پروژه تاریخ شفاهی دانشگاه هاروارد، مصاحبه با آقای اردشیر زاهدی - بخش پنجاه و یکم
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 чер 2023
- مصاحبه با آقای اردشیر زاهدی
در سال 1992
مصاحبه کننده حبیب لاجوردی
بخش پنجاه و یکم از پنجاه و یک بخش
پروژه تاریخ شفاهی دانشگاه هاروارد
#زاهدی
#اردشیرزاهدی
#پهلوی
با تشکر فراوان از شما که شانس شنیدن این اثر تاریخی مهم رو برای مردم فراهم کردید
بسیار مصاحبه خوب و مفیدی بود برای ثبت درتاریخ
آموزنده و قابل تامل است صحبت های با ارزش این مرد وطنپرست اردشیر زاهدی
ملکه دیبا مهره ی نفوذی تیمسار زاهدی بوده ؟ به شاه تحمیلش کردن ؟؟
الان در ایران قدرت دسته همین دار و دسته ی زاهدی هست ؟
سلام تشکر از زحمات شما
سلام ممنونم
تشکر از همراهی شما
پس ادامه صحبتاشون چی شد؟ بنظر میاد صحبتهای اقای زاهدی ادامه داشت
ضمن تشکر از صدای ارزشمند این مرد بزرگ ،آیا این ۵۱ قسمت ادامه داره؟چون به نظر میرسه مصاحبه ناتمام هست.
خیر، همین 51 قسمت هست کل مجموعه
Iran's constitution during the Pahlavi allowed multiple parties. Muhmmad Reza Shah Establishment of Rastakhiz Meli Party and abolishing all other parties in favor of his own creation was completely against Iran's Constitution. What is meaning of having monarchy in 21 century. We want people in country be literate and knowledgeable but we want one person be the king who came to power through force and violence and have this person and his children make the ultimate decision for this country and knowledgeable people. The Shah was for a society who are mostly literate.
از اونچه که از این مجموعه مصاحبه برمیاد جناب اردشیر خان زاهدی آدم صادق و شریفی بودن ولی در عین حال کم سواد و لمپن مسلک و تا حدودی بی ادب
پاچه خوار و دیکتاتور ساز و فرصت طلب را جا انداختی
Two things happened that Muhamad Reza Shah lost strong support in US before his dynasty collapsed.
1)In US during Carter presidency there was very high inflation. US conservatives group, that is republican, sector of the Government asked Iran to lower Oil prices which would have significant effect in controlling US inflation. Shah correctly refused to do so. So here he lost strong support among US conservative and wealthy class.
2) Iran Government was repressive toward political group who were progressive and wanted democratic group. No one should seriously argue the Shah's Government was a dictatorships. Here the Democrats and Carter who was the most liberal progressive President of US, had respect for such a system.
So there is no one left in US to strongly support Muhamad Reza Shah. It is important to appreciate Iran under Shah was dependent in all aspect on the US and Europe.
So the analogy of pressure cooker which is under pressure is very accurate. Shah was going to allow some freedom of speech liberty to its people. So just like a pressure which is fully pressurized you go to open the top without releasing the pressure first the lid hits sealing, there was an explosion against the Regime of the Shah and Islamic Revolution happened. Shah should have cleaned up all the corruption and established the rule of law before allowing full liberty with understanding that once full liberty is granted there will be transition to Presidential system not a monarchy. It is laughable in 20 th century to have belief that only one person should have authority to rule a country when people of the country become 90% literate. People have right to at any time change their ruler and this is not possible under monarchy. Having ceremonial monarchy like Britain to preserve a tradition is a false argument , a country that is economically poor and depends on oil need not pay money to a monarch for ceremonial purposes.
از زمانی که شاه خلاف قانون مشروطه به جای سلطنت تصمیم گرفت حکومت کنه و بر علیه حکومت مصدق کوتاه کرد آجر اول انقلاب پنجاه و هفت را زمین گذاشت. و با هر مخالفی که قلع و قمع کرد به گروه های تندرو فضای بیشتری داد و نهایتا چهل میلیون ایرانی پشت تندرو ترین مخالف شاه می ایستند و اگه ارتش آمریکا هم میومد ایران قادر نبود حکومت شاه را نگهداره.