Iranian Revolution was its climax in 1979 with the Revolutionary goal being met by its supports. Supporters of the revolution were very mixed in their goals for a new Iran. The Islamic Extremist lead by Ayatollah Khomeini wanted to install an Islamic regime inside of Iran that would follow Islamic law. Religious clerics viewed the Shah as not being a positive leader for Iran and wanted him overthrown and the country left as is. Iranians such as the middle class and students wanted to install an Islamic republic in place up the autocratic monarchical society which the shah created. All of these groups came together to follow Ayatollah Khomeini under the presence of overthrowing the shah himself. Needless to say Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow …show more content…
Change in Iran by the Shah was a part of what caused the shah to be overthrown by the Iranians. Fast economic or social change was not the cause but rather the development was to slow for the Iranians public. This can be inferred in Persepolis when the shah tested democracy “One day he made a declaration on TV. Together we will try to march towards democracy. After all that he has done? For a few months, he actually did try He tested a Dozen prime ministers” (Marjane pg 40). When the shah eventually got around to mending his country the current atmosphere was already too late. I stress the input of the father when he says after all he has done to mead his country to mean he has done too little too late. In a Journal article “Industrialization and revolution in Iran: Progress or Unmet Expectation” the author explains the shah was to slow in implementing social change and this was the downfall of his regime.
Despite a superficial appearance of modernism fostered by rising oil revenues, the Iranian economic and social infrastructure was found increasingly inadequate to meet the rising expectations of the Iranian people. Modernization, or Westernization, or industrialization, however ill-defined the concept, had come to be equated by Iranians with the material benefits and high standards of living enjoyed by North American and Western European nations. It was not because the Shah’s government forced upon people more largesse that they were accustomed to that
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
Iran was faced with high unemployment rates and immense property, as workers had low wages and protection, and the country was underdeveloped. Iranians lost hope for a better future, as the promises of a prosperous Iran made by the Shah were not coming true. For example, the Shah believed that developing an industrial base with multiple foreign contractors and corporations would be economically beneficial for the country. Due to these investments made, Iran's oil market was flourishing in the late 1970's. However, an increase in oil profits resulted in problems with absorbing funds, leading to an increase in spending. Iran was therefore hit with effects such as inflation and corruption. Another example is that the Shah hoped for a modernization program for Iran. With this, the hope was to limit the land one could hold, decreasing the financial gap between the wealthy and poor. The result was that wealthy families continued to be as wealthy and the economic status of peasants generally worsened. Modernization also negatively affected religious institutions relying on a network of exchange, as limited land made it harder for trade. A final consequence of land reform was that peasants were forced to move to cities, begging to Westerners in order to feed themselves. These peasants began to see the negative impact western culture had made in society. They found inner peace through
Various factors influenced the 1979 Iranian revolution, but at the core of this significant event was Islamic fundamentalism. The Iranian religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, led this movement to end the thirty-seven-year reign of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran (Diller 1991, p.152). The revolution was a combination of mounting social, economic, political and religious strains. The nation of Iran was never colonized, unlike some of its bordering countries, making its people intolerant of external influences. The Shah had gradually westernized and secularized his country, creating a strong American presence that was being felt
To begin, a few key events that caused the Iranian Revolution must be known to understand the politics and major changes that Satrapi grew up with in Tehran. The Iranian Revolution began on February eleventh, 1979 when the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was succeeded by the Islamic Republic. This took place partly due to an event that occurred about a year earlier; on January ninth, 1978 in the city of Qum,
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.
Firstly, Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi was the extremely isolated leader of Iran who was extremely concerned, by any means necessary, with consolidating his power. Not only did the Shah completely remove himself from the suffering society and ignore the injustice surrounding him but he ruled with absolute power meaning that everyone else had little say in government, if any at all. The Shah also created a force known as the SAVAK, and it was largely and widely feared by those who opposed the regime as it was known for extreme surveillance, torture and even execution. Mohammed Reza Shah completely overlooked the fact that up to 70%of Iran’s population of 20 million was living in poverty without basic liberties and at the mercy of their landlords. This evidence proves that the needs of the Iranian people were not being met which in many cases, like the case of the English Civil War sets the stage for revolution. Charles Stuart I, was a leader who also ruled by divine right with the belief that he was superior to everyone, including parliament whom he, due to this
The Iranian Revolution was an uprising by the common people of Iran who were upset about the doings of their Shah and his government. The Shah’s treatment of his own people can be characterized as unjust and cruel. After all, he severely limited the rights of groups whom he felt threatened his power to rule. He opposed the political rights of religious Shiite groups, which especially enraged Iranians, and led to the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini. The Ayatollah was a religious leader who would overthrow the Shah and establish a proper Islamic State in the nation. Ever since, the so called Islamic Revolution has raised concern over the dangers that Iran may pose to the Western world. Nevertheless, the Iranian Revolution was a progressive movement that reflected the major concerns of Iranians towards corruption in government, all with the intention of removing injustices and enforcing rightful liberties and common needs.
While often mistaken for the Iranian revolution, the cultural revolution is far different. The only real similarity they share is the fact that Ayatollah Khomeini played an important role in both. The Iranian Revolution lasted from January 1977 to February 1979 (Afary). Iran was in a sense trading in its monarchy for an Islamic republic (“e-Publications@Marquette”). The Shah was overthrown and the exiled cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile to Iran to lead the new republic (Reinbold). The cultural revolution however, was the period following the Iranian revolution where schools closed down to rid education of any and all Western and non-Islamic influences(“Iran Shuts Down Higher Education”). Although the differences between the Iranian Revolution and the Iranian Cultural Revolution were very distinctive, they are directly connected to each other.
It seems events were converging to bring down the Shah government very quickly. It was like how the Bolsheviks took down the Tsar government in Russia in the earlier century. In both revolutions, you had to convince the people their government is evil or uncaring, and then go out and demonstrate. Before the Russian revolution, the people were really mad because of the shortage of bread. And this was after the Russians suffered tremendous casualties from World War One. In the Iranian revolution, there were many factors. It was repression of opposition groups by the Shah’s police, inflation, support for Israel, and some Iranians didn’t like the way the Iranians were being westernized. For many years, the clerics were instigating the masses in their sermons in condemning the Iranian government. The people eventually went out in the streets to demonstrate. The people suffered some casualties in these demonstrations which made the Shah’s regime look repressive. More Iranians got involved
During Satrapi’s early childhood, the traditions and history of Iran had been going through drastic changes. The Iranian Revolution was when Iran’s monarchy under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was overthrown and replaced with an Islamic republic under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini who led the revolution. ii
Then, with the support of the army, the British and the ulama, Reza Khan persuaded the Majlis to “entrust the crown of the oldest monarchy on earth to (his) family”[5] thus marking the beginning of the Pahlavi dynasty. Reza Khan, now firmly in power, began a period of rapid modernization. Modernization is defined as the process of changing the conditions of a society by forcing them to accept many of the attributes and conventions of the current century. This is exactly what the new shah tried to do, however his methods proved ineffective. The shah’s reforms were on numerous occasions superficial and not successful.
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
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).
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