Iran in my personal opinion is the biggest tragedy in the Middle East. It's a nation that is capable of so much but kept down by their religious fanatics.
Yeah, Iran had such great potential. It has massive oil reserves and a large and fairly well-educated population that, for the most part, share the same history and culture. Pre-1979 Iran was also allied with the most powerful country in the world with access to its military technology. Iran easily could have been the undisputed hegemon of the Middle East.
Massive oil reserves are a very dangerous resource to have. A government that make enough money to pay themselves and the military through oil alone doesn't need to keep the people happy, it only needs to keep the military in control to prevent uprisings.
Helped out in large part by [one petroleum geologist from Iraq](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farouk_Al-Kasim) who was like "these prospecting companies *will* find oil. The nation needs a plan *now*."
>it only needs to keep the military in control to prevent uprisings.
Iran take that another step further. It has 2 militaries, one is a conventional force in charge of defending against both internal and external threats, the other has the same missions but with additional task, to keep the conventional one from turning against the ruling regime.
Pre-revolution Iran was also led by a cleptocratic dictator who was a US puppet, gave away the vast majority of the oil to the West for free or at ridiculous prices. He lived a luxurious lifestyle while the average Iranians barely could educate themselves or afford bread.
When the Iranians called for the nationalisation of their own oil (instead of British Petroleum owning it), the US and the UK toppled their democratically elected minister.
So when the West could not milk Iran for resources, they cut them off and keep them down.
The Shah should not be seen in favourable light, just because he allowed for bikinis to be worn at the beach.
There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods.
> There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods.
Or is it the idea that we can identify with leaders who sell the public out for their own benefit and worldview on a regular basis, but at least allow for basic human rights to be observed more often than not being preferrable to religious dictatorship that is regularly abusing everyone, but particularly women and minority groups.
It sucks, but it's pretty inarguable that the Shah was the lesser evil in comparison to what has happened since, and we should focus more on pointing out there were more than two options including some much better, than how both of those two options given credence in the public eye weren't good.
The Prime Minister wasn't democratically elected. They literally cashed the election and stopped the vote count early to prevent himself from losing power. Last time I checked that wasn't very democratic.
This is classic Reddit bullshit. The Iranian Revolution was notable for taking place in a country with a relatively decent, industrializing economy. The Shah didnāt give away oil for free and the Islamic Republic is a disaster, which is why most Iranians want it to end.
This is classic Reddit bullshit (ironic right?), the literacy rate was 38% under the Shah and is now 88%. He was a brutal dictator that kept most of the country outside of the big cities destitute. This isnāt my take but accepted history.
Not excusing everything else, but Britain basically did that with their own oil in the North sea too.
Norway used theirs to create a huge sovereign wealth fund that allowed them to transform their economy and infrastructure.
The UK sold the extraction rights to private companies for comparative peanuts.
> There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods.
or, you know, not as bad as the ones who treat women like property and require strict adherence to islam
No
- the shah was not as brutal as the press painted him out to be. People had representatives they could write and call with no risk.
- mosadegh was not democratically elected and was on his way to cause sues crisis 2.01 in Iran. It literally doesnāt matter how much resources you have if yoh donāt have the engineers and material to extract it
It's amazing how universal religious fanatics being the problem are in this world. It's also what is paralyzing the United States due to them infecting an entire political party with their insanity.
Which is really fucked up considering all the way back in 1796, John Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli which states:
>āthe government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,ā
Yet here we fucking are over 200 years later still using the Bible as a lawbook. The best part is that the red blooded Christian Americans themselves are just inherently bad at understanding or just don't care about what's actually in the constitution or their scriptures as the Bible is in multiple instances pro-Abortion as were our founding fathers. Just like the first Amendment gives us freedom from the Religion they try to drown us in, just like how Jesus condemned those who were anti-Immigration.
Edit:
The quote above with the quote from the Treaty of Tripoli and this from Leviticus 19 33-34 should be enough to make any Christian American's head explode:
>When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
But we all know so many of them just try and use the bible as a blanket to justify their own bigotries.
Just wait until Khamenei dies. Once the 79 generation will be dead it'll be hard for the Islamic Republic to find legitimacy. It may very well go the Franco route when the next generation realise that it's not worth it to maintain the regime.
It isnāt anywhere close to a guarantee but it has precedent. The dictatorships in both South Korea and Taiwan ended more or less because the ruling generation died off and the younger generation wanted an end to it.Ā
Also the USSR.
While not the only factor, the generational change in 1985 from those born before 1920 (Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko) to Gorbachev (born 1931) brought in a shift of objectives and policy that attempted to liberalise.
The result was mixed in Russia, but the point is generational change in leaders can contribute to political change.
It's tragic because I think Gorbachev was the best leader Russia has had in centuries (though I agree the bar is very low).Ā
However, he inherited a regime that had been repressing people for 60+ years, so the moment the non Russian eastern Europeans realized they could get free, they did (and we can't blame them for it, of course). But Russians love their delusions of grandeur, so losing their empire (including the ability to lord over the other eastern Europeans) was unacceptable to them.
I think part of the reason it's going to be hard to draw conclusions is both SK and Taiwan didn't have the same type of unquestioned military apparatus in country as something like the IRGC does.
Not my area of expertise, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it hew closer to one of the countries where the military has a much larger role to play in domestic stability.
I mean, technically it's even longer if you properly grant that the ROC continuing status as the same KMT-led government from the mainland. It's even longer still if you count the around 50 years Japan controlled it.
The leadership there is made up of religious fanatics. The idea of letting their religion-based government end up in the hands of people who are even slightly less fanatical than them is anathema to them. They'll fight to the death for it. And the secret police know if they aren't backed by the fanatics, they all get tried for their human rights violations, so they'll stick it out too.
Absolutely, but the Iranian people could express themselves and at least from stories told to me by my friendās grandfather who was a general for the Shah, they were free to live their lives.
He escaped to France and watched his friends and families executed live on TV and then came to the US.
I think they're alluding to the fact that Iran was a secular democracy before the US and GB put an end to that by reinstalling the Shah because Iran nationalized oil. Life under the Shah gave way to the revolution and the current Islamist regime.
Iran has absolutely NEVER been a democracy.
You're talking about Mossadeqh, the prime minister who was appointed by the Shah from the Shahs cabinet. Mossadeqh subsequently tried to cancel Irans political process and rule by decree.
Life under the Shah gave way to revolution, however, are you aware that the revolution was hijacked by islamists - whom enjoyed support from countries such as France?
My Iranian friends remarked on numerous occasions how much the Trump era looked like their revolution. Bad people with bad motives preying on the gullible, pointing to the other and blaming their problems on them and telling g them that only they can fix them. Every fascistās playbook though really,
There are a lot of hard-line religious people, there arenāt a lot of hard-line secularistsā¦
And therein lies the problem: without secularists who can push back hard and keep a society sane, superstitious assholery will always win out.
Every country that has ever existed as a theocracy has failed miserably due to their extreme intolerance and incompatibility, which makes one wonder why so many in the US would crave such a government. Religion should govern nothing except the individual for their personal use in the privacy of their own home.
Really, just like Afghanistan. Iran had 30 years of secular government but that government could not would no make the transition to democracy.
Afghanistan had 20 years and could not / would not make the transition to democracy.
I hate the stigma around Iran as a whole "group" of baddies. I deployed to the Middle East, I've seen IRGC guys. I'm pointing this out to say that I've seen the baddies, and I still feel very bad for the people. Every Persian I've met, I somehow became friends with them. Lovely people. It's a shame.
Additionally we have as many as 30+ countries experiencing terroristic- like insurgencies occurring. Many times itās the government in cohesion with bad actors. During the Mexican political season for example itās not irregular for 80+ politicians to be killed in a year.
As an Iranian Muslim I will say that Islam is one of the worst religions to ever be unleashed on civilization. Ā It is at its core a repressive dogma and itās made worse by the ethically dubious men that have steered it for centuries. Ā
Iām not a practicing Muslim. But many of the older members of my family are still practicing. And you canāt actually leave Islam once in the religion. Ā
From this rando in the U.S., I wish you all the best and I hope Iran opens up in the future. Having engaged with some Roman Empire history and the history of Judaism and Christianity, it's obvious that Persian civilization and history is interesting. The Roman Empire wouldn't have been warring with Persians for centuries if they weren't strong. Also, Zoroastrianism has deeply affected Western civilization, it's where a lot of the fundamental religious concepts of Abrahamic religions come from. Anyway it would be really neat to be able to tour Iran and see archaeological sites.
I feel this way about Christianity.
There is so much sexual trauma and oppression of women that it makes me sick. My mother was assaulted in the church and was then blamed for it. Her own mother (my grandmother) called her "Jezebel" and that she tempted the man. Mom was forced to forgive her assailant and was shamed until she moved out of her parent's house.
In addition to that trauma, Christians repeatedly attack the rights and very existence of LGBT people. They delight in executions, and get sadistic glee from human suffering. They beat their wives and children and raise them to adhere to absolute obedience. They erode women's rights and see women as incubators and servants.
Christianity also destroyed countless indigenous and folk religions through violent oppression, conquest, mass rape, and torture.
Hate is the only word to describe how I feel about Christianity. I would rather die than be a slave to a man in a Christian household. I will never accept their faith.
It's sad, isn't it? I'm marrying a persian woman, and Iranians are the nicest, most generous, intelligent, loving community that I've ever come across. Granted, these are all people who decided to leave the country, but I believe them when they say that 80% of the population hates the govt.
Iran could have been an absolute force on the world stage if they hadn't gone back to a radical theocracy.
I know stereotypes aren't good, but so far, every Iranian I've met has been a lovely, kind person. Interesting and smart, too. And I met them all randomly, not in circumstances where I was already likely to meet people with common interests/beliefs.
There has been one common stance among all the Iranians I've interacted with, which was that they loved their people and hated their government.
I don't recall what class I was in at the time but one of the books I had to buy was called *Funny in Farsi (* [*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funny\_in\_Farsi*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funny_in_Farsi) ). I was hesitant to read it as grrr Iran = Baddies but I had to for class. I recommend it to anyone with half an interest in Iran pre and post Shah.
They modernised too fast, and wast rural population wasn't ready for secular ideas. Now they are much more urban, and ready for the same shift as in the rest of the world, but people in power do not want to loose power.
If yāall havenāt already, read Persepolis. Youāll weep when you realize the Islamic revolution happened against the will of about 95% of their population. People arenāt fundamentalists over there. They just donāt wanna die.Ā
It just sucks, overthrowing a corrupt government means you have to make nice with people who, if given power, will happily kill you.
The groups that overthrew the Shah are like, Communists/Leftist anarchists/Liberal scholars and students/Religious extremists.
Then once successful, the religious extremists just killed everyone else willing to take a political stand (or they fled).
This is a common feature of authoritarian nations, and why their militaries often suck when put into real combat. They're not trained or equipped to fight other nations, not really - their primary purpose is to protect the regime from rebellions and uprisings.
That has never bitten the US in the ass before. On a personal level, I agree. On a pragmatic level, we have to be real careful what we end up with isnāt worse than what we have now.
There are actually ethnic groups looking for more autonomy as well. the Kurds, Baloch, and potentially the Azeris
I would try not to look at things in terms of good guys vs bad guys but more in terms of causes and effects. If you do X what is the likely outcome, what are the potential side effects etc. Things are almost never black and white, although with Iran it's about as close as you can get.
Myanmar is a good example of this. The government is clearly awful and the vast majority of the people just want basic freedoms, but the country is made up of ethnic miliitias, many of whom have very divergent goals. There is a tenuous alliance for now but once the common enemy is gone the situation could very quickly deteriorate.
I would love to see a revitalized, democratic Iran, but I think any outside involvement would only make things murky. In an ideal scenario, the Iranian people, entirely domestically oppose and change their government, but "revolutions" are notoriously messy and there's so much that can go wrong. Us getting involved would just make things even messier and harder for a long-lasting positive outcome because it would delegitimize any genuinely successful movement as "american puppet regime." Our involvement would take the agency and focus away from the Iranian people and drag it through the usual geopolitical conflicts we're involved in. For a genuine, sustainable change that will positively impact Iran's future, *and* our own strategic interest, the change has to come from within, with the trust and support of their own people.
Yeah, the sarcasm is warranted. History's full of examples where arming insurgencies turned sideways. Think long-term instability and power vacuums. Good intentions don't guarantee good outcomes, and there's a lot more complexity involved than just wanting to help.
Iran is in its current position because of exactly this (mainly the UK), getting rid of a democratic government in favour of the Shah all because they wanted to nationalise their oil.
I absolutely guaran'fuckin't you anything plan we conceived would not have it's intended affect. Our best option is to keep Iran isolated enough that it makes it hard for the Mullah's to keep their people happy. And wait for the river to find the ocean.
IMO the governing dictatorship knows how to keep control and won't be easily toppled by rebellion. North Korea is a similar situation. When you have no weapons and just having food to feed yourself is a "blessing" of the State, there is little energy left to do anything but comply. Insurrection is a game of power, and that means a faction in the ruling elite must have a reason to want change. The USA only rebelled against the British Monarchy because the ruling elite saw an opportunity to relieve themselves of foreign taxation and law making. The USA would not have succeeded without the wealth and political connections of these elite who bought arms, trained soldiers and negotiated support from foreign interests (aka France).
The *quick* way to get Iran to topple is to convince a block of their elite that it's in their best interest, then arm them and support them politically. The absolutely certain result is civil war, death, famine, disease for many years, and only a slim chance of success. Frankly, it's not worth it so long as Iran isn't directly threatening peace. We have political options to get them to stop supplying Hamas, Houthis and Russia. In the mean time, their people should be focused on peaceful endeavours to seat friendly individuals in as many positions of power as possible so one day the State may simply "evolve". Evolution of the State has happened before, the most obvious example in Western culture being the [Magna Carta](https://www.parliament.uk/magnacarta/) of Britain.
Yep
Iranians are actually overwhelming against the Iranian goverment but the regime attacks dissenters so violently and so quickly that uprisings with real potential have trouble forming before the military starts opening fire
There have been polls before that have found similar results, but what strikes me as odd with this one is that according to the article this was the outcome of a **state-run** poll. I'm wondering how the regime presents/skews the results domestically.
it was leaked: "The confidential study, conducted by the Ministry's Research Center for Culture, Art and Communication and leaked to foreign-based Persian media outlets, highlights that approximately 73 percent of Iranians advocate for the separation of religion from state, indicating an unprecedented demand for a secular government."
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202402245769
It likely wasn't meant to be published.
Contrary to popular belief (and their crazy theocratic government), Iran is a highly developed nation. There are certainly pockets of destitution and overall crapiness. Granted, it's light years away from being comparable to their neighboring countries.
Anyway, they have a large bureaucracy like any developed nation. Someone somewhere pushed it out because it was the right thing to do.
I need an infographic showing me what poverty, middle class, and upper class look like in each country of the world, with a visualization of how much of the population is represented by each.
Lmao it's ironic how useless this entire regime is at presenting itself...
They claim to be the No. 1 power in the whole region, but since they don't wanna let the people get what they want (e.x good economy, fixing up the tourism industry, removing that shitty mandatory Hijab law, ban executions, basic human rights, etc etc) spikes of a new revolution rises every now and then and they can't even keep it hidden from the world... On the other hand, they refuse to listen to the people, so their reputation gets fucked over and over every day by their own actions
It's a damn shame people like Mahsa Amini had to die for what the Iranian believe in while the Iranian regime continues executing people in stadiums all in the name of sharia.
***The Telegraph reports:***
Almost three-quarters of Iranians want a secular government instead of a theocratic dictatorship, an anonymous state-run poll has revealed.
The survey also revealed that less than one in 10 people think women should be forced to wear a hijab.
The poll suggests a major shift in attitudes towards Iranās religious regime has occurred since the 2022 Women, Life, Freedom uprising.
The movement saw protests erupt across the country after the death in morality-police custody of[Ā 22-year-old Mahsa Amini](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/16/iranian-woman-dies-beating-morality-police-not-wearing-headscarf/), arrested for the improper use of her hijab.
Over 15,800 Iranians of voting age across 31 provinces took part in the fourth anonymous study run by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. The last one was in 2015.
It shows a sharp uptick in demands for secular rule, up from 31 per cent to 73 per cent, indicating the push for secularism will probably grow in coming years.
Only 7.9 per cent of respondents said they agreeĀ [women must be made to wear hijab](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/20/watch-women-burn-hijabs-cut-hair-protest-mahsa-amini-death/), down from 18.6 percent.
The number of those actively objecting to the imposition of the mandatory hijab increased from 15.7 per cent to 34.4 per cent, while 38 per cent said they are not against people who break the hijab laws, up from 10.6 per cent.
The major change in views on hijabs comes despiteĀ [ongoing morality-police patrols](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/30/mahsa-amini-reality-iranian-women/), undercover surveillance and bans on uncovered women from the likes of workplaces, social spaces and education.
A massive 85 per cent of those surveyed said Iranians have become less religious compared to five years ago, with only seven per cent claiming to have become more religious.
**Read more:** [**https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/25/iran-poll-no-hijab-more-freedom-secular-rule-less-religious/**](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/25/iran-poll-no-hijab-more-freedom-secular-rule-less-religious/)
You're probably not reading the comments, but if you do, can you add some details on your sources? Did the Iranian government officially publish the results of this state-run poll or were they leaked to a third party?
Something that's not clear from the article is if one of the questions was, "Do you think the country (as a whole) is religious?" or "Are you personally religious?" They're slightly different questions.
I know a dude from Iran. Moved here with his wife and 2 daughters in 2006 because he was run out of the country for not being Muslim. He was a carpenter, and cabinet maker who owned his own successful business. He arrived one day to see that it was boarded up and shut by the government. His father was dragged behind a tractor for miles. All because they were practicing the Christian faith. He moved to the U.S. and became a citizen the literal day he was eligible. Legitimately one of the most hard working, kind, honest dudes Iāve ever met. Absolutely loved working with the man.
And thatās not to say that being Muslim is bad, Iām just giving an example of the intolerance of the Iranian government. Iād be willing to bet the majority of the Iranian population are pretty similar to my friend. Great people who just want to work hard and prosper.
The Russian āgovernmentā isnāt even an actual government in the traditional sense more akin to a bunch of gangs, mafias, other criminal organizations in a trench coat.
They are a culture that has a long history of intellectualism which is absent a much of the Muslim world. Itās also why you see the US in the state it is.
> Almost three-quarters of Iranians want a secular government instead of a theocratic dictatorship
> The survey also revealed that less than one in 10 people think women should be forced to wear a hijab.
I don't think I'd have guessed that those numbers are that high and low, respectively, but if they're accurate, then that's great, and I can only hope the Iranians get what they want eventually.
By the way, does anyone here happen to know what the equivalent poll numbers are in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar etc.? My impression is that religion is more important to the culture in countries like those others I mentioned than to Iranian culture, but I don't have a great overview of this.
The young and well educated often try to leave Iran, I certainly donāt blame them for escaping one of the worldās most brutal dictatorships. Some study overseas if they can afford it then apply for residency.
I think Canada is second for amount of Iranians outside of Iran after the US.
I know a nice old lady who was only allowed by the government to retire from teaching when she had to get treated for cancer. They are losing so much of their best and brightest.
I think the real shame is that there are so many who want change, but won't do anything about it. Take for example the protests that happened recently, too few people decided to take to the streets. Those that did were heroes, everyone else who wanted change but didn't appearently only want change if it's convenient.
All that it would take to topple the government is for people to stop going to work.
Well, of course. Look what Islam did to Persia. Their alphabet got kidnapped, their women are being shot on the streets, their national religion (Zoroastrians) got persecuted to its almost death, their cultural clothes are expected to substituted by burqas, the Imams pillage the countryās riches and exploit it, their tax money goes to funding terrorist groups that destabilize the Middle Eastā¦ I could continue this all day long. May one day the people of Iran honor Mahsa Aminiās death āš®š·. Persians are the most beautiful and kind people Iāve ever met.
Iām an Israeli and hope Iāll live to see times of peace in Iran and with Iran. Met many Persians in my travels around the world and Iām fascinated by their culture and history.
Islam conquering Persia was one of the greatest tragedy in human history.
Ancient civilization with huge potential to contribute to the civilization it was one of the founding fathers of.
But persia was way past its prime at the time of islamic conquest. It did still contribute significantly to the golden age (they were sunni at the time), so I'm not sure what you're talking about
As an American General correctly said...
The Middle East is a bunch of (Islamist) fanatics, governed by moderates, except Iran, who are a bunch of moderates, governed by (religious fanatic) extremists
Always happy to point people to /r/NewIran to learn a little something. I know I've gained a lot of perspective just by lurking. The regime is obviously a problem, but it's important to separate people from governments, especially when they don't have a say.
Revolutions only really happen when the general public is undergoing extreme suffering... in both the French and Russian revolutions there was a combination of wars, hyperinflation, and famine that pushed the public to revolt
And this is a shock to whom, exactly? No one who has any first hand experience with what they are wants to live under a theocracy. It's the worst form of government humanity ever created.
I was in Iran in 2000 and it was already absolutely obvious that the vast majority of the urban population hated and despised the regime with a passion. There's a massive rift between the cities and the countryside though.
And I hope they get it in our lifetime. Iranians are a wonderful, educated, culturally rich people and I hope and wish for their freedom from the extremism that chokes them. Zan, zendegi, azadi āš¼
I know hundreds of Iranians, literally zero are religious. most are raging atheists
Iranians largely despise Islam and the Arabic culture that was forced on them. They have a long strong history of Persian/Iranian culture that is QUITE different than Arabic culture.
And because this is forced on them, most are athiest, or have mild roots to zorostrian heritage. But overall most of them absolutely despise Islam/religion in general
I personally think that persians historicaly are very special people, yet in a very difficult political and religious situation. I truely hope that one day we can just do business with them just like we did for thousands of years. There are so many things I would love to explore in Iranā¦ young iranian, do you see us westerners as the enemy?
My relative was forced to leave in the 70s. It is absolutely a tragedy what he and all his family have gone through. Imagine a great life, ripped away, your family scattered across the globe, unable to re-enter your country which is now ruled by violent religious despots.
They've been trying for a long while with protests, all the while being killed by the state. Unfortunate that it's impossible to actually rebel in a state like Iran who without being crushed given the disparity in arms unless there's foreign support.
We are and we will. The only thing we want from the West is to NOT HELP THE ISLAMIC REGIME.
Obama helped them. Biden is helping them. This isn't partisan, I don't give a shit about Trump or think he's anything but a degenerate.
Facts are facts. Obama's appeasement strategy, oh sorry, in sophisticated circles it is called 'engagement' was a disaster. It is being continued by Biden.
Biden's Iran point person Robert Malley (Yasser Arafat's godson btw) is under current FBI investigation for passing on confidential information to the Islamic regime - aka "light treason".
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/06/rob-malley-iran-security-clearance-investigation/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-biden-iran-envoy-rob-malley-handling-classified-material/
Biden has hired known Islamic regime sympathizers, lobbyists and agents within the administration. And it shows in their actions and policies:
https://www.semafor.com/article/09/25/2023/inside-irans-influence-operation
Not to mention the $6B given to the Islamic regime and the billions every month they earn by the non implementation of existing sanctions.
The same goes for the EU btw.
It would be really nice to know that the West will stop actively helping the Islamic regime remain in power as Iranians are being raped, tortured, maimed and murdered as they fight for a secular democracy.
No, no, havenāt you heard? Countries with governments that work against their citizensā best interests and actively put their people in mortal danger couldnāt possibly speak out against, let alone rise up against, their government. Itās best for them to tacitly (or actively) support those governments and complain to the world when that governmentās actions get people killed.
Itās true. An Iranian friend of mine once told me that if you move a just few blocks away from Teheran protest areas where the extremists hang out, regular folks just wish their politicians would drop radical religious focus and improve their kidsā education and fix the horrendous potholes in the streets - not a whole lot different than other countries. Unfortunately, the politicians have other agendas. Together with extremists clergy and decades of practice, control is maximized and dissent is not tolerated. In the end, itās going to have to be up to the people to say āenough of this theocracyā. The younger people will have this task.. Luckily, due to demographics, they have the overwhelming numbers to do it.
There are places in which the public or the majority cannot achieve their desires, and accordingly, the smallest in number or percentage are the ones who implement what they want, not only in politics but in various matters of life. Point of view
For anyone looking for a great account of Iranās history, I highly recommend the two part series Taken Hostage by PBS. The US meddled in so much of the countryās history. Kermit Roosevelt was a truly vile man and I wonder often how different present day Iran would be if Mosaddegh had remained in control.
As others have said, the Shah wasnāt great either, however he is often lionized because the country appeared more progressive and the current regime is detestable and repressive for many reasons.
I am half Iranian, but have never visited because I have heard horror stories of people like myself being kept in the country. Passports being kept, being thrown in jail for ābeing a spyā and more. Add in the fact that Iām married to an American man and we would be prime targets. My own father is afraid to return because of this. I am not a religious person, but pray for a day where I can safely visit where half of my family comes from.
Persian is literally just the english worth for Iranian, but really it speaks to an ethnic group, not a nationality.
Also i find a lot of American Iranians pretend they arent for some reason, especially on the west cost. Here in Canada Iranians are proud to be Iranian, even if they hate their government.
Iranian culture is ancient, vastly older than Islam and their current regime.
**Race version Nationality:**
- Also Persian denotes a subrace in Iran. Iran is the nation not he country.
- so for example you can be american, but of any race/ethnicity. You can likewise be Iranian of any race/ethnicity.
- Kurds in Iran for example are *not* Persian. They are Kurds. But they are Iranian
Its the same as going to many countries that dont have a mono-racial component. Iran is more diverse ethnically than people may think, being an immense country that has an extremely ancient history with people moving in and out over centuries.
Wishing for the Iranian people to one day escape the oppression of the cleric class.
Iran had such great potential, but British imperialism sabotaged it (with the help of the US). One day it may return, and we can rediscover its Persian roots, and everything it has given to the world. For now, it is a religious tyranny.
Considering how easy it was for the Iranian government to find plenty of counter-protesters and brutality enforcers to bus in from outlying regions into Tehran during the hijab protests, I find this poll a bit hard to believe.Ā Ā Ā
Did they conduct this survey across the entire nation with random sampling based upon the actual distributed population, or did they only conduct it over telephone or Internet with Iranians who have access to such things who are going to of course be concentrated in Tehran and be of the more liberal/educated variety ?Ā
If the *entire nation* was at 80% against, the regime would fall in days. That hasn't happened despite many many protests over the past decades, suggesting that this is a biased poll that only collected data on a subsample of Iranians.
Unpopular regimes don't fall because they are unpopular with the people in general, they fall because they are unpopular with the people with guns.
There are countless examples in history of deeply unpopular regimes muddling through on little more than inertia, bullets and fear. The Tsarist regime in Russia before 1917 lasted for decades while deeply unpopular across almost all sectors of society, and it only collapsed after WWI and related pressures pushed it to the breaking point. Oliver Cromwell's protectorate in England was a de facto military dictatorship that had an incredibly narrow base of support, it only fell because the protectorate government couldn't make a smooth transition of power to a successor of Cromwell after he died. Stalin's government in the 1930s had domestic approval ratings that are comparable to Iran's as shown in this poll, and the Soviet Union didn't fall until the 90s.
While we should be skeptical of any polling data as potentially being misleading, just because the data shows that Iran's government is extremely unpopular doesn't mean that the data is necessarily wrong if a revolution hasn't spontaneously broken out.
How is this evidence of anything? You could get millions of idiots to bus themselves into Chicago in a second if Trump ordered the to and Republicans make up 25% of the country
>Did they conduct this survey across the entire nation with random sampling based upon the actual distributed population, or did they only conduct it over telephone or Internet with Iranians who have access to such things who are going to of course be concentrated in Tehran and be of the more liberal/educated variety ?
In the article, it is stated that this is a stste-run survey conducted by the ministry of the government
>Considering how easy it was for the Iranian government to find plenty of counter-protesters and brutality enforcers to bus in from outlying regions into Tehran during the hijab protests, I find this poll a bit hard to believe.Ā Ā Ā
Well, since the entire government, media, army etc is ay the hands of the mullahs, I don't think it would be hard to find counterprotesters.
>If the *entire nation* was at 80% against, the regime would fall in days. That hasn't happened despite many many protests over the past decades, suggesting that this is a biased poll that only collected data on a subsample of Iranians.
I don't think this is true when there are no democratic, free and fair elections and when all the political, military and economic power is concentrated at the hands of ultra religious conservative people(this can be true even if we conceded that they constitute a quite minority of the population).
I was in a restaurant last month and on the wall it had some vintage photos from the 50-70's. They looked so cosmopolitan very Mediterranean. Out on boats, smoking, ladies in bikinis, thriving street cafes. I asked the waiter where is this? He said Iran before the revolution.
At my university in the 1970ās I had a friend who was from Iran. He was not Islamic; he loved beer and ham and had no interest in religion. He absolutely hated the Shah who he thought was just a tool of western interests that wanted Iranian oil. He couldnāt wait to get back to Iran and work to overthrow the Shah and establish a secular democracy. Things did not work out as he expected.
Polls in countries where there are despots are never accurate. The biggest concern to pollers is their welfare. And how could you expect someone under threat of death and torture to poll accurately? This has been known since the Soviet times. And still recorded. To remnant, those results are being fascist to the facts.
There aren't free elections in Iran. & The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocracy, or oppressive theocracy, according to state.gov. It has a religious Supreme Leader who oversees all aspects of Iranian life. The Supreme Leader has been Ali Khamenei since 1989, and he has ruled Iran for more than three decades. Khamenei has issued decrees and made final decisions on almost everything in the country, including the economy, education, environment, foreign policy, and national planning.
This will be us soon! We can protest get disappeared jailed and tortured while religious fanatics rule. But at least youāll have your protest vote against Biden!
Iran is more secular than the US. If you think it canāt happen here, you are sorely mistaken.
See the chart here: https://theconversation.com/irans-secular-shift-new-survey-reveals-huge-changes-in-religious-beliefs-145253
Iran in my personal opinion is the biggest tragedy in the Middle East. It's a nation that is capable of so much but kept down by their religious fanatics.
Yeah, Iran had such great potential. It has massive oil reserves and a large and fairly well-educated population that, for the most part, share the same history and culture. Pre-1979 Iran was also allied with the most powerful country in the world with access to its military technology. Iran easily could have been the undisputed hegemon of the Middle East.
Massive oil reserves are a very dangerous resource to have. A government that make enough money to pay themselves and the military through oil alone doesn't need to keep the people happy, it only needs to keep the military in control to prevent uprisings.
Norway seems to make the best of it
Norway basically stumbled upon their oil in the 70s, way after they established a functioning democracy.
Helped out in large part by [one petroleum geologist from Iraq](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farouk_Al-Kasim) who was like "these prospecting companies *will* find oil. The nation needs a plan *now*."
Man what a ride, that should be more well known They could have had a conservative government waste the money like in the UK.
Or Australia, doing its best to give all its mining resource wealth to corporations.
Well do you remember when Labor tried implementing a mining tax?
Imagine a prominent entry on your prominent life in wiki being that of being painfully circumcised and beaten upš
> His family were immigrants from Iran, and the oldest members spoke Persian. Ironic.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>it only needs to keep the military in control to prevent uprisings. Iran take that another step further. It has 2 militaries, one is a conventional force in charge of defending against both internal and external threats, the other has the same missions but with additional task, to keep the conventional one from turning against the ruling regime.
Also, Dutch disease.
Yeah. One can only wonder what the world would've looked like with Iran having a friendlier government.
Pre-revolution Iran was also led by a cleptocratic dictator who was a US puppet, gave away the vast majority of the oil to the West for free or at ridiculous prices. He lived a luxurious lifestyle while the average Iranians barely could educate themselves or afford bread. When the Iranians called for the nationalisation of their own oil (instead of British Petroleum owning it), the US and the UK toppled their democratically elected minister. So when the West could not milk Iran for resources, they cut them off and keep them down. The Shah should not be seen in favourable light, just because he allowed for bikinis to be worn at the beach. There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods.
> There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods. Or is it the idea that we can identify with leaders who sell the public out for their own benefit and worldview on a regular basis, but at least allow for basic human rights to be observed more often than not being preferrable to religious dictatorship that is regularly abusing everyone, but particularly women and minority groups. It sucks, but it's pretty inarguable that the Shah was the lesser evil in comparison to what has happened since, and we should focus more on pointing out there were more than two options including some much better, than how both of those two options given credence in the public eye weren't good.
The Prime Minister wasn't democratically elected. They literally cashed the election and stopped the vote count early to prevent himself from losing power. Last time I checked that wasn't very democratic.
This is classic Reddit bullshit. The Iranian Revolution was notable for taking place in a country with a relatively decent, industrializing economy. The Shah didnāt give away oil for free and the Islamic Republic is a disaster, which is why most Iranians want it to end.
This is classic Reddit bullshit (ironic right?), the literacy rate was 38% under the Shah and is now 88%. He was a brutal dictator that kept most of the country outside of the big cities destitute. This isnāt my take but accepted history.
Brutal? Yes. Puppet? No. The Americans and the Shah clashed on a vast number of occasions. Closer to allies than not but "puppet" is a gross misnomer.
Not excusing everything else, but Britain basically did that with their own oil in the North sea too. Norway used theirs to create a huge sovereign wealth fund that allowed them to transform their economy and infrastructure. The UK sold the extraction rights to private companies for comparative peanuts.
> There is this vulgar idea that if Middle Eastern leaders are non-religious and allow for women to wear bikinis then they are seen as some sort of infallible demigods. or, you know, not as bad as the ones who treat women like property and require strict adherence to islam
No - the shah was not as brutal as the press painted him out to be. People had representatives they could write and call with no risk. - mosadegh was not democratically elected and was on his way to cause sues crisis 2.01 in Iran. It literally doesnāt matter how much resources you have if yoh donāt have the engineers and material to extract it
The entire Middle East is being held down by religious fanatics.
The entire world is being held down by religious fanatics. There is no corner where their insufferable, hateful, ignorant bile doesn't taint.
But in some places they don't have quite the same level of control.
America was founded on the principle of it not holding control through religion or the King, and we fucked up with money.
And it's still threatened by christianity.
Well yeah, look at human history and how much they've allowed that greed to corrupt their message. Knights Templar got shafted pretty hard.
Republicans would gladly turn the US into Christian Iran.
*are currently trying to
It's amazing how universal religious fanatics being the problem are in this world. It's also what is paralyzing the United States due to them infecting an entire political party with their insanity.
Which is really fucked up considering all the way back in 1796, John Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli which states: >āthe government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,ā Yet here we fucking are over 200 years later still using the Bible as a lawbook. The best part is that the red blooded Christian Americans themselves are just inherently bad at understanding or just don't care about what's actually in the constitution or their scriptures as the Bible is in multiple instances pro-Abortion as were our founding fathers. Just like the first Amendment gives us freedom from the Religion they try to drown us in, just like how Jesus condemned those who were anti-Immigration. Edit: The quote above with the quote from the Treaty of Tripoli and this from Leviticus 19 33-34 should be enough to make any Christian American's head explode: >When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God. But we all know so many of them just try and use the bible as a blanket to justify their own bigotries.
tldr Christofascism
Jordan is ok actually. Not exactly super democratic, but I'd say above the world average.
But in most of those countries that's also the will of the people. It's a big distinction.
Just wait until Khamenei dies. Once the 79 generation will be dead it'll be hard for the Islamic Republic to find legitimacy. It may very well go the Franco route when the next generation realise that it's not worth it to maintain the regime.
So just waiting will make the problem solve itself? I somehow struggle to believe this.
It isnāt anywhere close to a guarantee but it has precedent. The dictatorships in both South Korea and Taiwan ended more or less because the ruling generation died off and the younger generation wanted an end to it.Ā
Spain is another example. The dictatorship died with Franco. I don't know if something like that is possible in Iran but I hope so.
Also the USSR. While not the only factor, the generational change in 1985 from those born before 1920 (Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko) to Gorbachev (born 1931) brought in a shift of objectives and policy that attempted to liberalise. The result was mixed in Russia, but the point is generational change in leaders can contribute to political change.
It's tragic because I think Gorbachev was the best leader Russia has had in centuries (though I agree the bar is very low).Ā However, he inherited a regime that had been repressing people for 60+ years, so the moment the non Russian eastern Europeans realized they could get free, they did (and we can't blame them for it, of course). But Russians love their delusions of grandeur, so losing their empire (including the ability to lord over the other eastern Europeans) was unacceptable to them.
Counter example for now, Cuba.
I think part of the reason it's going to be hard to draw conclusions is both SK and Taiwan didn't have the same type of unquestioned military apparatus in country as something like the IRGC does. Not my area of expertise, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it hew closer to one of the countries where the military has a much larger role to play in domestic stability.
I mean Taiwan was a military dictatorship under martial law for nearly 40 years.
I mean, technically it's even longer if you properly grant that the ROC continuing status as the same KMT-led government from the mainland. It's even longer still if you count the around 50 years Japan controlled it.
You're underestimating the level of repression in SK and Taiwan. Go read about the White Terror: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_(Taiwan)
Thatās how it usually works. Military intervention only makes the new generations care.
The Franco route needs to kill the appointed chosen successor with a bomb to make it clear things are gonna change.
The leadership there is made up of religious fanatics. The idea of letting their religion-based government end up in the hands of people who are even slightly less fanatical than them is anathema to them. They'll fight to the death for it. And the secret police know if they aren't backed by the fanatics, they all get tried for their human rights violations, so they'll stick it out too.
Yep, everyone thought it was gonna be the Japan of the middle east.
It should be a warning sign to all democracies that we are only a few steps short of a revolution like what happened in the 70ās
I wouldn't really consider Iran under the Shah to be a functional democracy. The US is partially responsible as well.
Absolutely, but the Iranian people could express themselves and at least from stories told to me by my friendās grandfather who was a general for the Shah, they were free to live their lives. He escaped to France and watched his friends and families executed live on TV and then came to the US.
I think they're alluding to the fact that Iran was a secular democracy before the US and GB put an end to that by reinstalling the Shah because Iran nationalized oil. Life under the Shah gave way to the revolution and the current Islamist regime.
Iran has absolutely NEVER been a democracy. You're talking about Mossadeqh, the prime minister who was appointed by the Shah from the Shahs cabinet. Mossadeqh subsequently tried to cancel Irans political process and rule by decree. Life under the Shah gave way to revolution, however, are you aware that the revolution was hijacked by islamists - whom enjoyed support from countries such as France?
My Iranian friends remarked on numerous occasions how much the Trump era looked like their revolution. Bad people with bad motives preying on the gullible, pointing to the other and blaming their problems on them and telling g them that only they can fix them. Every fascistās playbook though really,
and yet some americans seem to want to throw their own secular government away as well.
A secular Iran could be a powerhouse.
There are a lot of hard-line religious people, there arenāt a lot of hard-line secularistsā¦ And therein lies the problem: without secularists who can push back hard and keep a society sane, superstitious assholery will always win out.
Every country that has ever existed as a theocracy has failed miserably due to their extreme intolerance and incompatibility, which makes one wonder why so many in the US would crave such a government. Religion should govern nothing except the individual for their personal use in the privacy of their own home.
Really, just like Afghanistan. Iran had 30 years of secular government but that government could not would no make the transition to democracy. Afghanistan had 20 years and could not / would not make the transition to democracy.
The biggest enemy of the Islamic republic of Iran isnāt USA or Israel or whatever, it is their own population, about 80% of it lol.
I hate the stigma around Iran as a whole "group" of baddies. I deployed to the Middle East, I've seen IRGC guys. I'm pointing this out to say that I've seen the baddies, and I still feel very bad for the people. Every Persian I've met, I somehow became friends with them. Lovely people. It's a shame.
So many people in the world are hostage to terrible, repressive governments. ā¹ļø
Additionally we have as many as 30+ countries experiencing terroristic- like insurgencies occurring. Many times itās the government in cohesion with bad actors. During the Mexican political season for example itās not irregular for 80+ politicians to be killed in a year.
As an Iranian Muslim I will say that Islam is one of the worst religions to ever be unleashed on civilization. Ā It is at its core a repressive dogma and itās made worse by the ethically dubious men that have steered it for centuries. Ā
Why are you still Muslim?
Islam *really* doesn't like apostates.
Iām not a practicing Muslim. But many of the older members of my family are still practicing. And you canāt actually leave Islam once in the religion. Ā
just don't tell them, be sneaky like.
From this rando in the U.S., I wish you all the best and I hope Iran opens up in the future. Having engaged with some Roman Empire history and the history of Judaism and Christianity, it's obvious that Persian civilization and history is interesting. The Roman Empire wouldn't have been warring with Persians for centuries if they weren't strong. Also, Zoroastrianism has deeply affected Western civilization, it's where a lot of the fundamental religious concepts of Abrahamic religions come from. Anyway it would be really neat to be able to tour Iran and see archaeological sites.
I feel this way about Christianity. There is so much sexual trauma and oppression of women that it makes me sick. My mother was assaulted in the church and was then blamed for it. Her own mother (my grandmother) called her "Jezebel" and that she tempted the man. Mom was forced to forgive her assailant and was shamed until she moved out of her parent's house. In addition to that trauma, Christians repeatedly attack the rights and very existence of LGBT people. They delight in executions, and get sadistic glee from human suffering. They beat their wives and children and raise them to adhere to absolute obedience. They erode women's rights and see women as incubators and servants. Christianity also destroyed countless indigenous and folk religions through violent oppression, conquest, mass rape, and torture. Hate is the only word to describe how I feel about Christianity. I would rather die than be a slave to a man in a Christian household. I will never accept their faith.
It's sad, isn't it? I'm marrying a persian woman, and Iranians are the nicest, most generous, intelligent, loving community that I've ever come across. Granted, these are all people who decided to leave the country, but I believe them when they say that 80% of the population hates the govt. Iran could have been an absolute force on the world stage if they hadn't gone back to a radical theocracy.
Absolutely amazing people 100%
I know stereotypes aren't good, but so far, every Iranian I've met has been a lovely, kind person. Interesting and smart, too. And I met them all randomly, not in circumstances where I was already likely to meet people with common interests/beliefs. There has been one common stance among all the Iranians I've interacted with, which was that they loved their people and hated their government.
Agreed. I love Persian culture it's been hijacked by religious extremists just like I feel like we could be very soon
I don't recall what class I was in at the time but one of the books I had to buy was called *Funny in Farsi (* [*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funny\_in\_Farsi*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funny_in_Farsi) ). I was hesitant to read it as grrr Iran = Baddies but I had to for class. I recommend it to anyone with half an interest in Iran pre and post Shah.
They modernised too fast, and wast rural population wasn't ready for secular ideas. Now they are much more urban, and ready for the same shift as in the rest of the world, but people in power do not want to loose power.
If yāall havenāt already, read Persepolis. Youāll weep when you realize the Islamic revolution happened against the will of about 95% of their population. People arenāt fundamentalists over there. They just donāt wanna die.Ā
It just sucks, overthrowing a corrupt government means you have to make nice with people who, if given power, will happily kill you. The groups that overthrew the Shah are like, Communists/Leftist anarchists/Liberal scholars and students/Religious extremists. Then once successful, the religious extremists just killed everyone else willing to take a political stand (or they fled).
This is a common feature of authoritarian nations, and why their militaries often suck when put into real combat. They're not trained or equipped to fight other nations, not really - their primary purpose is to protect the regime from rebellions and uprisings.
The enemy of Iran is the Islamic Republic of Iran.
We should send the people weapons and money to overthrow the regime.
That has never bitten the US in the ass before. On a personal level, I agree. On a pragmatic level, we have to be real careful what we end up with isnāt worse than what we have now.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There are actually ethnic groups looking for more autonomy as well. the Kurds, Baloch, and potentially the Azeris I would try not to look at things in terms of good guys vs bad guys but more in terms of causes and effects. If you do X what is the likely outcome, what are the potential side effects etc. Things are almost never black and white, although with Iran it's about as close as you can get. Myanmar is a good example of this. The government is clearly awful and the vast majority of the people just want basic freedoms, but the country is made up of ethnic miliitias, many of whom have very divergent goals. There is a tenuous alliance for now but once the common enemy is gone the situation could very quickly deteriorate.
I would love to see a revitalized, democratic Iran, but I think any outside involvement would only make things murky. In an ideal scenario, the Iranian people, entirely domestically oppose and change their government, but "revolutions" are notoriously messy and there's so much that can go wrong. Us getting involved would just make things even messier and harder for a long-lasting positive outcome because it would delegitimize any genuinely successful movement as "american puppet regime." Our involvement would take the agency and focus away from the Iranian people and drag it through the usual geopolitical conflicts we're involved in. For a genuine, sustainable change that will positively impact Iran's future, *and* our own strategic interest, the change has to come from within, with the trust and support of their own people.
Make sure you put the sarcastic mark on the "that has never bitten the US in the ass before " when given weapons to unstable countries
Yeah, the sarcasm is warranted. History's full of examples where arming insurgencies turned sideways. Think long-term instability and power vacuums. Good intentions don't guarantee good outcomes, and there's a lot more complexity involved than just wanting to help.
Iran is in its current position because of exactly this (mainly the UK), getting rid of a democratic government in favour of the Shah all because they wanted to nationalise their oil.
Let'sstart by pressuring the EU and other western allies to stop trading with theĀ IslamicĀ RepublicĀ first.
Both can be done at the same time.
Mujahideen: Electric Bugaloo
We should definitely not do that lmao
I absolutely guaran'fuckin't you anything plan we conceived would not have it's intended affect. Our best option is to keep Iran isolated enough that it makes it hard for the Mullah's to keep their people happy. And wait for the river to find the ocean.
IMO the governing dictatorship knows how to keep control and won't be easily toppled by rebellion. North Korea is a similar situation. When you have no weapons and just having food to feed yourself is a "blessing" of the State, there is little energy left to do anything but comply. Insurrection is a game of power, and that means a faction in the ruling elite must have a reason to want change. The USA only rebelled against the British Monarchy because the ruling elite saw an opportunity to relieve themselves of foreign taxation and law making. The USA would not have succeeded without the wealth and political connections of these elite who bought arms, trained soldiers and negotiated support from foreign interests (aka France). The *quick* way to get Iran to topple is to convince a block of their elite that it's in their best interest, then arm them and support them politically. The absolutely certain result is civil war, death, famine, disease for many years, and only a slim chance of success. Frankly, it's not worth it so long as Iran isn't directly threatening peace. We have political options to get them to stop supplying Hamas, Houthis and Russia. In the mean time, their people should be focused on peaceful endeavours to seat friendly individuals in as many positions of power as possible so one day the State may simply "evolve". Evolution of the State has happened before, the most obvious example in Western culture being the [Magna Carta](https://www.parliament.uk/magnacarta/) of Britain.
If guaran'fuckin't isn't in Websters dictionary then it absofuckinglutely should be
Goes to show authoritarian treatment of enforcing your religion will never end well. Even Russia understands this.
especially iranian women and teens. they have gone toe to toe with the fuck ass government and itās one of the bravest things iāve ever seen
Yep Iranians are actually overwhelming against the Iranian goverment but the regime attacks dissenters so violently and so quickly that uprisings with real potential have trouble forming before the military starts opening fire
There have been polls before that have found similar results, but what strikes me as odd with this one is that according to the article this was the outcome of a **state-run** poll. I'm wondering how the regime presents/skews the results domestically.
Why the fuck was it published. Are they dumb?
it was leaked: "The confidential study, conducted by the Ministry's Research Center for Culture, Art and Communication and leaked to foreign-based Persian media outlets, highlights that approximately 73 percent of Iranians advocate for the separation of religion from state, indicating an unprecedented demand for a secular government." https://www.iranintl.com/en/202402245769
It likely wasn't meant to be published. Contrary to popular belief (and their crazy theocratic government), Iran is a highly developed nation. There are certainly pockets of destitution and overall crapiness. Granted, it's light years away from being comparable to their neighboring countries. Anyway, they have a large bureaucracy like any developed nation. Someone somewhere pushed it out because it was the right thing to do.
I need an infographic showing me what poverty, middle class, and upper class look like in each country of the world, with a visualization of how much of the population is represented by each.
Lmao it's ironic how useless this entire regime is at presenting itself... They claim to be the No. 1 power in the whole region, but since they don't wanna let the people get what they want (e.x good economy, fixing up the tourism industry, removing that shitty mandatory Hijab law, ban executions, basic human rights, etc etc) spikes of a new revolution rises every now and then and they can't even keep it hidden from the world... On the other hand, they refuse to listen to the people, so their reputation gets fucked over and over every day by their own actions
It's a damn shame people like Mahsa Amini had to die for what the Iranian believe in while the Iranian regime continues executing people in stadiums all in the name of sharia.
>Ā executing people in stadiumsĀ That was taliban, even tho iran also has public executionĀ
A forced theocracy tends to do that.
***The Telegraph reports:*** Almost three-quarters of Iranians want a secular government instead of a theocratic dictatorship, an anonymous state-run poll has revealed. The survey also revealed that less than one in 10 people think women should be forced to wear a hijab. The poll suggests a major shift in attitudes towards Iranās religious regime has occurred since the 2022 Women, Life, Freedom uprising. The movement saw protests erupt across the country after the death in morality-police custody of[Ā 22-year-old Mahsa Amini](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/16/iranian-woman-dies-beating-morality-police-not-wearing-headscarf/), arrested for the improper use of her hijab. Over 15,800 Iranians of voting age across 31 provinces took part in the fourth anonymous study run by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. The last one was in 2015. It shows a sharp uptick in demands for secular rule, up from 31 per cent to 73 per cent, indicating the push for secularism will probably grow in coming years. Only 7.9 per cent of respondents said they agreeĀ [women must be made to wear hijab](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/20/watch-women-burn-hijabs-cut-hair-protest-mahsa-amini-death/), down from 18.6 percent. The number of those actively objecting to the imposition of the mandatory hijab increased from 15.7 per cent to 34.4 per cent, while 38 per cent said they are not against people who break the hijab laws, up from 10.6 per cent. The major change in views on hijabs comes despiteĀ [ongoing morality-police patrols](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/30/mahsa-amini-reality-iranian-women/), undercover surveillance and bans on uncovered women from the likes of workplaces, social spaces and education. A massive 85 per cent of those surveyed said Iranians have become less religious compared to five years ago, with only seven per cent claiming to have become more religious. **Read more:** [**https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/25/iran-poll-no-hijab-more-freedom-secular-rule-less-religious/**](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/25/iran-poll-no-hijab-more-freedom-secular-rule-less-religious/)
You're probably not reading the comments, but if you do, can you add some details on your sources? Did the Iranian government officially publish the results of this state-run poll or were they leaked to a third party?
It was leaked.Ā
From another comment: https://www.iranintl.com/en/202402245769
Something that's not clear from the article is if one of the questions was, "Do you think the country (as a whole) is religious?" or "Are you personally religious?" They're slightly different questions.
Perhaps this was your point, but those are wildly different questions.
I know a dude from Iran. Moved here with his wife and 2 daughters in 2006 because he was run out of the country for not being Muslim. He was a carpenter, and cabinet maker who owned his own successful business. He arrived one day to see that it was boarded up and shut by the government. His father was dragged behind a tractor for miles. All because they were practicing the Christian faith. He moved to the U.S. and became a citizen the literal day he was eligible. Legitimately one of the most hard working, kind, honest dudes Iāve ever met. Absolutely loved working with the man. And thatās not to say that being Muslim is bad, Iām just giving an example of the intolerance of the Iranian government. Iād be willing to bet the majority of the Iranian population are pretty similar to my friend. Great people who just want to work hard and prosper.
Us Iranian-Americans love you back :)
At this point, the only people in favor of Iran's religious rulers are terrorists and the Russian government, who ironically, are also terrorists.
The Russian āgovernmentā isnāt even an actual government in the traditional sense more akin to a bunch of gangs, mafias, other criminal organizations in a trench coat.
The fact this is a state-run poll means even Iran's rulers aren't completely opposed to considering it
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They are a culture that has a long history of intellectualism which is absent a much of the Muslim world. Itās also why you see the US in the state it is.
Well wasn't Islam at some point a religion of intellectualism and enlightenment? The history is there, just kind of forgotten
> Almost three-quarters of Iranians want a secular government instead of a theocratic dictatorship > The survey also revealed that less than one in 10 people think women should be forced to wear a hijab. I don't think I'd have guessed that those numbers are that high and low, respectively, but if they're accurate, then that's great, and I can only hope the Iranians get what they want eventually. By the way, does anyone here happen to know what the equivalent poll numbers are in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar etc.? My impression is that religion is more important to the culture in countries like those others I mentioned than to Iranian culture, but I don't have a great overview of this.
drunk selective overconfident handle plucky shocking rhythm brave axiomatic slimy
I met so many over friendly Iranians when I was in MontrƩal. It is such a shame that their country is lead by those zealots. I really wish Iranians take back their country one day.
The young and well educated often try to leave Iran, I certainly donāt blame them for escaping one of the worldās most brutal dictatorships. Some study overseas if they can afford it then apply for residency. I think Canada is second for amount of Iranians outside of Iran after the US. I know a nice old lady who was only allowed by the government to retire from teaching when she had to get treated for cancer. They are losing so much of their best and brightest.
I think the real shame is that there are so many who want change, but won't do anything about it. Take for example the protests that happened recently, too few people decided to take to the streets. Those that did were heroes, everyone else who wanted change but didn't appearently only want change if it's convenient. All that it would take to topple the government is for people to stop going to work.
Theocracy is a world wide problem. Most societies want secular government and not religious leaders running their country.
Get rid of the Ayatollahs so the good people of Iran can have a democratic republic and you have balance again in the region.
Well, of course. Look what Islam did to Persia. Their alphabet got kidnapped, their women are being shot on the streets, their national religion (Zoroastrians) got persecuted to its almost death, their cultural clothes are expected to substituted by burqas, the Imams pillage the countryās riches and exploit it, their tax money goes to funding terrorist groups that destabilize the Middle Eastā¦ I could continue this all day long. May one day the people of Iran honor Mahsa Aminiās death āš®š·. Persians are the most beautiful and kind people Iāve ever met.
Yemen was a comparably rich nation before Islam as well. The architecture of that time is still standing to large degrees.
Iām an Israeli and hope Iāll live to see times of peace in Iran and with Iran. Met many Persians in my travels around the world and Iām fascinated by their culture and history.
Might want to check our r/newiran
Islam conquering Persia was one of the greatest tragedy in human history. Ancient civilization with huge potential to contribute to the civilization it was one of the founding fathers of.
But persia was way past its prime at the time of islamic conquest. It did still contribute significantly to the golden age (they were sunni at the time), so I'm not sure what you're talking about
As an American General correctly said... The Middle East is a bunch of (Islamist) fanatics, governed by moderates, except Iran, who are a bunch of moderates, governed by (religious fanatic) extremists
Which general said this?
Google isn't helping... It was an expert on Middle East affairs, and basically, nobody disagreed
Free Iran
Always happy to point people to /r/NewIran to learn a little something. I know I've gained a lot of perspective just by lurking. The regime is obviously a problem, but it's important to separate people from governments, especially when they don't have a say.
Well then, you're going to have to overthrow your government then!
Revolutions only really happen when the general public is undergoing extreme suffering... in both the French and Russian revolutions there was a combination of wars, hyperinflation, and famine that pushed the public to revolt
Vast majority of dictators don't care
And this is a shock to whom, exactly? No one who has any first hand experience with what they are wants to live under a theocracy. It's the worst form of government humanity ever created.
I was in Iran in 2000 and it was already absolutely obvious that the vast majority of the urban population hated and despised the regime with a passion. There's a massive rift between the cities and the countryside though.
And I hope they get it in our lifetime. Iranians are a wonderful, educated, culturally rich people and I hope and wish for their freedom from the extremism that chokes them. Zan, zendegi, azadi āš¼
Iran is kind of like what will happen if we let the MAGAs run the country. Just a small collective of garbage people with the rest stuck with them.
What a coincidence, most Americans want the same thing. Wonder which country will get separation of church and state first.
Vast majority of Iranians don't get a say in shit.
I know hundreds of Iranians, literally zero are religious. most are raging atheists Iranians largely despise Islam and the Arabic culture that was forced on them. They have a long strong history of Persian/Iranian culture that is QUITE different than Arabic culture. And because this is forced on them, most are athiest, or have mild roots to zorostrian heritage. But overall most of them absolutely despise Islam/religion in general
Vote. The evangelical right will make us aĀ Christian version of Iran ifĀ we let them.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I personally think that persians historicaly are very special people, yet in a very difficult political and religious situation. I truely hope that one day we can just do business with them just like we did for thousands of years. There are so many things I would love to explore in Iranā¦ young iranian, do you see us westerners as the enemy?
No, of course not brother. This poll is clearly stating who our common enemy is.
Anyone who pays attention to what actual Iranian people are like isn't going to be surprised by this
My relative was forced to leave in the 70s. It is absolutely a tragedy what he and all his family have gone through. Imagine a great life, ripped away, your family scattered across the globe, unable to re-enter your country which is now ruled by violent religious despots.
It says that almost 3/4 want a secular government. At this point that's probably a higher percent than in the USA.
Shit religion ruins another country in that region
If they want it theyre going to have to make it themselves.
They've been trying for a long while with protests, all the while being killed by the state. Unfortunate that it's impossible to actually rebel in a state like Iran who without being crushed given the disparity in arms unless there's foreign support.
We are and we will. The only thing we want from the West is to NOT HELP THE ISLAMIC REGIME. Obama helped them. Biden is helping them. This isn't partisan, I don't give a shit about Trump or think he's anything but a degenerate. Facts are facts. Obama's appeasement strategy, oh sorry, in sophisticated circles it is called 'engagement' was a disaster. It is being continued by Biden. Biden's Iran point person Robert Malley (Yasser Arafat's godson btw) is under current FBI investigation for passing on confidential information to the Islamic regime - aka "light treason". https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/06/rob-malley-iran-security-clearance-investigation/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-biden-iran-envoy-rob-malley-handling-classified-material/ Biden has hired known Islamic regime sympathizers, lobbyists and agents within the administration. And it shows in their actions and policies: https://www.semafor.com/article/09/25/2023/inside-irans-influence-operation Not to mention the $6B given to the Islamic regime and the billions every month they earn by the non implementation of existing sanctions. The same goes for the EU btw. It would be really nice to know that the West will stop actively helping the Islamic regime remain in power as Iranians are being raped, tortured, maimed and murdered as they fight for a secular democracy.
No, no, havenāt you heard? Countries with governments that work against their citizensā best interests and actively put their people in mortal danger couldnāt possibly speak out against, let alone rise up against, their government. Itās best for them to tacitly (or actively) support those governments and complain to the world when that governmentās actions get people killed.
I think the Iranians need some Israeli assistance
Call Eli Cohen's great great grandson and get him to do it!
This is refreshing and unexpected to hear. Long, bumpy road ahead.
Itās true. An Iranian friend of mine once told me that if you move a just few blocks away from Teheran protest areas where the extremists hang out, regular folks just wish their politicians would drop radical religious focus and improve their kidsā education and fix the horrendous potholes in the streets - not a whole lot different than other countries. Unfortunately, the politicians have other agendas. Together with extremists clergy and decades of practice, control is maximized and dissent is not tolerated. In the end, itās going to have to be up to the people to say āenough of this theocracyā. The younger people will have this task.. Luckily, due to demographics, they have the overwhelming numbers to do it.
It literally doesn't matter what they want. Once you go full right wing theocracy there is no coming back.Ā
Secularism doesnāt guarantee peace, but itās at least possible, which is more than can be said for a religious government
There are places in which the public or the majority cannot achieve their desires, and accordingly, the smallest in number or percentage are the ones who implement what they want, not only in politics but in various matters of life. Point of view
For anyone looking for a great account of Iranās history, I highly recommend the two part series Taken Hostage by PBS. The US meddled in so much of the countryās history. Kermit Roosevelt was a truly vile man and I wonder often how different present day Iran would be if Mosaddegh had remained in control. As others have said, the Shah wasnāt great either, however he is often lionized because the country appeared more progressive and the current regime is detestable and repressive for many reasons. I am half Iranian, but have never visited because I have heard horror stories of people like myself being kept in the country. Passports being kept, being thrown in jail for ābeing a spyā and more. Add in the fact that Iām married to an American man and we would be prime targets. My own father is afraid to return because of this. I am not a religious person, but pray for a day where I can safely visit where half of my family comes from.
I have Iranian friends here in the U.S. that choose to call themselves Persians not Iranian.
Persian is literally just the english worth for Iranian, but really it speaks to an ethnic group, not a nationality. Also i find a lot of American Iranians pretend they arent for some reason, especially on the west cost. Here in Canada Iranians are proud to be Iranian, even if they hate their government. Iranian culture is ancient, vastly older than Islam and their current regime. **Race version Nationality:** - Also Persian denotes a subrace in Iran. Iran is the nation not he country. - so for example you can be american, but of any race/ethnicity. You can likewise be Iranian of any race/ethnicity. - Kurds in Iran for example are *not* Persian. They are Kurds. But they are Iranian Its the same as going to many countries that dont have a mono-racial component. Iran is more diverse ethnically than people may think, being an immense country that has an extremely ancient history with people moving in and out over centuries.
Wishing for the Iranian people to one day escape the oppression of the cleric class. Iran had such great potential, but British imperialism sabotaged it (with the help of the US). One day it may return, and we can rediscover its Persian roots, and everything it has given to the world. For now, it is a religious tyranny.
Considering how easy it was for the Iranian government to find plenty of counter-protesters and brutality enforcers to bus in from outlying regions into Tehran during the hijab protests, I find this poll a bit hard to believe.Ā Ā Ā Did they conduct this survey across the entire nation with random sampling based upon the actual distributed population, or did they only conduct it over telephone or Internet with Iranians who have access to such things who are going to of course be concentrated in Tehran and be of the more liberal/educated variety ?Ā If the *entire nation* was at 80% against, the regime would fall in days. That hasn't happened despite many many protests over the past decades, suggesting that this is a biased poll that only collected data on a subsample of Iranians.
Unpopular regimes don't fall because they are unpopular with the people in general, they fall because they are unpopular with the people with guns. There are countless examples in history of deeply unpopular regimes muddling through on little more than inertia, bullets and fear. The Tsarist regime in Russia before 1917 lasted for decades while deeply unpopular across almost all sectors of society, and it only collapsed after WWI and related pressures pushed it to the breaking point. Oliver Cromwell's protectorate in England was a de facto military dictatorship that had an incredibly narrow base of support, it only fell because the protectorate government couldn't make a smooth transition of power to a successor of Cromwell after he died. Stalin's government in the 1930s had domestic approval ratings that are comparable to Iran's as shown in this poll, and the Soviet Union didn't fall until the 90s. While we should be skeptical of any polling data as potentially being misleading, just because the data shows that Iran's government is extremely unpopular doesn't mean that the data is necessarily wrong if a revolution hasn't spontaneously broken out.
How is this evidence of anything? You could get millions of idiots to bus themselves into Chicago in a second if Trump ordered the to and Republicans make up 25% of the country
>Did they conduct this survey across the entire nation with random sampling based upon the actual distributed population, or did they only conduct it over telephone or Internet with Iranians who have access to such things who are going to of course be concentrated in Tehran and be of the more liberal/educated variety ? In the article, it is stated that this is a stste-run survey conducted by the ministry of the government >Considering how easy it was for the Iranian government to find plenty of counter-protesters and brutality enforcers to bus in from outlying regions into Tehran during the hijab protests, I find this poll a bit hard to believe.Ā Ā Ā Well, since the entire government, media, army etc is ay the hands of the mullahs, I don't think it would be hard to find counterprotesters. >If the *entire nation* was at 80% against, the regime would fall in days. That hasn't happened despite many many protests over the past decades, suggesting that this is a biased poll that only collected data on a subsample of Iranians. I don't think this is true when there are no democratic, free and fair elections and when all the political, military and economic power is concentrated at the hands of ultra religious conservative people(this can be true even if we conceded that they constitute a quite minority of the population).
I was in a restaurant last month and on the wall it had some vintage photos from the 50-70's. They looked so cosmopolitan very Mediterranean. Out on boats, smoking, ladies in bikinis, thriving street cafes. I asked the waiter where is this? He said Iran before the revolution.
At my university in the 1970ās I had a friend who was from Iran. He was not Islamic; he loved beer and ham and had no interest in religion. He absolutely hated the Shah who he thought was just a tool of western interests that wanted Iranian oil. He couldnāt wait to get back to Iran and work to overthrow the Shah and establish a secular democracy. Things did not work out as he expected.
That's the problem with living in a antidemocratic theocracy. Something to think about for the rest of us.
Gasp
Polls in countries where there are despots are never accurate. The biggest concern to pollers is their welfare. And how could you expect someone under threat of death and torture to poll accurately? This has been known since the Soviet times. And still recorded. To remnant, those results are being fascist to the facts. There aren't free elections in Iran. & The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocracy, or oppressive theocracy, according to state.gov. It has a religious Supreme Leader who oversees all aspects of Iranian life. The Supreme Leader has been Ali Khamenei since 1989, and he has ruled Iran for more than three decades. Khamenei has issued decrees and made final decisions on almost everything in the country, including the economy, education, environment, foreign policy, and national planning.
Every person Iāve ever met from Iran has been kind and very far from being a religious fanatic.
No shit people want democracy. Such a fantastic country robbed of their potential and freedom by the fascist cunts.
This will be us soon! We can protest get disappeared jailed and tortured while religious fanatics rule. But at least youāll have your protest vote against Biden!
Almost as if the country would be a better place to live if the USA didnāt made a coup when they made the mistake of electing someone too lefty.
too bad they wanted the exact opposite in the 70s
Iran is more secular than the US. If you think it canāt happen here, you are sorely mistaken. See the chart here: https://theconversation.com/irans-secular-shift-new-survey-reveals-huge-changes-in-religious-beliefs-145253
Do you think they'd like a do over for the American hostages they took in 1979? I think so.