Many in the West consider Iran to be a religiously conservative nation, the antithesis of liberal. This belief is mistaken. The error in this widespread belief exists because of a misunderstanding of how the Left and Religious Extremism actually complement each other. In the West, the Right is most commonly associated with religion because of our emphasis on the fact that our Creator endowed human beings the free will to choose between right and wrong and our tolerance of different faiths. Historically, religion has leaned more towards a more communal organization of human beings and so it is with Iran.

Let us begin with the Islamic revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini, which sought to depose the US-backed Shah of Iran and impose a system of government with a religious, moral authority as the absolute power. In the United States, when it comes to the opposing ideologies, conservatism preaches the preservation of federalism, the division of powers, and states’ rights. Liberalism, on the other hand, posits that that central government has the right and obligation to decide uniform law for the entire nation, particularly when it comes to moral (amoral) matters. Liberals want power concentrated in the federal government and use spending, taxes, and federal law to impose their will on all states in the union. This is why the abortion debate rages on, because it applies an interpretation of privacy and what constitutes life that may not be shared by all states, so conservatives oppose it and liberals defend it. So what is the difference between Iran’s liberals and America’s liberals? The former are Islamic, interpreting divine law, and the latter are secular and amoral, adhering to a leftist ideology that denies religion and denies individual rights.

The biggest weakness of the Left has been the fact that the most notable socialists/communists have been atheists and regarded religion as the opiate of the masses. What they fail to recognize is that a society needs to be heavily drugged for them to willingly accept a socialist society, at least a long term one. Neo-socialism does not make this mistake. Castro has allowed some religious freedom. Chavez embraces his faith. Others are quickly following suit. The mainstream left in our country does not readily deny religion, it simply wants to remove it from the state completely. In the end though, absolute state power and faith in a higher power do not converge well, at least not in the modern day, due to the fact that the state must resort to force, incarceration, torture, and murder to retain its rule, while religion does not allow such immorality. This explains part of what is happening in Iran, where the state is acting un-Islamic by squashing protesters who march with Quran in hand demanding the democracy that the revolution promised. To return to the status quo in Iran will be difficult now that dictatorship is standing naked before the people, the very thing that their revolution was supposed to end. There are signs that some of the Iranian leadership may be sensitive to the will of the people, but the problem is the fact that the clerics hold absolute power.

Just like liberals oppose individual rights here at home, liberals crack down on them around the world. So is it any wonder that the liberal administration is so hesitant to oppose the liberal rulers of Iran?

-AG