The Beginning Of The Xx

In Marjane Satrapi’s graphic novel Persepolis, Satrapi states that her goal in writing the book was to dispel many of the hasty generalizations made by the western world about Iran, a principal sentiment being that the country is little more than a nation founded by fundamentalists and home to terrorists and extremists. To combat the misconception, Satrapi enlists the assistance examples of barriers and dissent towards the new conservative regime in Iran from her adolescence. By employing events from her childhood in Iran Satrapi rattles the foundation of the myths and false beliefs assumed by the occident. Satrapi writes that the initial waves of conservative fundamentalism in Iran were met with unified national dissent. To support this

The reformation of the country of Iran toward Islam caused turmoil among the people because the drastic changes forced on the people were not easily accepted. One of the major changes is that

Leading up to, and throughout the first World War is when the tension started to build in Iran. The overthrow of Qajar regime, which was replaced by Reza Shah, lead to what is known as modern Iran. Iran was divided up by many powers. They were controlled by the imperial nations of Britain, Russia, Ottoman, and Germany. Because of a lack of government, it allowed nationalist groups to move in and develop in Iran. When World War 1 broke out, it increased foreign pressure in Iran, causing the flows of their government widen. “Following the approval of the Iranian Constitutional Code by the Qajar king in 1906, Anglo-Russian

Iran was now unprotected, and a new power came into being. The Arabs invaded and the quality of life changed. “People fell into poverty as the greedy court imposed ever-increasing taxes. Tyranny tore apart the social contract between ruler and ruled that Zoroastrian doctrine holds to be the basis of organized life” (21). The Iranian people couldn’t survive with a ruler who had no sympathy or respect for them. Their life was being over run by foreigners.

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

Thesis: Iran, because of these events, is in worse condition because of the cultural revolution, poisoned from within, and is the victim of the actions of the western powers.

Nationalism is defined as a nation’s, or ethnicities, desire to become an independent autonomous state. The Greek, Albanian, Serbian, Bosnian, and Macedonian nations’ nationalistic centrifugal force started the break up of the Empire in mid 19th century. All of the nations listed above became states by the time World War One began in 1914. This nationalistic movement happen under many Sultans, but it intensified under Abdülhamid II and finally under Murad V. It was Abdülhamid II who tried to curve the nationalistic movements, which were also sweeping through Europe, by introducing the Tanzimat Reforms of 1834 and 1856, at the request of European pressure.

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.

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

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

movement. The dual legacies of discrimination against ethnic minorities and the country’s uneven economic development have created strong support in non-Persian areas for political reform. During recent presidential elections, the non-Persian electorate tilted heavily toward the reformist wing. Support for democratic political change among Iran’s ethnic minorities is likely to persist so long as the country’s periphery remains an economic backwater. Although the Iranian economy has been growing, the symptoms of underdevelopment remain acute in Iran’s ethnic enclaves. Discrimination, compounded by poor economic conditions, could motivate ethnic groups to challenge the Iranian government in the future. A combination of state-sponsored suppression of Azeri sentiment (during the Pahlavi rule) and a massive integration movement toward the Iranian mainstream (under the Islamic regime) has prevented the rise of ethnic nationalism in the northwest. As a result, there has been the crystallization of an overarching sense of Iranian nationalism, which has been skillfully manipulated and intertwined with allegiance to the tenets of Shi‘i Islam, which makes a universal devotion to Iranian national identity possible.

The 1979 Iranian Revolution was a major landmark in Iranian history. “Iran 's revolution began with a popular democracy movement and ended with the establishment of the world 's first Islamic state.” (In pictures: The Iranian Revolution) There are various parties that have different viewpoints and opinions of the revolution. Those who were pro-Islam during the revolution believe that the revolution was an event that brought structure and order to Iran. However, those who were against the country becoming an Islamic state believe all the revolution did was cause more unrest and instability.

Every political development that approaches the scale of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 is guaranteed to involve a number of moving parts whose collective impact eventually yields the end result. But with the Iranian Revolution, it can be useful to simplify this more holistic view down to two figures set in a dichotomy of sorts, with each representing the two different states of Iran, Iran pre and post revolution. These two individuals, Mohamed Reza Pahlavi and Ruhollah Khomeini comprised the leadership position of Iran before and after the revolution, and due to actions of those who were in favor of the revolution became directly associated with what was the old, and what was the new path for Iran.

Its nuanced precursors that date back to the economic and ideological limitations of the Shah’s nationalization efforts have showed the world how the Islamic Revolution could not only appeal to Iran’s marginalized people but maintain its hold on the populace for decades

In simplistic terms, Iran nationalism can regarded as reactionary within the context of circumstance and time, which sets it apart from other movements that would otherwise be categorized and interpreted similarly. Mossadegh, in fact, who came to symbolize nationalism and the anti-colonial struggle, acted in opposition to not only the imperial British, but his predecessor Reza Shah, the pioneer of the modern nationalist insurgency in Iran.