What Were the Causes of the Iranian Revolution and
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
…show more content…
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 …show more content…
In the document "The Uprising of Khurdad 15" written in 1979 addresses to the Iranian people his belief that all Iranians should follow the customs and belief of Islamic culture. Those who are against Islamic culture should be cured with guidance from Iranians and the Ayotollah. The Ayotollah also questions how much the West cares about universal human rights, believing they only care about Americans being superior to everyone else, implying that the Americans don't care as much as Iraninians as perceived. He also implies that Muslims are the real ones caring about humanity, saying they are the real Society for the Defense of Human Rights and they are always working for the betterment of humans. He therefore tries to convince the Iranian people that they should work towards human rights as understood by the masses. In this document, the Ayatollah concludes on the matter that Iranians opposed to Islam should not be considered as citizens of Iran. He begs for the Iranians to preserve their mosques, as the mosques are the real reason that the Iranian Revolution is in being. His final words are that Iranians should not imitate Westerners, as they are their own unique
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.
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
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,
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
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
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
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
Luca argues that the shah ‘promoted western values and culture, whilst gaining control of the customary sectors of the Iranian society. This included religion, education and the bazaars’ . This is backed up by Kamran Matin, who states that he attempted to liberalize Iran through his attempt to ‘modernize the bazaars, irritating merchants of the bazaars with his policies such as obligatory membership and dues. He also interfered in the political, economical and religious concerns of the Iranians ’. Trenta further extends the argument and argues that this ‘westoxication of Iran culture and society angered religious leaders. The bazaaris also resented the impositions such as price controls and having to make room for western size malls’ . Trenta further extends her argument and highlights that ‘the Iranian opposition groups viewed and interpreted the interest and intention of liberalizing Iran as a response to the election of President Jimmy Carter in November 1976 as Human Rights was his ‘corner stone’ in foreign policy’ . Due to this coincidence, the Iranian people began to build resentment towards the Shah and his regime. The opposition grew as the Iranians viewed the Shah as a ‘puppet of the united states’ . Trenta argues that the election of ‘Jimmy carter and his rhetoric of Human Rights was merely a coincidence’ .
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.
The Iranian Revolution, also known as the Islamic Revolution of 1979 took place in Iran. It is when Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi the emperor of Iran during that time, was overthrown by the revolutionary forces led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and thereafter established the Islamic National Republic of Iran. The Iranian Revolution brought a big change into the international community and how it viewed revolutions. As Iran’s revolution lacked many of the fundamental causes that were though to give rise to revolutions. It was unusual in the sense that it had no ‘agrarian’ pattern. As the traditional social structure was maintained after the revolution and it reinstated old structure as the Muslim clergy came into power. To understand what led to the Iranian Revolution of 1979, we need to look back into the Iranian history and the timeline leading up to the revolution. In doing so, we can use the psychological theories of revolution and structural- functionalist theories of revolution in order to analyses and explain the cause of the Iranian Revolution.
As Susy Kassem once said, “Just like freedom, truth is not cheap. Yet both are worth more than all the gold in the world. But what is freedom, if there is no truth? And what is truth, if there is no freedom? Both are worth fighting for – because one without the other would be hell” (Kassem). In the beginning of 1980, the Cultural Revolution began, and with it the people of Iran fought back against the existing regime. The government oppressed the citizens by changing their education into a religious based system and forcing the women to wear veils, stripping them of both their truth and their freedom. Refusing to conform, the revolutionists had to secretly rebel while hiding from the government and their neighbors. In Marjane Satrapi’s
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
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).
This continued to exacerbate the gap between the social classes of Iran. The main reason for the Shah’s confidence in bringing his people prosperity was the mass amount of revenue Iran was generating from Oil. The nationalization of Iran’s oil in the fifties meant increased profits for the nation. Iran’s economy was growing exponentially; its GDP was five times higher in 1976 than it was in 1960 (Clawson, p.15). Islamic modernists, such as Marxist Mujaheddin-e-Khalq, opposed the Shah’s capitalist economic policies (Diller 1991, p.152). There were several other groups that were not pleased with the Shah’s growing focus on economic growth, including the ulemas (councils composed of local Mullahs or respected religious leaders) (Sanders 1990, p.66). These ulemas possessed considerable local influence, as they were in charge of the educational systems and had influence over the urban poor and bazaar merchants (Diller 1991, p.152). In the midst of all that was going on in Iran, Khomeini lived in exile in Paris. The Ayatollah however, was well informed, and managed to sneak tapes into the country to his supporters and the local ulemas. These tapes spread the word of Islamic fundamentalism to these groups that opposed that Shah, and gave them a binding power that eventually would be the revolution of February 1979. Not long, Khomeini had