Blog Discussion Group Ten
Blog post due at 11:55pm on December 4 and comment due at 11:55pm on December 7.
Iran
- In what ways can the global context influence
- What parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in
- Can religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
While the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was mostly about social hierarchy and the class system, there are similarities with the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Both revolutions had a population fighting for better treatment and rights as individuals as both were reactionary. Another parallel would be that both promised order to the region while chaos was widespread throughout each revolution as well as the population in each revolution were fed up with the current leadership of the area.
ReplyDelete(https://www.britannica.com/event/Russian-Revolution-of-1917)
I do certainly agree with with on both of there frustrations and longing for a more representational governmental body. Though one attribute between both governments is evident in there actions, neither wanting the citizen to have the opportunity to experience a capitalistic environment. Main reason being that it would create to much individual independence and self sovereignty. Ultimately, undermining the absolute dependence which both governments were trying to instill within the population.
DeleteWhat parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran? Both revolutions took place in the 1900's, the Bolshevik Revolution staring on Mar 8, 1917 and ending on Nov 7, 1917. And the Islamic Revolution stared in January 1978 and ended in February 1979. During both revolutions there was an abundance of riots to partner with the up risings. For both the Russian and Islamic altercations there were many casualties on both sides, but with the current leader being victor. The violence grew throughout both revolutions and each riot created more and more tension between the sides.
ReplyDeleteI agree with some of the parallels you discussed in your argument but from what I read the revolutions were also very different. However, the Islamic revolution had ideas and was influenced by outside countries and that included Russia. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/116d/ea9c6f2167aa7f10a910e19a62201518319d.pdf
DeleteFor a secular state a strong religious identity would ideally have little to no impact on the state institutions, as these institutions stand on neutral ground in terms of religion. In terms of serving developmental goals a strong religious identity may serve to create a more unified nation that is unified under not only a state but also their religion. The holding of similar beliefs and values as well as possessing strong work ethics would help a country develop not only industrially but also ideologically.(http://marripedia.org/effects_of_religious_practice_on_work_ethic)
ReplyDeleteI agree, it would be ideal if a strong religious identity would have little to no impact on the state institutions. The influence religion has on the country makes it difficult to separate religion and politics. Religion would possibly be implemented into non-religious state institution because of the strong influence religion has on the country. Eventually, I think, whether they intended to or not, secular state institutions would be controlled by religion.
DeleteWhat parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran?
ReplyDeleteEven though the revolutions were ideologically different, there were many similarities between them. Some of them are listed below
1. Both were reactionary revolution
2. Formulated by leaders with support of foreign powers (Lenin by Germany and Ayatollah Khomeini by West). Many people will be surprised to know that ayatollah was supported by Western Powers, but Yes! Western powers concluded that a Religious fanatic is better than the Left-wing Communists who were also playing a crucial role in Iranian revolution.
3. Both nations were under a monarchy at the time of revolution
4. Both revolutions promised order in the society as chaos was widespread.
5. Both revolutions were internationalist in tone. Communist revolution wanted to export the revolution all around the world and Iranian revolutionaries wanted to export the revolution to neighboring Shia majority countries such as Iraq, Bahrain and Azerbaijan.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-similarities-and-differences-between-the-Russian-Revolution-and-the-Iranian-Revolution
Hey Gwen!
DeleteYou make some great point here. However, I wonder what you might think is different between the two landmark revolutions. As The Russian Revolution was merely political and the Iranian was based on religious thought, I would think the driving motivations are highly different. Although politics do drive people, I think the single strongest galvanizing force so far to date on this planet is organized religion. No other cause has driven mankind stronger, and the fervor we saw during the Iranian revolution is one example of this reckoning that religion can cause.
Another interesting part of the Iranian revolution is its casting off of Western ideals and social models. Although the Bolsheviks were similar, the Iranian revolution was unique in that its outcome was truly unique to its region.
Thoughts?
References:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p141_Benson.html
2. One of the main parallels between the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran during 1979 is the use and control of land, as well as the extent which the citizens had an opportunity of ownership and contrasting labor. As many of those in Russia at the time were peasants rather than industrial workers, the revolts left them in a form of complete state ownership.1. They now had no land ownership, but instead worked a labors of Russia as if a factory worker operated machinery. This can also be seen in Iran as the State focused on a religious attribute of society to take ownership of companies and resources.2. Ultimately, both nations were seeking to reduce, or completely eliminate, the possible influence and introduction of capitalism into their countries. The best way for them to accomplish this is to completely remove the resources, ownership, and control over individual assets that could produce competitive financial gain for the individual.
ReplyDelete1.https://www.mei.edu/publications/iranian-revolution-february-1979
2.https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-46-our-russian-ally-(1945)/what-was-the-bolshevik-revolution
I did not know that the revolts left industrial workers in a form of complete state ownership. Yes, both nations wished to lower the influence of capitalism, they thought it was a curse upon the land. They let religious places take control of various companies, etc. Overall, i agree with this answer and learned from it.
DeleteQuestion: Can religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
ReplyDeleteAnswer – Yes, according t]o the Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/05/american-atheists-religious-european-christians/560936/). As religious identity is, for most people, a private matter, this means that people are usually free to identify with one religion, multiple religions, or even no religion at all. This highly personal characteristic has only partial bearing on a secular government so both religious identity and the secular society can habitat and even prosper. One interested point documented in the article is how a secular society deals with those that identify as agnostic or even atheist. In those cases, again there seems to be no conflict and, as the article points out, being agnostic or atheist does not mean there isn’t a certain amount of spirituality. So, it does seem that secular states can not only be sustained by the various religious identities but they can also grow from the shared experience of theit beliefs.AC
What parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran?
ReplyDeleteEven though the revolutions were ideologically different, there were many similarities between them.
-Both were reactionary revolution
-Formed by leaders with support of foreign powers
-Lenin --> Germany and Ayatollah Khomeini --> West
-ayatollah was supported by Western Powers,
-Western powers concluded that a Religious fanatic is better than the Left wing
-Communists who were also playing a crucial role in Iranian revolution.
-Both nations were under a monarchy at the time of revolution
-Both revolution promised order but caused chaos
-Both revolutions were internationalist in tone.
-Communist revolution wanted to export the revolution all around the world and
-Iranian revolutionaries wanted to export the revolution to neighboring Shia majority countries
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-similarities-and-differences-between-the-Russian-Revolution-and-the-Iranian-Revolution
I agree that the two revolutions were ideologically different but also had many similarities between the two. The last couple of your points were interesting to me as I did not know that revolutionaries wanted to spread the revolution to other areas. Both Lenin and Ayatollah Khomeini were influenced by outside powers and I think it is interesting one of them Knomeini is influenced by the West as that is making strides towards democracy in Iran.
Delete