History will be kind

On Reza Shah the Great


History will be kind
by Shah4Iran

As I tried to pay close attention to both the gossiping women and the head-strong men arguing about Iranian history and politics, I took a good look around and carefully analyzed the people who filled the host's home with drinks, jokes and roars of laughter. These people had always been my image of the Persian culture and heritage. Thinking further, I had an interesting thought-a question,rather: what makes the Iranian people greatly different and exception in regards to their neighbors? My earliest and most immediate thought was Reza Shah the Great.

The common and numerously repeated modernizing actions of Reza Shah are all well-known and, perhaps, drilled into the heads of Iranians supporting and against the deposed monarchy. Roads, education, railways, security forces, secularism and westernization (if it can even be called that) are all common attributes given to Reza Shah. Although all of these advancements were, in fact, directly related to the reign and new system of Reza Shah, the most important attribute of Reza Shah is never written or mentioned; Reza Shah forcefully opened the minds of the Iranian public to make them see the world from which they had been repressed from for centuries.

As a general statement, the majority of Iranians against the reforms of Reza Shah argue that the fashion in which he implemented reform was brutal and far too strong-handed in nature. Such reforms, in particular, included women's emancipation, the weakening of the clergy, the dispersion of Iranian tribes, education reform and also the anti-communist feeling his government possessed. In Iran's particular circumstance, the majority of these strong-handed reforms are able to be justified when observing objectively.

The women of Iran had been confined to the home for centuries. As sheep and cattle, they were expected to obey their master and be dutiful. The extreme influence of Islam on the Iranian way of life had made Iran appear more as an Arab nation than the great empire of Cyrus the Great. When the veil was banned and women were forced to leave the home without covering themselves, they were forced into a necessary realization and awakening. Advocates of religious freedom see this act of Reza Shah's to have been highly inappropriate and offensive to reverent women of the Muslim faith. Stepping away from the boundaries of political correctness, it can be argued that such an assessment is far from the reality and true purpose that Reza Shah intended. As a father to the nation, Reza Shah had a responsibility to do what was necessary for the nation's progress. Integrating women into society was one such action towards progression. Old habits die hard and Reza Shah was the one who broke them. Iranian women who criticize this action of Reza Shah always seem to forget that it was that very action that has even allowed them to voice their opinions freely as individuals amongst the Iranian community today. As children are forced to go to school at an early age when they have no desire to do so, Reza Shah forced the women of Iran to integrate into society in order to create a better future.

Secularism and the weakening of the clergy as well as education reform all go under the same category. Before the kingship of Reza Shah, the clergy was a powerful entity supported financially by the government and believers. Common customs of the time show us that people's every-day lives were, in some odd way, connected to the clergy. People consulted the clergy regarding financial issues, social issues, blessings and other every-day happenings. Since the public was vastly connected to the clergy by a strong sense of faith, the government controlled the clergy by paying them large sums of money to support and back up the government. In essence, the clergy and the government were directly related. Reza Shah sought to gain the power of the clergy and replace Iranian religiosity with a sense of national pride. For this reason, maktabs,or religious schools, were shut down and modern education became mandatory for all children. Reza Shah wanted to educate the masses and loosen the grip on religious ideology. By forcefully taking the dependence on the clergy of the people away, Reza Shah created a new generation of less religious and innovative citizenry. Universities became accessible to the public and were no longer a luxury of royalty and nobility. Reza Shah's new nation was going to be a red rose amongst the thorny bushes of the Middle East.

Instead of criticizing Reza Shah, we must strive to understand the time in which he ruled, the motives he carried and the vision he saw for Iran. When we think of the banishment of the veil, we must think of the women of today and how greatly it has impacted them. When we think about the radical dismissal of the clergy, we must remember the the independence Iranians gained mentally and financially from an entity that only sought to generate money. When we think of the brutal dispersion of the Iranian tribesmen, we must remember that our boarders are still intact because of Reza Shah's forced assimilation of the tribesmen. As we ponder the injustices of the left wing citizenry of Iran who pledged their allegiance to the USSR, we must remember half of our preserved Azerbaijan and the sliver of the Caspian Sea we can still claim as Iranian waters. History will be kind and just to our King, Reza Shah the Great, who took Iran and created a proud culture, people and nation.



A nation of idol-worshippers!

by Arj on

It's 21st century, and amazingly a good chunk of our peopulation (mostly of the older generation) are stuck with the choice between glorifying an illiterated bully whose ideas of "reform" backfired in the from of Islamic fundamentalism, and a theocracy headed by a religious bully whose mission is to reverse the course of history!

Keep worshipping idols, perhaps a miracle could be on the way!!! 

Mash Ghasem

Thank you, Mr. Khorasani for a very informative contribution

by Mash Ghasem on

It's incredible someone writes such a good essay and we all go back to calling each other shahollahi....

Mr. Khorasani thanks again for your  hagiography. Years ago I had read (1), that he had established ties with Germany and they were beginning to get very active in Iran, hence the allied forces removal of him.

In the Rail Station of Tehran (Rah Ahan) there still is (or was) a very old swastika symbol, back from the '30.

Also, was wondering what sources did you use for this piece,

(1) Gozashteh Cheragh Rah Ayandeh, JM.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

What is Shaollahi

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Is it people who rightfully recognize the good Reza Shah did. Yes there were secular intellectuals who did good. But as the DICTATOR Reza Shah had the last word. He was able to either promote or suppress them.

Love things in moderation and make sure your love doesnt blind you.

Yes that makes sense plus being hones. Not allowing hate to blind us. Reza Shah was a benevolent dictator. I got trashed for saying this. Yes I agree that we should be honest. 

In hope of a Free, Democratic, Independent and Secular Iran

Nice idea but probably not gonna happen anytime soon. But it does not hurt to wish !


These Shahollahis will never learn

by spatima on

These Shahollahis will never get it, many great thing that are attributed to Reza Khan were actually intiatives of others like Foroughi, teymourtash and etc... that he took credit for. What should be praised is the secular intellectual movement that manifestated itself in the constitutional revolution. Reza Khan was simply the "dozde sare gardane" in the sense that he benefited from instability of the country as a means to solidify his own rule.

nonetheless he did contribute to the persianization of iran so he is definately a much more significant character then let say that rag head mullah khomeini. but let us not make an Imam hossein out of him.


Love things in moderation and make sure your love doesnt blind you.



In hope of a Free, Democratic, Independent and Secular Iran

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Pahlavi were great

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


those who hate and trash them did nothing for Iran. Pahlavi both of them did more for Iran than anyone in modern history.

I know some are jealous; some lost property or power. But for Iran Pahlavi were great. Most their detractors have a personal axe. But when it comes to actually doing something they do NOTHING.

Before Pahlavi Iranians were backwards and yes "dumb" as dirt. Reza Shah dragged them into the 20th century. The payback was backlash of Al Ahmad; JM; MEK and the rest of morons. DK Jan you are so right:

Merely Calling someone a "giant dumb ass" doesn't necessarily make you a 'smart ass' either ...

No it proves the person is out of argument and desperate. Yes jealousy is a sad thing specially against the Great people like Reza Shah who made Iran modern. 

Proof we got tons of morons to this day: //iranian.com/main/2011/oct/father-kills-...


Darius Kadivar

Calling him a "giant dumb ass" doesn't make you a 'smart ass'

by Darius Kadivar on

Merely Calling someone a "giant dumb ass" doesn't necessarily make you a 'smart ass' either ...


PRAISE FOR REZA SHAH: Adjoudani Slams Lack of Recognition for Pahlavi Dynasty's Founder




COMPLAINING JOMHURYKHAH: What Have the Pahlavis EVER Done For Us ? ;0) 

Esfand Aashena

Reza Shah is as much "The Great" as Khomeini is the 13th "Imam"!

by Esfand Aashena on

Shah4Iran I love history, I have read books about Reza Shah both for and against but you are not talking about history.  You are having an arbaein for him and call it history and his greatness.

You want to talk about history, write about how ordinary people lived under his rein in those days, how were his "forced reforms" implemented, what were people's hopes and aspirations, how he abandoned the constitution faster than Kim Kardashian can say "I do!", ....

He forced reforms why?  Because Iranians are dumb asses?  So a giant dumb ass forces reforms?  Come on!

Hitler made VW available for the masses but is that how he is remembered?  Sure that is something that he is reminded of but not as a whole.  Reza Shah is remembered for being a brutal dictator who f'ed up big time in the end.

Incidently many still call Hitler "The Great" and refer to him as a "great partiot".  Not that I want to compare Reza Shah with Hitler or his supporters with neo Nazis, but when you just throw in a Great and Patriot and have an Abolfazl spread, well there is so much you can say! 

If making roads and infrastructure is important, Islamic Republic has made multiple times as many roads, Ahmadi opens a dam every other week!

What I said about Edison was about the fact that he did something and that's how he is remembered and how people and technology have moved on from that first step.

Reza Shah has nothing on Iranian women.  Iranian women have stood up to this Islamic Republic all on their own and they have no one to thank for but themselves.

But in the end you can say whatever you want and believe whatever you want.  When it comes to Reza Shah we have moved and passed him.  Praise him, hate him, he was one giant dumb ass in the great scheme of things in the great history of Iran.

Everything is sacred


Mr. Cyrus Khorasani

by yaar on

you said
"To begin with Reza Shah renewed the D’Arcy concession in 1933 for 60 years without having received any concessions in return."

Wasn't reducing the area to 1/5 any concession? from the original 1,240,000 sq. km. to 260,000 sq. km.
Wasn't making the Brits paying a minimum amount of £750,000 any concession?

I don't want to make this very long but your comment contain many misinformation.


Mr. Khorasani...

by Shah4Iran on

Thanks for bringing such an in depth and valid argument t o the table- I fully agree that HIM Mohammad Reza Pahlavi is worthy of the same, if not more praise than his father. My article is a short and simple one- My point was really to illuminate the importance of the monarch and make people consider and respect him. Although I have no doubt that all your points are valid and have reason, I must say that, personally, I think the leader who gives the green light for ideas and policies to be passed is just as important as the thinker who thought of the. As you very well know, Reza Shah was a simple man from Savadkooh; it would be naive to say he pulled these brilliant and intellectual thoughts out of a magic hat but he put them into action. If Reza Shah's drive and Mohammad Reza Shah's insight and brilliance could be combined, Iran would have been a vey different nation today...in any case, I thank you for taking the time to give your lengthy and insightful commentary. Pirooz baasheed

Cyrus Khorasani

Reza Shah Hagiography

by Cyrus Khorasani on

The hagiography about Reza Shah never ends. This forum is as good as any to strip Reza Shah of facile simplicities. 

Contrary to the prevailing public perception, history will likely be much kinder to Mohammad Reza Shah, and the reverse is  true in so far as Reza Shah is concerned. The difference can be explained by the fact that accounts about Reza Shah produced after his removal from the throne in 1941 were all subject to 37 years of sanitization until the end of the Pahlavi dynasty. Who would dare publish a realistic account of Reza Shah during his son's long reign. Mohammad Reza Shah on the other hand had the ill fortune of being subjected to the most acrimonious accounts immediately after he relinquished the throne. The sensationalism enveloping Mohammad Reza Shah never ends.


For starters current accounts extol Reza Khan's brilliant ability to scheme his way to the throne in the early 1920s. While Reza Khan certainly did prove savy, the most significant factor to pave his way to the throne was the suitcase Monarch, Ahmad Shah, who essentially forfeited the throne by remaining abroad for over two years before Reza Shah ascended the throne. Another significant factor was the brutal manner in which Reza Khan shut down newspapers and assassinated anyone he perceived as a threat (eg., Mirzadeh Eshqi, and a failed assassination attempt on Malek ol Shoaray-e Bahar to name a few). Finally, the ecclesiastical establishment fully supported him to become Shah.


Although Reza Shah did embark on reforms, every single one  of the most significant changes associated with his 15 year reign were conceived and almost all completed in the first half of his monarchy. During this period Reza Shah learned from the experience of Seyyed Zia eddin who had been deposed within 100 days of leading the coup in 1921 solely due to his decision to take on the entire political establishment. As such, in sharp contrast Reza Shah allowed members of the political establishment to initiate reforms during the first half of his reign. These reformers, in turn, were inspired by the ideals first raised during the second Parliament in 1909-1911 and they all put their shoulder to the wheel of state to resume the state building effort in the 1920s. If anything had focused the thinking of the intellectuals of the country it was the mayham of the war years 

The entirety of Reza Shah’s reforms of building of a railroad, educational reform, emancipation of women, establishing a National Bank, eliminating capitulation agreements, judicial reform, eliminating Soviet and British influence and urban renewal had first been debated years before Reza Khan arrived in Tehran, and by the early 1920 represented powerful ideas around which all politicians coalesced. Apart from building a railroad for which Reza Shah is owed sole credit, it was the sheer administrative talents and tireless efforts of Abdolhossein Teymourtash, Ali Akbar Davar, Nosrat ol Dowleh Firouz, Hossein Ala, Moshaver ol Molk Ansari, Issa Saddiq and many others who made all these efforts possible. Reza Shah was a recluse who never involved himself in the details of these matters, and solely focused on the military.


By the early 1930, after these lengthy achievements had been accomplished, Reza Shah steped to the fore and steadily eliminated the influence of all the great state builders of the 1920s. The consequences were disastrous. To begin with Reza Shah renewed the D’Arcy concession in 1933 for 60 years without having received any concessions in return. While Teymourtash had fought tooth and nail for improved terms from APOC for years, he was removed in 1932 and thereafter Reza Shah had no interest improving royalty payments for fear of antagonizing the British Government. Other milestones of Reza Shah’s reign in the mid-1930s was bloodshed at Goharshad mosque to quell demonstrators opposed to dress reform and of course forced unveiling. While forced unveiling has been hailed as a great move, one must query why at the same time in 1935 Reza Shah also banned a women’s rights organization as well as a newspaper published by women that had been active for over a decade. Both these civic organizations could have assisted with ensuring that a majority of women would support unveiling but were foolishly deemed a challenge by Reza Shah. Forced unveiling without an elaborate public educational campaign is as bad as forced unveiling under the IRI. Reza Shah also had other parallels with present day Iran. In the last decade of his rule newspapers were banned from reporting on any events in Europe. Furthermore Iranians would be arrested for speaking to any foreigners after 1933. The treatments of minorities was also abhorrent in the second half of his reign, and all minority schools were shuttered by 1934. Furthermore, the regime callously murdered such luminaries as Teymourtash, Firouz, Sardar Assad, Hassan Modaress, Farrokhi Yazdi, Arbab Keikhosro and almost Mohammad Mossadegh. Other of the country’s leading minds such as Habibollah Shibani (by all accounts the country’s greatest military commander was court martialed and forced to depart the country in 1933, while the brilliant likes of Hassan Taghizadeh and Hossein Ala could no longer render governmental services to their country. Even the tireless Davar could no longer tolerate the Shah and took his own life in 1937.


A comparison of Reza Shah and Attaturk would also be instructive. The former was incapable of giving a speech and never communicated in any meaningful way with Iranians. Attaturk, on the other hand, spent most of his period in office giving speeches in every far flung corner of his country to explain the rationale behind his transformative agenda to the public. Moreover, by the early 1930s Attaturk relinquished power and assumed a ceremonial rule and never robbed his country blind. Reza Shah increasingly became a one man show and his lust for money and land was maniacal. Even royalists agree that by by the end of his rule he owned 15% of all the land in the country, the most arid at that.


Hero worshipping Reza Shah is facile and simplistic and based on 37 years of Pahlavi reign that followed this removal from the throne. If the legacy of anyone needs to be properly reassessed it is Mohammad Reza Shah. Although he made his share of political blunders, he accomplished much that has alluded many other statesmen of developing countries in the Twentieth century. He showered limitless resources on education, and is responsible for building a sizeable middle class in Iran – a very complex social and economic task indeed. Mohammad Reza Shah also laid the foundation for industrialization. Unlike the IRI he allowed others to harness their entrepreneurial skills and did not insist that he had to control the economic life of the country. The Khosroshahi’s, Ladjevardi’s, Elghanian’s, Iravani’s, Khiami’s, are a testament to Mohammad Reza Shah’s liberal approach to wealth creation.

If the brutal regime of the Ayatollah’s took a page out of any Iranian figure of the Twentieth Century, it was Reza Shah rather than Mohammad Reza Shah. Little wonder therefore that all the military thugs in present day Iran refer to Reza Shah as their role model.


شعر بهار در مدح رضا شاه


ین فرصت و فراغت و این نعمت و رفاه

مولود کوشش ملِک مُلک پرور است

ایمن غنوده ایم به عصری که بر و بحر

آن یک پر از مسلسل و این یک پر اژدر است

گشته سپهر خصم توانا و ناتوان 

دور زمان عدوی فقیر و توانگر است

گر بی خطر شبی به سر آری دلیل آن

شب زنده داری سر و سالار کشور است

عمرش دراز باد که در روزگار او 

هر روز، کار ما ز دگر روز بهتر است

یک روز از درآمد ما بُد هزینه بیش

امروز از هزینه درآمد فزون تر است

یک روزمان خزینه تهی بود از اعتبار

امروزمان خزینه پر از شوشه زر است

یک روز طرز کار به میل رجال بود 

امروز طرز کار ز قانون مفسر است

یک روز بود اداره کشور به دست غیر 

امروز کار در کف ابنای کشور است

یک روز بود داوری کنسولان روا

امروز داوری به کف دادگستر است

یک روز بود کار سیاست به دست خلق

امروز کار خلق به آیین دیگر است

یک روز بود هر کس و ناکس وزیرساز

امروز کار و پیشه هر کس مقرر است

یک روز کار تعبیه کردند بهر شخص

امروز هر کسی کند آن کش فراخور است

یک روز بود کار تجارت به میل غیر

امروز در معاش خود ایران مخیر است

یک روز بود در همه ابواب هرج و مرج

امروز این دو لفظ به درج کتب در است

صاحبقران شرق رضاشاه پهلوی

شاهنشهی که سایه خلاق اکبر است

در عهد دیگران همه اغراق بود شعر

در عهد شه، زبان حقیقت سخنور است

گر صد کتاب ساخته اید به مدح شاه

گر بنگرید، گفته ز ناگفته کمتر است


I like different opinions...

by Shah4Iran on

Those of you who completely dismiss Reza Shah are far beyond my realm of understanding....I won't answer you simply because you're missing my entire point. Reza Shah utilized the clergy as a political tool...this still happens in modern nations.Furthermore, he was secular in his rhetoric...I don't understand how "making yourself king" and being secular are related in any way. Suggesting that making Iran a democracy in the 1920s is absolutely far-fetched and unrealistic in my personal opinion...for those of you who think he is old news, I have some news for you. Whether you like the late King, think he was a dictator, fascist, crook etc, it is naive to deny his significant influence on the Iranian way of life and out look as a whole. Agha Mohammad Khan, Nassereddin Shah and Edison weren't the ones who gave me grandmother, mother and sister the opportunity and right to go to university....it was Reza Shah.If you're not interested in history, than you're right-there is no purpose in discussing it.For those of us who are, I think it's very important to share the contributions of this great leader with our posterity.As for Mash Ghassem.....you just seem like you hate the late King and have some emotions to get out ;) every leader has his own problems and mistakes-I understand that. Thank you all for reading and commenting. شادزی و شاد باش


Completely agree

by BacheShirazi on

Reza Shah was a great man. A person like him is exactly what Afghanistan needs right now. Somebody to force them into the modern world.


Esfand jaan

by Cost-of-Progress on

You seem like you don't deal with relativity, but like to think in absolute terms. Agha jaan there are no absolutes (except for death and taxes, of course). There are few things in life that are absolute. This is specially true when you talk about people and "leaders".

Compared to Dubya, Obama is a great improvement in that starting in Jan 2009, the US has had a president who can actually articulate and explain himself, who at least sounds intelligent. Is he the best president? Probably not, what is "the best president", best leader anyway? Should they not be judged relative to one another? 

As for Iran and Islam, talk to me after you retrun from your pilgrimage to makkeh, you're going this year, aren't you? You identify yourself as a muslim, don't ya? Or talk to me about your Rooze gereftan. Say, do you make your wife wear the symbol of the islamic opression? Is it OK for you to marry off your daughter at the age 0f 9? If the answer to these were No, then consider yourself an Iranian, othersie, you're a muslim. 

(I'd take you with me, but as you know, I cannot enter the holly, I say holly makkeh, so I'll have to leave you as we disembark the plane in Jeddah).

I hope that my humble attempt to reply to you answered the debate about Iran and Islam. You seem very confused in that department. I, on the other hand, am not confused at all. I also do not have any illusions about what we have become after all these centuries.





شاه کجا صدر اعظم و رئیس جمهور کجا


There is no doubt that Reza shah made some major mistakes.  Perhaps the biggest was actually naming himself shah . Had he decided to become president similar to what Ataturk did we would be in a very different place today.  
فراوانی استفاده از عنوان و کلمه شاه در ادبیات و فرهنگ ایران نشانه بزرگی و سربلندی بوده و خواهد بود  . ایران کجا و ترکیه کجا !
آنچنان در برابر فرهنگ غرب کوچک شده ایم که میخواهیم مقام بزرگان خویش را هم با آنها یکی کنیم ، شاید از احساس حقارت خود بکاهیم

Esfand Aashena

BREAKING NEWS! Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries are kaput!

by Esfand Aashena on

It's over! 

Everything is sacred


Good points but not the compete picture!

by aliash on

Dear Shah4Iran,

In your article you made some excellent observations.  There is no doubt that if it was not for the forced modernization by Reza shah we would be more like Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia than the current day Iran.  Iran is a modern and vibrant country with a highly educated society where women are involved in every aspect of the society despite 30 years of clerical rule.  Considering where Iran was at the time, and Reza shah’s own background it is amazing that he accomplished all that he did.  There is no doubt that Reza shah made some major mistakes.  Perhaps the biggest was actually naming himself shah.  Had he decided to become president similar to what Ataturk did we would be in a very different place today. 

Mash Ghasem

و قافیه‌یی که گذاشت آدولف رضاخان

Mash Ghasem


و معبرِ هر گلوله بر هر گوشت
دهانِ سگی‌ست که عاجِ گران‌بهای پادشاهی را
در انوالیدی می‌جَوَد.


و لقمه‌ی دهانِ جنازه‌ی هر بی‌چیزْ پادشاه
شرفِ یک پادشاهِ بی‌همه‌چیز است.


و آن کس که برای یک قبا بر تن و سه قبا در صندوق
و آن کس که برای یک لقمه در دهان و سه نان در کف
و آن کس که برای یک خانه در شهر و سه خانه در ده
با قبا و نان و خانه‌ی یک تاریخ چنان کند که تو کردی، رضاخان
نامش نیست انسان.


نه، نامش انسان نیست، انسان نیست
من نمی‌دانم چیست
به جز یک سلطان!




زندگی بدون حافظه ؟


Saying Reza Shah was this or that is like saying Edison was this orthat,Newton was this or that.

رضا شاه و سرآمدان دیگر یعنی دوره های اعتلای ایران ، یعنی حفظ حیات امروز ما ، یعنی سند و جود و بزرگی این کشور و ملت .  بر شمردن بزرگی های رضا شاه  و دیگران یعنی ایران از این چاه تباهی کنونی بیرون خواهد آمد . ملتی که حافظه خود را از دست بدهد و غرق افکار و رفتارهای مد روز و ساخته پرداخته بیگانگان شود نه امروز دارد نه آینده

Esfand Aashena

COP jaan once again you're comparing apples and oranges!

by Esfand Aashena on

You know I have a feeling if you were to explain the apples and oranges ritual you'd explain it like Cain!  Remember how he explained it in his debate with Romney in Las Vegas when he was asked when folks in NV pay 9% tax and you add 9% sales tax that equates 18% he said that is comparing apples and oranges, to which Romney responded well people don't like neither your apples nor oranges!

You say "(or hate, as we Iranians are good at hating this, or that)" whereas you forget to include "praising" (or good, as Iranians are good at "praising" this or that) for the opposite effect and factor yourself out of being Iranian in this formula!

My point was that history is ALREADY written about Reza Shah but we are either "good" at praising him or hating him and nothing will change as far as he is concerened.

They say he was a secular, yet he made himself a King!

They say he was against clergy, yet he courted clergy to advance his agendas!

They say he was a builder yet he sided with Fascists and was thrown out by the Allied forces who occupied Iran while his Foreign Minister was screaming Iran's "neutrality" in the war!

So the history is already written on him and it just depends what your definition of the word IS is!  You just like to kick me to get a satisfaction out of nothing!

One day you should write a blog and explain to all of us the difference between Iran and Islam!  To me since they both start with "I" they are the same!  What's the difference?! 

Everything is sacred


Esfand, once again

by Cost-of-Progress on

your dislike of the Pahlavis (reason is not relevant) has caused you to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Reza SHAH was the greatest thing that happened to Iran following the Ghajaar abortion and that of Safavids. He did more for Iran than a lot of the so called leaders before him.

Now, you can dislike (or hate, as we Iranians are good at hating this, or that) him or his son, but it doesn't change the fact that Reza SHAH was good for Iran. Think about the fact that in a country where the majority of folks could barely read their arabic ghoraan (notice the pun), the concept of true democracy is as meaningless as it is for Islam to claim it is democractic.

Now, here's something to ponder, ay?




Esfand Aashena

Reza Shah is gone! He is already history!

by Esfand Aashena on

When it comes to Iran it appears our history keeps being re-written over and over again and been being written for the past couple thousand years!

How kind was or is history to Agha Mohammad Khan, Nasir-din Shah or other kings?  Also, which generation are we talking about?  Those who were born in 1910s, 1920s, 30s and all the way to 1990s, 2000s and beyond?

Saying Reza Shah was this or that is like saying Edison was this or that, Newton was this or that.  Not many care much about Edison anymore and certainly no one names him every time they turn a light switch on!

Like all other historical subjects on i.com let's pile on on both side of the "issue"!  Let's have a "debate" ----> Reza Shah was neither a Dictator nor a Shah; Discuss! 

Everything is sacred