This is a quick post that will probably elicit lengthy answers. I have two questions that I would like some of you to answer.
1. Without the benefit of hindsight, if you were an Iranian in 1979, do you believe you would have participated in the Revolution against the Shah? Why or why not?
2. Now with the benefit of hindsight, does your answer change? Why or why not?
I am interested to see what you guys think.
-Amir
12 comments:
I don't believe I would be a part of the revolution before or after hindsight. The Shah was a good and fair man. He allowed a lot of freedom in religion and for women. After the Revolution women had to wear coverings and many of their privelages were taken away, just as they are to this day. As far as religions goes, it was much more strict than before, there is no freedom to serve the god you please you have to be Muslim, and if you show that you are anything other than that you get punished. The economy has greatly suffered after the Revolution also.
With the situation and the ideology of the time, I might have probably been brian washed and joined the revolution. Keep that in mind that many joined, millions joined... I might have one it too because you always hope for the best... it's like when you computer gets old and you get tired of it, you will like to change it for a new one even though you might get one which is not as powerful. However, with what we can see right now or even a few days or months after the revolution, when you can see the gap between what was promised and what is happening, you will change your mind.... The idea has happened again and again throughout the history... We Elected G.W.Bush or Iranians Elected Ahmadinejad... this is what I call being under the influence.
If I was present in 1979, I don't think I would have joined the revolution against the Shah. Primarily my reason for not supporting it would be that I would not want to give someone the power to limit my country to only one religion, for instance Muslim. I would have also figured that with the new organization, we would be losing a lot of rights, such as women's rights. I would also assume that we would be cutting our ties with the western world, which would surely set the country back financially. In hindsight I definitely would have not joined the revolution. Iran's economy now suffers greatly, especially with all the sanctions set by the UN. Iran also hasn't decreased their hatred for Israel and the West, which I believe will always hinder their progress as a growing country.
I don't know if I would have necessarily joined the Revolution in 1979, but I would have probably asked to see change in the Shah's regime.
I believe that the Shah was an intelligent man and had many great ideas on how to modernize Iran and make it a better country. However, some of his policies where hurting the people, and not everyone (especially the lower class and the middle class) were reaping the benefits of the economic growth. This is probably the main reason that people were unhappy.
I think many people that participated in the Revolution did so because they believed that real change was going to come about. That more people were going to be economically safe and that there would be more social freedoms (like the right to disagree with the Shah).
Most people were not expecting the Islamic Republic to be far worse for the country than the Shah's regime.
After learning about the aftermath of the Revolution and its effects on Iran I don't think I want to have ever been involved with the Revolution. Economically and socially more people are unhappy now than under the Shah's regime. The middle class and the lower class have the same type of problems, the only thing that has changed is who is in charge.
I can see the draw to joining the revolution. After details of the US's involvement in previous history, I probably would have been upset at the government that allowed the interference. I can't say for sure, but I probably would have joined the revolution thinking that the power could be given back to the people. That said, after knowing what happened during and after the revolution, I don't think that I would have participated. Any time there is that much bloodshed one has to wonder if anything could be worth the loss. Even then, the outcome did not, in my opinion, serve the interests of the people as no power was given to the people. Additionally, women seemed to be in a good position before the revolution compared to their situation afterward.
Had I been a young student in Iran at the time of the Revolution, I believe I would have directly participated in the Revolution. The Shah's government did far too little to improve the conditions of the people during the "White Revolution." The Shah makes a spirited defense of his regime, however, the SAVAK indiscriminately tortured the people. Politically, only two parties were allowed within government and any other opposition found itself beaten and outlawed.
If you look at the initial beginning of the Revolution there were different blocs that formed a coalition against the Shah's regime. Not all of them were "fundamentalists." Unfortunately, the religious segment of the coalition proved to be the only well organized sector of that coalition.
Even with the benefit of hindsight, I think I probably would be happier with the current regime than with the regime under the Shah. From the perspective of an average Iranian, which I am not, I'd be happy that at least I could vote for municipal and federal officers (granted they are pre-selected). In addition, at least my country has control over its resources and can set its own course in its development.
I recognize that there are numerous problems with the current regime. However, at least Iran has its own sovereign control of its affairs and can hopefully improve its internal situation, something I don't believe would have been possible under the Shah.
After seeing the documentary about the 1979 Revolution in the last class session, I think that I too would have been convinced to join the revolution. Considering that many Iranians felt that their liberties and way of life were being threatened, that they were being unjustly oppressed by the Shah and SAVAK, I could see myself doing the same thing whether I was simply brain-washed and caught up in the movement, or genuinely suffering under the Shah's rule. However, in hindsight and with the little knowledge I have gained in this class of Iran's past and present state (before this class I had almost no genuine knowledge of Iran-I have also always ignored the media on this and similar subjects), I probably wouldn't have joined the revolution. I would not want to be forced to practice one religion if it was not my own, and considering the limited rights of women without the Shah's "enfranchisement of women", I don't imagine my life as a woman would have been so great during and after the revolution. If I had been an Iranian in 1979 and I could see that the future was to be nearly the same if not worse, I certainly wouldn't have joined the revolution. But I honestly don't know that that would have been the wisest choice at that time. In the documentary, it seemed as if you were screwed even if you didn't participate in the revolution.
I would have participate in the revolution for sure, casue I see the Iran's revolution as a step toward a more democratic society. when you look at history as a whole you would see that human history has some similar patterns, not necessarily the same but similar, we can not expect to scientificly be an advanced society unless we would be advanced in terms of society and politics. progress in a nation should happens in all aspects of a nation , in pahlavi period more focus was on scientific progress and it failed, I believe iran's revolution was a must toward an advanced country. it does not mean that I am happy with today's iran but like I said it is a step that must be taken in history of iran.
Certainly without hindsight as a factor, I think that I would have joined in the revolution if I were an Iranian during the uprising. I would have been infuriated by the sentiment that the Shah was beholden to Western power--mainly the US who was seen as contaminating Iranian culture. In addition, the oppressive regime of the Shah and the corrupt handling of dissidents, as well as his extravagant lifestyle would have contributed to my discontent. Looking at it from an economical side, the technical failures of the regime: the shortages and severely high inflation, unemployment, failure of security forces and the overly centralized royal power structure is not and ideal situation to permit.
When looking at that current situation, i would say no. I would have liked the Shah to stay in power. i believe that with a strong relationship with the US, that Iran would have benefited with Western technology and engineering. But I am also saying that because I am an American and that is how I was brought up. If i was put in that situation where a majority of the population wanted change, i could see myself joining the crowd by not wanting a foreign influenced ruler controling my country.
Post a Comment