This photograph is in Iran in the 1970s, she couldn’t be wearing this outfit today, and she would need a Hijab.
This photograph is in Iran in the 1970s, she couldn’t be wearing this outfit today, and she would need a Hijab.
Google 1970s Iran vs now. It’s an interesting contrast of how quickly societies can change; and some would argue, not towards the future but backwards.
You're viewing a single thread.
It's funny that people in the West are completely unaware of how this happened....
I'm a bit East of Iran and also clueless...
In the 1950s, the democratic government of Iran almost succeeded in driving out the monarchy for good. The US and the UK secretly sponsored a coup ('Operation Ajax') taking advantage of said government's instability over an oil/nationalization dispute. The UK wanted to keep their colonial-era concessions, and Iran, understandably, rather prefered they didn't.
In the late 1970s, there was a revolution which DID drive out the monarchy, but was hijacked by religious extremists.
Wasn't there a video years ago where an young Iranian women schooled reporters when they hit her with this propaganda? This was the period far more intense political repression and violence against the public than the Islamic Republic. You could be beaten in public for wearing the hijab at this time.
So a beating in public is worse than a beating in public, going to jail, or being killed? Sure is a good thing that hasn't happened since the Islamic Republic took over, amiright?
Shah's secret police wasn't too nice. They are both worse.
Yeah, I'm not defending either group, just pointing out that the group the other poster was defending had the same things happen or worse.
Evil muslims that hate freedom, obviously!
Wuzzat? The previous Iranian government was a corrupt monarchy set up by USA-UK because of oil? Nonsense! When the did the USA and UK ever orchestrate a coup to set up a friendly government for their own profit? That's totally NOT something they did back in 1953, no sir!
/s
It's almost like imperialism and colonialism are the major sources for why countries have failed.
Which is funny because Anti colonialists have an entire wiki describing that they "critically support" modern Iran
Probably some shit that happened before I was born that makes me more responsible than the people that are actually beating women to death right now?
At a certain point maybe we should consider that Iranian assholes to shitty things to people in their country are responsible for their own actions? I mean there's only so far you can take the "White Man's Burden" narrative isn't there?
No access to travelling band instruments salesmen?
And yet Tankies still "critically support" modern Iran
Do you even know what critical support means?
My point is look at the list of highlighted allies, and if your set of values is similar to theirs, maybe rethink whether or not you are an ally of lgbtq people or even treating people with decency. If you guys critically support Russia and Iran, maybe we critically support the West?
National liberation is a prerequisite for socialist liberation. Marx correctly observed this back in his own day, and directed socialists to support struggles against the British Empire even if the leaders of those struggles weren't socialist. Nowadays we support national liberation from the American Empire for much the same reasons, even if those revolutions and their leaders aren't perfect.
Those revolutions and their leaders are the exact opposite of who I want or am willing to give power to, and if you think they are the path forward to a better future you are a dangerous fool