Hopefully this quotation may explain why an authoritarian approach was necessary to attempt in rescuing Iran from 1400 years of foreign domination (physically or ideological-wise), nation-wide poverty & disease, dis-integration of the territorial integrity of the country, banditry and lawlessness, nation-wide illiteracy, a superstitious society governed by an anti-Iranian Islamic religious establishment, and a thousand other ills which faced Iran at the time that the founder of modern Iran (Reza Shah the Great) decided to put the country on the path towards modernity, progress, and prosperity. Imagine that society, facing the thousands ills that were present at that time, being given full democratic rights, as suggested by these gullible individuals a 100 years after the realities of that period in history, the results would have been nothing short of anarchy or the powerful anti-Iranian Islamic religious establishment capitalizing on their stronghold of Iranian minds and bring further misery to a country that had at that time suffered for 1400 years...
“Authoritarian political structures sometimes work well. They offer opportunities to make rapid change and to impose firm leadership which more accountable systems lack. In the hands of honest leaders of determination and vision, they give opportunities for stability and long-term planning which democratic regimes often find difficult to achieve.”
(Kay & Silberston, 1995, National Institute Economic Review, Aug: 84-95)
Certainly authoritarianism may also lead to negative outcomes if those that exercise it do not have the interests of the nation at heart - but again any sane human being that makes an informed evaluation of the efforts of modern Iran's founding father and his successor will come to the conclusion that their actions were made with nothing but the interests of their countrymen and future generations to come. Also, it need to be said, that even with the best interests at heart there may also be negative outcomes to decisions that are made, however in general the approach that was adopted was the only feasible and realistic approach that could have been taken.
Posts
6 comments:
dear friends!
greetings from kurdistan! Don't ask me which Kurdistan. for us kurds there is one Kurdistan only. One part of our Kurdistan is under Iran's occupation. This occupation should come to an end! In form of independency or federalism. my objective here is the following: I heard the crown prince speech. He emphysized on democracy and human rights. That is fine. as far as we kurds are concerned, there are some scores should be settled before going any further!
In 1947 our president Qadhi Mohammad was most unjustifically hanged by the late shah.an event kurds even today feel betrayal from the shah's era. the only crime president Qadhi committed was seeking freedom. the very freedom Mr. Reza is seeking today for his country.
The second event was the cheap deal the late shah did with saddam Hussein of Iraq in Algerie 1975, of wich the kurds fall victims as a result. In another words and unfortunately we were betrayed by the Shah.
I ask the people responsible on this website to convey this massage to the crown prince! " The people of kurdistan demand an open and clear apology from the crown prince on the above mentioned events that occured at the time of his father, the late shah. If the crown prince is positive and willing to do so, then the subject could be taken with further details. please contact me on sherkobotani@hotmail.com
with best regards
sherko Sabri Botani
kurdish activist
kurdistan
Sherko,
Do not come here and spew out some garbage about some Soviet puppet (Qazi Mohammad) and try to portray him as a hero for Iranian Kurds.
Secondly, that Soviet puppet which you adore, with backing by the Soviet Union, set up an illegal and fictional state on Iranian soil which he and his followers refered to as "the Republic of Kurdistan". Now how dare you come here and cry about how your "President" was sentenced to death by the founder of modern Iran, whose task was to secure Iran's territorial integrity?
If you have a bit of Kurdish blood in you, you wouldn't come on here spew out such garbage and try to make out Kurds as a seperate part of Iran. Since you seem very ignorant and ill-informed about your own history let me enlighten you on your history. Kurds are Iranians from the Aryan tribes (Mede branch). Before the Arabo-Islamic invasion Medes(Kurds)/Persians/Parthians shared the land which Greater Iran encompassed. Cyrus the Great which is one of the greatest national symbols and historical figures of Iranian history, who united all of these people under ONE Iranian Empire, was half mede (todays kurds) and half persian. Iran has always covered the territory which makes up modern Iran, although due to incompetent and anti-Iranian rulers after the Arabo-Islamic invasion much territory was given away or lost.
Now if you make another half-assed statement you will simply be wasting your time and attempting to tarnish the reputation of Iranian Kurds, which I will not allow on here. If you have a decent comment other than praising dead communists puppets and making secessionist comments please be my guest.
Lastly, Persians and Kurds come from the same roots and should be treated equally in a future democratic and secular Iran. Kurds should have a right to learn and speak kurdish in school alongside the national language which is persian and have certain autonomous rights to govern in the province of Kurdistan, but the moment you even mention secession, firstly you show your true colors that you are no real Kurd because what real Kurd would want to seperate themselves from their family (Iranian Peoples)?! What real Kurd would want to disown their own mother (Iran)?! When you make such idiotic and anti-Iranian comments all you need to remember is what happened to your Soviet puppet leader Qazi Mohammed - secessionists like you will not be tolerated by ANY Iranians be they Kurd, Persian or other.
Thanks.
democracy needs some type of authoritarian rule to take shape. the anti-shah morons on the left drive me nuts.
lol @ this kurdish guy. YOUR PRESIDENT???? LOL... you took some parts of Iran hostage and claim that your terrorist guy should have been treated like an angel? what the hell.... You tried to disintegrate Iran and therefore you deserved it
@ Sherko
After reading your comment the first term came to my mind was "PKK".
Aryamehr pretty much explained to you the history of Kurds in Iran but I also like to mention a good lesson you and alike must learn from recent Iranian history. 29 years ago 2 Soviet puppet groups named "Kurdistan democratic Party" and marxists group name "Koomaleh" decided to take advantage of the anarchy and weakness of central government and decided tom tomming secessionism and consequently started banditry and armed conflict.
They were swiftly crushed by Islamic Regime not because the regime was so powerful and/or determined.
They were crushed miserably because Iranian populace didn't show a bit of support and after both group were annihilated no one witnessed any outcry from Iranians. You know why??
Because Iranians despise separatist, it is as simple as that.
If you don't learn from history you're bound to repeat your mistakes and outcome will not be any different.
BTW: Just out of curiosity, It is obvious that you live in caves of south eastern Turkey just north Iraqi border along with your other PKK "Comrades" how could you get access to internet?
Dear friends, I have read a lot of books regarding the facts that brought to the revolution in 1979. Unfortunately I came to the conclusion that all of this had to take place because Iran was not ready for the type of society dreamed by the Shah. The Shah was a dictator but, hey tell me is there any Muslim country that is a full democracy as we know it?? The Shah was a weak dictator and above all did not understand that in the Muslim world you should pay attention to the religion factor. Had he wanted a modern society without woman's vote and equality, more arabized and complying with the rules of the religion, the house of Pahlavi would still rule over Iran. He was too European for a Muslim country. All the rest does not matter. So things evolved in that way, the believers in Iran thought he was not a good Muslim and they wanted to get rid of him because an Imam ordered so. What happened to the Iranians then was like an illness they had to go trough and they have not yet recovered from. I think that had they known they would have stick ed with what they had. Now Iran is a country whose entire population is held hostage by some fanatics, that impose on them a culture (Arabic) that is not theirs: from the government point of view, well, they have now a far stronger dictator who rules on them with the power he says comes from God. So how can you object when his word is the word of God?? They are still going trough this illness and who knows when they will get out of it?? One more thing: Alahazrat had great ideas but he was not up to the role had, above all he acted in a cowardly way when he left because he betrayed all the people who believed in him, all those Mehdi Rahimis all those Pakravans and all the others that gave their lives for the Iran they wanted. I think he should have stayed and fight the enemy or, before surrendering at least try to save all the people loyal to him. But he left, leaving them alone to face the enemy. He was Mohammad Reza, he was not Reza the Great.
Post a Comment