Reflections on the Origins of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 by Michael Axworthy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 чер 2024
- Talk by Professor Michael Axworthy at Stanford University on February 15, 2018.
Michael Axworthy is a Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies and the co-director of the Centre for Persian and Iranian Studies at the University of Exeter. He discusses different explanations for, and interpretations of, the 1979 revolution, with a particular look at the significance of religion. His most recent book is Iran: What Everyone Needs to Know (2017).
His book Revolutionary Iran is incredible!
Just finished his book Iran Empire of the Mind a brief but deeply insightful book on history including the events leading to the revolution.
The professor was dishonest about the BBC's relationship with the UK government in the QA session. It's understandable, since the professor served in the British Foreign Office before entering acamdemia. Wasn't the famous BBC program attacking Reza Shah in 1941 directed by instructions sent from the British Embassy in Tehran?
it seems to me that some of the comments below missed the main point presented by the late professor Axworthy-that the religious fervor among us in those days (most considered Shariati as a legitimate thinker!) indeed played a major role in inception of the revolution. Even the most secular independents among us had become a little more religious. Most of us ignored the potential dangers associated with religion especially Islam.
I came here to learn just exactly the Lefts role in the Rev... Can you direct me to a video or book?
Left unites with Right or it dies as a sidekick of the Centre for eternity. Life expectancy and literacy arr up as is urbanization and fertility decline to 1st World rates (the latter two debatable merit but notable) was the left really destroyed?
Axworthy’s book on Nader Shah is exemplary!
I believe his analysis were bias, it seems his research missed many interviews Shahan Shah had with western reporters, and the good thing is we can see it now. That how Shah had to defend Iran's interests because in some of the interviews he's being literally attacked verbally, that by increasing oil prices how British people are suffering and he doesn't care. I have seen only a glimpse of some of the interviews I'm sure he would have a good access to these information, and write an unbiased book. As his speech it was okay but during questioning I was shocked as how he denied British government and BBC'S propaganda during the revolution by giving falls report.
His view of the Shah was quite fair. Certainly not monarchist propaganda but not particularly unfavorable either.
The Shah of Iran only cared about the wealth in Iran. He didn’t care about the common man in Iran. He threw a lavish party at the expense of the Iranian people for Shah of Iran.
This lecture feels like a piling together of facts and events into a kaleidoscope. Isn't the best place to look for the answer simply the revolutionaries themselves? I think it's simpler than he's making it seem. The Shah was seen as an illegitimate tool of the west and the Iranians wanted to assert their sovereignty. That meant a break from the west and an attachment to Khomeini's Islamic nationalism.
And khomienie flushed Iran like a turd down the toilet
Smart little kid
This is very broad opinion of this guy (Axworthy) and not informative at all, simply a summary of several books by others. you'd get much more information reading Abbas Milani's and Houchang Nahavandi's books about the 1979 Iranian Revolution.
Thanks I’m gonna do that
3:00 "After intervals of 40 days each time" protests.
This is because the dead (of the previous demonstration)
are commemorated on the 40th day.
"But the soul lives on and may visit loved ones on the seventh and 40th days after death "
8:00 "One group have never supported the Revolution : the monarchists"
Also, the huge Communist party, and the Socialists, and the huge number of democrats,
Trade Unionists and Feminists. Most of whom wound up in Khomeini's torture camps.
9:00 "The Shah himself believed ...." Good God, even the Shah's supporters recognise he had lost the plot. The Shah wrote an embarrassing book "
All the leftists you mentioned were actively involved in the revolution. Khomeini simply outmanoeuvred and massacred them all afterwards.
@@beback_ , Well said.
If you read journals from political prisoners under the Shah, they talk about boredom and tedium of prison.
If you read journals by political prisoners of the Ayatollah Khomeini, they talk about terror, torture and death.
Origins of Irans Revolution. 50% of Iranians were living under the poverty line and the Shah was living a lavish life style and ignoring his people poverty. He didn’t care about his fellow poor Iranians while UK/USA/France were stealing Iranian oil for themselves because they didn’t want to pay full price. Today we are paying a fair price and the west is getting poorer year on year. Iran doesn’t need anyone they are resource rich.
You sound like a treasonous, Marxist Kunt.
Propaganda lies!
Why is he pro Islamic regime? I listed to five minutes of his audiobook and was bored to tears. Very tedious for the average listener who wants a simple history of iran. We don’t need to memorize and know every name in the govt. gonna look for other authors
this man is imposing the western narrative as opposed to a narrative written by the victors, which would be Iranians. further, he is studying the Iranian revolution through the epistemological eyes of the west
What's so essentially "western" about it? Sounds like straight up facts to me.
The Iranian were tired of US IMPERIALISM and intervention in their affairs. They are now getting tired of the sanctions and interference of the US EMPIRE + ZIONISM..... leave them in peace for goodness sake
You sound like a mullah, or worse, an apologist. Embarrassing.
Why does he refer the Iranian Government as Iranian Regimes?
It's all inter-changeable.
The Revolution went to the Iranian clerics because most Iranians are very conservatives. It’s in their blood and they are very determined people. Iranian Revolution was real. However the west don’t want to give it that name because the word Revolution is very powerful. So western Governments want to forget it occurred because they are in denial and want to forget about it and they want to create a new revolution but western Iranian Revolution.
There were many counterrevolutionary movements denouncing what Khomeini, Khalkhali, and others around them had done after the revolution. Many Iranians did not expect, or want to accept, the imposition of hijab laws. Many Iranians, including those who had helped the revolution, were executed.
Also, the throwing off the egregious influence of the clergy is not an exclusively western idea. Even if it was most strongly implemented in the West, it is something that others want and can have.
@@alisedighi7833 hello Ali. Thank you for your response. Yes I agree there were internal issues after the Revolution. Something for Iranians to discuss and resolve in the most peaceful respectful manner.
However the problem with the Shah was he came to power on the back of a Abrams tank, imported from the western Regime change text book after the overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Iran who wanted to enrich Iranians rather than the western companies. This was the episode that catapulted the Iranian Revolution to what it’s became after 40 odd years. The west will not and cannot accept this. New faces have arrived on the scene and these new faces stick with the same old policies. Now you mention the hijab. Please also mention Iranian culture. The hijab is part of the south Asian, Middle Eastern culture. It also used to be part of Jewish and Christendom culture, which the west likes to forget. It’s a mark of a women’s self respect. It’s part of cultural discussion rather than a political one, which the west loves to use to politicise and turn on Iran for one simple reason Regime change Iran. Turn Iranians against Iranians like they did with Libyans against Libyans and Syrians against Syrians and Iraqis against Iraqis and now Ukrainians against Ukrainians.
@@viscountengland7826you have points except for hijab. That’s great that it holds such rich history but persian women don’t care for this. If you get used to living a democratic life without a scarf on your head you want to keep things that way. Let those who want to wear it, wear it!! Great for them! As an Iranian who grew up in a Muslim family I condemn the imposition of the hijab. Not every woman wants to cover themselves. Let them reveal their gorgeous thick flowing hair that’s native to Iranians and live your own hijab loving and respecting life if that’s what you want.
@@viscountengland7826 I can assure you that Iran is not the reason why we in the west hate the hijab. In fact, it's the other way around: some of our leftists pretend to not mind it because they want to support any enemy that could hurt the west, so they can finally get their turn in power. But the majority of the people here see those restrictions on women as a violation of their dignity, and many men would die to prevent it.