IRAN

manny2001, the way you describe Iran as your shi'te ideal

is both religion/ideology centric, and confrontational. An Iranian government obligations are to Iranians not shi'te around the world. However, you are correct that a shi'te/IRR government has that obligation as it has demonstrated because it's loyalty is to shi'te not Iran.

Your reference takes a broad geo-political analysis and focuses on the current regime in Iran which is an anomaly incongruent with Iranian culture & history. So when I talk of isalm in Iran, it is not specific to the current regime that is not islamic or republic and it is certainly un-Iranian, if not non-Iranian. It certainly has many non-Iranians is key positions and leverages non-Iranains against people of Iran. So it is IRR. Your suggestion of re-igniting is something IRR will do if it survives its current problems by killing & suffocating Iranians. Iran neither has sufficient econo-military power, nor the statistical numbers, or support to do what you suggest, and that attempt would be a formula for complete ruin of Iran. Beside being a poor strategy, the radicalism you support and promote and IRR is not a significant part of the 'dichotomy' referenced in my article, as I explained IRR is an anomaly. The suggested remedy for the broad aspect of it, however, is suggested in the first paragraph of the article.

OKtaby

Furthermore

I could not disagree more with you manny2001

Point by point:

Given that Iran happens to be an almost exclusively Shiite nation.

Here we go with the Islamic thing again putting Shiite ahead of nation. First of all just because a person was born do a Shiite family does not make them either Muslim or Shiite. I know many Iranians who are nominally Shiite but secular by nature. My family going back many generations has been secular. I know this sends Islamists into frenzy but the days for forcing people into Islam are gone. It is now a personal decision.

Plus Iran is an Iranian nation. All Iranians should be treated equally. Our duty is to Iranians not Shiites! Any other approach is discriminatory.

The Iranian government has a natural duty to defend and protect Iranians and their interests. Moreover, it has a moral obligation and a geopolitical interest in defending vigorously the rights and
interests of Shiites worldwide. 

Why? Iran should focus on Iranians but some foreigner who happens to be Shiite. To me a Sunni Kurd or an Iranian Jew is much more important than a Lebanese Shiite. Get the priorities right! I am 100% opposed to a primary religious identity.

Furthermore, Iran should seek to re-ignite religious fervor amongst the majority Shiite seculars in Azerbayijan in order to bring Azerbiyijan under its sphere of influence.

I would love to see Azerbaijan reunited with Iran. But not at the cost of fanning flames or Islamic fundamentalism. I rather see a free secular Azerbaijan than a radicalized Islamic nation. Besides your suggestion is a recipe with conflict with our neighbors.

Furthermore

Given that Iran happens to be an almost exclusively Shiite nation and given that there a pockets of Shiites all around the world that seek guidance from Iran, it would be hard for any present or future foreign policy advisor in Iran to ignore them.

The Iranian government has a natural duty to defend and protect Iranians and their interests.  Moreover, it has a moral obligation and a geopolitical interest in defending vigorously the rights and interests of Shiites worldwide.  This translates into, backing Shiite majorities in Iraq and Lebanon and assuring they always have a firm hold in their governments.  It also means financially and politically supporting Shiites in Yemen, Bahrain and Eastern Saudi Arabia to achieve independence and political power.

Furthermore, Iran should seek to re-ignite religious fervor amongst the majority Shiite seculars in Azerbayijan in order to bring Azerbiyijan under its sphere of influence.

good analysis

and great writing. you should start writing for my favorie magazine, The New Yorker.  however, you need to be less biased in order to maintain a semblence of neutrality by not referring to iri as irr which is laughable and ridiculous.

Thanks for the response

Now I have a guess about who you are :)

As for Ebn-Moghanae being treated badly in the history, I think it depends to your sources. I believe you belong to my generation. Granted, we have been thought things in History courses, which were more "story" than history!

But if you look at our recent literature, almost all the new poets (I am talking of the intellectuals) have referred to him as a hero or at least the messenger of the freedom!

Regarding his "magic powers" though, I am not sure what to think about.

At that time, lots of people were into this business. I don t know if we can call it "science". I have to study more about this to be able to talk about, but as much as I know, the Sufis were also able to do lots of magics. I don't remember his name (who was the one who could change the stones in his hand to the Rubis?"....

Anyway, I value Ebn-Moghanae and Babak Khorramdin (and of course Mazdak even if he was not of the same category) for their courage and their upstanding against the atrocities of Arabs. Love to know more about them

Thanks again for the information.

Seagull, enjoyed reading your comment and analogy

It would make a very interesting discussion and merits dissection.

 VPK, your comments: "What we are seeing is a battle of ideologies..", "This has created a schism among Iranian thinkers.", "...that Iran is at a cross roads..",  is essentially an expansion of the 'dichotomy' that we as Iranians need to deal with. I think 'ten demands' and others are simply half measures from those who are on the islamic side of that dichotomy, that is borne of the impact of islam that I was suggesting must not be ignored, and I think Seagull's reference to distortions. Part of the corrective measure and 'upgrade' in addition to seculardemocracy is "the reemergence of some degree of the nationalist, pre-Islamic legacy will moderate Iran's more zealous Shi'ite side."

OKtaby

Dear Souri

I will be direct. If you find my responses unclear please let me know and I will attempt to respond.

First on my position on Monarchy

• I am not a Monarchist.
• I believe in a secular democracy based on an elected government.
• I am absolutely opposed to a Shah style dictatorship. I do however credit the Pahlavi's speciall Reza Shah for all he did for Iran.
• My preference is for a parliamentary system.
• I am open to a presidential system but don't like the idea of a powerful executive like in USA.
• I am open to a figurehead Monarch with no real power like that of England or Japan.

Now on VPK

• I was fascinated by Muquanna from the day I learned about him in school years ago in Iran.
• To me he represented the ability of reason and science to perform wonders that are yet to be matched.
• He started from very humble beginning; was a self though man who managed to become one of the  greatest scientists of his time.
• He stood up to the Arabs and fought the best he could.I put him up there with Babak Khorramdin.
• I often wonder if Sassania had not fallen what would have become of him. Perhaps he would have been a scientist and worked his wonders for the betterment of Iran and the world instead of dying fighting the Arab invaders.
• I have no claim as to either be or know of the promised person. I think we are on our own and better fix our own problems without waiting for the Sayosant.

Please keep in mind that he has been treated very badly in history. In fact almost all the historical information on him was written by his mortal enemies. People who did whatever they could to portray him in as negative a light as possible.

Veiled prophet of Khorasan

May I ask you a question? It has nothing to do with the subject of this blog but it is a while that I want to ask this from you and can't find an appropriate moment to do so. (my apologies to the author and the readers of this blog)

I want to ask you why you called yourself the Veiled prophet of Khorasan? What is your message?

No need to explain who was Ebn-Moghanae and what he was standing for. I think everybody here knows him. He is so much well known in our history and our literature, as in many poems and stories, he is referred to as "Savar e Sabzpoush" like in Siavash Kasraee's poem here below:

//iranian.com/main/blog/arthimis-1

But he, had a message for the people. That messages was clearly : Someone will come!

Some say that person who had to be coming, was "Abu-Muslim Khorasani" and some say that was "Mazdak" and some say that was a prince.....

Anyway, no matter what, I just want to know why you chose that name and what is the relation between your username and your political idea?

From your past comments here, you strike to me as a Monarchist.

But I am not so sure. Are you a Monarchist ? and if it is true, who is your promised person ?

I'll be thankful to you for a direct response.

nature vs nurture

Iranian vs Islam or religion.

I like to think of our genetic make up and nature as Iranian and the religion or the sets of guidance we follow as what nurturs our nature. Our culture is the outcome and the manifestations of the effect of that nurture over our nature. a mouthful.

It makes sense that we end up wanting more of our nature when what nurtures us is tipping us off ballance in relation to ourselves and in relation to the other cultures.

Our Iranian hardware, nature is having trouble with the old software and is in need of updated drivers and software to make us more compatible with the age. This can be done inorganically by reforming the source of our nurture or organically by replacing it.

The interface needs an upgrade to allow information to come across to our brains pure and free of distortion. That distortion is what makes some of us over suspicious of the world and sets some against the world, others and even against our own self.

Just a thought

Political Islam

I did not mean to be ignoring religion. That would be silly.I would however like to see its influence reduced as much as possible. 

What we are seeing is a battle of ideologies. Until recent years most Iranians accepted that religion specially Islam had a great role to play in politics. The gave rise to the Islamic Republic as well as the Islamic Marxists. A number of  recent factors have changed this:

1. The monumental failure of the Islamic Republic has changed people's perception of Islam; particularly political Islam.
2. A large number of Iranians have been forced to move to the West thanks to IRI. This has exposed them to secular democracies and how it is run.
3. Recent acts of terror by non Iranian Islamic radicals has turned many off to Islam. Many Iranians who once proudly called themselves Muslims no longer do so.
4. The youth in Iran do not have the same romantic feelings about Islam. They want freedom.

This has created a schism among Iranian thinkers. The Islamic intellectuals feel on the run. They are afraid that their revolution and whole ideology is collapsing. Therefore they are  fighting back. Once example is the "Ten Demands". Other examples include postings on this site trying to justify political Islam.

I don't know the outcome but I do believe that Iran is at a cross roads. The results will determine future of at least the next generation and maybe more.  We can  go the way of India or Pakistan. We can become a prosperous secular state or a failed Islamic dictatorship. I make no secret of my preference for secularism.

 INMHO< Shia religion is a

 INMHO< Shia religion is a manifestation of our nationalism in response to Islamic colonization. It was a mean to an end, which crept up on us and become an end unto itself. But the original goal remains the same, which is to return to our organic, natural state of being Iranian.

A heart or liver transplanet might save the patient for a few years but it won't add to its life and eventually the medicine that the patient needs to take in order for the body to accept the transplanet will eventually does the patient in....

Dear VPK, you are correct about the length & depth of our

identity and that is referenced in the article. However, over a thousand years of islam in whatever form, and more recent than our ancient heritage, has had its impact on our culture, politics & history. I also agree fully with Dariush's comment about IRR being some mandaravardy concoction and essentially a mix of Erteja' & imperialism gone awry. However, turning a blind eye to religion/Shi'te and its impact would be a disservice to ourselves. This article is not about roots of Iranian culture even though it referes to it in the context of an outside-in geopolitical view.

And Thank you David ET.

OKtaby

ManDar avardi

This is "Man dar avadrdi " system,it has nothing  to do with Iranian,Islam or remotely

related to  any proven system for god sakes.These people are just good merchants  , every thing can be traded for the money as long as there is a hand shake and they can sign it in the name of God.

Our Identity

Folks,

Our national identity goes much deeper than Islam either Shia or otherwise. All our major celebrations like Now Ruz; Char Shanbeh Soori; Yalda; Sizdeh Be Dar are pre Islamic. While these traditions were originally Zartoshti they are now secular for all practical purpose. Therefore they serve to unite us. Religious based identities on the other hand serve to divide. Sunni vs Shia; Jew vs Muslim or Christian and so on. If we want to have a united Iran then we better have an Iranian identity.

What I am seeing is that as the Islamic Republic fails Islamists are panicking. They are worried that a secular Iran will allow nominal Muslims to leave Islam. Therefore they redouble efforts to convince us that somehow we need Islam. Or that Islam is somehow so rooted in Iran that we cannot live without it. Others argue that we are different from Westerners and cannot handle a secular democracy. Fortunately it is not at all true.

In fact  until the Safavids there were still millions of
Zastoshtis and a large number of Jews in Iran. They were forcefully converted to Islam. In fact until the time of Shah Sultan Hossain in the 18th century there were still around a million Zartoshtis in Iran. Islam's roots are not as deep as people think they are.  

It makes little sense for us to base our identity on religion. Our Identity is Iranian not any particular religion. My advise is: practice your religion in private but do not try to impose it on me or Iran.

HS, good question even if it rhetorical.

I believe we'll get a good view into the answer to your question and future of Iran based on the outcome of the current uprising/revolution. Your question/comment is at the heart of what is going on now and the dynamics of this movement will effect its outcome; but I tend to agree with benross's assessment when/if we get to that secular democracy.

OKtaby

PN, That is an interesting question and can readily be

argued either way. One can assert that because of Shi'te maybe Iran became less like the Arabian Peninsula in cultural terms. However, one can also assert that because of it we adopted islam easier.

My opinion: What helped us maintain a portion of national identity was keeping our language even if it absorbed many Arabic words. It not only helped us but it also stood like a wall and helped most countries around Iran maintain their language and hence, more of their culture. Countries that lost their language became Arabs even though they were/are quite different than Saudi/Arabian Peninsula people in many ways. To the extent that Shi'te was a derivative of Islam/Arab religion & idealogy it did bring 'foreign', non-Iranian elements to our culture even if it took Iranian aspects and is diferent than Sunni islam. 

OKtaby

Shi'a VS Muslim

Do you think then, it's fair to assert that Shi'aism has helped us to reclaim and maintain our national identity?

Excellent article. My sense

Excellent article.

My sense is that Iran of future, provided being a secular democracy, will no longer hold that mysterious, multilayered -and threatening- attitude toward the west and the rest of the world as a whole. All these layers will dissolve in well protected pluralism, providing a transparency, not only to the world, but first and foremost, to its own citizens. That would be the first time we would know who we really are, without any sense of superiority, inferiority or hatred toward others.

Great article.

Thank you.

Iran cannot yet decide whether it is more Iranian or Moslem.

You are right. The question is, can we resolve this dichotomy or will it dissolve us?