Hardline Conservatives Essay

Iran has always, it seems, been the breeding ground for some kind of political upheaval or another. In recent times, back in 1979, there was a major revolution which was, in some ways, similar to the revolution we are seeing today. The people were angry and they were tired of being controlled by the government that was in power. They had concrete ideals and were incredibly passionate about their revolution. The revolution Iran is experiencing today does not appear to be quite as passionate and does not appear to maintain a belief in any real solid political system. They just know they want something different. In the following paper we present an illustration of the current revolution that is taking

With the shah still sick, it was hard to manage what was back in Iran. The speed of change in Iran was too hard to get command. “The shah was in trouble, reaping the harvest of years of brutal and unpopular policies, including the use of secret police that controlled dissent with arbitrary arrests and torture.” It was obvious that the shah had lost all control of his people of Iran, but the president had hoped for an alliance of opponents to be formed. A man

Before the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, liberalism and conservatism were two big ideologies in European society; many citizens were fighting towards liberalism while some were still standing behind conservatism. Meanwhile, many individuals, along with several organizations, were moving closer towards socialist ideals. Socialism’s role in society during the nineteenth and twentieth century changed how various thinkers approached the issues of labor, production, and property.

When the Iranian Revolution succeeded in 1979, Iran wanted to gain the admiration and the support of Arab countries, benefiting in particular from the support by the Shah of Iran and his relationship with Israel before the collapse of his regime. On this very first day of the victory of the revolution, Iran was keen to extend its bonds with the Islamic world, and when this was not possible in most cases, because of many complex causes of the revolution, Iran began to look for «organizations» instead of «regime’s or countries», in order to continue its role in Islamic issues. Iran was keen to show that this role was one of the foundations of the revolution and its beliefs, in

Why is it that most ultra-conservatives (typically Southern states) cling to the idea that our second amendment is being violated when it is in fact NOT being violated? Why do most conservatives honestly believe that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton are the Anti-Christ? Why do most ultra-conservatives believe that "Trickle Down Economics" works? When in fact even during recessions the rich people are still richer than ever? Why do Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity truly believe that they are in fact experts on global warming or climate change? It's snowing outside in GA and TN! Therefore, global warming must not exist! Yes, that's the most intelligent and forensic analysis I have ever heard in my life. Give me a f*cking break. What

Conservatives and Liberals are two different political parties that have similarities, and differences. According to the Student News Daily website, Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. It is the duty of the government to get rid of social problems and to protect civil liberties, and individual and human rights. Conservatives believe “in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense.” Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

The complexity of America’s relationship with Iran increased steadily beginning in 1908, when Iran struck oil. The Shah, the king or emperor of Iran, after taking the place of his young predecessor Reza Shah Pahlavi with the help of the CIA, led Iran into a period of extreme wealth and prosperity, the likes of which the Iranian people had never experienced. However, with the growth of wealth in Iran came the growth of Iranian resentment towards the West, specifically the United States. The Iranian’s resented the uneven distribution of wealth that they felt existed and the United State’s influence in “westernizing” their society. In 1963, this growing hatred led to a conflict with the Islamic clergy. The conflict was quickly settled by the Shah, but he was unaware that this dispute was the beginning

In the late 1970's, the world was hit with the events of the Iranian Revolution, a movement in which the Shah was overthrown in replacement with Ayatollah Khomeini. Causes for this movement included the economic, political, and socio-economic conditions in Iran before the Revolution. Economically, the Shah's hopes for the country ended up being their downfalls while politically, the Shah's ruling as a dictator prohibited the freedom of the Iranians. Socio-economically, the Shah didn't place much emphasis on religion, angering the majority of the population. The overthrow of the Shah led to the uprise of a religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, a figure supported by many. Unlike advice

As Michael Axworthy states on the back cover of his book, A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind, Iran is a “land of contradictions”. As this is true these contradictions is what makes Iran, Iran. Iran today is looked as the pinnacle of the Islamic faith in the form of a Government structure. Since 1979, Iran has been known as the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran will continue being an Islamic Republic for centuries to come. Iran has a rich history of intellectuals and scholars. Iran is known for its vibrant culture that dates back longer than the Western Ideals were even conceived. However Axworthy asks a question about Iran and its impact on the world’s history and the current events that we see in Iran today, Axworthy asks “Is Iran an aggressive power, or a victim?” This statement is a true paradox, can Iran be the next Nazi Germany, the next Soviet Union or the next Great Islamic Caliphate or is Iran just fighting to keep its culture alive from a vast array of attacks from foreign entities and internal struggles.

Early in the 1960s, the Shah announced social and economic reforms but refused to grant broad political freedoms. Iranian nationalist condemned the Shah and his U.S. supported regime and accused him of “westernizing” of Iran. Between 1963 and

Differing values and opinions between conservatives and liberals is nothing new. During the twentieth century that gap between the two widened. Religion has always played a role in defining each party. Basic principles of morality as seen by liberals, were not the same viewpoint that conservatives have. Although the religious barrier between Protestants and Catholics, Jewish and Christians, and the social barrier between Blacks and Whites had somewhat been lifted, the age-old liberal vs conservative still remains.

However, the ideas had already spread throughout the Iranian people and religious protesting escalated continuously. People’s ideas of recreating a religious based government persisted to an unstoppable level. Khomeini, whom many protesters felt to be a hero, said in a speech in 1979, “Do not try to westernize everything you have! Look at the West, and see who the people are in the West that present themselves as champions of human rights and what their aims are. Is it human rights they really care about, or the rights of the superpowers? What they really want to secure are the rights of the superpowers. Our jurists should not follow or imitate them” (Ayatollah Khomeini: speech on the uprising of Khurdad 15, 2010). Based on this quote, the “voice” of the protesting Iranians was that westernization was not a good thing because the west does not care for human rights and freedoms of the lesser powers in the world and that the way to change for the better is to impose the Islamic values that already existed into society. In January of 1979, the Shah fled the country under the pressure of the people and Khomeini returned to Iran to be greeted as a hero (Bentley & Ziegler, n.d., p. 1117). Fighting erupted between Khomeini’s supporters and remaining military officials and on the eleventh of February the government fell. On the first of April, Khomeini proclaimed the beginning of the new Islamic republic (Islamic

Beginning with Nixon and continuing with Reagan after the radical changes of American culture in the sixties and seventies, Americans would begin to shift towards more conservative ideas unsure of the rapid radical change. In the 1994 mid term elections, the American people would elect a congress of mostly conservatives for the first time in nearly 50 years. At the core of this success would be the Contract with America. A set of promises and goals devised by conservative congressional representative Newt Gingrich. In 2000 the Republicans (modern conservative party) would retain the Congress and capture the White House. Conservatism has been a leading political ideology since the inception of the United States to

The emergence of the Islamic Republic in late 1970’s Iran demonstrates how middle class Iranian people purged themselves of the Pahlavi Dynasty in an effort to continue down a more righteous and egalitarian path. As a result, the country underwent a complete social upheaval and in its place grew an overtly oppressive regime based in theoretical omnipotence. In response to this regime, the very structure of political and social life was shaken and fundamentally transformed as religion and politics became inexorable. As a result, gender roles and the battle between public and private life were redrawn. Using various primary and secondary sources I will show how the Revolution shaped secular middle class Iranians. Further, I will show how the

Before the revolution, Shah Reza Pahlavi was the ruler of Iran. Under his leadership power was clustered and concentrated among his close allies and networks of friends and others with whom he had close relations. By 1970s, the gap between the poor and the rich was widening and huge distrust about his economic policies grew. Resentment towards his autocratic leadership grew fuelling people to dissent his regime further. Shah now was considered an authoritarian who took full control of the Iran government preventing the Iranians from expressing their opinion. The government has transformed from the traditional monarchial form of government to authoritarian with absolute authority replacing individual freedom of the Iranians. This transformation to Iranian was unacceptable because they needed to control their own affairs. They wanted self-government where they could take control as opposed to what Shah was doing. Shah was seen as a western puppet for embracing authoritarian form of government (Axworthy, 2016).