Dariush Homayouns lastest interview.

[parham79]

Very interesting that shah offerd these cancerious tumor the so called roshan fekers a role in the regime in 1961 but they refused and even supported failed coupe in 1963 as well.As much respect I have for the shah I cant believe he listend to Azhari a incompetent general and he jailed this man.Dariush was a great man. God bless him.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hds4y4trjYM

 

[keyvan_pars]

he raises very very EXTREMELY important points about Federalism and multi lingualism.

What he emphasises on about the sovereignty and the head on collision with federalism is absolutely correct in my opinion.

thanks for posting finally something worth listening to by an iranian.

also the banality of being a 'middle eastern' society. One has to be very intricate not to mistake this for racism. This is not racism of mind but the corruption of culture be it an iranian one or an arab one.

POST OF THE WEEK. thank you Parham.

'We must look to Europe and not to the middle east', important comment.

"We have to look to those that are ahead of us not the ones that are behind us or at the same level. We should ideally separate ourselves from the insolvency and prostration of the Arab world."
kamelan dorost migeh.

For 20 centuries Iranians and Jews have been collaborated and helped each other.

WHAT HAVE ARABS DONE FOR US other than pillage rape and invasion ????

 

[parham79]

The best point he made was Shah's insistance on progress and bringing religiouse dehaties into Tehran who were loyal to him but after coming into the big cities, the mollahs took advantage of them.Shah built 55 thousand masjeds which is mind boggoling.Once the standard of living had gone up and the annual income was very good, the country had enough jobs and projects that we had to import foreign workers because of how many projects that were being worked on and the economy was booming, the only thing according to roshan fekers was azadi siasi .according to them azadi saisi yani fosh kharamadar kesshidan be shah to oghdehashoon darbiyad.Dr milani says the same thing in the link below.I think Dr Milani is one of the fairest and best historians of alltime


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SfqOW89ctU

 

[Zob Ahan]

Very good interview. RIP. A must see interview.

 

[parham79]

Very good interview. RIP. A must see interview.

He would have been a great president in a free iran and secular state.

 

[DireStraits]

Very interesting that shah offerd these cancerious tumor the so called roshan fekers a role in the regime in 1961 but they refused and even supported failed coupe in 1963 as well.As much respect I have for the shah I cant believe he listend to Azhari a incompetent general and he jailed this man.Dariush was a great man. God bless him.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hds4y4trjYM

Sharif emami and Azhari were the most terekmon primeministers shah chose. Sharif emami asked shah to jail hoveida which was the only person who could win khomeini. This is my oppinion and I don't discuss it because it is about past.
But why does he say if IRI falls Iran is devided ?

 

[parham79]

What he means if if the samething happens like in 1979 where the amy just decides to go home after shah left and the borders are not defend, opportunists will decide to take advantage of the situation. don't agree because I believe the regular army is not with this regime unlike in 1979 where majority of the army was loyal to the shah. .This regime knows the regular armed forces will never side with them if they are asked to start killing. That's why they created a multilayerd sarkob system. Bassij, sepah, lebas shakhsi, guard zede shoresh and vezarate ettelat.

His points on fedreralism is spot on. Iran needs a central government but still respect ethnic minorities rights as well.

 

[ChaharMahal]

It is rather interesting that all those who have lived in Tehran or who have a connection with the capital city insist that Iran needs Central Only government.

and those from provinces who have seen under both regimes especially the latter one how ineffective the bureaucrats appointed by central government are in the matters of provinces like decentralization.

There is no modern large country that is effectively governed by Central Authority only.

There is nothing wrong with having a U.S esque System where people locally decide who the police chief is, who the local prosecutor is, how the local districts for electing members of parliament are divided.

The National government meanwhile is still in charge of protecting the borders and National Security policy.

The Central government can affect other policies of the Provinces by using Grants like the they do in the U.S.

things like if you want x Amount of money put guard rails on your roads.

if you want X AMount of money install heating and cooling system in your schools.

 

[keyvan_pars]

It is rather interesting that all those who have lived in Tehran or who have a connection with the capital city insist that Iran needs Central Only government.

and those from provinces who have seen under both regimes especially the latter one how ineffective the bureaucrats appointed by central government are in the matters of provinces like decentralization.

There is no modern large country that is effectively governed by Central Authority only.

There is nothing wrong with having a U.S esque System where people locally decide who the police chief is, who the local prosecutor is, how the local districts for electing members of parliament are divided.

The National government meanwhile is still in charge of protecting the borders and National Security policy.

The Central government can affect other policies of the Provinces by using Grants like the they do in the U.S.

things like if you want x Amount of money put guard rails on your roads.

if you want X AMount of money install heating and cooling system in your schools.

How old were you when you left Iran and how many provinces have you lived in (not visited) ?

 

[ChaharMahal]

How old were you when you left Iran and how many provinces have you lived in (not visited) ?

Back When Iran had 24 Provinces I had visited 15 of them.

 

[keyvan_pars]

imagine you are driving in tabriz and you get into an accident and you are taken to write a police report and non of the clerks or policemen read or speak any farsi. What would you do?
If you leave the fate of provinces to a supposed federal authority this would happen.

scenario 2: you have decided to open a software company in kurdistan and no one writes or reads farsi, how would you able to employ people that don't even understand what you are saying ?

 

[parham79]

Here is the butcher yazdi the so called roshanfekers in action.Timsar Rahimi will forever be rememberd as a man who refused to join iran's sworn enemies and died with pride and honor. Yazdi will allways be rememberd as a scumbag.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpLGZy75Ars


Yazdi must pay for his crimes.

 

[Flint]

Where did these characters come from? A pediatrician from Houston ends up as an interrogator at a revolutionary court in Iran wearing Castro style fatigue. Amazing.

 

[parham79]

Yazdi is a very shady and manfoor character.This guy was a KGB and CIA spy for years and his whoring himself to the highest bidder was well documented.He was also at khomenies side bfrom 974 as his liason with foreign intelligence services. He and another shady character named Ghotbzadeh who khomenie orderd to be executed after the revolution. Yazdi was ted kennedy and other democrat liberal charllatans best friend.

The NY Times disscustingly fake claims of Shah (khodabiamorz) killed a 130 thousand people or he had well over 100.000 political prinores were fabrications made by Yazdi and Ted Kennedy with Carters blessing. The only person in the Carter administration who was appaled by these stuff was brezenski who was pro shah even to the end and urged him to crackdown and restore order.

Sadly in our history we have had these so called vatan foroush melli mazhabi characters. only 3 of them I have respect for. Amir Entezam. Dariush forouhar and his wife and Bazargan who cut from khomenie as soon as he found out what was happening and even said we should have reformed the monarchy and it was a mistake to follow khomenie later on.

 

[ChaharMahal]

imagine you are driving in tabriz and you get into an accident and you are taken to write a police report and non of the clerks or policemen read or speak any farsi. What would you do?
If you leave the fate of provinces to a supposed federal authority this would happen.

scenario 2: you have decided to open a software company in kurdistan and no one writes or reads farsi, how would you able to employ people that don't even understand what you are saying ?

You have answered your own questions. From an Economic Integration point of view everybody has an incentive to learn the dominant language (farsi). and it is not like that it will be a challenge because Faris is already the de facto language in all of Iran.

as with the U.S the Central Government can encourage certain policies by the way of block grants.

Things such as:
-> Offer Mulch-lingual government forms and we give you x-Amount of money.
-> Give Food Stamps to the lowest 10% of the society and we give you x-Amount of Money.
-> Clean up Parks and we give you x Amount money.
-> We give you X-Amount of money to keep water supplies clean with y percentage of such and such pollution levels.

This can be done and is being done in many countries.

But you have got the question backward and that is because of the mentality that RezaShah for the wrong reasons made fashionable.

That is people from provinces should prove they are not nuisance to the central authority not the other way around.

if you want to have a country that is the long term is maintainable, sustainable and unified you need to have system that people locally have a whole more to say about their affairs that then Central government.

Sure they are gone be trade-offs. but mostly for a country as large as Iran, 90 years of Strong Central Policy has proven that a Bureaucrat in Tehran no matter how good of a man has no idea what is required at the local level.

 

[keyvan_pars]

You have answered your own questions. From an Economic Integration point of view everybody has an incentive to learn the dominant language (farsi). and it is not like that it will be a challenge because Faris is already the de facto language in all of Iran.

no they don't have the economic incentive to learn at all levels. This is not only based on theory but on experience, present everyday experience where I am living right now.
I live in Quebec which was attached to the rest of Canada by Wars, exactly, as explained in the interview and there is a constant murmur of independence and french-only culture even though the countries official languages are both English and French.

English speaking people are being refused services in hospitals, insulted on occasion in the public transport system etc etc.


You cannot compare US to Iran because US has a uniform language which is English (except the hispanic illegals and they are spread all over),

As a matter of fact what holds different communities in Iran together is language. You start to undermining that and you are supporting the dissolution of that country.

People in different provinces of Iran have different customs, languages, dresses, complexion, etc etc and the language is what holds them together, remove that and you have nothing left but a bunch of bandits (as during Reza shah's time) that want to fill their own pockets but usurping others.

Iran has been a country since 3000 years ago. Iranian confederation was formed between the akhamenids and medes by Cyrus the great. We don't need another confederation.

If you think that ethnic rights would be more respected under a confederate system you are sadly mistaken. In most cases it is the people from the provinces (people who are holding power in their own provinces) are the ones that tend to suck the place dry and remove centralized control on that .... forget it, it will be a much worse mess than it is now.

 

[ChaharMahal]

no they don't have the economic incentive to learn at all levels. This is not only based on theory but on experience, present everyday experience where I am living right now.
I live in Quebec which was attached to the rest of Canada by Wars, exactly, as explained in the interview and there is a constant murmur of independence and french-only culture even though the countries official languages are both English and French.

English speaking people are being refused services in hospitals, insulted on occasion in the public transport system etc etc.


You cannot compare US to Iran because US has a uniform language which is English (except the hispanic illegals and they are spread all over),

As a matter of fact what holds different communities in Iran together is language. You start to undermining that and you are supporting the dissolution of that country.

People in different provinces of Iran have different customs, languages, dresses, complexion, etc etc and the language is what holds them together, remove that and you have nothing left but a bunch of bandits (as during Reza shah's time) that want to fill their own pockets but usurping others.

Iran has been a country since 3000 years ago. Iranian confederation was formed between the akhamenids and medes by Cyrus the great. We don't need another confederation.

If you think that ethnic rights would be more respected under a confederate system you are sadly mistaken. In most cases it is the people from the provinces (people who are holding power in their own provinces) are the ones that tend to suck the place dry and remove centralized control on that .... forget it, it will be a much worse mess than it is now.

First of all Nobody has talked about Confederation. Federalism has been talked about. and Federalisms have not been created equal.

You must go back to your drawing boards. you can not a country like Iran together by force.

Everyone will have to feel like they have stake in it. They feel they have a stake in it if they are an equal part of the country.

What you are suggesting is continuing the same thing that was under Reza Shah, Mohammad Reza Shah and I.R. That is let's place all the resources in the hands of a few in Tehran
and let them decide who gets what. and Naturally as has happened in the past 90 years those in far corners of Iran get completely neglected.

Why do you think it is that Tehran has kept growing larger and larger in the past 90 years but the rest of Iran has not kept up with pace.

That's because disproportionate amount of country's wealth is being spent in Tehran and that is in the expense of everybody else.

Trust me that does not increase their loyalty to their mother-land.

 

[keyvan_pars]

First of all Nobody has talked about Confederation. Federalism has been talked about. and Federalisms have not been created equal.

You must go back to your drawing boards. you can not a country like Iran together by force.

Everyone will have to feel like they have stake in it. They feel they have a stake in it if they are an equal part of the country.

What you are suggesting is continuing the same thing that was under Reza Shah, Mohammad Reza Shah and I.R. That is let's place all the resources in the hands of a few in Tehran
and let them decide who gets what. and Naturally as has happened in the past 90 years those in far corners of Iran get completely neglected.

Why do you think it is that Tehran has kept growing larger and larger in the past 90 years but the rest of Iran has not kept up with pace.

That's because disproportionate amount of country's wealth is being spent in Tehran and that is in the expense of everybody else.

Trust me that does not increase their loyalty to their mother-land.

I thought we had a cohesive discussion based on the interview and now you have completely lost me.

none of the sentences you have written here are EITHER suggested by me OR have been pointed to in the interview. I have no idea you have arrived at above points.
let me be more precise:

First of all Nobody has talked about Confederation. Federalism has been talked about. and Federalisms have not been created equal.

when you have a minute you need to explain this one to me because i don't really understand what you are trying to say here.

You must go back to your drawing boards. you can not a country like Iran together by force.

Iranians are ruled by force but no held together by force. Believe you me, if people in Azarbijan, Lorestan, Kurdestan, Khuzestan and Baluchestan did not want to stay in Iran by choice no possible force could hold them there. not even the blood sucking scumbags of the muslem republic.

Everyone will have to feel like they have stake in it. They feel they have a stake in it if they are an equal part of the country.

Federalism has not been an epiphany when it comes to the above if i am not mistaken. I have to say though your sentence is very vague. 'having a stake in it' could be interpreted a thousand ways. Please elaborate with accurate examples here.

What you are suggesting is continuing the same thing that was under Reza Shah, Mohammad Reza Shah and I.R. That is let's place all the resources in the hands of a few in Tehran
and let them decide who gets what. and Naturally as has happened in the past 90 years those in far corners of Iran get completely neglected.
'

this is the part in which I was most confused at. I am afraid I have to say this is a little naive of you to passify me as a monarchist just because I am opposed to federalism. This is, please don't get offended, how governments such as IR or shah operated and operate. It is a very personal opinion and by my human rights to privacy I have no obligation to disclose this but just to clear your mind please allow me to let you know that I am a Republican and not a monarchist. Having said that I am still flabbergasted on how you have arrived at this conclusion that I am suggesting so and so and 'naturally' ??? etc etc.
please don't judge without knowing.

Why do you think it is that Tehran has kept growing larger and larger in the past 90 years but the rest of Iran has not kept up with pace.

That's because disproportionate amount of country's wealth is being spent in Tehran and that is in the expense of everybody else.

Second and Third rate side effects that don't related to our topic. Please lets stay on the topic.

Trust me that does not increase their loyalty to their mother-land

In order for me to trust you, you have to earn my trust.
I trust knowledge combined with logical reasoning and critical thinking.

Again people's loyalties are earned they are not taken by force. You have to provide them with means, infrastructure, services and unemployment insurance for them to trust you. So instead of feeding them like slaves allow them themselves to provide these means for their families and provide them not with the services themselves but with the instruments by which they can achieve such goals.

No system has ever been able to provide this for the people of provinces in Iran and that has nothing to do with systems themselves (as faulty as they have been and are), this has to be with the selfishness and corrupt nature of Iranian officials under shah and IR officials under akhounds. So again I don't see how this comment, even though it is correct to a certain extent, connects to the discussion above.

We really need to stay focus on the topic. That allows me to learn from you and extend my historical and political knowledge based on your comments. If we hop from one topic to another we kind of lose the focus of the conversation.

 

[ChaharMahal]

First of All let me say that I have a lot of respect for Homayoon because he is the few "Mashroote" talabs which actually has a brain and is
not afraid to challenge the status quo. I have listened to many of his interviews before he past away.

I thought we had a cohesive discussion based on the interview and now you have completely lost me.

none of the sentences you have written here are EITHER suggested by me OR have been pointed to in the interview. I have no idea you have arrived at above points.
let me be more precise:


when you have a minute you need to explain this one to me because i don't really understand what you are trying to say here.

Confederation refers to arrangement similar to that which 13 Americans states had Prior to Forming the current constitution.
Today's closest example can be perhaps the European Union. but even the European union is far more cohesive than the American Federations were.

Federalism can refer to the old federalism in the U.S as a lot of Iranians like Homayoon Understand it.

New Federalism can refer to the new system in the U.S after federal income tax was instituted in which There is Revenue Sharing program.

That is the federal government has a system of carrots and sticks to make states do certain things.

all be it. I don't care about the name so long as there is a considerable amount of decentralization.

Federalism has not been an epiphany when it comes to the above if i am not mistaken. I have to say though your sentence is very vague. 'having a stake in it' could be interpreted a thousand ways. Please elaborate with accurate examples here.

Well What a certain amount federalism guarantees is that people locally feel more in control of their affairs.
By That I mean they decide directly or indirectly who their police chiefs, prosecutors and judges are.
This grantees that even if a despot came in power in the center of the country.
he is not automatically in charge of 100% of people's affairs.

this is the part in which I was most confused at. I am afraid I have to say this is a little naive of you to passify me as a monarchist just because I am opposed to federalism. This is, please don't get offended, how governments such as IR or shah operated and operate. It is a very personal opinion and by my human rights to privacy I have no obligation to disclose this but just to clear your mind please allow me to let you know that I am a Republican and not a monarchist. Having said that I am still flabbergasted on how you have arrived at this conclusion that I am suggesting so and so and 'naturally' ??? etc etc.
please don't judge without knowing.

I don't remember having called you a monarchist. I just made an observation that in the past 90 years Iran has been enjoying a huge amount of centralization of power.
Which by design has certain benefits but it also creates many issues.

Second and Third rate side effects that don't related to our topic. Please lets stay on the topic.

Economics is the number one priority of any people. division of economic resources is what 99% percent elections campaigns are about.

In order for me to trust you, you have to earn my trust.
I trust knowledge combined with logical reasoning and critical thinking.

I strongly believe in the notion of consent of the governed.

And if you believe that you (a person who is proposing) a for of government have to earn their trust no the other way around.

but incidentally people of Azerbayjean, Khuzestan, Lorestan, Khorasan, Kerman, Kermanshah all fought bravely in the eight war.

They should not have to re-earn anybody's respect.