COMPARISON

Comparisons

Well Fair, for the sake of argument, let's allow the comparison to be extended to the United States. I personally do not believe the US (or Iran) is comparable to Nazi Germany. But using Fariba and your terms of comparison, you could argue that the US is like Nazi Germany for the following reasons:

War of aggression in Iraq.

Global hegemonist projections of political and military power.

Incarceration of tens of thousands of citizens without due process, with documented cases of sexual abuse, torture and murder.

Armament spending on an unprecedented level in history.

Belief in national supremacy.

Historical record of racial genocide committed against indigenous populations in its wars of regional westward expansion.

Forced slave labor for centuries based on race.

I could go on, but do you see my point now? Is such a historical analogy between the US and Nazi Germany widely accepted? No, for the same reasons the analogy doesn't work for Iran. If anything, the Iran example is even farther remote than the US one.

Anyone can make negative comparisons to Nazi Germany. They are the convenient villain of pop history. (Hence Godwin's Law.) But putting forward a proper historical analogy is another matter altogether. 

You still don't address any of the similarities

that Ms. Amini brings. I wonder why?

In the meantime:

All intermediate range ballistic missiles have an offensive nature. If you use them for deterrence, that is a choice, but that does not change the nature of the weapon, just how you aim to use it. A surface to air missile is a defensive weapon by contrast.

The Bahais are in violation of the law? What kind of stupid law states that you cannot be a Bahai? A fascist one, that's the kind. So they don't have to wear badges or go to concentration camps, but they can be executed on a whim whenever the Islamic fascists feel like it, so the IRI is not as bad as the Nazis? You are very sick.

There is no ideological war of aggression? The constitutions says that it hopes that all governments in the world are overthrown and replaced by a worldwide Islamic government!

Race and nationalism are not the same thing as religion? Great. But discrimination based on either is equally reprehensible in today's world, plain and simple.

And no major, YOU come on. All of the parties you listed have sworn allegiance and obedience to the Islamic Fuehrer and their platforms cannot go against the main party or against the current head of state, i.e. the Islamic Fuehrer. So they are different incarnations of the same party. If anything, it is a much more sophisticated version of Germany under Hitler, as it creates a facade of many parties when there is only really one. A facade created specifically for discussions like this, for people like you to tout.

Again, most importantly, notice how you completely ignore the similarities that Ms. Amini brings.

And again, I wonder why waffen SS major.

-Fair

Jenab Sargord ...

Sargord,

I guess you decided to ignore the comment about Islamic double talk, Sadre Islam, your beloved Khalifes, etc.  Not exactly to your liking , eh?

At least be kind enough to respond to the last paragraph, the one about the "Fair Price of SOUL and National Dignity !!!".  I thought all you pasdars viewed yourselves as macho.  Honestly didn't take you for one running with tail between your legs.  Come on back and use some more big words without content, don't underestimate your BS talent.

Payandeh Iran, our Ahuraie Fatherland

Fair, part 2:

There is no offensive potential to Iran's armaments industry. The entire defensive doctrine is based on deterrence. I've stated that Iran's military is n need of modernization. But it it handily outspent on military weapons by a number of other nation's militaries in the region. There is no massive armament program taking place in Iran. The situation could not be more different than Germany 1933-45. You know that Fair. You're fairly up to date on Iran's military station. You do yourself an injustice by arguing just for the sake of arguing.

The Bahais are in violation of the law. That said, they do not have to wear Bahai markers on their clothing. They are not  being rounded up, every man, woman and child, and being expelled or sent to death camps. And this is not based on racial grounds. Setting aside the moral argument for or against the law, you cannot reasonably state the situation is comparable to Germany, 1933-45. In German, a jew could not convert to Christianity to save his life. For the Bahais, the simple act of conversion is all that's required to become law abiding and accepted back into society. (Personally, I find fault in this law against the Bahais. However, it is the law.)

There is no ideological war of aggression. There was a war to remove Saddam, in Saddam's war of aggression. And there is the resistance to apartheid Zionism. Are there Iranian troops positioned in Iraq. Has south Lebanon been occupied? Does Iran have a claim or desire for these region's resources? No. There is no imperialistic territorial pursuit. 

Race and nationalism are not the same thing as religion. 

The racial war as a motor of history is far removed from religious aspiration. They are not comparable.

That reference you cite in the constitution is a justification for the order of government. It is based on an old, established religion. It is not based on a newly established national myth, which seeks to create a new movement with new highly nationalistic ideals and customs. The fascists rejected their religious past. The IRI promotes its religious past. The two could not be more different.

Come on, Fair. In the last election alone, there were two political parties- Alliance of Builders, National Trust- and two independents. Iran is not a single party system. There are many political parties in Iran. Here is a partial list:

Islamic Society of Engineers
Combatant Clergy Association
Islamic Coalition Party
Association of Islamic Revolution Loyalists
Moderation and Development Party
Coalition of Iran's Independent Volunteers
Iranian Nation's Welfare Party
Fundamentalist group
Association of Combatant Clerics
Islamic Iran Participation Front
National Confidence Party
Executives of Construction Party
Society of Forces Following the Line of the Imam
Organisation of the Mojahedin of the Islamic Revolution
Islamic Labour Party
Workers' House
Iran Solidarity Party
Youth Party of Iran
Freedom Party of Iran

This could not be more different than Germany 1933-45.

Still think Nazi Germany is analogous to the Islamic Republic of Iran? Well, anything is possible for an argument based on emotion. But I must point out, it does not hold up to academic scrutiny.

It "doesn't work"?? The real failure

is yours- you claim that somebody's comparison between two regimes has failed because they have not been able to show that they are equal in every single aspect, even though they are similar in many important ones.

In fact, Ms. Amini pointed out the similarities, which are substantial, which you still conveniently ignore and choose not even to get near.  And as in any good comparison, she has also pointed out some of the differences.

The other real failure of yours is to try to say her comparison is not worth much, simply because it does not satisfy your arbitrarily defined requirements, while completely ignoring the merits of the points she brings. You call these points a "dirty laundry list" which is "mundanely" compared to the Nazis, when the only thing dirty here is your discounting of it. People are dying in the streets and torture chambers of Iran today for citing this list.

And finally, you cannot invoke Godwin's law, because the Hitler analogy did not just come up now in Ms. Amini's post, it came up very early by yours truly immediately after you clearly stated your position in favor of fascists. (Godwin's law for those who do not know about it is a humorous observation that states "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.") Like I said, the discussion did not grow long before the analogy was made, since your tendencies were obvious.

Since Godwin can just make a humorous observation and call it "law", I will also make a similar law here that you can invoke from now on- call it "Fair's law":

"As an online discussion of IRI's crimes grows longer and the apologists are unable to defend these crimes, the probability of a comparison with American Israeli and British crimes, as well as accusations that the victims were American, Israeli, and British agents approaches 1."

You can invoke this law now quite often, and retroactively.

-Fiar

Fair:

IIt doesn't work to base an aspect of a historical comparison upon a projected hypothetical scenario. 

The creation of a "new man", as opposed to restoration of an independent order based upon an old, established  religion is in no way the same thing. 

The expressed "hope" of this order- a universal government grounded upon religion- is in no way a call for imperialistic territorial expansion. (In fact, I'm sure many Christian fundamentalists share this sort of desire.)

Fariba's historical analogy fails for the reasons I've provided. Of course, you're right: if her intent was not to produce a reliable historical analogy, then she hasn't failed. If instead, it was merely to draw up a sort of dirty laundry list and mundanely declare it comparable to the Nazis, well then I stand by what I've said: simply invoke Godwin's law. For that's all her comparison is worth. Nothing more.

continued- ill fated attempt:

Where is the massive expansion of the armament industries?

You yourself and other IRI apologists have boasted that Iran has become self sufficient in its armaments needs and that the Shah had no real industry as he was an American puppet and just bought American goods at high prices. So given Iran's huge defence needs, this would have required a massive expansion of the armament industries.

Where is the persecution, expulsion and killing of an ethnic minority based on racial grounds?

Not on racial and ethnic grounds, but certainly on religious and belief grounds it is there. Have you ever heard of Bahai's, who actually do not have any rights whatsoever?

Where is the launching of an imperial war of aggression?

There is certainly the launching of a worldwide ideological war, as clearly stated in the constitution, and regularly by high ranking political and religious and military officials of the IRI.

Where is the exaltation of the "nation" as a race?

Not as a race. But certainly there is an exaltation of the "muslim nation", or "ommat". That is all over the place.

Where is the notion of inevitable racial war as the motor of history?

Same difference- not a racial war, but an ideological war in which the cause of all failed movements is departure from Islamic principles, hence the inevitable requirement to return to Islam. This is clearly stated in the very beginning of the constitution.

Where is the idea of a national decline as opposed to a mythical past, which the fascist movement aims to reawaken?

Again, quoted directly from the preamble of the constitution:

"Although the Islamic line of thought and
the direction provided by militant religious leaders played an
essential role in the recent movements, nonetheless, the struggles
waged in the course of those movements quickly fell into stagnation due
to departure from genuine Islamic positions. Thus it was that the
awakened conscience of the nation, under the leadership of Imam
Khumayni, came to perceive the necessity of pursuing a genuinely
Islamic and ideological line in its struggles. "

There it is- a national decline due to deviation from Islamic principles (a mythical past), to which a return must happen.

Where is the single party?

There is one party in Iran- the party of Allah, or Hezbollah. Any "party" with any other name is subject to approval of that party, which itself is subject to approval by the Velayate faqih, or Islamic Fuehrer.

So you see waffen SS major, your pathetic attempt to defend fascists and rapists is once again an embarassment for you. All you can say is that they are not "racist", i.e. they discriminate based on religion and not race. Today in the 21st century, this doesn't buy you much improvement. Maybe in your 6th century backward fortress it does.

I think Ms. Amini has provided an excellent article for which I am quite thankful. She has pointed out some very important similarities of the two fascist systems, for which no rebuttal has been made.

I wonder why.

-Fair

Another ill fated attempt by waffen SS major

to defend the regime.

First of all, Thank you Ms. Amini for an excellent article which I thought was right on. She was not saying that these two regimes are exactly the same. If you actually read the article, she is merely pointing out the many similarities. None of which waffen SS major has refuted by the way.

Instead, you try to divert attention away from these very similarities by trying to point out (by now) irrelevant differences:

Can you imagine the Nazis tolerating opposition voices such as Karroubi, Mousavi and Khatami?

Yes I certainly could- if Nazis had stayed in power for another 20 years, in 1965 Hitler would have been dead, some successor would have been in power, and some junior Nazis that had supported Hitler in the 1940's could have loyally opposed the Nazi leader of 1965 (just like Mousavi and Karroubi do today) and may very well have been tolerated, yet warned and threatened and supporters killed, etc. It is indeed very plausible. Fortunately for the German people and the rest of the planet, the Nazi regime was destroyed way before this point. We Iranians have no such luck.

Where is the fascist call for the creation of a "new man"?

The following is a direct quote from the constitution of the Islamic republic:

"Our nation, in the course of its
revolutionary developments, has cleansed itself of the dust and
impurities that accumulated during the past and purged itself of
foreign ideological influences, returning to authentic intellectual
standpoints and world-view of Islam. It now intends to establish an
ideal and model society on the basis of Islamic norms. "

There you have it- cleanse yourself of dust and "bad" influences, and achieving Islamic purity. Nothing else. So an Islamic "new society" at least.

Where is the call for territorial expansionism beyond the present borders?

There is no call for territorial expansionism, but there is a call for overthrow of all governments around the world and be replaced by a global Islamic one. The preamble of the constitution concludes by saying that the Assembly of experts has ratified this constitution "in accordance with the aims and
aspirations set out above, with the hope that this century will witness
the establishment of a universal holy government and the downfall of
all others." So this is even more expansionist than the Nazis, who only wanted to conquer Europe, not the whole world.

To be continued in following posts....

Re: Sargord Pirouz

I left the comment below elsewhere on Iranian.com, but I think it's something that other visitors to this website might find worth reading: 

Sargord Pirouz is an Internet troll who leaves comments on a number of blogs that cover Iranian events. On the NIAC blog and a number of other websites, he goes simply by "Pirouz" and claims to be a half-Iranian, half-American resident of the San Francisco Bay area who took part in the "anti-establishment" movement in the U.S. in the 1960s and early 1970s. On the other hand, the "Sargord Pirouz" who appears on Iranian.com claims, I believe, to be a member of some branch or other of the IRI's military. However, they both take very, very, very similar propaganda lines, i.e. that the demonstrators are being beaten and arrested (and in some cases killed) as part of a "law enforcement" operation--no more, no less. They both use the phrase "pro-establishment" to refer to the armed enforcers of the regime. They are both very tedious in correcting real or alleged errors regarding which of the regime's enforcers are Basijis vs Pasdaran vs "police" (and are keen to refer to the IRI's street thugs as IRIPF). What alerted me to the fact that these two individuals are one and the same (despite their affecting different cyber personas) is when both objected on different websites to Neda Aghasoltan being Time's Person of the Year on the grounds that Allison B Krause (one of the 4 students killed at Kent State in 1970) was never declared Time's Person of the Year either. I will leave it to Iranian.com readers as to who the real Pirouz or Sargord Pirouz is: just a freelance Internet troll or part of a more organized IRI propaganda campaign.

delete

Delete

Sargord ...

This call for Islamic Unity is pseudonym for Islamic Expansionism, it has always been that, meaning this is not an invention of your IRI masters (Employers).  Even at the time of Sadre Islam, this same tactic was used first in Ghazavats and then during Omar, Osman, and Ali's khalifdom, to a much bigger scale.  This is exactly how the Islamic Cancer became the death of great civilizations in Persia and later the Eastern Roman Empire.  It was only because the savage ingenuity of Charles de Martel that this sick idealogy could not take over Europe.  So, please Dear Sargord, spare us the Islamic double talk about no desire for expansionism by Moslems, and the other BS.

As far as similarities between NSDAP and IRI, they are superficial and tactical only in my opinion.  The Nazis were actually Super Nationalists that wanted to advance Deutchland and took extreme pride in their ancestory, as opposed to the turn coat IRI that has no nationalistic pride whatsoever.  To the point that your Dr. AhmadiNejad (Dr. AN for short) sits under a banner that calls Persian Gulf, the arabian gulf !!  Don't get me wrong, I deplore what the NSDAP stood for and what they did to Germany, but even these guys were leaps and bounds above your Khaen IRI, because they did not intentionally betray their nation as Khomeini and the rest of Rozeh Khoon have always done.

By the way, this is a question I always ask people like you or Brother Mehdi, "Is any amount of money enough to sell your soul and your nation for ?".  It's still not too late Sargord, you can still repent and join your hamvatanan e Irani.  Turn your back on the Satanic Tazi Cult before it's too late.  Jenab Sargord, I hope you will forgive any spelling errors I may have in the text above !

Payandeh Iran, our Ahuraie Fatherland

Paykar

None of your itemized "characteristics" line up analogous to Germany, 1933-1945.

They more closely characterize your own personal list of grievances, than anything else.

In a historical analogy, the essential elements of the historical model are mapped out, and the current model's similarity to those essential elements are identified.

Now I've provided a brief list of essential elements for nazi-Germany and have asked readers to identify that which applies to the IRI. The fact is, I don't believe it possible to make the analogy based on these (non-applicable to the IRI) essential elements.

But hey, by all means, take a crack at 'em. 

Hey, my reference to Islamic

Hey, my reference to Islamic unity was not necessarily provided for advocacy's sake. I was merely attempting to reference the remark by khar, what he tried to identify as "pan islamic idiology" (sic).

khar was attempting to rebut just one of the many objections I raised to this crackpot analogy made by Faiba.

Anybody else like to take a crack at refuting those objections? Fariba? 

Sargord

You are good at deception, but the here is the kick, you are only fooling yourself.

There
are many tendencies of the regime that make it fair to label it a
fascist one. You are so myopic in your views and definitions, that you
require absolute parallel examples to demonstrate the Nazi tendencies of 
the regime. But before I get to that, just a quick observation, your
military clad picture awfully resembles a Nazi henchman! 

1.Systematic pressure with ultimate goal of elimination of Bahais.

2. Notion of Velayate faghih

3. the slogan that the road to Jerusalem is through Baghdad

4.Suppression of any from of decent.

5. The regime is not as advanced as the Nazis of 75 years ago, so it can't develop war insdustry but it can buy Russian and Chinese junk.

6. You can replace the word race with Isalm and Imam Zaman and find the rhetoric morph into a fascist one.

7. Creation of paramilitary enteties with direct ties to Rahbar

8.
I agree with you, in just one sense, that these goons differ from the
other goons, because they do not have the sophistication to come remotely close to the originals

Above were some of the similarities; now as to why the regime does not eliminate figures such as Mussavi an Karoubi, the only reason is that Rahber is scared of the backlash it would create.

You have clearly demonstrated your allegiance to
the regime of torture and rape, therefore you are an enemy of the
people -  here I am using a language that your kind understands; having said that, I have to commend you for being the only basiji known to have more than a few neurons firing simultaneously.

One major difference

Under Nazi regime Germany managed to lift itself out of a depression. In a few years it went from a total wreck to an industrial power house. It nearly gobbled up the world. In contrast under IRR Iran went from an well of nation to a economic wreck. 

The Mullahs are not able to "get the trains to run on time". Nor are they going to gobble up the world. 

I am with Vildee on this (to Sargord)

What Islamic unity, look what happened after the revolution in Iran and just among the Shiites. Soon after the revolution Shariatmadari supporters went their way, then MEKs went their way violently, then likes of Montazeri went their way, then Muslim liberals (likes of Ommaties) went their way, then Mojahedine Enghelaabe Eslami (likes of Behzad Nabavi) went their way, then likes of Mousavi went outside the main circles, ........, and  many other saparations and ensheaabs, ...., and finally this latest rift that Mollas and non Mollas are at each others throut and are weakening the whole country when U.S/Israeli fascists are pounding on Iran every day and through any methods.

BTW, Vildee joon, en roza ye kami adam shodia, I see that you are reading some of Dr. Sahimi's articles! 

sargord: Islamic unity??

sargord: Islamic unity?? What is Islamic unity?? Who wants this Islamic Unity? Bin Laden, Khamenie, Salfis, Shia? Islamic unity under Shia VF? Islamic Unity under IRI's Khamnei??

what is the goal of this "Islamic Unity"?? Islamic Unity as a political force? Islamic Unity as a religous force??? Islamic Unity as an economic force?? Who will be in charge of this "unity"??

 prey tell

Well said Mr. Massombagi

Well said Mr. Massombagi, I wouldn't be surprised to see more of this kind of "intellectual" khosh raghssi. Perhaps an article like this can be very good for resume building and ultimately getting one accepted by some neocon or AIPAC controlled institute (e.g., Washington Institute for Near East).

khar

Hate to be forced into the position of a pedantic, but you cannot even spell "ideology" correctly- and you're attempting to direct me?

And what are you trying to do? Equate calls for Islamic unity to territorial imperialism based on racial superiority? If you see that in the present context of the Islamic Republic or Iran, your context is just as mistaken as your poor attempt at spelling. 

Hey Sargord

Look at your own questions one more time and this time look at them in the context of Pan Islamic Idiology, you'll find that the answers to your questions and you will not like what you find!

Where is?

Can you imagine the Nazis tolerating opposition voices such as Karroubi, Mousavi and Khatami?

Where is the fascist call for the creation of a "new man"?

Where is the call for territorial expansionism beyond the present borders?

Where is the massive expansion of the armament industries?

Where is the persecution, expulsion and killing of an ethnic minority based on racial grounds?

Where is the launching of an imperial war of aggression? 

Where is the exaltation of the "nation" as a race?

Where is the notion of inevitable racial war as the motor of history?

Where is the idea of a national decline as opposed to a mythical past, which the fascist movement aims to reawaken?

Where is the single party? (one might note that the single political party instituted by the shah regime was called "Rastakhiz"/ "Resurgence")

I could go on and on. But really, what's called for here is invocation of Godwin's Law.

And Fariba, I've a suggestion to further along your Nazi Germany studies. Pick up a copy of "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze. Read the preface. It will provide you with a guide to bypass the technical details (which are substantial) and get right to the heart of the thesis. It may enlighten you beyond the mundane moral narrative so many have been conditioned to accept into the form of a modern day, historical fable- which is rubbish.

Thanks Ms. Amini for Your Piece! You are indeed very insightful!

First off, this is not an article for a peer-reviewed journal that would require establishing case-homogeinty; as is the case in comparative politics. Accordingly, the the systems that are the subject of a comparative suvey should share structural and contextual commonalities before any comparison is applied according to the methodologies applied in political science: 

1. Establishment of the regime and its evolution, Leadership hierarchy, system of government, monopolization of violence and its exercise to those trusted by the state against those who attack it, intellectual superstructure to reinforce the idealogy at hand through mass policy making apparatus and macro planning. If we put it to that test, perhaps it is difficult to say that the IRI since 1979 could be similar to Nazi Germany. Unlike Nazi Germany, the way the IRI was established was somewhat popular. The Nazis came to power with one party intent upon taking over the state, with one idealogy, and with purges that ensured that the system is centralized properly. The IRI came to power with no proper idealogy and with a coalition of religious nationalist and passive approval of other forces. Purges in Nazi Germany were different from the IRI and the intentions were different as well. The Nazis started a war in their last five years of power, which spelled their demise, whereas the IRI did not start the invasion of any country; yet it effectively turned the war brought to it by Saddam's Iraq in the first decade of its establishment to reinforce a totalizing hegemonic system.
2. However, if we look at it differently, i.e. depart the formal concerns of social scientists, the two regimes are still strikingly similar: idealogy for one worked much like a religion, i.e. exactly the same way that a certain reading of religion was turned into the idealogy of Velayate of Faqih in the other. Both regimes in their totalistic formats consolidated power through mob rule and populist means. After this stagey, they both purged their opponents as systematically as possible as they could. Both regimes developed systems and processes of censorship, inquisition, and idealogical employment in the public sector and amongst the academia. Both regimes have a strong anti-semitic tendency (one was outright anti-semitic, the other one calls itself anti-Zionist). In the end, both regimes are intent upon refusing the Jewish people of having their own agency (the Nazis wanted to destroy their citizenship and eventually destroy them completely; the IRI wants to destroy their citizens' state, Israel, which will inevitably lead to ethnic-cleansing unless the international community comes to the aid of the Jews living in Palestine after Israel is gone). Both regimes hate and persecute liberals and Freemasons systematically. Both states hate and systematically persecute communists. In both states, women are second class citizens. Both regimes have farfetched expansionist agenda (one with a nationalist bent and the other with an Islamist one). Both states have parallel intelligence organizations (the Nazis different intelligence organizations constantly competed with each other as much as Ghods Force, VAVAK, and the Intelligence of the Judiciary and Nirooye Entezami do under the IRI). Both regimes resorted to mass execution of their political dissidents and chained assassination of the intellectuals to eradicate dissent. In the IRI, people thought that it was never prone to be a totalitarian system because of Rafsnjani's economic reforms and Khatami's political reformist attempts. However, when the failure of both was established beyond doubt with the advent of Ahmadinejad, many tried to rule Ahmaindejad out as exception while Ahmadinejad and his type where the rule in the IRI that had always controlled key seats of economic, political, spiritual, and military power. It was the pragmatist types of Rafsanjani and reformist types of Khatami that were exceptions. This reconstruction/reform character of the IRI is the only aspect of it that caused doubt amongst many that such comparisons are right. However, as the totalitarian, and as Ganji called them: the religious fascist forces, continued to promote the Cult of the Leader, the IRI in fact proved that a fascist system can have a democratic facade that it may hide behind to fool others. Ahmadinejad just destroyed the democratic decorations and showed the true fascist cult of the leader character of the IRI. In both Nazi Germany and the IRI, a religious minority has been the subject of systematic persecution. In the former, it were the Jews, whose status was also regarded a racially inferior one and no just a religious minority, and in the latter it is the Baha'i that have assumed such a status. The Bahai's are just persecuted a tad bit better in the IRI than the way the Jews were being treated in Nazi Germany (but I would not be suprised if did not live in this day and age the IRI would have already put the in death camps to finish them off). So if some people think that by identifying the IRI as being capable of developing such a systematic monsterosity that could be so comparable to Nazi Germany, the author is crediting the IRI too much, then, my response is this: Credit must be given where it is due.

What is the point of this?

I'm not sure what the point of this article is.  You can make just as convincing comparisons with Maoist China.  If anything, the IRI's core revolutionaries have stolen more rhetoric from the Left than the Right, what with their talk of permanent revolutions and anti-intellectual violence a la the Cultural Revolution. During the early 80's, they even used that very term when purging the universities.  The Baa'th movements also demonstrated similarities with fascists, as did the Spanish Phalange (and their offshoots in Lebanon for instance).  The Phalange even had religion in common with the IRI.  So why the Nazies?  You can compare them with the Zionists for that matter, who were also a utopian and strongly communitarian movement.  This is not to whitewash these criminals.  They are thugs of first order, and lumpen thugs.  But I'd just be afraid to bring the Nazi comparison in these days of renewed war drums against the IRI since it's been one of the stock items in the neo-cons arsenal as a prelude to a ware against those authoritarian regimes they tend to want to get rid of.  Don't back off Ms. Amini.  You don't need to play the game by the IRI's rules but a little caution will be nice.  And I think you know what I mean.

This author is nuts

I can't even begin my argument. Extrimism comes in the form of opposition, religion, politics and even story telling. This person is suffering from ignorance to compare Iran and Iranians to Nazi Germany. I see more similarities between the Zionist ideologies that Hezbollah. Author should chew on that for a while and I'll return to show you examples.

The Weimar Republic was not

The Weimar Republic was not an anti-semitic state.  There was anti-semitism in Germany and other parts of Europe.

The question is not whether the Nazi regime and the IRI were alike. They are different in many respects however, some of the elements within both regimes are strikingly similar.

The scope with which the Nazis ruled and eliminated their opponents was far deadlier and brutal but that was a different era. The IRI however has used similar tactics: intimidation, terror, propaganda, indoctrination, etc.  especially in the post election period.  Prior to the election of 2009 for ex. the families of opponents were rarely targeted. That has changed.

The Nazis began their campaign with eliminating their opponents, one by one, Communists, Social democrats, Catholics, progressive intellectuals and then they went on to finish their deadly crusade against Jews, gypsies and even the physically disable. The IRI went after the Bahais, and their political opponents.

In many instances though, when you read Evans 3 volumes , you see many similarities. One example is that Hitler at every instance stopped the prosecution of those who had engaged in criminal activities within his own government, much like the IRI. 

In Germany, the Aryanization of the society is much like the Islamization which took place in Iran.  Get rid of the bad elements and create a society based on certain principles and a specific ideology.

The purges in the universities is also quite similar. the fact that social sciences did not matter to the third Reich is also what we see in recent times as echoed in the words of Khamenei himself.

The differences between the two regimes are far greater, but one can find similarities that are also astonishing.

too many differences

1) the Iranian people do not support the current regime unlike the Germans and Austrians choice of Hitler,

2) the Iranian regime does not persecute and murder entire people and do not try to enslave million others on the basis of race superiority 

so, IRAN is a classical fascist dictatorship and not a Nazi regime 

14 Characteristics of Fascism

//www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

I think the Inquisition of

I think the Inquisition of the New Wrold  is a more apt analogy.

//www.sefarad.org/publication/lm/037/6.html

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peruvian_Inquisition

.

The Pahlavis, all mullahs, and all public figures associated with the Green Movement  must disclose the source and the amount of their wealth/income.

Niloufar Parsi

You're literally shameless in your stilted, subjective, circular analysis. So you write, "i have on a number of occasions argued with some of those who describe the iranian regime "as a fascist one."

Are you actually saying that the IRI is not a fascist regime? If you are, then you have absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Just making sure. And I don't have to spend any time detailing the massive bloody record of the IRI to prove my point. The last 30 years is replete with evidence of their fascistic nature.

Are you one of those retarded leftist loons who doesn't see the fascistic nature of leftist brutes like Stalin or Mao, but is a self-righteous critic when it comes to the excesses of the CIA?