Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi takes place in the immediate aftermath of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and tells the story of growing up in Iran under the new regime. What the book doesn’t cover is the many factors that contributed to the replacement of the Shah; the biggest of which was his misrepresentation of his people. The Shah of Iran came to power in an American and British backed coup in 1953, and his relationship with both nations remained prevalent throughout his rule. This relationship helped foster his strong Westernization polices that aimed to make Iran more democratic and industrialized. The White Revolution is the culmination of his western ideas, which included new policies involving land reform, education, and voting rights for women. It was also a campaign against his political opponents, who were silenced in the wake of his absolute consolidation of power. His Westernization polices disregarded numerous Iranian traditions and combined with his decreased support for established Islamic religious leaders, lost him the support of the people. When economic crisis hit in 1975, he lacked the support to survive it. In 1979, the Shah fled the country and never returned.
The idea of misrepresentation is a great place to draw a parallel between the Iranian Revolution and the American civil rights movement. There are many differences between the two events, mainly racial and religious discrimination, however they are structurally the same. Both events were mostly non-violent movements to replace a system that poorly represented the people. Both revolutions also occurred against a strong and legitimized leader, which subjugated the people. However, the biggest comparison between the two events is how the master-slave relationship lead to misrepresentation.
In each event, the master is a powerful, established, and legitimized body that subjugates the slaves. A leader must be so powerful for them to force change upon a people with no regard for established cultural identity. Before the Iranian Revolution, the Shah pushed Western ideas onto a people that strongly opposed them. Before the American Civil Rights movement, “[black people] continued to endure the devastating effects of racism, especially in the south,” (History.com editors). These events are important to study to get a better understanding of the master-slave dialectic and how the slave can change the power dynamic in their favor.
Abrahamian, Ervand. “Structural Causes of the Iranian Revolution.” MERIP Reports, no. 87, Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), 1980, pp. 21–26, https://doi.org/10.2307/3011417.
Ali M. Ansari (2001) The Myth of the White Revolution: Mohammad Reza Shah, ‘Modernization’ and the Consolidation of Power, Middle Eastern Studies, 37:3, 1-24, DOI: 10.1080/714004408
History.com Editors. “Civil Rights Movement.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 27 Oct. 2009, https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-movement.
The background information you included about the Iranian Revolution really helped me to better understand the history and politics of Iran. I like how you related the book to the Master Slave Dialect as it expands on our previous knowledge of this concept and allows us to explore it further relating to Iranian culture.
I think it is interesting that you chose to compare the downfall of the old Iranian government to the Civil Rights Movement in America. I think that the Master-Slave construct can pertain to the Shah vs. the people of Iran. Since the Shah held all the power in the government, he was able to control what cultures and ideas were introduced into society. In this case, he was beginning to take many ideas from Western societies and implement them into Iran. The people of Iran became the slaves because even though they were protesting the idea of a new culture, they could not change anything because they did not have a voice.