Tensions in Iran
In the late 1970’s, tensions in Iran mounted, ending finally in a revolution. The two major parties involved were that of the Shah, or king, of Iran, who wanted a more westernized country, and the fundamentalist party led by a very religious Ayatollah Khomeini. This group did not appreciate the Shah’s liberal ideas. The background, causes, and events of this revolution were discussed in my interview with my informant, my mother, Ladan Bayani, a forty-four-year-old registered nurse born and raised in Tehran, Iran, who lived there during this conflict. Bayani discussed the poor economic conditions, the discontentment amongst the religious people of the country, and the horror of the resulting demonstrations.
Many of the activities that led to the revolution were stimulated by the terrible economic conditions in the country at that time (Stempel 81). As Bayani states, "Although the country was very wealthy because of oil, we had a lot of poor people." By June of 1977, many young working men were forced to pay between 50% and 60% of their salaries on housing (Stempel 81). These economic conditions were due to mishandling of the country’s money: " Most of the money from oil was taken to their (the Shah’s family) personal accounts," says Bayani. The economy, however, was just one of many factors that contributed to the revolution.
In addition to the problems with the economy, there was a conflict over the westernization of Iran. Many highly religious, poor, and uneducated people living in the villages of Tehran were against the westernization of Iran brought on by the Shah. Conversely, at the same time, there were many people who agreed with the Shah’s plans. These religious and secular groups met oppositi...
... middle of paper ...
...al."
In the end, the revolution in Iran did not reach its expectations of bringing the country together and solving the problems it faced. As Bayani puts it, "It went from bad to worse. The economy is so bad, and everything is so expensive…people just hardly make it." Bayani claims that in her trips back home since the revolution, she thinks there is more poverty now then there was then.
The revolution in Iran had no positive outcomes. Many of the things that have been brought by the revolution are negative, such as less freedom for its own citizens, and an economy that is still as weak as it was before. It changed many lives, including my mothers, and it could have been prevented.
Works Cited
Bayani, Ladan. Personal Interview. 25. Nov.2000
Stempel, John. Inside the Iranian Revolution. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, November 1987
This completely changed the perception of the United States within Iran. Many Iranians believed that “American influence and power made a mockery of their national autonomy and desecrated their religious beliefs” (Farber, 37). The real struggle came once the Shah sought asylum in the U.S. Iran believed this to be a betrayal and demanded the Shah be released to the revolutionaries. Due to the fact that the United States did not refuse the Shah, the revolutionaries took the embassy in Tehran and all of the people that worked there hostage. One of the hostages wrote back to his parents during the crisis “‘We will not be set free until shah is released and the longer we stay here like this the better is a chance for something terrible to happen’” (Farber, 156). The siege was led by Iranian students who supported the revolution and the Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader that the revolution had selected to take the place of the
Not only did the religious history play a large role in Iran’s beliefs but also foreign invaders have been imposing their power on the Iranian region for thousands of years. Iran...
The Iranian government is fighting a losing battle against a rapidly growing Western force. Although Iran is not physically waging war against the United States, the government is fighting to eradicate its increasing cultural influence in Iran. The young, Iranian population is currently speaking out against the Islamic Republic’s attempts to rid the country of Western culture, demanding more freedom and less censorship, similar to how Marjane Satrapi acts out against the regime in Persepolis.
First, the Shah, out-of-touch with what his people wanted, became the catalyst for massive xenophobic and anti-Western feelings to spread throughout the nation. By giving up traditional Islamic ideals and becoming sort of a “puppet” for the U.S. and the Western world, the Shah made a mockery of himself and of those traditional Islamic values, which were paramount in Iran. For many years, Iranians wrote letters to the Shah, voicing their discontent with many aspects of his rule — the spread of the Bahá’í Faith, the collapse of Islamic traditions, and the crumbling economy. The Shah, however, did nothing to fix these issues. Instead, he designed a political reformation movement, hoping to silence his opponents, to introduce personal rights for women, and to establish a sense of fiscal equality. This series of reforms, which appeared to be a blatant attempt to Westernize Iran, became known as the “White
A few years later in 1979 the Islamic revolution began, causing the Shah to flee (introduction pages one and two).
The issue of whether charter or public schools are more beneficial for students has been an ongoing debate. The question that arise is which type provides a better education. Having gone to a charter high school myself, I got to see and experience first-hand the benefits of going to a charter school as well as realizing the issues charter schools face here in Oklahoma. These problems need to address in order to guarantee that students are getting the best education that they can get. We are facing an epidemic today with our education system and charter schools could be the solution. There may be opponents to the idea of having charter schools, but they have been wildly successful lately and are quickly expanded throughout the states. This is due to the fact that charter schools can benefit people economically, educationally, and as well as socially.
Over the course of the last century, the Islamic Republic of Iran (formerly known as Persia) has seen colonialism, the end of a dynasty, the installation of a government by a foreign power, and just over three decades ago, the popular uprising and a cleric-led revolution. These events preceded what could be considered the world’s first Islamic state, as politics and fundamentalist religion are inextricably linked in contemporary Iran. Looking at Iran from the mid 1940’s until the present day, one can trace the path that led to the rise of fundamental Islam in Iran in three distinct periods. The first is that which began with the rise of secular nationalism and the decline of Islam. In the second, the secular, western-friendly government eventually gave way to the Islamic revival in the form of a government takeover by hard-line clerics and disillusioned, fundamentalist youth; both motivated and led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Rule of Iran by these fundamentalist clerics then led to the formation of the fundamentalist Islamic theocracy that governs present-day Iran. The current government has some democratic appearances, but all real power is in the hands of the supreme leader, an Ayatollah who is chosen by the Assembly of Experts, a group of clerics chosen by the Guardian Council. With the Iranian Revolution, political Islam was born, with the fundamentalists holding the reins of power in Iran to the present day.
The Sunni and Shiite branches of Islam have been feuding for hundreds of years dating back to the beginning of the Islamic religion. The deity or god of the Sunnis is Allah. The Sunni branch of Islam is the larger of the two branches with over 80% of the Muslim population. The Sunni are the majority in most of the countries that have Islamic followers. There are a few different translations of what Sunna stands for, one of which is “Habitual Practice.” The differences between the two branches can be traced all the back to the 7th century CE when the disagreements as to who should succeed Muhammad. Sunnis believe that the Muslim community should maintain the right to select who the successor to Muhammad is going to be. The Shiite branch maintains the belief that Muhammad has selected his son-in-law to be the successor. Even though the two branches agree on most matters, the Sunni put more power behind god and his determination of fate, and are more inclusive about their definition of being Muslim. The Sunni place heavy belief in the role of religion in some aspects of life and a lot of weight is put on the Islamic law known as Shariah as the standard for a vast range of social issues including marriage and divorce. (Patheos.com)
In the 1970’s Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a very centralized military state that maintained a close relationship with the USA. The Shah was notoriously out of touch with working class Iranians as he implemented many controversial economic policies against small business owners that he suspected involved profiteering. Also unrestricted economic expansions in Iran lead to huge government expenditure that became a serious problem when oil prices dropped in the mid 1970’s. This caused many huge government construction projects to halt and the economy to stall after many years of massive profit. Following this was high rates of inflation that affected Iranians buying power and living standards. (Afary, 2012) Under the Shah, political participation was not widely available for all Iranians and it was common for political opposition to be met with harassment, illegal detention, and even torture. These measures were implemented by the Iranian secret police knows as ‘SAVAK’. This totalitarian regime combined with the increasing modernisation of the country paved the way for revolution.
Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid." July/August 2008. The Alantic Magazine. 20 February 2012 .
The Iranian Revolution, “was the 1979 overthrow of Iran 's monarchy and the establishment of an Islamic Republic. Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was replaced by the cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The revolution established religious leaders as the ruling class and integrated fundamentalist Islamic law into all aspects of the government, military, and public and private enterprise” (Definition of Islamic Revolution). The symbolism that is associated within the novel shows her rebellious stages such as, smoking a cigarette due to the amount of deaths that occurred in the revolution. Satrapi became curious about her surroundings and she seeks for knowledge and information about the Iranian Revolution in different ways such as reading.
Many of the reforms put in place by the White Revolution had a direct impact on the ulama and went against the ideology of the Islam. One of the “major grievance” the ulama had against Pahlavi’s regime was the continuous attempts to mitigate the “power and influence” of the ulama, as well as the “growing power of Western Infidels and their ways”. One policy that the ulama felt was an attempt to mitigate their influence was the land reform policy. The land reform policy allowed landowners to have “one village, or a total of six dongs (each dong is one sixth of a property)”. The government purchased the excess land, and then would redistribute the land to peasant farms. However, this policy directly affected the ulama economically. The ulama relied heavily on waqf lands, and used the revenues in order to maintain mosques and seminaries. Another policy that affected the ulama financial and contributed to their discontent with the Shah was in 1977, when Iran was in the middle of an economic crisis. The Shah appointed a new Prime minister, Jamshid Amuzegar, who imposed the austerity program. In the austerity program, Amuzegar decided to “substantially lower the allocation of a secret fund from which the ulama received lucrative stipends”. This act shut off an important source of capital that the ulama used to carry out their day-to-day operation. Further
...ny underprivileged children the opportunity to receive a formal education, paving the way to an overall better future. However, those underperforming charter schools invite criticism from the public school system as their remarkably low test scores deem them unable to prove their worth or purpose of existence. This may leave some to question what the charter school system is able to achieve that the public school system cannot. While advocates of the public school system may not entirely agree with the effectiveness of the charter schools system, a couple of positives they are able to learn from the charter school structure are the concepts of flexibility and experimentation, as they are crucial to the learning process. While both systems of education differ greatly, their greatest commonality lies in their overall goal of aiding their students in reaching success.
The education system in place when the shah was in charge was secular in nature, and the education system implemented by the Islamic regime was incredibly religious and based upon the teachings of Islam. If the students of Iran were not forced to switch from one education system to the other, then each system in their own way would have succeeded. However, since the students were forced to switch education systems, this caused the students to become rebellious. “I think that the reason we were so rebellious was that our generation had known secular schools,” (Satrapi, 2000, p. 98). The students had become accustomed to they ways of the secular schools, that when they were forced to switch to the strict rules of the education system of the Islamic regime, this caused pandemonium and ultimately led to rebellion. This switch is education system was the reason both forms of education ended up not succeeding but failing.
A revolution is a mass movement that intends to violently transform the old government into a new political system. The Iranian Revolution, which began in 1979 after years of climax, was an uprising against the Shah’s autocratic rule, resulting in much religious and political change. Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi made efforts to remove Islamic values, create secular rule and “westernize” Iran through his White Revolution. In addition, his tight dictatorial rule and attempts at military expansion felt threatening to the people, who desired a fairer governmental rule immensely influenced by Islam. Afterwards, governmental affairs became extremely influenced by Islamic traditions and law which created changes religiously and politically for years to come.