail, torture, harassment, possibly

death penalty? On the other hand, you have a family to feed, you have elderly parents, you have rents to pay, you have to make ends meet, etc. What would be your choice?

Iran is in a transition just like many other Third-World countries. Transition periods are painful, and come at great cost. Not everybody wants change. Not everyone wants

the same freedoms. Iran is not different from other countries that went through these transitions. Look at Spain under Franco, Chile under Pinochet, South Africa under Apartheid.

 


Anonymous Observer

FDML & APSM

by Anonymous Observer on

FDML: your link is the exact the type of activism that one would expect from a progressive nation that values gender equality.  Then again, we're talking about Iran. so....

APSM: Your statement here is very important:

Before he came the only way to get around tehran was on a donkey and unlike other countries that had oil wealth but corrupt systems that would not help the people, the shah really helped the people, had over 5 anti-corruption agencies, with a team that created the largest growth in middle class in the world as a percent of population and a world class advanced air force and army that was the envy of most countries.

Whatever fossil 1960's and 1970's irrelevant Shah haters say does not take away from the fact that Shah was the person who moved Iran into the 20th century.  Before him, Iran was, for the most parts, a "khanate" and a feudal system with zero infrastructure, much like today's Afghanistan.  The Shah used the newly found oil money to invest in roads, sewer systems, airports, an airline, a modern military, a modern banking system, modern educational system, etc.,--all in the span of three decades.  His land reforms, which are constantly poo pooed by the mullahs (who were paid by feudal landowners to call them a sin) and by the communists (who should really be supportive of it if they follow their own doctrines) changed Iran's agricultural base--and economy--from an Afghanistan like Khan system to a modern one, competitive on the world stage.   Much of what the IR had done during its miserable existence has been to simply carry out the Shah's long term infrastructure plans--which were already planned and ready for implementation when the Shah was overthrown (i.,e., the Tehran metro and Tehran airport).     


oktaby

wrong car. It's a Trabant :)

by oktaby on

متمم به نکتهٔ ۲

در هندوستان گاوان مقدسند؛ در ایران مقدسان گاوند

 

Oktaby


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

If the USA really was serious about removing the Mullahs & cared

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

for iran then they would only need to look towards the young shah and have his team make it happen as a result of over 2500 years deep rooted history, among the mullahs alone the vast majority want religion out of govt and mostly are supporters of reza pahlavi and surround him in dc.

The USA is actually after replacing these mullahs with extremists it thinks it can control and move away from russia/china, it wants to use reza pahlavi and then keep him out of the pictire as they realize that he, like his father and grand father will succeed in progress for iran which they oppose fully in agreement with all allies.

If US and EU Power continues to decline relative to the China and Russia, the west will not have the power to keep extremism in Iran in the next decade. So 20's and will be fascinating and uncertain for Iran.  To See where US/EU will be relative to Russia/China and will Russia/China support the winners in iran or will the winners side with the West?


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

LOL FDOML

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

If Iranians even speak with each other or log onto a social network they are dead like sattar, if people did the high heels thingy.  i'm not too sure the govt response would be humane, based on their track record at the hosptial mortuary.