The Supreme Dictator regime is in most ways worse than the Shah. The Shah didn’t make women wear ridiculous clothes and arrest people for making dancing videos about being happy.
No one here is debating that there is some hidden upside to theocracy. They’re bad, we get it.
His point though, is that much like the Miami Cubans, the Iranian exiles that fled after the overthrow of the Shah, tend to be part of the old ruling class that had been disempowered. At least, the most vocal ones.
Also, just like Batista, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was enabled and backed by Western powers, before revolutionaries overthrew him and ended his dynasty.
I know. I stubbed my toe this morning, must have been because of Israel. Also the office coffee wasn’t that great and as a drank the burnt cheap brown water I asked myself why Israel did this to me.
He failed to legitimize the government that has been ruling the country since 1979…?
Presumably this website feels the Pahlavi dynasty, which was installed and backed by foreign powers and also lasted about 50 years, was the last legitimate government.
You don’t have to support theocracy to recognize the absurdity of claiming that a government that’s been in charge for 50 years, and is recognized around the world, is somehow illegitimate.
He failed to legitimize the government that has been ruling the country since 1979…?
The monarchy system of the Shah lasted 2500 years. Not sure what the point it.
You don’t have to support theocracy to recognize the absurdity of claiming that a government that’s been in charge for 50 years, and is recognized around the world, is somehow illegitimate.
It is illegitimate as a democracy and government that represents its own people. People are protesting the fakeness of the election by not voting.
Sure, they had a system of relatively successive monarchies, but that isn’t the same as having a single running system of government. And it certainly not somehow more legitimate than theocracy, if your own benchmark is democratic rule - which you just said was the determining factor of a government’s legitimacy.
Also, not for nothing, but the last monarchical dynasty was literally installed by the British, and propped up by Western powers until the people, or at least, a fanatically religious subset of the people, overthrew them.
Again, it’s not like I’m a fan of theocracies, but saying that their current government is illegitimate is absurd, whether viewed in the context of international relations, or internal support and control.
The regime is definitely illegitimate in eyes of the people.
the context of international relations,
The US has had not diplomatic relations with Iran since 1979 and does not recognize that regime as legitimate.
and control.
Yes they do control people. With torture and murder. But torture and murder is not really viewed as a legitimate way for countries to control their population.
Can Iran not be a victim of the west but also wrong in their treatment of women?
Society isn’t stuck in the medieval ages there. It’s cruel, sure. But they have phones, coffee and automatic weapons just like everyone else, so they’re firmly in the same age as everyone else.
This woman is using her privilege as a prominent(ish) figure to highlight the injustices prevalent in Iran, so she’s unlikely to get the worse punishments you’ve mentioned. I say fair play to her and I hope more people get to speak out.
Sadly, though, history tells us that dictators can do whatever the fuck they like to their own people with no repercussions.
No, just for creating the conditions that allowed the mullahs to seize power. You know that the vast majority of Iranians hate the dictatorship, right? Everything they do is to control their internal population. A lot of people who would never call themselves feminists suddenly care about women’s rights when it privides a way for them to unleash their hatred on Iranians.
It’s an evil theocratic dictatorship, but do you know how it got that way? There was a revolution opposing a US puppet ruler. The west would like all Middle East nations to be like the Saudis: nice, stable petro states who are compliant for the most part and who cares what happens there internally. But this formula has gone wrong several times (Iran) or the west hasn’t tried as hard to achieve stability because the oil incentive isn’t there (Syria) or the borders were specifically drawn to crate instability (Iraq).
There’s no pointing fingers at the Middle East without acknowledging the culpability of the UK, France, Russia and the USA in their horrid dysfunction. Understanding this is a rite of passage. Children point and hoot about the horrible Arabs. Adults know what’s actually up with that part of the world.
iranwire.com
Hot