Top   /  New
Ash Ash (@Ash) on
So according to that Arab, apparently every group of people in Iran who speaks a different dialect or language has become a "nation". Amazing how some individuals think we live in a world where there are nations within nations.

Poor ethnic minorities, they feel oppressed just because their language is not taught at school. I guess it's time to call the State Department for "humanitarian intervention" and remove the Supreme Leader who incidentally happens to be an Azari in this Persian racist regime!
See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
An interesting article about Tabriz under the Mongols:
See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
This is an interesting entery in Wikipadia on the History of Masshad and Shiraz:
Mongolian invasion: Ilkhanates[edit]
Although some believe that after this event, the city was called Mashhad al-Ridha (the place of martyrdom of al-Ridha), it seems that Mashhad, as a place-name, first appears in al-Maqdisi, i.e. in the last third of the 10th century. About the middle of the 14th century, the traveller Ibn Battuta uses the expression "town of Mashhad al-Rida". Towards the end of the Middle Ages, the name Nuqan, which is still found on coins in the first half of the 14th century under the Il-Khanids, seems to have been gradually ousted by al-Mashhad or Mashhad.[citation needed]
Terken Khatun, Empress of the Khwarazmian Empire, known as "the Queen of the Turks", held captive by Mongol army.
Shias started visiting there for pilgrimage of his grave. By the end of the 9th century, a dome was built on the grave and many buildings and bazaars sprang up around it. During more than a millennium it has been devastated and reconstructed several times.[10] In 1161 however, the Ghuzz Turks succeeded in taking the place, but they spared the sacred area in their pillaging.[citation needed] It was not considered a great city until Mongol raids in 1220, which caused the destruction of many large cities in Khurasan, leaving Mashhad relatively intact in the hands of Mongolian commanders because of the cemetery of Ali Al-Rezza and Harun al-Rashid (the latter was stolen).[11] Thus the survivors of the massacres migrated to Mashhad.[12] The only well-known food in Mashhad, "sholeh Mashhadi" (شله مشهدی) or "Sholeh", dates back to the era of the Mongolian invasion when it is thought to be cooked with any food available (the main ingredients are meat, grains and abundant spices) and be a Mongolian word.[13][14] When the traveller Ibn Battuta visited the town in 1333, he reported that it was a large town with abundant fruit trees, streams and mills. A great dome of elegant construction surmounts the noble mausoleum, the walls being decorated with colored tiles.

The city was spared destruction by the invading Mongols, when its local ruler offered tributes and submission to Genghis Khan. Shiraz was again spared by Tamerlane, when in 1382 the local monarch, Shah Shoja agreed to submit to the invader.[15] In the 13th century, Shiraz became a leading center of the arts and letters, thanks to the encouragement of its ruler and the presence of many Persian scholars and artists. For this reason the city was named by classical geographers Dar al-‘Elm, the House of Knowledge.[16] Among the Iranian poets, mystics and philosophers born in Shiraz were the poets Sa'di[17] and Hafiz,[18] the mystic Roozbehan, and the philosopher Mulla Sadra.[19] Thus Shiraz has been nicknamed "The Athens of Iran".[20] As early as the 11th century, several hundred thousand people inhabited Shiraz.[21] In the 14th century Shiraz had sixty thousand inhabitants.[22].
See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
This is an excerpt of a book (The Mongol Conquests in World History by Timothy May) reviewed by Peter Jackson whom Mr Edalat had consulted:

"Much of May’s book is concerned with the Mongol impact on the diffusion of ideas, technology, raw materials and manufactures, which he terms ‘the Chinggis Exchange’. The unification of much of Eurasia under a single imperial regime considerably eased long-distance communications across this vast region and reduced the costs and hazards of trade and travel. For a century or so after 1240 merchants, missionaries and adventurers from western Europe were able to reach the Far East and those who returned brought back new ideas and techniques. Far from exercising the passive role often imputed to the nomads Mongol rulers actively encouraged these exchanges and orchestrated the transfer of skilled personnel and material goods. This persisted even after the fragmentation of the united empire into four independent and often hostile states (c.1260).

Especially pivotal in this context were the close political ties between the Ilkhans (ruling Iran and Iraq) and the Great Khans (reigning over China as the Yüan dynasty), whose dominions together embraced the two culturally most advanced areas of the Old World – the Chinese and the Perso-Islamic. We thus find, for instance, Chinese medicine and cuisine betraying Middle Eastern influences and the motifs and techniques of Chinese art imported into Persian miniature painting. Symptomatic are the works composed under the aegis of the Ilkhans’ minister Rashid al-Din, who wrote treatises on agronomy and medicine that drew partly on Chinese expertise and whose universal chronicle, Jami‛ al-tawarikh (c.1303), comprised histories not only of the Mongols but also of China, India, the Jews, the Armenians and Catholic Europe (‘the Franks’). Without the Mongol conquests such a project would have been unthinkable.

This is a far cry from the popular image of the Mongols as merely the agents of depopulation and devastation. Yet the negative aspects of Mongol expansion are not played down. While the movement of bodies of skilled craftsmen and larger population groups across vast regions of Asia may have contributed to the ‘Chinggis Exchange’ it was usually involuntary and occasioned great suffering. May further endorses the view that the Mongols inadvertently made possible the emergence and spread of the Black Death, an event which perhaps did more than the collapse of the Ilkhanate and the Yüan to bring to an end the world system they had created. Their legacy in the military sphere also included the transmission of gunpowder technology from China to Europe and, in the much longer term, efforts to replicate the mobility and striking power of Mongol strategy during the 20th century.
See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
(Part 2)

Mr Edalat’s thesis also contains factual errors: one example,

“The breakdown of the Abbasid caliphate as nominal leaders of the Sunni population on the one hand and the historic role played by Shi’ism in the Iranian nationalist and liberation movements such as the Abu Muslim rebellion against the Arabs….”
First of all contrary to what we were taught at school that Abu Muslim was an Iranian it is highly unlikely that he was. There is no historical proof. The reason he was known as “Khorasani” doesn’t make him a native Iranian. During the Arab conquest of Iran many Arabs moved to the Iranian territories. It has been suggested that Abu Muslim was a freed slave who became a military leader. Secondly Edalat’s sentence deliberately or not misleads the reader, “Abu Muslim rebellion against the Arabs…” Abu Muslim helped establishing the Arab Caliphate by defeating the Umayads. So between two rival Arab clans he gave his military support to the Abbasids.

If someone writes about trauma they should also acknowledge the fact that during Khawarzmshah there were many wars and massacres. The Khwarazm ruled with an iron fist. It was a military rule and the local indigenous populations living under them were in constant fear and alienation as the Turkish soldiers controlled the environment.
The area that Mr Edalat is writing about needs far more research by scholars. It’s best to leave the ‘trauma’ out of it until more historical and unbiased facts are discovered and written about. For example, the sacking of Baghdad and destruction of the Abbasids Caliphate by Halague was not something that Halague wanted to do but gradually convinced by the Christians, Jews and the Shiites living under the Abbasids who were treated discriminatory? No tears were shed by them when the Caliphate was uprooted.

It is interesting to note both the names, Baghdad and Iraq are from Middle Persian but everyone associates them with the Arabs. The extent of Arabs taking over many parts of the Iranian culture and territory was huge. Iranians had no choice but to work with them and adopt their religion, customs etc… I don’t really think Iranian culture would have survived under the Arabs (Abbassids) and the Turks. There were no more local dynasties left. That’s my area of research I guess to try to prove and satisfy my own curiosity about yet another painful period in Iranian history.

Some further readings:
-Ghenghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World by Jack Weatherford.
-The Mongol Empire : Genghis Khan, his heirs and the founding of modern China / John Man.
-The Mongols / by Robert Nicholson
-The rise and fall of the second largest empire in history : how Genghis Khan's Mongols almost conquered the world / Thomas J. Craughwell.
-The Mongols by David Morgan
-Medieval Persia by David Morgan
See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
I disagree from the start with the hypothesis of Mr Edalat’s thesis which is continious “trauma” is related directly to one violent episode in history in medieval Iran. Iran has experienced more trauma since the coming of Islamic republic: a million soldiers killed in war, many came back with PTSD and a body part missing. Mass executions of political prisoners, moral and thought police surveying the populations. It’s ludicrous to blame what happened nearly a thousands years ago. It’s scapegoating and ultimate victimhood mentality. Doesn’t it make far more sense to write something about the wounds that are still fresh in the memory and the trauma which still very much prevalent today and we all know the causes? Beside there is no scientific evidence that trauma can transfer from one generation to the next let alone continues in 10 consecutive generations. If that is true then Iranians have always been traumatised and suffering from PTSD, because it’s always been one catastrophe after another.

One thing Mr Edalat has missed entirely in his mini thesis is the history of Crusades. Muslims killing the Christians or vice versa was a sanctified violence. And it wasn’t always between soldiers but more often than not women and children were slaughtered and entire villages were pillaged and destroyed. During the Mongol rule there was no partaking in the Crusades any more from the Iran side (which was mainly instigated by Baghdad and the Turkic rulers ). Many Khwarazm fleeing the Mongols joined the their Muslims brothers as mercenary against the Crusaders. During the Ilkhanate three main forces remained in the Middle East. The Christian West. Mamluks in Egypt and Ilkhanate in Persia. Ilkhanate and the Christian West were at peace with each other and did try to make a pack against the Mamluks but failed. There is a very interesting cover story in the reputable magazine, History Today about Halague and his efforts to join forces with the Christian West against the Mamluks which if they did world history will read very different today (

It was very hard to swallow for the Chinese, Arabs and Turks who thought of themselves as militarily and morally superior to everyone else to be defeated by nomadic tribes with no culture or ‘religion’. It was this harsh reality that they could not come to terms with. If the Mongols were Byzantinians or the Mamluks then they could have theologically make sense of what was happening, as everyone in those days being religious had to make sense of the world and what was happening in it. (Part 1)
See More
abolhussein abolhussein (@abolhussein) on
It seems that a majority of Americans detest Trump also, so the Canadians are not alone
See More
ChamoshChamoshvnd ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) on
Author of the book mentions how Flag's politics get serious, extreme,...
Read the piece below on the etiquette of handling American Flag and ponder how it has become a Merchandise itself, sometimes even made in China!

"The flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. It should never be displayed with the union down, save as a signal of dire distress. It should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise. It should never be carried flat or horizontally, but always aloft and free."

Back in the 60's Abbie Hoffman utilized the flag and wore it! Yippies (as in 'The Youth International Party') had some fabulous street theater.

Pigasus - 1968 presidential candidate of Yippies

See More
ChamoshChamoshvnd ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) on

Any King's Shilling

My Science Fiction Twin

Pump It Up
See More
ChamoshChamoshvnd ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) on
Thanx for another gem of observations and (almost) treaties. There are so many topics mentioned here it would take a while to go over all of them.

!سیاست پدر, مادر نداره
Above saying, literally translated as: Politics has no father or mother!, is a common phrase in our vernacular. Not only it indicates the orphan statues for politics in our culture is also implies the bastardy, untidy side of it.
And of course as your own experience in Iran of late 70's indicated during Revolutionary Situations optimism dominates politics. The exception which proves the rule? Not necessarily.

The whole issue of our common non-comprehension of Universal values: Justice, a long, old, sad tail.
Very few individuals and groups condemned those early summery executions on top of that school, (I forget school's name) and even now application of Justice is still selective and non-existent.
Not sure to call it Ironic or Iranic, but it's noteworthy how in 1943 khomeini's supports monarchy as the only legitimate form of government, and labels it as 'the discovery of secrets!' Kashf al-Asrar!!

Athenian Democracy with all the limitations and flaws it might have had, and even after thousands of years still has significant relevance for our body politics, nationally in Iran, regionally in our neck of the woods as well as globally. See below:

A Study of Democracy in Ancient Greece Its Meaning for Today

For a cursory look at slaves status in ancient Greek the comedies of Aristophanes are invaluable; especially "The Frogs." Curious to see if there's any recent studies on slavery in Greece.

See More
Parsa Parsa (@Parsa) replied to Ash (@Ash) on
Thanks for your comments.
Iran is not the only country with the rocky past. Take Spain as one example its colonial history, anti Muslim and Jewish past and the presence of diverse ethnic groups with their own regional dialects all have contributed in making her transition to democracy difficult. But finally Spain made the necessary leap and put fascism behind it. ‘Since 1808 no political system has lasted a full fifty years’, a Spanish writer wrote. It was only in 1975 after Franco’s death that the country made the transition to democracy. And after she joined the EU in 1985 it opened up to the world. It had high participation of women in public life (even higher than Scandinavia). And the low level of birth rates which were offset by massive immigrations from South America and Africa in the 90s.

Italy only became unified in 1861. Rome became a capital in 1870. In 1946 an Italian republic is set up by popular vote and in 1984 Catholicism ceased to be the state religion. Today Italians identify more with their Catholic faith and football team than anything else and still struggle with many democratic processes.

As much as we think Iran had a turbulent modern history I can think of few more diabolic cases. Take Brazil for example. It was only in 1888 that slavery was abolished. Before that Portugal and Holland had colonised the place. Although Pedro II in 1889 set up a republic (constitutional democracy) it ended in 1930 by a military coup and became a dictatorship until 1945. Brazil had military rule from 1964 to 1985.

Why am I giving you all these examples just to say Iran is no different to many other countries and we should learn from the past and move on toward a better future. Iran still has a unique language and a rich treasury of literary works. It is a large and wealthy country with lots of creative and clever people. What Iran is lacking is leadership.

I tend to politely disagree with most of the conclusions made in the article you sent me but I will respond in due course.
See More
PersianReporter PersianReporter (@PersianReporter) on
Welcome to the club. We're kinda', sorta', really disliking ourselves as well. This too shall pass. Right?
See More
Ash Ash (@Ash) on
That Iranians were devotional and loyal to authority is debatable, as is the claim that Kurosh-e Bozorg was driven by a desire to enshrine "human rights". It must be said that the history of ancient Iran is full of examples where Iranians stood up to abusive leaders. The Shahnameh too does not shy away from pointing out the imperfection of Iranian rulers. But in spite of its flaws, ancient Iranian monarchy was certainly less hypocritical than Athenian democracy in addition to being much more functional and just. It is only with the coming of Arabs, Turks, and Mongols that Iranian political culture declined.

Democracy is a form of government, not THE form of government. It works in some countries, but not in others. So an important question begs to be asked: Are the people fit to partake in democratic governance? It seems Iranians are not yet ready for democracy. The democratic form of government demands transparency, justice, sanctity of law, and cooperation between state and society as well as between competing political camps within the system. The modern history of Iran up till the present day proves that these elements are absent not only in the successive Iranian regimes, but also in the culture and society itself. Anyone who wishes for a short answer as to why Iran is a failed government and society should take a look at Iranian traffic and the chaotic scene will speak for itself. Besides, there is no Iranian political camp worthy of assuming power in the country once the mullahs are gone. The royalists are irrelevant, the Marxists are as bad as the Islamists, the nationalists are a miserable failure, the liberals are nothing but political apes, and the Islamists are on the way out. So who's there to inherent Iran?

The fact of the matter is that Iran and Iranians have unfortunately become dysfunctional due to several historical reasons, so much so that they don't even agree on what Iranian identity is. Need I mention the self-defeating belief in the Aryan Myth? The people are truly lost, and what was known as Iranian culture is barely surviving today and has become nearly mummified. What is worse is that many believe that after the fall of the IR the situation in the country would magically improve, but this misplaced belief ignores the reality that the IR is a product of Iranian society and culture, it doesn't exist in a vacuum. So unless unhealthy Iranian habits are changed, culture is reformed, the dysfunctional mentality is remedied, and the religion of the Arabs is ditched, Iran is never going to elevate itself to the dignified status it once had as a leading civilization.

The following paper is an excellent explanation for how Iran became the traumatized and dysfunctional nation it is today:
See More
Dakho Dakho (@Dakho) on
Sanders was the only candidate who attracted millions of inactive American youngsters into electoral politics.
If Democrats could have controlled themselves and had stopped from stabbing Sanders in back (as all the documents indicates), if Democrats hadn't alienated millions of young first time voters from the process, then it would have been a different story.
What regime lobbyists have in common with Clinton (and Republicans) is an attachment to Neoliberlaism and all that comes with Neoliberalism.
Since November the Democratic party has also lost four major local elections. Any sane person should comprehend by now that the problem stems from Democrats attachment to mainstream corporate, big-money, big-business politics: NEOLIBERALISM.
Which side are you on? With the people, or with establishment, that is the question.

Civil war has broken out inside the Democratic party. Does the future belong to the populist left or the centrists?

See More
zanduvid zanduvid (@zanduvid) on
The Italian rider won his 115th race.
See More
iraj iraj (@iraj) on
Well, it seems like the so called left's role in American elections is to turn off voters to vote for Democrats. Trump didn't have much trouble by using Bernie Sanders criticism of Clinton and democrats to demonize Clinton.
The question addressed to this crowd is:
How do you like it now?
See More
iraj iraj (@iraj) on
It already did.
Supreme Court allows limited version of Trump’s travel ban to take effect and will consider case in fall.
Saudi supported Arab terrorists are in, Iranian tourists, migrants are out.
See More
Shahir Shahir (@Shahir) replied to ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) on
Thanks for your comment. My greatest worry is the direct involvement of Israel in the Syrian war. According to the IDF, on June 26, the Israeli Air Force attacked the Syrian government forces’ artillery positions after 10 projectiles fell on the Israeli-controlled part of the Golan Heights. While no independent body has yet confirmed the validity of Israel’s claim it is worth noting that the incident occurred one day after Benjamin Netanyahu stressed that Israel will not allow Iran to establish a permanent presences on the Golan. Whether the move will provoke a response from Assad's supporters, allowing Israel to open an Eastern front against Assad remains to be seen.
See More
ChamoshChamoshvnd ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) on
Shahir jan thanx for another timely contribution.
De-confliction seems to be the operative word here, and alas it doesn't seem to be in such direction.
But there's still hope, and as always, other possibilities.
See More
ChamoshChamoshvnd ChamoshChamoshvnd (@ChamoshChamoshvnd) replied to AndonDay (@AndonDay) on
There could be a certain fatigue set in for humanitarian rights NGOs and others in that line of work, with all the migrant and refugee issues of the past five years.
But there are also a set of unfolding crisis (economic, regional, global,...) that exacerbate the fatigue.
It would take a mere fraction of what they spent on armaments to eliminate hunger world wide, but they'll never do it. Wonder why?
See More