The difference between Iran’s revolution and October, French ones in attracting the youth

News ID: 441423

Date: 07 November 2018 - 14:48

One of the remarks that constitute the main line of the enemy's psychological warfare today—which I must mention—is that they say the third generation of the revolution are separated from the values and ideas of the revolution! Then, they make up philosophies in support of their remarks--like all other fraudulent arguments they make up to justify their lies-- so that nobody would dare reject their remarks. They claim that this remark is based on a philosophy! What is that philosophy? That philosophy is that, in all the revolutions the third generation following the revolution turns against its values: a nonsensical lie! Which revolutions are you referring to? In 1789, a revolution took place in France; then, not the third generation, not the second generation, rather, the very first generation of the revolution turned away from it! After only four or five years, a movement was created against the first revolutionaries and took power for a few years; then, again after four, five years, movements were launched against them. By 1802, the quintessence of the French revolution had changed so much that a person like Napoleon could emerge again and become the king! The country that had fought against monarchy, and executed Louis XVI by guillotine, after about ten years, moved to a place where they would allow the crowning of Napoleon Bonaparte: a man who called himself an emperor and exclusively ruled over the country for many years. Then, for about ninety years, royal regimes - of course different monarchies and various dynasties - continued to rule over France, and they were constantly engaged in conflicts, decadence and corruption! That revolution did not reach the second generation, let alone the third generation; because the foundations of the revolution were loose.

Today, after two centuries, some people in the Islamic Republic are unashamedly presenting to the Iranian people ideas that failed to launch a revolution at the right time, making a fuss about it: they [dare] present them to the [real] revolutionaries who managed to successfully launch the greatest revolution with robust foundations, and safeguard it against storms of events for many years!

The Soviet Union’s October Revolution did not reach the third generation, either. Hardly seven years had passed since the revolution when Stalinism took over. Stalin who came to power was such a brutal person that today whenever someone is a bully, cruel, and inconsiderate, they are actually analogized with ‘Stalin’. That's right, Stalin was really a manifestation of these negative traits. The so-called labor government, which was supposedly formed to support underprivileged classes, became a rule of absolute despotism! Stalin did not even allow the Communist Party—which was controlling everything in the Soviet system—to make decision in certain matters. With that harsh and brutal characteristics, Stalin continued the autocracy for some thirty years; nobody dared to protest. Maybe you've heard the story of the strange exiles. The first book that was published after the collapse of the Soviet Union, in describing the disastrous suppressive situation of the Soviet Union, was a novel - I do not remember the title now - two volumes of which have been translated into Persian; and I have read them. The book is very well written, describing the situation at that time. Although it is about the situation after Stalin—that is when situation had completely changed—yet, the ruling method of that despotism continued. Hence, it was not about the second or third generation; at the very beginning [following the revolution], everything was lost.

What philosophy is this? Based on which revolution has it been formed and where has it been experienced, that the third generation of the revolution turn away from the revolution? This depends on what the ideas of that revolution are. If the ideas of a revolution can convince the second, third and tenth generations—because of their authenticity—then that revolution survive eternally. The ideas of the Islamic Revolution are ideas eternally valid. Justice is never outdated; freedom and independence are never obsolete; fighting against the interference of foreigners is never obsolete. These are ideas that are always attractive for generations. Their theoreticians made up philosophies, and some simple-minded people believed them here. They said the third generation of the revolution reject ideas, and since the attraction of the revolution diminishes, we can go and take the revolution from the revolutionaries and control it ourselves! ‘Ourselves’ are whom? ‘Ourselves’ are those who dominated the country for many years before the revolution! I tell you, this is a very naive and stupid thinking. They must know that, undoubtedly, the same enthusiasm, faith and emotions that were present in the young generation of that day, who could bring about that event, are still present in this young generation. They should know that every stone they throw towards the revolution will boomerang and hit their own heads. The revolution will never be obsolete, and the flames of the revolution will remain fresh and it burns when it comes into contact with their worn cotton storage.

Statements during a meeting with students and faculty of Amir-Kabir University of Technology

February 27, 2001

847/940