Discussion on future of Free Iran

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#1
As the struggle of Iranians for freedom, equality and justice grows stronger to move beyond the reach of conservative vs. reformist, the realization of a truly free and prosperous Iran begins to gleam on the horizon.
Let us reflect on some of the features and qualities we as individuals wish to see in a free Iran. Let's have a discussion:

1. What form of governance do you favor and why?
Secular or religious, Republic, Constitutional Monarchy, or other forms? How would it function? (particularly in relation to provinces)

2. How do you see the role of clerics and Islam in general in a free Iran?

3. What flag do you think best represents Iran:
current one, lion & sun (with the sword, with a torch, with nothing?), Derafsh Kavian, or another one?

4. Which song do you think is suitable for national anthem?

5. Do you support separation or autonomy of any of the provinces?

6. What are your views on the Islamic veil and women status in general?

7. What role previous elements or groups of the revolution/Islamic republic should play?

8. What should the foreign policy be like?

9. Anything else you like to add.
 
Last edited:
May 9, 2004
14,809
103
#2
As the struggle of Iranians for freedom, equality and justice grows stronger to move beyond the reach of conservative vs. reformist, the realization of a truly free and prosperous Iran begins to gleam on the horizon.
Let us reflect on some of the features and qualities we as individuals wish to see in a free Iran. Let's have a discussion:

1. What form of governance do you favor and why?
Secular or religious, Republic, Constitutional Monarchy, or other forms? How would it function? (particularly in relation to provinces)

2. How do you see the role of clerics and Islam in general in a free Iran?

3. What flag do you think best represents Iran:
current one, lion & sun (with the sword, with a torch, with nothing?), Derafsh Kavian, or another one?

4. Which song do you think is suitable for national anthem?

5. Do you support separation or autonomy of any of the provinces?

6. What are your views on the Islamic veil and women status in general?

7. What role previous elements or groups of the revolution/Islamic republic should play?

8. What should the foreign policy be like?

9. Anything else you like to add.

1-
اگر بگیم سکولار که نود درصد از مردم حتی به قول گفتنی روشنفکران
اصول سکولاریزم را نمیدونند یا حتی اگر بدانند عمل نمیکنند
اگر بگیم اسلامی که به اسم اسلام دزدی میکنند
اگر بگیم سلطنت یا سلطنت مشروطه که رضا پشه سرو کلش پیدا میشه و عربستان و امریکا هم باج میخواند
اگر بگیم دمکراسی مثل کشورهای غرب
که ملت نمیدونند دمکراسی یعنی چه اصلا اصول دمکراسی رو نمیدونند که بخواهند پیاده کنند
به نظر من یک حکومت دیکتاتوری خیلی خشن که با گرز اهنین بر ایران حکومت کنه لایق ماست نه بیشتر
یکی مثل استالین بد نیست
ادم خشن و دیکتاتوری بود ولی دزد نبود!!!آ
2-
اسلام با ایران و مردم ایران پیوند خورده خوب نمیشه که مثلا اگر شما یا دیگران با اسلام مخالفید بتونیم بگیم اسلام را در
ایران ازاد کنار بگذاریم که باز همان جواب اول فکر کنم روشن میکنه که طرز فکر ما ایرانی ها در مورد ایران ازاد چیست

3 پرچم خیلی مهم نیست همین سفید و سبز و سرخ یه کس و شعری هم بزن وسطش مهم اینه که همه ملت زیر حمایت پرچم
و پرچم زیر حمایت همه ملت باشد
والا ما پرچم داشتیم که یک شیر نر در دستش یک شمشیر برنده بود اخر کار ژنرال امریکایی امد گفت برو شاه ما رفت
نه شیری دیدیم نه شمشیری
4-
ای ایران ای مرز پر گهر
5-
صد در صد خیر
6- هرکی هرچی دوست داره بپوشه بپوشه
البته تا حدی که اداب رسوم ما ایرانی ها می پذیره
7- هرکسی که جنایت و خیانتی نکرده باشه حق داره در ایران ازاد فعالیت سیاسی کنه
8- از نظر سیاسی مستقل باشیم نه مثل زمان شاه که تابع امریکا بودیم نه مثل این رژیم که خودش رو واسه فلسطین جر داده
مهم مصلحت مردم ایران است که می بایستی مد نظر قرار گرفته شود
9-
من کلا با هر انقلابی در حال حاضر مخالفم زیرا از یک طرف اپوزسیونی داریم که متشکل از یک عده خائن وطن فروش
که بلانسبت حتی کون عربستان رو میلیسند تا بایند و حکومت کنند و عده ای دیگر تجزیه طلب
و عده ای فقط و فقط به فکر انتقام جویی یعنی اگر ایران نابود شود و سوریه هم شود به تخمشون هم حساب نیست
ویک عده محدودی که واقعا برای ایران دلسوزی میکنند که این عده اخر در اقلیت هستند
این از یک جهت از جهت دیگر رژیم کنونی صدها بلکه ملیونها طرفدار دارد که حاضرند کشته شوند و رژیم سقوط نکند
و با برخورد این دو گروه خدا به داد ایران و ایرانی برسد
این رژیم تغییر خواهد کرد
ولی ساقط کردن ان الان در وضعیت کنونی بوسیله یک انقلاب درست مثل این است که کسی زنش حامله باشد و بخواهد بزور جنین که هنوز سه چهار ما بیشتر ندارد رو از رحم
زنش بیرون بکشد تا بشود بابا
اینجا نه جنین زنده خواهد ماند به کسی به او بابا خواهد گفت
ایران خانوم هم که بزور بچه را از رحمش میخواهند بکشند بیرون
دار فانی را وداع خواهد گفت
زمانی که رژیم سابق سقوط کرد همه چیز برای سقوط رژیم اماده بود تقریبا همه چیز
یک رهبر همه اقشار همه مخالفان با یک شعار تا جایی که کسی نمیدانست این که شعار میدهد
کمونیست است یا اسلامی
توده ای است یا مجاهد خلق
الان نه رهبری هست نه شعار واحدی نه حتی یک گروه و دو گره هستند
اوضاع منظقه هم کاملا بر علیه یک انقلاب است
فرض محال که شب بخوابیم صبح بیدار شویم جمهوری اسلامی محو شده باشد فردای ان روز همین به اصطلاح انقلابیون هریک سازی میزند
میپرند و بین خودشان اختلاف و کشت و کشتار و تجزیه طلب هم نمی نشیند و ایران را تکه تکه میکنند
کدوم ایران ازاد عمو خواب دیدی خیر باشد


 

TeamMeli

Legionnaire
Feb 5, 2014
7,265
26
Las Vegas, NV
#3
1-Thank you for this post and I have thought about this for decades now. To answer you first question Secular, direct Western Democracy not like a federal republic you see in USA or Russka

2- Let's be realistic, Islam will always have a role in Iran for better or worse. Iran is a Muslim nation predominantly so we cannot just pretend that with a change in government, people are going to stop being Muslims. The Clerics might have a role but they will be more of a support role, they cannot have a guardian council.

3-I have always been a fan of the shir or khorshid but another one I do not mind is the Zoroastrian Eagle

4-Eye Iran
Before someone says something I know Shhan Sahi(Spelling) was the official national anthem back then and Eye Iran was something people liked but I would pick Eye Iran.
5-I support each province having relative autonomy and each province should get x number of representatives in parliament.

6-I think you know my voews on Islamic veil and women's status in general. What I would do is make the veil a personal choice. If you are a Muslim woman who wants to wear the veil then that is your choice but it won't be mandatory. Women in Iran are second class citizens in general

7-NONE once they are gone, they lose everything nothing about this system is good.

8-As for our foreign policy, If we have a new government I think for the first decade, our focus should be on our own country. I would cut all aid to foreign countries and give that money to the poor people in Iran. Once our nation is strong, we can start setting foreign policies but I would still have small delegates and keep our main allies, ie Russia. I would also try to restore relations with USA and Israel it is better to get along than to fight.

9-I would like to add something when I was in the 2nd grade I went to a school camping trip on Friday to Sequoia National Forrest and the country was still CCCP. I come back on Monday and see on the news that the Soviet Union collapsed. My dream came true once before and it will happen again, in my lifetime.
 
Last edited:

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#4
...2- Let's be realistic, Islam will always have a role in Iran for better or worse. Iran is a Muslim nation predominantly so we cannot just pretend that with a change in government, people are going to stop being Muslims. The Clerics might have a role but they will be more of a support role, they cannot have a guardian council...
The question is: can Islam have a role like other religions in a secular society? Are there examples in Islamic history to support this notion? Are people supposed to serve a religion or is religion supposed to serve humans in their quest for progress and pursuit of an ever-advancing society?
 

Sly

Football Legend
Oct 18, 2002
27,102
264
#5
1. I'd like to have a system for Iran like in Sweden. However, knowing that the Iranian population is not ready for that yet (in fact it's not ready for any democracy), I'd go with an Educated and honest group of people who would work as a committee to lead the country in a half dictatorship which the Iranian people currently need. Then they should slowly loosen up as time passes by and make the country democratic.

2. Whether we like it or not, there are tons of heavily religious people in Iran! Hence, religion should be respected and the clerics should continue to do their jobs as long as they are limited to that only.

3. Don't care as long as the vote of the people is decisive.

4. Definitely the first national anthem from Qajar's time (Vatanam vatanam). I'd be happier if they could modify the text a bit so the Arabic word of vatanam was changed to something else.

5. Yes but only if the whole population of Iran vote for it! Because all provinces of Iran belong to the whole population, not just to the ones who live there.

6. Women (or even men for that matter) should be free to wear what ever they want as long as they don't aggravate the majority of the population. (I'm sure a completely naked woman or man, wondering in the streets of Toronto, Los Angeles or Stockholm in a normal day, would be taken into custody).

7. If criminals, they should be convicted according to the laws! If not, they'd be free to do what ever they were doing before the revolution.

8. Being friends with everybody. Trying not to get into conflicts.

9. In a free Iran every group will be going crazy to take over the country. I bet people like MKO would even kill for it. That's why a semi-totalitarian system, yet civilized and educated is needed to give the people their freedom, yet not to let the freedom be misused. They should concentrate on building up the economy/industry as their main task.
 

TeamMeli

Legionnaire
Feb 5, 2014
7,265
26
Las Vegas, NV
#6
The question is: can Islam have a role like other religions in a secular society? Are there examples in Islamic history to support this notion? Are people supposed to serve a religion or is religion supposed to serve humans in their quest for progress and pursuit of an ever-advancing society?
My apologies now that I understand the question better, I shall try to answer. I do not think there is a historical example of Islam playing a role like other religions in a secular society because the Sharia law is a contradiction Western Democracy. What I mean by that is Islam under Sharia law has it's own laws and rules, which are vastly different than Secularism. Why is it that Christianity can have a role in secular societies like USA or Western European nations? It's because it is a good fit and does not contradict western democracy.

As for the second part of the question I do not think people should ever serve a religion however, religious authorities should be there to serve the people.Since I have some experience wearing the religion hat, in the military(When they bestow that title on you, it is rude to say no and I am open minded): I think it is the duty of a priest, pastor, rabbi, mullah etc whatever to serve the people, not the other way around. I apologize if this is a long answer but that is a complex question, which cannot be summarized by a few sentences or a paragraph, unless you want it to be simplistic.

@Sly jan I don't think the Scandinavian model is going to work in Iran just because their population is small compared to us. You mentioned Sweden population 9,000,000 Iran population 70,000,000. I also agree that the Iranians are not ready for that system but I think they are ready for a true democracy. Maybe one day they will be ready for more of a socialist system but that is going to be a very long time and the population would probably need to decrease, in order to execute it properly. One reason why Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark can get away with it is because of their small population.
 
Last edited:

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#7
That's interesting because you all have said that Iran is not ready for democracy. Can any or all of you say what are the conditions of democracy that in your opinion is non existent in Iran? I could be wrong but it seems that people inside Iran have a lot more capacity for democracy that we imagine on the outside. Not to mention that since the Constitutional revolution over 100 years Iranians have been yearning for freedom and justice and the first constitution had no mention of religion in it, until mullahs came along....

And Sly, can you elaborate on this council that you mentioned, would it be elected or selected and how it continues?

As for an alternative word for vatan, might I suggest "Meehan"? :)
 

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#8
And here it is:

وطنم وطنم
اولین سرود ملی ایران
ساختهٔ اهنگساز فرانسوی
Alfred Jean Baptiste Lemaire
که برای اولین بار با اجرای ارکستر ملل به رهبری پیمان سلطانی در ایران به روی صحنه رفت.
این سرود به وسیله سیاوش بیضایی با افزودن يك مقدمه،بخش میان و بخش پایانی تکمیل شده است

شعر آن سرودهٔ بیژن ترقی Bijan Taraghi می باشد.

نامِ جاوید وطن صبحِ امید وطن
جلوه کن در آسمان همچو مهرِ جاودان

وطن ای هستیِ من شور و سرمستیِ من
جلوه کن در آسمان همچو مهرِ جاودان

بشنو سوزِ سخنم که هم آوازِ تو منم
همهٔ جان و تنم وطنم وطنم وطنم وطنم

بشنو سوزِ سخنم که نواگر این چمنم
همهٔ جان و تنم وطنم وطنم وطنم وطنم

همه با یک نام و نشان به تفاوتِ هر رنگ و زبان
همه شاد و خوش و نغمه زنان ز صلابتِ ایران جوان
ز صلابتِ ایرانِ جوان ز صلابتِ ایرانِ جوان

 

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#9
Or this one:


Lyrics to Ey Iran (Persian: ای ایران) (O Iran)

ای ایران

ای ایران ای مرز پرگهر
ای خاکت سرچشمه هنر
دور از تو اندیشه بدان
پاینده مانی تو جاودان
ای دشمن ار تو سنگ خاره ای من آهنم
جان من فدای خاک پاک میهنم
مهر تو چون شد پیشه ام
دور از تو نیست اندیشه ام
در راه تو کی ارزشی دارد این جان ما
پاینده باد خاک ایران ما
سنگ کوهت در و گوهر است
خاک دشتت بهتر از زر است
مهرت از دل کی برون کنم
برگو بی مهر تو چون کنم
تا گردش جهان و دور آسمان به پاست
نور ایزدی همیشه رهنمای ماست
مهر تو چون شد پیشه ام
دور از تو نیست اندیشه ام
در راه تو کی ارزشی دارد اين جان ما
پاینده باد خاک ایران ما
ایران ای خرم بهشت من
روشن از تو سرنوشت من
گر آتش بارد به پیکرم
جز مهرت در دل نپرورم
از آب و خاک و مهر تو سرشته شد گلم
مهر اگر برون رود تهی شود دلم
مهر تو چون شد پیشه ام
دور از تو نیست اندیشه ام
در راه تو کی ارزشی دارد این جان ما
پاینده باد خاک ایران ما


Oh Iran, oh bejeweled land
Oh, your soil is the wellspring of the arts
Far from you may the thoughts of evil be
May you remain lasting and eternal
Oh enemy, if you are of stone, I am of iron
May my life be sacrificed for the pure soil of my motherland
Since your love became my calling
My thoughts are never far from you
In your cause, when do our lives have value?
May the land of our Iran be eternal
The stones of your mountains are jewels and pearls
The soil of your valleys are better than gold
When could I rid my heart of your affection?
Tell me, what will I do without your affection?
As long as the turning of the earth and the cycling of the sky lasts
The light of the Divine will always guide us
Since your love became my calling
My thoughts are never far from you
In your cause, when do our lives have value?
May the land of our Iran be eternal
Iran oh my green paradise
Bright is my fate because of you
If fire rains on my body
Other than your love I will not cherish in my heart
Your water, soil and love molded my clay
If your love leaves my heart it will become barren
Since your love became my calling
My thoughts are never far from you
In your cause, when do our lives have value?
May the land of our Iran be eternal
 
Feb 18, 2005
13,113
951
#10

1-
اگر بگیم سکولار که نود درصد از مردم حتی به قول گفتنی روشنفکران
اصول سکولاریزم را نمیدونند یا حتی اگر بدانند عمل نمیکنند
اگر بگیم اسلامی که به اسم اسلام دزدی میکنند
اگر بگیم سلطنت یا سلطنت مشروطه که رضا پشه سرو کلش پیدا میشه و عربستان و امریکا هم باج میخواند
اگر بگیم دمکراسی مثل کشورهای غرب
که ملت نمیدونند دمکراسی یعنی چه اصلا اصول دمکراسی رو نمیدونند که بخواهند پیاده کنند
به نظر من یک حکومت دیکتاتوری خیلی خشن که با گرز اهنین بر ایران حکومت کنه لایق ماست نه بیشتر
یکی مثل استالین بد نیست
ادم خشن و دیکتاتوری بود ولی دزد نبود!!!آ
2-
اسلام با ایران و مردم ایران پیوند خورده خوب نمیشه که مثلا اگر شما یا دیگران با اسلام مخالفید بتونیم بگیم اسلام را در
ایران ازاد کنار بگذاریم که باز همان جواب اول فکر کنم روشن میکنه که طرز فکر ما ایرانی ها در مورد ایران ازاد چیست

3 پرچم خیلی مهم نیست همین سفید و سبز و سرخ یه کس و شعری هم بزن وسطش مهم اینه که همه ملت زیر حمایت پرچم
و پرچم زیر حمایت همه ملت باشد
والا ما پرچم داشتیم که یک شیر نر در دستش یک شمشیر برنده بود اخر کار ژنرال امریکایی امد گفت برو شاه ما رفت
نه شیری دیدیم نه شمشیری
4-
ای ایران ای مرز پر گهر
5-
صد در صد خیر
6- هرکی هرچی دوست داره بپوشه بپوشه
البته تا حدی که اداب رسوم ما ایرانی ها می پذیره
7- هرکسی که جنایت و خیانتی نکرده باشه حق داره در ایران ازاد فعالیت سیاسی کنه
8- از نظر سیاسی مستقل باشیم نه مثل زمان شاه که تابع امریکا بودیم نه مثل این رژیم که خودش رو واسه فلسطین جر داده
مهم مصلحت مردم ایران است که می بایستی مد نظر قرار گرفته شود
9-
من کلا با هر انقلابی در حال حاضر مخالفم زیرا از یک طرف اپوزسیونی داریم که متشکل از یک عده خائن وطن فروش
که بلانسبت حتی کون عربستان رو میلیسند تا بایند و حکومت کنند و عده ای دیگر تجزیه طلب
و عده ای فقط و فقط به فکر انتقام جویی یعنی اگر ایران نابود شود و سوریه هم شود به تخمشون هم حساب نیست
ویک عده محدودی که واقعا برای ایران دلسوزی میکنند که این عده اخر در اقلیت هستند
این از یک جهت از جهت دیگر رژیم کنونی صدها بلکه ملیونها طرفدار دارد که حاضرند کشته شوند و رژیم سقوط نکند
و با برخورد این دو گروه خدا به داد ایران و ایرانی برسد
این رژیم تغییر خواهد کرد
ولی ساقط کردن ان الان در وضعیت کنونی بوسیله یک انقلاب درست مثل این است که کسی زنش حامله باشد و بخواهد بزور جنین که هنوز سه چهار ما بیشتر ندارد رو از رحم
زنش بیرون بکشد تا بشود بابا
اینجا نه جنین زنده خواهد ماند به کسی به او بابا خواهد گفت
ایران خانوم هم که بزور بچه را از رحمش میخواهند بکشند بیرون
دار فانی را وداع خواهد گفت
زمانی که رژیم سابق سقوط کرد همه چیز برای سقوط رژیم اماده بود تقریبا همه چیز
یک رهبر همه اقشار همه مخالفان با یک شعار تا جایی که کسی نمیدانست این که شعار میدهد
کمونیست است یا اسلامی
توده ای است یا مجاهد خلق
الان نه رهبری هست نه شعار واحدی نه حتی یک گروه و دو گره هستند
اوضاع منظقه هم کاملا بر علیه یک انقلاب است
فرض محال که شب بخوابیم صبح بیدار شویم جمهوری اسلامی محو شده باشد فردای ان روز همین به اصطلاح انقلابیون هریک سازی میزند
میپرند و بین خودشان اختلاف و کشت و کشتار و تجزیه طلب هم نمی نشیند و ایران را تکه تکه میکنند
کدوم ایران ازاد عمو خواب دیدی خیر باشد


you are spot on .... a charismatic patriotic leader(Dictator) with a sharp sword is needed who would treat every Iranian regardless of ethnicity and religion the same ....we were not ready for democracy western style 40 years ago and we are not ready for it now and for a foreseeable future .
 

Sly

Football Legend
Oct 18, 2002
27,102
264
#11
That's interesting because you all have said that Iran is not ready for democracy. Can any or all of you say what are the conditions of democracy that in your opinion is non existent in Iran? I could be wrong but it seems that people inside Iran have a lot more capacity for democracy that we imagine on the outside. Not to mention that since the Constitutional revolution over 100 years Iranians have been yearning for freedom and justice and the first constitution had no mention of religion in it, until mullahs came along....

And Sly, can you elaborate on this council that you mentioned, would it be elected or selected and how it continues?

As for an alternative word for vatan, might I suggest "Meehan"? :)
The first condition for having a democracy is the capacity to tolerate an opposite opinion. It should be embedded in the culture from early ages. In Iran, from the first grade at school you need to learn to accept and respect what ever an elder, specially a teacher tells you. The critical thinking or questioning is non-existent. Just as a simple example, go to different Iranian forums where you have a high number of active members and see how many times opposite opinions are tolerated and is not directed by personal attacks and insults. and that comes mostly from Iranians who've lived in the west and experienced democracy, let alone the ones in Iran.

Yes, the first constitution may not have mention of religion in it but look how it went. People have longed for democracy since many decades ago but every time they tried to have it, something or someone withing Iran stopped it. This means the problem is not religion but rather embedded in the culture. From 2500 years ago until now, never did Iran have or experienced a democracy. The only thing people really know is to listen and be directed by a upper person (parents, a teacher, a boss, a leader). As said, start having a true democracy in Iran today and groups like MKO who consider themselves the rightful leaders of Iran will take over the country by force. There are tons of other examples.

The committee I mentioned should be elected yet all the members should be highly educated and civilized. As said, they should be semi-dictators in the beginning but as time passes by, they should slowly but surely loosen up. Look at Saudi Arabia. Slowly but surely they are turning from being the least democratic country in the world to the second least one (before Iran). During the past few years, they have allowed women to vote, to drive and to enter their stadiums. It wont take long before they enter their politics as well. The committee should take the same procedure and slowly allow more and more democratic ways until full democracy is achieved. Then a system like the one in Sweden is my preference.
 

Sly

Football Legend
Oct 18, 2002
27,102
264
#12
To General Parsaian and Oghab:

I don't really agree with you about a complete dictator. What you are suggesting is someone like Reza shah who did a lot of good for Iran indeed, but look how it went later. A big contribution to the revolution of 1979 and Iran being a theocracy today, is hampering the religion and the life style of religious people by Reza shah. When you put complete force on people, it will only backfire to the worst possible scenario later.

As said, I don't think Iran can have a democracy today but a complete totalitarian leader is not an answer either.
 

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#13
The first condition for having a democracy is the capacity to tolerate an opposite opinion. It should be embedded in the culture from early ages. In Iran, from the first grade at school you need to learn to accept and respect what ever an elder, specially a teacher tells you. The critical thinking or questioning is non-existent. Just as a simple example, go to different Iranian forums where you have a high number of active members and see how many times opposite opinions are tolerated and is not directed by personal attacks and insults. and that comes mostly from Iranians who've lived in the west and experienced democracy, let alone the ones in Iran.

Yes, the first constitution may not have mention of religion in it but look how it went. People have longed for democracy since many decades ago but every time they tried to have it, something or someone withing Iran stopped it. This means the problem is not religion but rather embedded in the culture. From 2500 years ago until now, never did Iran have or experienced a democracy. The only thing people really know is to listen and be directed by a upper person (parents, a teacher, a boss, a leader). As said, start having a true democracy in Iran today and groups like MKO who consider themselves the rightful leaders of Iran will take over the country by force. There are tons of other examples.

The committee I mentioned should be elected yet all the members should be highly educated and civilized. As said, they should be semi-dictators in the beginning but as time passes by, they should slowly but surely loosen up. Look at Saudi Arabia. Slowly but surely they are turning from being the least democratic country in the world to the second least one (before Iran). During the past few years, they have allowed women to vote, to drive and to enter their stadiums. It wont take long before they enter their politics as well. The committee should take the same procedure and slowly allow more and more democratic ways until full democracy is achieved. Then a system like the one in Sweden is my preference.
To large extent I agree with you that problems in Iran are highly cultural. At the same time I believe this culture is a mullah culture highly prejudiced and intolerant of any other beliefs. For instance the same clerics that called the demonstrations, burning banks and buses and movie theaters an act of fighting for freedom in 1978/9, now call any simple act of peaceful disobedience and disagreement as "ashoobgar" and influenced by foreigners!! And some of the older religious people still listen to them.

If the religious people didn't go and listen to the highly charged sermons of Ahmad Khatami that calls for death penalty for the ones that participated in the demonstrations, if he didn't have an audience he wouldn't make such outlandish declarations that are outside their own constitution and Islamic feghh! There was an analyst that totally rejected all Khatami's claims on TV based on their own Feghh and constitution. How is it that he is allowed a podium; more importantly how is it that he has an audience?

One of the main reasons is the mullah culture that has been breathed into people of Iran that they all inherently have some of its feature. Some of its main features are deep prejudice and mob mentality. Prejudice is such a destructive force because it won't allow critical thinking. In addition to that, other than brief periods, Iran for over 14 centuries has been under attack or influence of Arabs, Mongols, Turks, etc. that it has not been allowed to flourish even to the extent that it did in ancient times.

However, the new generation that has lived under the rule of the same mullahs has seen their machinations, their fallacies, their spins, their corruptions and is not as deeply affected by the same mullah culture and ready for democracy, one that need not blindly copy other countries - there are so many problems with Western democracy - but one that has the same principles of freedom and justice and is open to all ideas under a secular rule of law.
 
Feb 18, 2005
13,113
951
#14
To General Parsaian and Oghab:

I don't really agree with you about a complete dictator. What you are suggesting is someone like Reza shah who did a lot of good for Iran indeed, but look how it went later. A big contribution to the revolution of 1979 and Iran being a theocracy today, is hampering the religion and the life style of religious people by Reza shah. When you put complete force on people, it will only backfire to the worst possible scenario later.

As said, I don't think Iran can have a democracy today but a complete totalitarian leader is not an answer either.
I am not a fan of dictatorship but I don't see another useful or helpful option with the way things are with our nation and our mentality, and if you read my post again I wish for a charismatic and patriotic leader who sees every Iranian citizen regardless of their ethnicity or religion equal ....
 

TeamMeli

Legionnaire
Feb 5, 2014
7,265
26
Las Vegas, NV
#15
That's interesting because you all have said that Iran is not ready for democracy. Can any or all of you say what are the conditions of democracy that in your opinion is non existent in Iran? I could be wrong but it seems that people inside Iran have a lot more capacity for democracy that we imagine on the outside. Not to mention that since the Constitutional revolution over 100 years Iranians have been yearning for freedom and justice and the first constitution had no mention of religion in it, until mullahs came along....

And Sly, can you elaborate on this council that you mentioned, would it be elected or selected and how it continues?

As for an alternative word for vatan, might I suggest "Meehan"? :)
Meehandoost if you read my post I said that Iranian people ARE ready for democracy, what I said is they are not ready for Sly's idea of a Scandinavian style government, more Socialist. Iranians will have a mental block and if you say Socialist, they will automatically associate it with Communist however, you can see that those countries Norway, Sweden, and Finland are not Communist. Iranians are not ready for that system but they yearn for justice, freedom and democracy the achounds in power are not ready to give it up. As Lord Actin once said, "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely." The only way we can implement this system is if Iran is one day free, I hope that clears up any misconceptions because you said, "all of you guys," however I mentioned we are ready for that.

@Ogahbealborz, jan I agree with you a dictator is the worst thing for Iranians but a charismatic leader who sees every Iranian as equals, regardless of ethnicity would be good, as long as that leader is elected democratically. I say no to replacing one form of dictatorship(IRI) with another(a King, monarchy) because then you are replacing one bad system, with another. I do not want to see any more royal families in Iran, I want to see a free and democratic Iran.
 
Last edited:
May 21, 2003
19,733
98
Not The Eshaalic Goozpublic !
#16
pull the TOILET of religion out of the constitution and all will fall into place.

it will be very natural with minimal amounts of force. confine religion to people's domiciles. they want to bend over for allah or put the addition sign for the faggot carpenter or head bang for the imaginary figure or stick a cow's horn in their ass for budda go ahead and do it at home.

magically a country which is currently a toilet will evolve (EVOLUTION) into a modern society within the next two decades.
 
May 9, 2004
14,809
103
#17
To General Parsaian and Oghab:

I don't really agree with you about a complete dictator. What you are suggesting is someone like Reza shah who did a lot of good for Iran indeed, but look how it went later. A big contribution to the revolution of 1979 and Iran being a theocracy today, is hampering the religion and the life style of religious people by Reza shah. When you put complete force on people, it will only backfire to the worst possible scenario later.

As said, I don't think Iran can have a democracy today but a complete totalitarian leader is not an answer either.
سلای جان من نگفتم یکی مثل رضا شاه
گفتم مثل استالین
رضا شاه هم تابع بود یا حداقل ضعیف بود و نتونست وقتی که انگلیش ازش خواست کنار بره تو ایران بمونه حتی کشته بشه
بلند کرد و رفت
رضا شاه کارهای خوبی کرد ولی ضعیف بود
من یک دیکتاتور رو میگم که کاملا خودمختار باشه عاشق ایران البته مثال استالین رو که زدم فقط به این خاطر بود
که استالین تابع نبود و دزد نبود والا استالین هم قتل عام زیاد کرد
من مشکلی با دمکراسی ندارم برعکس خیلی هم خوبه
ولی مردم ما و کلا مردم شرق نمیدونم مثل اینه که با دمکراسی جور در نمیایند !!ا
همین هایی که میگن دمکراسی میخواهیم فردا از دیکتاتور هم دیکتاتور تر رفتار میکنند
به حرفهایشان درست دقت کن میبینی که بویی از دمکراسی و ازادی نمیاد
برایشان ازادی بیان یعنی ازادی بیان خودشان و بس
 

Meehandoost

Bench Warmer
Sep 4, 2005
1,836
6
#18
I don't think Iran needs a dictator, on the contrary, I think people of Iran, especially the younger generation, have great capacity for democratic governance. Youth are the arrowhead of change as they are not chained by generations of prejudice masking itself as common sense. They also have a great sense of justice. They will bring about change and a secular democracy that is fit for Iran. It doesn't have to be the American, Canadian, European or Scandinavian style; it will be Iranian style, and that is fine.

It is of no use to keep saying people in Iran are not ready for this or can't handle democracy, we cannot possibly know that with any level of certainty. It is ok to analyze the shortcomings of the past, but to dwell on them will only retard progress. It is not going to be easy; but let's not make it harder than it has to be. There is a subtle difference between being a realist and a pessimist, but it's there!

There were some other good ideas like no religion in the constitution, I personally agree with this, freedom of and from religion, and a secular governance. There was some discussion on autonomy of regions or provinces, like a federated government, which I personally like and puts some regional fervor to rest. There was a suggestion about possibly an elected council instead of one person which I think is worth consideration.

As for Hijab, there was a comment that people are free to wear what they want as long as they don't aggravate the majority of the people. There rests the problem, the as long as part, because regimes such as the current one use it to force their version of morality onto other people so that could be problematic. It needs to be clarified more. As long as people conform with civil law and international norms (meaning not running naked in the streets) they should be free to dress whatever they want. It seems ridiculous to even discuss it seems, we are talking about Iran! I believe one of the major problems is the idea of telling others what to do and what not to do.
 

Sly

Football Legend
Oct 18, 2002
27,102
264
#19
To large extent I agree with you that problems in Iran are highly cultural. At the same time I believe this culture is a mullah culture highly prejudiced and intolerant of any other beliefs. For instance the same clerics that called the demonstrations, burning banks and buses and movie theaters an act of fighting for freedom in 1978/9, now call any simple act of peaceful disobedience and disagreement as "ashoobgar" and influenced by foreigners!! And some of the older religious people still listen to them.

If the religious people didn't go and listen to the highly charged sermons of Ahmad Khatami that calls for death penalty for the ones that participated in the demonstrations, if he didn't have an audience he wouldn't make such outlandish declarations that are outside their own constitution and Islamic feghh! There was an analyst that totally rejected all Khatami's claims on TV based on their own Feghh and constitution. How is it that he is allowed a podium; more importantly how is it that he has an audience?

One of the main reasons is the mullah culture that has been breathed into people of Iran that they all inherently have some of its feature. Some of its main features are deep prejudice and mob mentality. Prejudice is such a destructive force because it won't allow critical thinking. In addition to that, other than brief periods, Iran for over 14 centuries has been under attack or influence of Arabs, Mongols, Turks, etc. that it has not been allowed to flourish even to the extent that it did in ancient times.

However, the new generation that has lived under the rule of the same mullahs has seen their machinations, their fallacies, their spins, their corruptions and is not as deeply affected by the same mullah culture and ready for democracy, one that need not blindly copy other countries - there are so many problems with Western democracy - but one that has the same principles of freedom and justice and is open to all ideas under a secular rule of law.
I think you are mixing 2 things. 1. The mullas and the way they have literally destroyed Iran. 2. Iranian culture (not only mulla culture) which is not ready for democracy yet.

In the case of number 2..... go back before the revolution to get rid of the mullah culture as you put it and see how things were. Iran and Iranians had it so much better under shah but it's not like they had a democracy. Shah was a dictator, his father was one, before him Qajars were dictators and go back all the way to 2500 years ago when Mullas didn't even exist. At a time when Rome was kind of democratic, Persia was ruled by dictators. As said, this is embedded in the Iranian culture. It has nothing to do with the mullas or the religion.

You say young people of Iran today are ready for it. I don't know what you base that on but as the example I told you before.....go to any Iranian forum with lots of young active members and see how tolerant they are against each other. Sorry dude but the young people are the children of their parents who themselves were the children of their own parents and every generation learn the culture of each other. Unfortunately it will take a very long time for Iranians to be able to live in a democracy.
 
Last edited:

Sly

Football Legend
Oct 18, 2002
27,102
264
#20
سلای جان من نگفتم یکی مثل رضا شاه
گفتم مثل استالین
رضا شاه هم تابع بود یا حداقل ضعیف بود و نتونست وقتی که انگلیش ازش خواست کنار بره تو ایران بمونه حتی کشته بشه
بلند کرد و رفت
رضا شاه کارهای خوبی کرد ولی ضعیف بود
من یک دیکتاتور رو میگم که کاملا خودمختار باشه عاشق ایران البته مثال استالین رو که زدم فقط به این خاطر بود
که استالین تابع نبود و دزد نبود والا استالین هم قتل عام زیاد کرد
من مشکلی با دمکراسی ندارم برعکس خیلی هم خوبه
ولی مردم ما و کلا مردم شرق نمیدونم مثل اینه که با دمکراسی جور در نمیایند !!ا
همین هایی که میگن دمکراسی میخواهیم فردا از دیکتاتور هم دیکتاتور تر رفتار میکنند
به حرفهایشان درست دقت کن میبینی که بویی از دمکراسی و ازادی نمیاد
برایشان ازادی بیان یعنی ازادی بیان خودشان و بس
General jan, I do agree with you about our people not being able to live in a democracy but my point was not the difference between Reza shah and Stalin but their similarities. You are suggesting a leader who put complete force on the people. In that regards, there is no difference between Reza shah or Stalin or even Khomeini for that matter. Just the other side of the same coin. Iran does need a dictator but in regards to the people, a much softer one than Stalin who can slowly but surely change the society into becoming democratic. Of course as you say, he should not be tabe' as Reza shah but that is another discussion.
 
Last edited: