We're not surviving in the gruesome planet of Orwell's imagination from today. It is ruled by the Eternal Present, manipulated and highly false. In the dosed portions it is eaten by a completely fabricated past, in fact a forgery serving the current agitation. In turn, the future lies in a dangerous fog. More and more dangerous.
I'm an old man. At my age, memory has the right to fail, even the memory of a scientist-history. Over the years, however, I have had the habit of making careful notes with the chronicle of current events, which I have briefly commented on. This memory stored on paper continues to support natural memory.
Now that I'm tracking the hopeless despair of the conflict of the murdered Iran, it's that memory that's driving me far back. In the first 4th of 1979 the Empire of Iran collapsed, whose last ruler Mohammed Reza of the Pahlawich dynasty, Szachinszach Aryamer (King of Kings, Light of the Arias) reigned for a very long time, for from 1941 to 1979. How did he fall?
So I request to introduce any historical reflections. The tremendous Indo-European (Aryan) Persian empire under the regulation of the ancient Achemenid dynasty (668-330 BC) created a completely self-existent culture. It conquered all of Asia the Fore and Asia the insignificant and Egypt, threatened Greece. However, it lost in a collision with the Macedonian empire of Alexander the large and was absorbed by Hellenist monarchs (330–248 BC). From this immense defeat, however, it rose rather rapidly in the slimmer somewhat bordered Kingdom of Parties with the Arsacid dynasty on the throne (248 BC – 224 BC), rival of the Hellenist Seleucids and then the Romans, but delicate to the influence of Greek and Roman civilization. After the Parties another formation of the Persian state was formed under the authority of the entirely native Sasanid dynasty (224-651). Its absolute binder was the fascinating henoteistic religion of masdeism (Zaratustry), which in the form of archaic was already present in the Achemenid Persia. After years of greatness, the Persians endure a series of disasters. Their state is conquered by the Muslim arabian Caliphate (651-1258) and the inevitable Islamization of the local population. The remains of the mazdeists defend themselves in India. After the mid-13th century and throughout the 14th century, Persia succumbs to the insistence of the Mongols (the state of the ilchans of the Hulag dynasty) and between 1405 and 1501 Turkmens. All abroad power is characterized by 1 scratch: the affirmation of Muslim religion. There was no turning back from this fact, although the first Mongolian ilchans, guided by their typical spiritual tolerance, hesitated. But they besides adopted Islam in the Persian-Arabic sea.
In 1501, the alleged fresh Age begins. Persia regains independency under chess from the national Safawid dynasty (1501-1736), then Nadira (1236-1750/1796), Zandid (1750-1789) and Kadjarów (1789-1925). It is simply a powerful country, fighting successfully with Ottoman Turkey, which is simply a Muslim country in the Shiite version. And here, in 1925, Reza's chess from the fresh Pahlavi dynasty sits on the throne, which “modernizes” the state with large measurement and gives it a fresh name in 1935.
So I return to the reign of my last chess, my son. Rezy, Mohammeda Rezy. As early as planet War II, Iran was under the jurisdiction of the alleged Allies, primarily the United Kingdom. Fortunately for the Pahlawich monarchy, the influences of the USSR were rapidly eliminated, while the appetites of Comrade Stalin in this area were clearly formulated. After the weakening “care” of British Iran, they took care of the United States and never left it. This, however, did not safe Iran's future. The U.S. industry's ferocious tycoons have always attracted the vast oil wealth of this country. From 1953 to 1954, the Mossadek government dared to nationalize oil deposits, treating them as a national treasure. The CIA so prepared a coup to be endorsed by young chessmen. The emancipation mistake until the end of his reign was never repeated. 1 lesson was enough. However, Mohammed Rezie cannot be denied much merit. Taking seriously the duties of the ruler and father of the nation, he sought comprehensive improvement in all field (called the "white revolution"), but the full policy was based on an alliance with the US. Like many before him and many after him all over the world, he had the illusion that this would guarantee long-term prosperity of Iran. No uncertainty he was motivated by the fear of the expansion of russian communism, and in the right course he was assured by the rage demonstrated by the leaders of the “Soviet camp”.
Iran chess stood in the way of the Asian russian plans. But believing in the eternal guarantees of Americans he was incorrect painfully and deeply. In addition to this strategical error, however, he made the second, importantly worse. In the 1970s, he began to openly disregard Shiite Islam or the foundation of culture, mentality and customs of the full people. A fistful of cosmopolitan elites like everywhere, had no prestige in this country. The Shah decided to resurrect the tradition of an ancient empire from the Ahemenid and Sasanid era. He did not realize that millions of fervently believing Muslims would consider it a dense insult, and in the word of Shiite theologians and lawyers it would be an inexcusable disgrace. Few people remember that, on the basis of a kind of “laicization”, the ruler brought many experts from Israel (with full families) to Iran, giving them luxury surviving conditions. That was anger, too. The hard authority of the monarchy (fully justified) did not counterbalance the increasing crisis, which resulted in the illusion of permanent support from the US (which, of course, benefited as much from Iran's economical capabilities), and above all the public contempt of the court for the religion of the full society. There's been a disaster. The revolution of the turn of 1978 and 1979 aroused conflicting hopes in observers and silent abroad partners. The USSR was counting on the triumph of native communists and imports, or Afghan method. The russian pupiles after the chaos phase were to seize power and carry out appropriate slaughters. This was the case in Afghanistan (but at the price of a terrible 10-year war, but what the hell) in 1975 in Indochina and simultaneously in Africa (Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique). The USSR was at that time everywhere in the attack, and the “West”, smeared from the inside, suffered defeat everywhere. In turn, liberal “progress” of the alleged West hoped to overthrow the “backward” monarchy and establish another pathological creation of the alleged liberal democracy, with all the immanent features of the degeneration of this systemic model.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who from emigration in France [sic] prepared the full coup, swindled both sides in a superb way waiting to jump. The Muslim conspirators under the leadership of the Shiite clergy utilized all subversive forces to overthrow the throne and change the system, and then absolutely free themselves of rivals and momentary allies. The first executions killed monarchs (more than 1 100 generals of the faithful were murdered to chess, ministers, court dignitaries and scholars of this orientation), and were subsequently taken for "red" all ointments and prowess. I remember first shock and then beating commentators from the Warsaw Pact. The ripe apple slipped out of their hands. But it besides eluded the beasts of capitalism. Grotesque liberal groups had a choice of fast emigration, or prison, and in attempts at rebellion besides executions. At the end of the winning camp he trampled on the "people's mujahideen", a left-wing terrorist organization (her emigration survivors entered rational breeding under the baton of the US, and after 1990 they were placed in Albania!). After that, only the Kurds or Azerbaijani pacifications occurred, and the unsolved war with Iraq was more important.
Iran became the Muslim Republic. He went his own way, following the Qur'an and Sharia indications. This strategy was supported by the vast majority of residents. The Shiite clergy enjoyed large respect and trust. With respect to the bloody turn of 1979, the typical US casus deserves separate attention. Mohammed Reza completely believed in helping Americans who had a tiny debt of gratitude to him. But this category is not in politics. The chess proved to be a tragic feature of the “last rulers” (other examples: Nicholas II, Hajle Selassie). Namely, in the decisive phase of the conflict for the future of the state, he demonstrated good-natured wankeriness. specified rulers are consumed by all revolution alive. There's no area for mercy and compromise. Of course, the U.S. responded typically: a black man did his job, a black man could leave. The Americans besides left strong and persistent allies on the ice (videos: National China, Tibet, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, etc.). erstwhile chess, severely sick with cancer, left his country, neither the U.S. administration (then Carter) nor any another filthy “liberal democracy” gave him shelter, although thanks to his governments global capitalism was heavy stuffed with Iran's wealth. The guest was given by the human president of Egypt Anwar el-Sadat, who was killed in 1981 by a Muslim bomber. The chess itself died a year earlier.
The Muslim Republic was built on violence, but by alleged masses was widely accepted. Its circumstantial strategy is based on 3 axioms: 1) the actual independency of the state, 2) the treatment of the full economy as sources of income exclusively to its own citizens, 3) the defence of Islam as the foundation of identity and spiritual formation. The West is not tolerant of specified demoliber states. It was apparent that either there would be a permanent suppression of Iran by sanctions (did not succeed), or there would be a brutal invasion. Notabene, despite the Muslim government and the legally guaranteed authority of the Shiite clergy hierarchy tolerance for Armenian Christians, was there so far greater than in the U.S. pet – Azerbaijani dictator Aliyev. But it's not global.
Indeed, Muslim Iran called Israel a small Satan, while the US a large Satan.. He trained, armed, and supported fellow believers throughout the mediate East. But since 1979, this country has been the subject of a constant assault, insult and intrigue of the very powerful “satans”. So it defended itself on many azimuts. The top hatred of globalists has sparked serious treatment of religion as the basis of collective, household and individual life. For Western degenerates, it's a dangerous precedent. We request to burn it out. And Iran took the notion of sovereignty seriously. This eliminates him in the current economical climate to global empires. What Muslim countries are loved by the United States? Naturally, arabian Persian Gulf monarchs – decorative Islam without prejudice to the privileges and supremacy of large corporations of global capital, a paradise for decadent rich people.
In the days of Trump and Netanjah no pretexts are needed for genocide.. Those who argue the geopolitical interests of the US, and those who defend themselves against the overt exploitation of global capital, in the region-Israel, are doomed. In the context of executions, it is disgusted to see the United Nations’ embarrassing remains, indeed useless. Despite the thick darkness, I want the Iranians perseverance, in the fight for dignity and their own home without intruders and bandits.
Tadeusz M. Trajdos
Retired prof. IH PAN
Photo: wikipedia (photo by Shah Reza Pahlavi, King of Jordan and Jimmy Carter)
Think Poland, No. 11-12 (15-22.03.2026)
