All-Iranians

Ryan Seacrest trumps Dai-jaan w/ the new generation, any day

we can go on with references like that all day long!

MM jan

I have also read the most definitive and scholarly book on the secret hand of the British imperialism in Iran: Daee Jan Napoleon (LOL)!

Anglophile

I guess you did not read the rumor that there was a flap of skin under his beard that said "made in GB" or the common knowledge "daste ingilisi-ha too kaar-e".  But, I am sure that you read Divaneh's series on the influence of the Brits on Shi'a mullahs!

MM dear

If Khomeini was an Anglophile then I must be Winston Churchill's love child!

AI

If you have access, how about posting a blog on a summary of Khomeini's smuggled cassette tapes that misteriously became illegal to own after 1979.  That should complement David's blog on "50 lies under the apple tree" (//iranian.com/main/blog/david-et-41) and a good lesson to the younger generation. Whether Khomeini was an anglophile will be a bonus! And, as well as a nice complement to Divaneh's series on the influence of the Brits on Shi'a elitists.

With thanks to Siamak and Roozbeh and apologies to AI

کاست روحانیت شیعیان+دولت رانتی(نفتی)=جمهوری اسلامی جهنم

Anglo khan, you have many correct points about the deep roots of religion in Iran, Left's non-attention to this central point, and the continued influence of people like Shariati, but

-There is no "religious Class" as a solid sociological category, unless we use it metaphorically. On the other hand we have extensive sociological, anthropoligical theories on Religious Caste (all the way from Weber to right now). Amongst Iranian Left ther were actually a good number of organizations and individuals who correctly saw IR as an embodiment of Shia Clergy's Religious Caste ( Mostafa Rahimi, "Rah Kargar" organization,...). The not so funny part was that even amongst the Left itself some would ridicule and confuse the concept of Caste with cassett tapes!

- What makes Aramesh Dostar's critiques of Iranian culture and history so potent and forceful is that he traces back the influence of religion all the way back to pre-Islamic era, and shows how even back then the religious Caste was a force to reckon with. Through his powerful textual analysis of various Iranian writers he also demonstrates how we have been, are and for the foreseeable future caught in a web of "religious" thinking, from our Leftists, to Rightist and everything else in between.

-Ethics and morality, and the Workers movement intrepretation of it is a timely and significant topic, but out of respect for our dear AI, we've probably 'high jacked' his blog (which is a compeletly different topic) long enough. Perhaps you could initiate that topic in a blog, and Rozbeh, me and others could continue it. Cheers

anglo: Islamist Regime is not the first religious Fascist regime

General Franco's spain had the full and active backing of catholic church. So your arguement is not really valid one

The reason people chanted for ali Shariati more than jazani was because Shah killed Jazani and allowed sharaiti to go for a nice holiday to London, and built thousands of mosques and hosseinyehs to teach Iranian people shariati's chart o part, ali Shariati's only use was his hatred of Marxism.

Islamist regime owes it's entire existance to SAVAK, and ultimately MOSSAD. Ironic as it sounds.

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Thanks gentlemen but the Islamic revolution proved Gramsci wrong

Thank you both Siamak and Roozbeh for replying to and elaborating on my question. If anything the Islamic revolution showed that there is one underlying class whose members come from BOTH the bourgeoisie as well as the proletariate and walk side by side against the same adversary.  This class which, as Roozbe points out, surpasses the materially/economically defined social classes is the religious class.  This revolution proved all the established left wing theories of class struggle wrong. From the hugely wealthy bazaaris to the modestly wealthy middle class and the new rich down to the poor working class came together under new paradigm. But if you think about it it was not such a new paradigm. It had happened during the Christian evolution post St Paul (which in turn can be argued to have its root in Persian Zoroasterianism - not Judaism). Not ot mention the Islamic revolution of Mohammad and Co.

I know that you may not agree with me and will not accept that Shariati had more influence on the crowds chanting against the Shah than Jazani but there again this is where the Iranian left got it entirely worng. By sticking to the rule books of Mao and Gramsci they totally dismissed the significance of a potent force called religion (as blind as it was).

The question I would like ask you gentlemen is this: what is the leftist defintion of morality? 

"Religious Intellectual": a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron.

According to Gramsci, only the two main social classes: The Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat are capable of having proper intellectuals. In the sense of having thinkers that could ask "the big question,"  the Ontological (Hasti'shenasaneh) questions, raising doubts about the basics and the fundamentals of all long held beliefs. Hence the advent of Enlightenment, Renaissance,...Based on this taxonomy each of these two main social classes have their own intellectuals, and he invents the term "Organic Intellectuals," to describe them; serving as a part, parcel and an extension of their social class.

Furthermore Gramsci considers the works of monks and church clergy which were basically occupied by writings on sides of previous religious text, and constitutionally incapable or unwilling to questioning the basic tenets of their religioue beliefs, as non-thinkers. For him there could be no religious "Organic Intellectual."

A distinction not so obvious for someone like Daruish Shayegan, who actually cites Gramsci as his 'source' when writing about his confused catagory of 'religious organic intellectual.'

Mr. Aramesh Dostar is an outstanding, probably the most significant intellectual we have had in the past three decades. Hope that cleared some issues. Cheers

P.S. Mr. Dostar is anything but a Leftist.

توده نفتی

1. //www.amontazeri.com/Farsi/khaterat/web/..%5Chtml%5C0112.htm

2. اصطلاح توده نفتی  از کجا پیدا شد و چرا؟
//www.rahetudeh.com/rahetude/Amuyi/HTML/jonbeshe-chap-4.html

anglophile; by "class", Siamak is referring to "Social class"

 e.g. "working class". there is no such thing as "religious class" or "islamist class". Religious beliefs cross social class boundaries. e.g. "working class" in Iran are pre dominantly religious.

The "ruling class" can be also religious or not. late Shah Aryamehr despite all allegations of wonanising and drinking and such by islamists (no doubt very true, as he did not apparently did a sigheh on each occasion...) I believe was a very religious man, a good shiat king, himself -did he not say that he was saved from assasination attempt by some godless commi by some Shiat emam?- I actually think that Aryamehr was in many ways more islamists that ali khamenei, but that is only my opinion...

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Thanks Siamak. Now a question for you.

Development and under-development

See I'm trying to work with you, hence "dal" to begin with!

To make a long story short, in  properly developed societies, Westrern Europe, US,...each class has its own intellectuals, and not all intellectuals are confined to join the ranks of the Left, because of severe mal-development of their country.

For instance in the US we had people like William F.Buckley, who no matter what you thought of his politics was a genuine thinker, all around individuale, and by all accounts a respected man, even by his political foes. He  never lacked a political space to be active in. 

Whereas in Iran we have everyone from Nader Naderpour, to Golestan to, to Shahrokh Meskob, to...(you probably know more of them than me) who all joined Todeh.

What is revealing, is that none of them stayed in there, why? Because if there were other modern sounding, relatively new political formations in Iran, none of them would have joined the Left to begin with.

To make a long story short: "Development or Under-Development, that is the question!" Cheers 

قاسم جون بازم اومدی نسازی با ما

ا

اولا که قاسم قاسمه. حالا اسمشو بذاره هوشنگ یا قاسم یا سیامک فرقی‌ نمی‌‌کنه. فقط خوبیش اینه که حالا که اسمتو سیامک گذاشتی‌ می‌شه باهات یه بحث نسبتا معقول کرد ولی‌ به ارواح خاک لنین و استالین و رفیق کیانوری ایندفعه خرابش نکن.  

اول که حیدر خان چراغ برقی نه چپی بود نه راستی‌ نه بالا نه پایین (تقریبا مثه همه چپی هایی ایرون). فقط تنها فرقی‌ که داشت این بود که مثل آب آدم میکشت. دیگه بهتره راجع به آدم 
کشی  هاش حرفی‌ نزنم که گندش بالا میاد.  ولی‌ بقول مولوی میگفت: من تیغ از پی‌ "حق" میزنم!!! یه روز مسلمون دو آتیشه بود یه روز آزادیخواه بود یه روز رفیق ستار خان بود یه روزم بر علیه ستار خان می‌‌جنگید. یه روز پناهنده به انگلیسا میشد یه روز برای کشتن محمد علیشاه بمب درست میکرد یه روز میرفت تو تبعید ازش پول میگرفت! آخه بابا این چپی‌های ما چیزی به نام "غیرت" می‌شناسن؟

دوم اینکه مرحوم تقی‌ زاده در زمانی‌ با حیدر خان حشر و نشر داشت که حیدر خان هنوز تنه ش به تنهٔ لنین نخورده بود یعنی‌ هنوز نمی‌دونست می‌شه از طریق مرام اشتراکی هم نون خورد.

سوم اینکه یعنی شما میفرمائید میرزا فتح‌الله آخوندزاده یا ملکم خان یا نسیم شمال یا کسروی یا رفیق خودتون آرامش دوستدار  و صد‌ها نفر دیگه همه یه روزی چپی بودن؟ یا اینکه اینها رو به عنوان روشنفکر به حساب نمیارین؟

چهارم کی‌ گفته که هرکی‌ چپ شد روشنفکر شد؟

حالا دال بده رفیق سیامک.

//elaydin.blogfa.com/post-10.aspx

Anglophil jaan, name one Iranian intellectual that wasn't Todeh

or in active relationship with Leftist at some points (specially during their youth) in Iran.

Even your own avatar, Taghi Zadeh during the constitutional revolution was hanging out with Haider Ammoghloo, a central leader of the original CPI.

Needless to say such attraction had less to do with Leftist ideas per se, and was  due  to the backward, underdeveloped, conservative, traditional nature of Iranian society and culture. Cheers 

امان از تودهٔ‌ای‌های فراماسون و فراماسونهای تودهٔ ای

این پدیده فقط در مملکت گٔل و بلبل یعنی‌ ایران عزیز خودمون ظهور کرده و نظائر آن به انواع گوناگون هر چند گاهی‌ به ظهور میرسند. داستان مثلث گلستان - باهری- انتظام مرا به یاد این پدیده ایرانی‌ الاصل انداخت. ابراهیم گلستان که از تاجر زادگان فرنگ رفته محسوب میشد (البته پدر بزرگش از اخوندای کله گنده شیراز بود) برای اینکه روشنفکر هم شناخته بشه اول به حزب تودهٔ پیوست و بعد هم شد بوی فرند فروغ فرخزاد. وقتی‌ خلیل ملکی‌ از حزب تودهٔ انشعاب کرد اول با او بد شد ولی‌ بعدش که دید ملکی‌ سرش به جای "خوبی‌" بند هست او هم خوشش آمد و شد رفیق تیمور بختیار و بعد هم استخدام شرکت نفت ایران و انگلیس شد و بعد از ۲۸ مرداد هم شد استخدام رویال داچ شل. تمام دار و ندارش رو هم مدیون شرکت نفت انگلیسی‌ شل هست و بعد از انقلاب هم یه قصر نزدیک برایتون خرید و  روز و شب به عبادت پرداخت - منظورم عبادت دولت فخیمه! یعنی‌ اگر خواسته باشین یکی‌ از درجه یک‌ترین "کارپردازان" دولت فخیمه را پیدا کنید از ابراهیم گلستان بهتر کمتر کسی‌ پیدا می‌شه. حالا چرا ایشون خودشو از مخالفان رژیم شاه میدونه به همون علته که حسین فردوست هم خودشو مخالف می‌دونست!!

برگردیم سر داستان مثلث!  آقای دکتر محمد معتضد باهری هم از تودهٔ یهای فراماسون شده (لوژ تهران) و همکلاسی گلستان در شیراز بودند. جالب اینجاست که گلستان ادعا میکنه که اسماعیل رأیین - یکی دیگر از دوستان و همکاران گلستان - کتابهای فراماسونی رأیین رو توی استودیوی گلستان قایم میکنه که بدست ساواک نیفته!. مثل اینکه اسماعیل فراموش کرده بود که به یار قدیمش گلستان بگه که تمام مددرک و اسناد فراماسونری را خود ساواک به دستور شاه به رأیین داده بود که کتاب بنویسه.!!

ای بابا! تنها ضلع صدیق این مثلث شخص حضرت انتظام بودند که جزو مفاخر فراماسونری محسوب میشدند و هیچ وابستگی‌ به جایی هم نداشتند به جز به ایران. 

Jenab MM

You are always welcome

Thank you, AI

.

جناب فتح الله

با تشکر از سوال کاملا بجای شما، فراموش نکبیم که بسیاری  گفته اند که این نتایج نظر سنجی و پرسش است که قضاوت آینده ی تاریخ را شکل خواهد داد.

Jenab Red Wine

Thank you for your visit and for your input. You may also like to view this

گورستان ظهيرالدوله

//fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%DA%AF%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86_%D8%B8%D9%87%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%87

"تاریخ قضاوت خواهد کرد که طالح و صالح کیست"

 پس نظر سنجی و پرسش برای چیست؟

...

تنها کسانی‌ می‌‌توانستند در ظهیر الدوله به خاک سپرده شوند که در آن جا آرامگاه داشتند،مثلِ خاندان ما و افرادی دیگر که این قانون بدانها تعلق میگرفت،تصور می‌کنیم که برایِ مرحومه فرخزاد و چندی دیگر این قانون را رعایت نکردند.

با سپاس از شما

طالح و صالح کیست

صالح و طالح متاع خویش فروشند
تا که قبول افتد و چه در نظر آید؟
حافظ

جناب نادر ونکی

ضمن تشکر از توجه شما ، بسیاری از منابع تولد نصرالله انتظام را ۱۲۷۸ نوشته اند، شاید یکی در فروردین ۱۲۷۸ و دیگری در اسفند ۱۲۷۸ متولد شده باشد. اما ممکنست صحیح آن ۱۲۷۹ باشد. در مورد قسمت دوم نوشته ی شما، تاریخ قضاوت خواهد کرد که طالح و صالح کیست.

جناب All Iranians

اگر میگی عبدالله انتظام برادر بزرگه نصرالله انتظام بود پس چرا تاریخ تولّدشون رو 1278 نوشتی؟  منظورت اینه که دوقلو بودن یکی زودتر از اون یک به دنیا آمده بود، یا اینکه copy&paste زدی و بی خیالش شدی؟  اصلاً در اینجا باید mahmoudg نظر بده که خیلی وقته روی این سایت پیداش نیست.

من که اصلاً ذرّه ای سرسپردگی به انگلیس در سوابق این دو ندیدم. کجاش برای بریتانیا کار کردن؟  حالا هرکی در شرکت نفت کاره ای بود مزدور انگلیسی ها بوده؟  یعنی 40 سال گذشت و انگلیسی ها یکبار هم به خودشون نگفتن که از این نوکرهای خودمن خسته شدیم چرا کار را به یکی از آدم ها پرورش یافته همین ایران نسپاریم؟

To People like Jenab Delldaar

What does history teach us? //answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071007211646AAH52bV

Jenab Delldaar

Thank you for your visit and for your input. You may also like to view this

//iranian.com/main/blog/all-iranians-13

what is the sense of...

writing about all these guys that are gone and irrelevant.. why don,t you write about present agents of greate Briton who run our country at present , like all those  Akhounds and Bacheh akhounds with their Phds from cambrige and oxford.

Jenab Dr Saadat Nouri

Thank you for your visit and for your input. You may also like to view this

نصرالله انتظام  //iichs.org/index.asp?id=200&doc_cat=7