A question to older members please

RoozbehAzadi

National Team Player
Nov 19, 2002
4,272
0
#1
Mark Twain once said that "History never repeats itself but sometimes it rhymes." And so I don't see the current events as being a repeat of 30+ years ago, but they do seem to rhyme. My question to the older members here is what does the current situation rhyme with? Is it the early 70s, mid 70s, or late 70s? Is it maybe not even the 70s?

I know it seems strange, but I say this because it's obvious that the revolution of 1979 didn't start just 6 months or 1 year beforehand, but built up over many years, perhaps all the way back to the coup of 1953. For those of you who were alive then, what times back then rhyme with right now? Thanks. :4kerim:
 

Oldman

Bench Warmer
Jan 6, 2005
1,023
0
#2
Ba dorood:

This is my last post here and since it is a very important thread (IMO), I am replying and as I stated, this will be my last post here. I had my reservation to post at ISP to start off with as I knew there are members here who would not tolerate other political views and have been here much longer thus will cause what has taken place, LIMIT MY POSTS!!!

You do not need to limit me as I shall not post here.



Roozebehaazaadi, your point is very true. Based on my research (reading books and documents), Islamic crap started right after Mullah Khomanni was kicked out of Iran and it does not go back to 1953.

Book called Eteraafaat Hossien Boroujerdi indicates that late 60s (1967) was the year that all began and it started by elements such as himself taking pictures of decision makers, their house and their loved ones.

In early 70s, they started terror by kidnapping people and drag them to old ABAASI KAAREVAANSARAA located between Qoum and Tehran for executions.

This movement is much closer to the movement of 1906 revolution.

Taghizaadeh's writings (known as:”Yaadaashthaay Taghizaadeh”)right before 1906 depicts the situation in Iran of LAST year where everybody was wondering how long they will endure the regime (Qajar back then).

In fact, Iran's economy is much closer to what it was back then as well. Iranians did not have economical problems in 1979 but did in 1906.

The chants of 1906 was also for AAZAADI not JOMHOORY HEYVAANI. In 1979 the chants were Islamic Crap but in 1906, people were chanting for AAZAAADI.

So, I would compare this movement with the one of 1906.

Hope this has helped you and bid you farewell along with fine members here.
 
Oct 20, 2003
9,345
1
#3
Roozbeh JAn, I think it has been suggested by some that the 1979 revolution was continuation of 1953 coup, however, I do not think so. Kashani who was united with Mossadegh before 1953 parted way with Mossadegh and implicitly accepted the Shah's reign. I do not think that the Grand Ayatollah Borojordi who was the highest ranking of Shia at the time had a problem with the Shah either. What the Shah started under John Kennedy's directive (i.e. the Shah' White Revolution) started the 1342 unrest led by Khomieni in which a score of people were killed. The Kennedy's inspired White Revolution was an attempt to thwart the communists precieved takeover and to avert an uprising by the people. That IMO was the start of the religious movement by Khomieni who opposed the Shah's policies and not the 1953 coup. Khomieni was not even an Ayatollah at the time and Qom clergies were not in agreement with him in those days. It should be said that the Shah's secret police (Savak) was not a brutal as in later years in 1975s. The country was poor in 1960s as Iran was selling the oil cheaply after Mossadegh was removed and his nationalization of oil was effectively reversed, but all and all it was not a bad place.
The revolution of 1979 started as you know by a stupid article in a Ettelaat, and the uprising spread like a wild fire in protests and the killing that ensued. It took less than a year and half to topple the Shah. IMHO, the Shah could have thwarted the revolution early on but he made one mistake after another by electing one incompetent Prime Minister after another and not knowing what to do next, primarily due to the fact that he was so detached from the people and would not listen to anybody. I have to add that the human rights policies of Carter had weakened the Shah's support in the US in a way handcuffed what the Shah could have done. Additionally there was disagreement in Carter's White House as to how to deal with Iran between NSA and the Secretary of State. The Shah's power was based on the Armed foreces and the West's support. When the Armed foreces declared their neutrality and the West's support was not there anymore the Shah's regime fell. Sorry for the long post, I tried to get to the main points.
 

RoozbehAzadi

National Team Player
Nov 19, 2002
4,272
0
#4
Oldman-jan I hope you stay because even though I disagree with you on constitutional monarchy, I appreciate your views. I really hope you don't leave and continue to contribute.

What you said about the 1906 constitutional revolution movement makes sense, since as you said during the Shah's time the economy was really good while during the end of the Qajars dynasty it was "harj o marj" which led to Reza Khan becoming Reza Shah, and his first 10 years are perhaps the best 10 years in Iran's development in the last 300 years. Also back then Russia supported the Qajars. But nowadays, my hope is that things will proceed quicker then it did then, especially with communication and the internet being a huge difference.

Iranpaak-jan, it seems that the Shah's problems with not being supported by the outside are multiplied by 1 million with the akhounds having no friends outside of Iran besides other terrorists like themselves. The only thing that's necessary is for Artesh to side fully with the people, and this might take some time.
 
Oct 18, 2002
11,593
3
#5
What you said about the 1906 constitutional revolution movement makes sense, since as you said during the Shah's time the economy was really good while during the end of the Qajars dynasty it was "harj o marj" which led to Reza Khan becoming Reza Shah, and his first 10 years are perhaps the best 10 years in Iran's development in the last 300 years. Also back then Russia supported the Qajars. But nowadays, my hope is that things will proceed quicker then it did then, especially with communication and the internet being a huge difference.
Oldman is right about certain similarities between constitutional movement and today's movement; one being that at that time the anti-mashrootiat cowd also had a strong popular base. Although there was no harj-o marj at that time. The harj o marj actually started after the consititutional movement. A big difference is that the constitutional movement was a clash between forces of modernity and a government that was archaic in every form, including methods of repression. This does not apply today: the IRI is equipped with the modern methods of repression. Also, the constitutional movement quickly became a military battle between the two sides. Not applicable today.

However oldman's picture of the 1979 revolution is quite biased. Regarding Islamist movements he claims it started after kicking khomeini out of Iran or from 1967. Hello! In 1964 the Islamist groups killed the prime minister! 15 Khordad happened before Khomeini was sent to exile! Saying that those events had no impact on the 1979 revolution is simply unbelievable.

BTW the economy was NOT in a good shape in 1978. While not comparable to 2009 in any way, starting around 1976 Shah's mismanagement of the evenue from 1973 oil boom and his decision to ignore his own economic advisors started to show its negative impact. Iran started to wrestle with really high inflation rates and for the first time in years the government had a budget deficeit. Whenever a government adds economic hardship to social opening after a decade of political repression, expect an explosion.
 

masoudA

Legionnaire
Oct 16, 2008
6,199
22
#6
Oldman Jaan
The fight is against IR not some members here on ISP.
As far as I am concerned is you have been and still are the link between Iranian internet community and one of the important opposition political parties. If CPI has been on the side of the Green movement is because of people like you. So, please do not get too involved with pitty discussions and do what you have to do. If you want to post a message from RP, or one from CPI, you must dedicate a new thread.

The problem was that in a span of a few hours, you and I posted 4 different messages from the Pahlavis under separate threads. As you know I have been a strong advocate for no group trying to steal the Green. I know RP has been extremely careful not to do that - so has everyone else, with the exception of a certain leftist group.


As for Roozbeh Question -
My answer is yes - there are many parallels and similiarities. But there is a major difference too - in 1978 only the people who were involved in politics were ahainst the regime, this time around everyone is against the regime.