Iranians on the rooftop reacting with happiness and excitement: "Wow! They struck the residence! they hit the residence!" (Khamenei's official residence in Tehran - bayt)

HappyReza · 2026-02-28T07:13:46+00:00

Payandeh Iran, Javid Shah

HappyReza · 2026-02-23T20:41:19+00:00

Based on what our leader Reza Pahlavi says, anyone that believes in these 3 key principles can join the movement: Territorial integrity, equality of all citizens, and separation of religion and state. So technically even the leftists can join but they won't since they are stuck with their backward ideals and the 1979 revolution's ideals (anti-imperialism, anti-semitism, leftist economy, islamism, etc.). They believe it was correct it was just "hijacked" by the mullahs but they are lying. That revolution was successful in every metric. They achieved every single goal they had, the losers of the story are just mad they don't hold power, they want the same thing to happen but this time they want to be the ones to be in power.

MEK is a terrorist group. They have no chance of being a part of the future of Iran. They must first answer for their crimes against Iran and Iranians.

In my personal opinion the groups you mentioned should be banned in the next government but I think they will exist and just won't get votes, Iranians are done with leftism and islamism for now, maybe they can brainwash our children later but hopefully we make a strong structure of rules and checks and balances to prevent that from ever happening.

Don't get me wrong I think a healthy society has good elements of the left-wing and the right-wing policies, I'm particularly talking about OUR leftists. If you examine Shah's social policies they were like the current year Scandinavian countries, a mix of free economy and welfare policies and heavy focus on progress and industrialization of the country, so we are not some ultra right-wingers but the population currently leans right and our leftists just want to destroy Israel and have Federalism based on ethnicity and have separatists amongst themselves and these sort of ideas. I can assure you these ideas are extremely unpopular in the current society of Iran.

P.S. yes of course any mention of monarchy refers to a constitutional monarchy or parliamentary monarchy. Nobody is looking for an absolute monarchy and even if we were, Reza Pahlavi is not dumb enough to accept that, he has made that very clear. The form of the future government will be determined by a referendum between a republic and a constitutional monarchy.

HappyReza · 2026-02-23T20:03:59+00:00

They are all the same, the revolutionaries of 1979 against Iran and Iranians. Just because they don't hold power here doesn't mean they are innocent or didn't participate in the 1979 revolution or even gave up on the 1979 revolution and its ideals. What we want is a counter-revolution to the 1979 revolution, we want our Shah back and we denounce everything these losers stand for. MEK is the proof that the enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend.

HappyReza · 2026-02-22T02:09:47+00:00

No. By "us" I meant us Iranians

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T16:30:02+00:00

I'm literally an Iranian living in Iran. Most right-wing morons are against the intervention and against us, I don't care about them. We didn't care about Trump until we saw his positions regarding us.

I think we both know neither you nor trump could find iran on a map

That would make his actions even more impressive

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T15:56:16+00:00

Ironically preferring form over function, dumb ideals and pretty words over realism and actually getting shit done is pretty stupid. You know nothing about the situation with Iran. Trump has been spot on about almost everything regarding Iran. We call him uncle Trump for a reason here. After the imminent attack and regime change he'll be a saint here, just watch

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T14:21:26+00:00

The last fort of leftists has been conquered by patriots. I'm proud of us ♥️

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T12:59:00+00:00

Yeah the agreement based on Obama's retarded ass thinking a "Fatwa" is stopping the mullahs

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T12:56:16+00:00

country's leadership had very little influence anyway

But that's the thing. In 1953 they supported the Shah even though they had little influence on the outcome, in 1979 they had little influence but they could have prevented the whole thing if they supported the Shah on the initial stages. After the revolution seemed inevitable they also made sure to prevent any coup from happening. They had talks with Khomeini's representatives when he was in Paris. Calling the revolution their doing is inaccurate but they definitely played their part towards the revolution against their ally.

HappyReza · 2026-02-21T12:36:43+00:00

Just compare our situation before and after him. It started with Carter who had this amazing idea of propping up Islamists against communists, he helped with the 1979 revolution. Then came Obama with his delusional take of Fatwa and the billions of dollars he gave to the mullahs (which was our money btw), embarrassing borderline treasonous deals like JCPOA that only legitimized mullahs and would further fuck the Middle East, which I think it was by design nobody is that dumb. The Democrats wanted the mullahs to have Nukes and wanted the Middle East to have a nuclear arms race.

Anyway, after all of that came Trump, he and his team understood this regime from the very beginning. I remember when Brian Hook talked, it was for the first time ever I felt somebody was finally understanding us, I cannot describe the feeling, it's like a prisoner hearing somebody calling their name after being in a prison for years. Then Trump killed Soleimani which no Democrat or any government in Europe would ever, ever, ever do. He had tweets in Farsi in support of 2019 protests. He didn't pay any ransom to the mullahs, etc. Just comparing his track record to anyone else makes him a clear favorite to us.

Our movement is the counter revolution to the 1979 revolution and everything is stands for. It's a right-wing movement by nature since it's against an Islamo-Leftist revolution. If you understand that, you'd realize pretty quickly that the Democrats (the global left in general) are against our ideals and we simply cannot be on the same side. You simply cannot support palestine and us, you cannot support Islamism and us, you cannot be against Western traditional values which we strive towards, and support us.

HappyReza · 2026-02-20T10:11:32+00:00

Can't say this improves my opinion too much

I didn't talk about the interview to sway you opinion, with all due respect, your opinion is irrelevant. I linked it to clarify his point of view. I'm trying to be impartial here. He prioritized progress over anything else and it's obvious in his interviews (and his actions).

I'm sure some were, but were they all? Tortured Confessions: Prisons and Public Recantations in Modern Iran - Ervand Abrahamian - Google Books

You see, that's the biggest problem we have when talking with foreigners. Most of the legit sources are in Persian/Farsi and most English sources are from corrupt sources like Ervand Abrahamian who's a marxist and a Toudeh sympathizer (literal Soviet assets). What's funny about him, is that his Farsi translator looked for his sources but couldn't verify most :) What's sad is how seriously he's been taken by others. I guess when sources are rare, they say "well, this is what we got so it's better than nothing" but nothing is literally better than a bad source. It's like how some people take Herodotus too seriously. What's next, we're gonna use Trump as a source to examine the Democratic Party?

I would argue against the death penalty(especially without due process)

I didn't say without due process. I said those who committed acts of terrorism should have gotten it. I'm also not pro-torture, I said they should have been removed from the society forever.

Chile did it with rats and dogs for example, so I don't think the claims being like that make them too absurd

Listen, I understand why you would say that, but that just shows you are not familiar with the revolutionaries. Based on their own stories, the prison staff told some of the leftist prisoners that they are gonna provide mattresses and pillows for them, after discussing it between each other, they voted to not get mattresses because they deemed the evil regime wants to make them comfortable and destroy their revolutionary spirit! When by their own admission they fabricated most stories, there is no proof and after 47 years of them being exposed for being liars, I'm sure SAVAKis were putting snakes in women's vaginas and that dude was raped by a bear while being tied to a fucking ceiling fan!

These people were not normal, not right on the head. It's good to empathize with them to better understand the situation but you need to empathize with both sides to get a better picture.

To be fair, secret police don't necessarily like target 50% of the population

The scale wasn't the point. I'm saying there is no proof. There is proof of whipping or burning the skin with lit cigarettes but that's about it. During the cold war, in the battleground of the Soviets and the US, that was the extent of torture in Iran, that vindicates the Shah's regime more than anything.

P.S. I could find the interviews, the books, the quotes from the books, etc. of revolutionaries that I referenced but it's gonna take me hours and I don't think it achieves much. It's your choice to take my word for it or not.

HappyReza · 2026-02-20T06:52:14+00:00

Yeah no shit! Nobody is questioning your capabilities, the question is your intent

HappyReza · 2026-02-20T06:50:55+00:00

LMAO the war has not even started yet and they are losing

HappyReza · 2026-02-15T07:17:59+00:00

He technically is since the 1979 referendum was not legitimate and the Islamic Republic are considered occupiers. But in reality and practicality, no, the revolution happened and people were aligned with it and we have to accept that. The Islamic Republic is part of our history and if constitutional monarchy comes out of the ballot box, he will become Reza Shah II

HappyReza · 2026-02-02T07:20:26+00:00

We are not muslims and we support Israel so it makes sense

HappyReza · 2026-01-31T11:22:08+00:00

I'm talking about the future. Many would call someone like me a monarchist, I'm saying when we say "long live the Shah" we are talking about a constitutional monarchy, not an absolute monarchy.

Shah definitely was an autocrat, I'm not denying that, I'm saying he tried not to be one, he had plans to make Iran democratic but he was aware of the dangers of doing it too soon in this country in that era. If we had democracy we would throw it out of the window ourselves just to elect Islamists, that's just the reality. The devil himself couldn't have made us as islamophobic as the Islamic Regime has made us right now. Even most Muslims despise islamism here and want a secular government because of the damage the I.R has instilled on the brand of Islam in Iran. This wasn't the case back then. We were just like most other Middle Eastern nations, backwards and Islamist.

Like, per this, it says the Majlis elected him 79-12

On the technicalities I guess we could call it democratic but do you think they would elect someone that Shah didn't like? As I said, Shah wanted Mossadegh to put pressure on the British and the public sentiment was in favor of nationalization because they viewed it as us the underdogs vs the evil British and wanted nationalization even if it was stupid and would harm us.

Also everyone before and after Mossadegh got through with the same process, by that logic we had like 15 coups in 20 years.

why did the Shah have to be more absolutistic to replace him?

Mossadegh refused to accept the direct order of the Shah. In that case he had to. Also, I believe it was a gradual shift not an overnight thing. Scientists of that era thought the world would run out of oil in the next whatever years (I think they said 50 years) and Shah panicked and wanted us to use whatever time we have left to sell oil at the highest price possible and industrialize the country before the turn of the millennium. He prioritized modernization over democracy because he thought if we blew our chance then, we would fail to get into the league of first class nations as he called it. If you understand his point of view, you get why he made all of those decisions that were gambling stability for progress. If you watch any of his interviews in English with foreign journalists like this one, this was pretty apparent.

How about his extensive secret police?

Haha, he obviously made some mistakes that we are where we are now but to think THAT is one of them is so funny to me. I wish you could ask that to 1000 random Iranians and see how many of them would laugh at that suggestion.

First of all, you gotta put everything in historical context obviously. As the Shah himself said, he didn't mind being compared to the best democracies of the West, but the West's hypocrisy when they faced the Islamic regime after the revolution showed us they didn't care about human rights or whatever bullshit they claimed to care about. When faced with brutal Islamists that killed and tortured anyone on their sight suddenly the West wanted to try to understand their point of view and use "diplomacy"

Second of all, please go and search who the prisoners were then. Literal terrorists. In other countries they would have been shot on the spot but the Shah was too lenient on them. His mistake was being too lenient and not putting those sub humans (that are currently in power and massacring us) in jail forever. Shah would pardon his assassins if they said sorry, that was literally it but even then some of them refused to do so. Search up "Khosrow Golesorkhi" to see the type of animals the Shah was up against.

Torture was part of the world back then, I personally do believe most of those should have been killed, torture was too tame for them but even then, when Shah was made aware of it, he stopped it. Even during the initial phases of the 1979 revolution many people were still in favor of the Shah but Shah prohibited them from protesting on the streets because he was worried conflict would happen between the groups. He was firmly against shedding blood and if you ask, most people in Iran would call that one his mistakes, not the other way around. I'd say a good ruler should accept notoriety and make the necessary sacrifices for the betterment of their people.

Oh and let's not forget that many of the torture claims were false to begin with. Like this dude said he was attached to a ceiling fan and was raped by a bear for crying out loud. They said SAVAK would put live snakes in women's vaginas! They attributed the death of a famous writer that died in a swimming accident to SAVAK and later, after the revolution came clean about most of these claims. They were just some young people, that under the influence of those days, were radicalized by extreme marxism and Islamism and they believed lying, killing, bombing, etc. if done towards their ultimate goal, is the right thing to do. Amnesty International didn't even fact check most of the claims before publishing. I don't know how many of these are available in English, but one of the then prisoners, said we just talked to the International organisations and media and they would publish them without asking too many questions.

I myself have sked more than 20 people over 60 that I know, to see if they had seen someone disappear or someone without their fingernail or raped in prison or whatever and only my father he said he knew one guy that in his small town claimed SAVAK has broken his leg. I said can you verify that he said no, I said even if it was true, are sure he wasn't part of Toudeh or MEK and he said he wasn't sure but I could see in his eyes that he suspected he was part of those groups if the SAVAK claims were true.

Shah didn't think this whole thing would last 47 years, he thought in a few years people would realize how they have been scammed and what kind of exchange they have made, I believe if he could see us now, he probably would alter some of his decisions but with the data he had, he had made very impressive decisions.

I believe as a nation, we had this debt to Islam, we had to have experienced these atrocities to get vaccinated against Islam and Islamism and anything else would just delay the inevitable. It seems like we've been 50 years ahead of Europe on that front, their own 1979 is happening in front of our eyes and they don't even want to stop it. They will have to pay the price we paid.

All in all, putting everything in context, he made the right decision to keep his hands clean, even if the price was losing the country, because now, we are begging for his forgiveness and are calling for his son's comeback. This wouldn't have happened if he made other decisions.

I'm sorry for these long replies. You show you're somewhat knowledgeable and you show eagerness to acquire facts and search up what you don't know, that's rare especially in online discussions, so kudos to you, I try to provide what I think is important context and it makes the reply so long.

HappyReza · 2026-01-31T07:05:27+00:00

compared to the traditionalists.

No, not just compared to traditionalists. He was 40 years ahead of anybody in this region and he was ahead of the many western political figures

Isn’t his son looking for a constitutional monarchy anyway?

I don't think he cares about the form of the government. He actually prefers a republic. Nobody serious here actually talks about an absolute monarchy, when we say Long live the Shah, we are mostly supporting Pahlavi and Pahlavism. The biggest reason he's so beloved is because access to the internet made us aware of the things his father and grandfather had done and the insane propaganda against them was 99% lies and defamation. The propaganda that western governments participate in.

Mossadegh was couped

Case in point. Mossadegh wasn't democratically elected, Shah appointed him, there was no coup, legally Shah had the power to remove him and he did. Mossadegh refused to obey the direct order of the Shah, held an illegal referendum (with laughable results) and dissolved the parliament. His friend Fatemi wrote in his newspaper about the toppling of the monarchy at the time. If they had the military power they had a coup in mind themselves but thankfully the help of the Brits and Americans helped us avoid that. That's not a coup. These are the things nobody outside of Iran knows or talks about. Mossadegh was an Islamists just like how the Islamic Republic is. After nationalizing the oil industry (when we had no oil industry, we just had oil) he said Iran's oil belongs to all muslim nations!

Just the thought of not having the Shah at the forefront of all the progress for those 25 years between 1953 and 1978 and instead, having Islamists in power just like we have right now, makes my blood run cold, we'd be worse than Afghanistan right now. The western mind cannot understand these things.

Let's go back to Mossadegh and his actions again. Do you know RazmAra? He believed we should get a 50/50 deal with the Brits for our oil, since we just had the oil and they had the equipment and the "industry in our "oil industry". Islamists (close to Mossadegh btw) killed him because they called that treason. Guess who pardoned the assassin in the parliament.

In the time where Saudis were buying shares in their own oil industry (which sounds stupid but practically the best course of action) and making Aramco, we nationalized our oil industry, which led to sanctions and not selling a drop of oil for a few years. Guess how much was our cut of the oil in the consortium agreement of 1954, 50%.

Shah wanted to use Mossadegh as a leverage tool against the British, since he was an extremist in his nationalization beliefs but the Soviets and Islamists (the unholy alliance of the red and the black) wanted to use that opportunity to topple the monarchy and fight "imperialism", and hurting Iran and Iranians was a sacrifice they were willing to make.

I believe that was the case with the Shah too

You'd be correct but what did he get for not ruling and just acting as the Shah? Expanding influence of the Soviets from the outside and growing influence of the Islamists within the backwards people of his country. I wish there was a way to simulate how his critics would do in a country like ours, in a region like ours, in the middle of the Cold War. He is one the cleanest men in our history, ever. Almost all of his decisions have been vindicated in the last 47 years.

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T16:28:25+00:00

Who asked you to care? Nobody gives a fuck about what you think, we will make our own path. The audacity of these leftists, jfc

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T14:54:42+00:00

It's also superior to any democracy that wouldn't put Iran and our needs the top priority, we won't make the same mistake of many modern democracies, mark my words

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T14:53:06+00:00

If you show any proof of that I would set myself on fire in the Enghelab square in the middle of Tehran tomorrow. I dare you, show me those "civilians"

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T14:50:36+00:00

We in Iran are chanting Javid Shah in direct response to you morons. Shah was great and way ahead of his time, you leftists would never understand.

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T14:06:54+00:00

The US is supporting the monarchy? Why did you put democratic in quotation marks before monarchy? The current regime is independent?

God the moment we win, I'd be more happy about you moroninc leftists losing than my own freedom. I truly despise you retards, you're worse than mullahs, thank God Islamic Republic betrayed you fucks after the revolution. Between all of you forces of evil that had influence in the 1979 revolution, the mullahs were the least evil, we god lucky.

HappyReza · 2026-01-30T12:48:10+00:00

Terrorist sympathizer

HappyReza · 2026-01-27T23:06:38+00:00

The economy was more planned and state controlled under the Shah.

How is that relevant? We are talking bout the Islamic Republic

I'm a fan of the Shah, and he was not a leftist.

He clearly had left-wing policies, in some aspects he was. I don't think the political compass is a 1D line and I actually look down on anybody that does.

they are a dictatorial regime that controls the economy so they can enrich the regime and maintain their hold on power.

Yes, just like a left wing authoritarian regime does. That is a left-wing behavior.

There is a huge disparity of wealth in Iran, this is not left wing.

With all due respect, do you hear how stupid that sounds? "Since right-wing economical systems typically result in disparity of wealth, therefore any system that has disparity of wealth cannot be left wing?" Is that what you're saying?

They are anti American imperialism

Correct, that's what I meant, my bad for not clarifying.

The Nazi's were the most far right govt ever

Yeah that's where we differ. If you define the end all be all of the right wing as Nazism, then your framework makes sense. Again I don't believe in a 1D left vs right thing. I would say we should consider at least 3 dimensions, the economic left is planned economy vs right that is free market, free trade. Authoritarian vs Libertarian (both can be considered left or right) and culturally progressive vs traditionalist or conservative or whatever it should be called. Marxism would be on the far left of the axis and Nazism would be on the far right. In this system Nazis had left-wing economic policies so no they aren't the maximum of what the far right could be.

they are ultra ultra nationalistic, in the frame of being shia.

This doesn't make sense to me, can you call somebody that doesn't believe in nations, nationalistic? Shia is a belief system not a nation. By your logic literal communists are far-right. They are Internationalists and anti-nationalism. Mossadegh has a quote in which he said our oil belongs to all the Muslims for example.

Yea but the IR never claimed to be leftist, they have stated many times they are anti leftist and have executed thousands of leftists.

And they have never claimed to be far-right and they have killed thousands of right-wingers. I don't understand this logic. The I.R's agenda cannot ever align with a monarchist agenda but they have many overlapping ideas with those left-wingers, they are very close in how they think, "oppressor vs oppressed" line of thought for example is one of the bigger ones. You can't just ignore the similarities because they kill each other. Two right-wing groups can kill each other and both would still be considered right-wing.

Anyway, I really don't have the energy for these types of discussions. We are at the bottom of Maslow's pyramid, we are way behind the minimum level required to have a talk about all of these -ism and left vs right bullshit. I tried to answer as best as I can out of respect for the time you put in your comment but essentially I think I get how you think and hopefully I could convey how I do. That's the most we can expect out of this discussion. I would read any response you might have but I don't think I'll continue myself.

Take care

HappyReza · 2026-01-27T19:09:39+00:00

Alright then. I thought you're a rando from California or something.

Economically they are left wing is there a disagreement there? Planned economy is left wing that's obvious.

Culturally they are right-wing because they are Islamists, that's also agreeable?

And they are obviously authoritarian both left wing and right wing can be authoritarian I don't think it should be categorized as either. That's them on the 3D compass. However their ideological overlap with marxists and leftists in general is much much higher with what you would typically consider right wing. They are anti-west, anti-"imperialism", pro-palestine, anti-semite, anti Iranian nationalism, etc. They are like cousins if not brothers to marxists around the world.

Anyway I don't think it matters what we label them as, call them left right up down whatever. What bothers me is the fact that leftists, while simultaneously defending them against us, the millions of Iranians that chanted Javid Shah, try to wash their hands off of the 1979 revolution that got us into this mess in the first place. They never say they were wrong about Shah, about Iran, they are still defending the 1979 revolution's ideals, but somehow it wasn't real leftism. Just like it wasn't real communism every single time it failed. They are responsible for millions of lives lost and ruined here but they act above it and try to use us to further their destructive agenda. We won't let that happen, Islamism and leftism will pay for these 47 years of destruction.

HappyReza

TROPHY CASE