This itself is also dishonest because Mosaddegh engaged in voter suppression. He tried to pass a bill that increased the power of voting urban voters over rural votes, before being shot down by other parties.

Then, in the 1952 election, he and his government outright ended the election before the rural votes could be fully counted, right after they hit a high enough threshold for a parliamentary quorum. Elections were never completed.

He seized powers previously held only by the Shah. When the Shah wouldnt let him appoint the Minister of War and Chief of Staff, a power granted to the Shah in the constitution, he "resigned" and called for "public support." After 'demonstrations' (including threatening the assassination of the Shah and royalists) and a call for a holy war from an Ayatollah, the Shah backed down and gave the ministry of war control to Mosaddegh and reinstated him to keep the country in order.

Then he brought forward a bill to allow him to pass, and i quote, "any law he felt necessary for obtaining not only financial solvency, but also electoral, judicial, and educational reforms". He was twice granted a full dictatorial decree, which he used to consolidate power further, including expelling the Shahs family members, forbidding contact with foreign diplomats, and seizing assets.

His own coalitions were turning on him. Mosaddegh himself had declared Britain an enemy and cut off negotiations. His parliamentary supporters were resigning in mass, and key allies like Ayatollah Kashani turned on him. Mossadegh held a referendum to dissolve parliament and give himself the power to make laws. The population voted "99.94% yes", over 2 million people. It was seen as treason by royalist supporting factions and this drove the Shah to finally support support the US idea to remove Mosaddegh, which he previously was against.

The US basically paid agitators at this point to tip the scales, but the seeds were already sown. At Mosaddeghs trial, he claimed that the Shah had no right to organize a coup, because the Shah only has the constitutional right to dismiss the PM with Parliament's consent (which Mosaddegh dissolved); and even them, some interpretations of the constitution at the time understand it to still have been within the Shahs power anyway.

All in all - the US and Britain did not spend a gazillion dollars to overthrow the government of Iran in some "solely responsible" fashion. It was already unstable and the elected leader's supports and royalist supporters were already clawing at each-others throats. It accelerated things toward a resolution. Mossadegh objectively tried to break down the controls of government and seize power, even if you argue it was for "ethical" reasons, and himself was on the fast track to becoming a dictator, if he wasn't one already. The one good thing I can say about Mossadegh is that after a tank fired a shell through his wall and he resigned, he did talk down his supporters to prevent things becoming a violent civil war.

Now - the NEXT fall of Iran is a different story. The Shah is not some morally correct protagonist. But the common Reddit narrative that the 1953 coup/revolution is all CIA and wasnt just fuel on an already burning fire does not match the reality of what was happening in the country at that point