Would you have supported the 1979 Iranian Revolution?

[Dr. MB]

Remember that the Islamist faction was not the only one!

[Progressive Pessimist]

I don't think I would have been a Shah supporter, but definitely not a Khomeini supporter either.

[dead0man]

If I was Iranian (and not 6 at the time) I would have supported the revolution at first, and then the bearded men would have murdered me like they did to most liberals with heart and courage.  As with several other important revolutions, the bad authoritarians in charge were replaced (with a lot of blood and lost coin) with worse authoritarians.

[kelestian]

In the 1979 - probably yes. With the hindsight - hell no.

[FT-02 Senator A.F.E. 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

Yes

[Sir Mohamed]

Nah (sane)

As horrible as the Shah was, the Mullahs rising to power made things much worse for Iran and the entire region.

[Dan the Roman]

With hindsight I would know the shah had 18 months to live and that was going to solve a whole lot of problems.

[TDAS04]

Wrong board.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

A hereditary dictator with a violent and oppressive secret police propped up by a foreign power being overthrown in a truly popular revolution? Of course I would have supported it, and I'd be lying if I pretended otherwise.  I would have hoped for a better outcome than the theocratic rule that resulted, but I would have supported the revolution.

Was the end result worse on the whole for Iranians? I don't know enough to say. It was certainly worse for American interests in the region. It was beneficial for Israel in the sense that it removed any alternative American proxy power in the region (although in the long term that benefit may be outweighed by Iranian antipathy).

[Ferguson97]

The Iranian Revolution is one of the most tragic and horrific events of the last half century.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

A hereditary dictator with a violent and oppressive secret police propped up by a foreign power being overthrown in a truly popular revolution? Of course I would have supported it, and I'd be lying if I pretended otherwise.  I would have hoped for a better outcome than the theocratic rule that resulted, but I would have supported the revolution.

Was the end result worse on the whole for Iranians? I don't know enough to say. It was certainly worse for American interests in the region. It was beneficial for Israel in the sense that it removed any alternative American proxy power in the region (although in the long term that benefit may be outweighed by Iranian antipathy).

No? Turkey still existed. Also Saudi Arabia and others, but Turkey was and is the largest economy in the Middle East and is tied with Iran for population size.

[Podgy the Bear]

It wasn't as unpopular in early 1979 in the United States as you might think.  There was a reasonable amount of sentiment that favored deposing the Shah and replacing him with more rational leadership.   Somewhat similar to the situation in Cuba in 1959.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes of course (though not Khomeini's subsequent consolidation of power, of course)

[LostFellow]

I honestly don't understand how the Shah was that different in terms of domestic matters from figures like Sukarno, Tito, etc. Obviously he was US-aligned in foreign policy which might not have been 100% moral, but I would take the benefits of the White Revolution easily (women's education, industrial development, land reform). Can someone inform me better on why he should have been overthrown?

He was definitely a megalomaniac in some ways, but to have someone with the vision of:

In the cities, electric cars would replace the gas engines and mass transportation systems would be switched to electricity, monorail over the ground or electric buses. And, furthermore, in the great era of civilization that lies ahead of our people, there will be least two or three holidays a week.

in 1974 is pretty great.

[gerritcole]

likely not, while im an ideologue at heart i think im better at ladder climbing than revolution and so id likely have favored the status quo

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Definitely, as much as I would’ve fought against the consolidation of the revolution by theocrats, as plenty of others have reiterated.

[Schiff for Senate]

I'd probably have supported the Shah till the late seventies and then turned against him, like so much of Iran. And of course, like so many of the left-wing revolutionaries, I would've subsequently deeply lamented the rise of right-wing religious authoritarianism (Shah > Khomeini).

[Indy Texas]

In 1979, Iran's economy was doing quite well thanks to high oil prices, infant mortality was half what it had been 20 years earlier, and the Shah's White Revolution, while obviously not as far-reaching as what the Iranian Left wanted, was certainly far more generous than any social welfare programs built by other Middle Eastern countries of the time.

If you were anything but a stridently conservative Islamist and devout follower of Ayatollah Khomeini, supporting the overthrow of the Shah was an incredibly stupid decision that made your life worse in every way.

[TheReckoning]

If you were anything but a stridently conservative Islamist and devout follower of Ayatollah Khomeini, supporting the overthrow of the Shah was an incredibly stupid decision that made your life worse in every way.

It is impossible to be a conservative and support revolution. By definition, conservatives oppose revolution. Don’t mix up being religious and conservative- they are not the same at all.

[Pericles]

At the time, absolutely.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And later you would all have been hanged.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hell no

[Ljube]

Hell no

[KaiserDave]

Obviously yes. Dead in prison a few years after that most likely.

[Yelnoc]

I likely would have been an Ali Shariati supporter (along with most of the crowd). I would have opposed the clerical turn, and then, well...

And later you would all have been hanged.