Unfortunately I dont see why the clerical regime would fall. At most I think Khamenei may be ousted along with Ahmadinejad, but I would predict that even so the basic contours of the Iranian state would remain intact, under new, somewhat more moderate and less belligerent management.
Did you think the same thing 30 years ago when the Shah fell from power?
posted on 06/21/2009 8:02:54 PM PDT
("That if gold rust, what shall iron do?" --Chaucer)
Too young to have pondered it much at the time other than having a hearty contempt for Jimmy Carter's wimpishness and impotence. But in retrospect, I'd have been shocked if the Shah's overly rapid social-political liberalization of Iran (forced upon him largely by Carter) hadn't led to revolution, and an Islamist takeover was logical because Iran was (and is) deeply and overwhelmingly Muslim, and Muslim zealots were the single largest faction among the Shah's foes (others such as the communists and middle class democrats were overly cloistered in their sophisticated urban enclaves and underestimated the broad sentiment in favor of Islamism, especially in the rural areas). Many Iranians clearly want more representative government and more personal freedom, but Iran remains a seriously Muslim country, as witness prominent reformers and protestors justifying their actions and condemning the government's in the name of Islam. And Islam sets Allah's purported will above the citizenry's right to have all the laws of their liking. So I'll be very surprised if they do away with the theocracy, though they clearly desire for it to be less confining.
posted on 06/21/2009 9:57:44 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson