In the past, at “blessed” time of Dr Mossadegh, we used to say that the Iranian people elected their nationalist leader, a personality democratically designated and overthrew by the “evil Shah”. But what was the reality?

In the late 40’s, 80 % of Iranian population lived in rural areas (based on the census data extrapolation from 1936 to 1956). The peasants were bound to their lands and suffered in the facts from a serfdom regime, which has been abolished in 1963 by the same “evil Shah”.

The “nationalist Dr Mossadegh”, also known as “Mossadegh-ol-Saltaneh” (Qajar Prince), was one of the most important landlords in Iran. He practised the serfdom and grew in wealth like his fellows during the famines of 1910’s (he was then 40 years old). These artificial famines were recurrent during the second part of XIX century (under Qajar reign) and stopped when Reza Shah took the power(Another “evil man” from the occident considerations). These famines, artificially maintained by the cereal speculators (such as the last Qajar king, Ahmad Shah, and the high clergy), reduced by half the Iranian population and transformed a prosperous country into one of the most miserable and poorest country in the world.

Although having voting rights (granted by the constitution of 1906), the peasants did not vote, or when they did, they voted according to their Master’s instructions (the princes and the clergy). That is why the members of the Iranian National Assembly (the mejliss) were mainly consisted of important landlords (princes or mullahs) opposed to Pahlavis who were considered as annoying in their plans to have control over the richness of Iran.

From the 20% remaining citizens, the half (the women) did not have voting right. They gained it only in 1963, granted again by the Shah against the alliance of the feudality and the clergy. (The clergy was also one of the most important owners of lands in Iran).

Before 1963 and the Shah’s reforms, at last, only 10% of the population (any age) was capable to vote, even though, the participation was not so high that we could suppose.

In 1951, Mossadegh, “our nationalist leader”, shared this poor electorate with the communists, the pro-palahvis, and the other political tendencies and was only representative at most of 3% of the Iranian population. In this context, talking about democracy would be abusive.

Even if the sociological organization of Iran is nowadays very different, the same phenomenon is persisting, which means the non-representation of the electoral results. In fact, the peasantry does not represent 80% anymore but 20% of the overall population and, moreover, owns their own lands (thanks to the Shah who has abolished the feudality and the serfdom). This peasantry is now educated, (always thanks to the reformed fought by the clergy) and has the voting right, in the texts as in the facts. It is true to say that the women have also the voting right. But for whom can we vote in Iran?

The occidental military-industrial lobby (which owns the press, at least in France) is favorable to the mullah’s regime and put forward the pretext of having elections as a proof of democratic political life in Iran.

Except the journalists who want to preserve their job, and the experts who want to stay in the favor of this lobby, intellectuals perpetuate a misunderstood without being the direct beneficiaries of this system? (unless if they are attracted by a press career).

But can we talk about democracy when the freedom of speech, the freedom of meeting, the freedom to create a political party and the freedom to run for elections are missing?

The Iranians don’t vote anymore and those they do, it is only for having updated authority stamps on their identity card, avoiding by that to be annoyed in administrative tasks. The stir around elections in Iran seems to be, in these conditions, obscene and not appropriated.

© WWW.IRAN-RESIST.ORG
All our articles in English...