(Part 2) Top products from r/iranian

> P has asked for facts of daily language use. You have offered him your personal philosophy


It isn't a personal philosophy. My information was based on the analysis of Nietzsche: Thus Spoke Zarathustra Cambridge print. The book has much deeper analogy of Khoda's etymology. What I wrote is a conglomerate cluster of 100 pages of analysis.

> OP did not make any mention of heresy either

He did. his reply under KhosrousAnushiravan says: "some hyper religious social circles they're seeking to replace "khodafez" with "allahfez"". By talking about heresy, I meant to explain why hyper religious circles are against using 'khoda'.

> Your understanding of both Islamic and pre-Islamic Iranian theology is a fringe modern interpretation probably gleaned from poorly informed

I'm currently obtaining my masters in philosophy from UCL. My main project is actually centralised on Iran's theologists and philosophers; Rumi, Jabir ibn Hayyan and Avicenna. Admittidly, I'm more aware of Iranian theology more than you, unless you've surpassed me in academic levels of studying theology; which I doubt you do. When presented with new sets of knowledge, you can double check their validity, or engage in healthier debate on points, rather than than bashing me on being 'poorly informed'.

> The etymology you have offered for «خدا» may sound "cool" and work well with your personal philosophy but it has no grounding in linguistics.

I agree, it's cool. but it isn't personal philosophy, and it has grounding in linguistics. Read the book I've linked. You will be appreciating learning something you've completely closed your mind to.

> New Persian word «خدا» (khodā) is direct descendant of Middle Persian xwadāy which means lord, king and is widely attested in Middle Persian texts in that exact meaning.

Accurate point. But merely a repetition of the point I made. It is** a direct translation to address god. But it's origins as I mentioned, it originates from Zurvanist beliefs. I urge you to read the book if you want to know more about the connection between the religion and 'Khoda'.

> This is where other words such as kadkhodā (lord/chief of the village) and khānekhodā (master/owner of the house) also originated. There are instances of a ruler being addressed as mar khodāy (my lord) in New Persian poetry as well.

As I mentioned it in my comment, 'Khoda', has lost its original meaning, and now it is merely a translation for 'god/lord'. Hence why it's formed into titles such as the ones you mentioned. 'Allah' was a part of prophet Mohammad father's name. The name later became associated with the 'god' he introduced. It was always forbidden to put 'Allah''s name on anything, as it was deemed disrespectful. However, now, it seems 'Allah' has lost is value as well, much similar to 'Khoda'. There are people named, 'Abdullah' (servant of god), 'Ruhoullah' (spirit of god), even terrorist organisations named 'Jundullah' (army of god). It's common for such religiously sacred words to lose their weight of meaning through time. 'Khoda' isn't any more special than 'Allah'. It's lost it's original value and meaning.

> Your answer is heartfelt and personal but it is as far from accurate as one can get.

Be open to learning something new. We both get our resources from either books, or available online data bases. Your resources don't go into depth as much as my resources do. Just because I'm not close to the surface as much as you are, that doesn't mean I'm not accurate; in fact, it's quite the contrary.

Oh and Iran has an extensive social care network including a medical care delivery system that is a world model https://www.aarp.org/health/doctors-hospitals/info-06-2010/iranian_cure_for_thedeltas_blues.html

In general, Iran is now a "Highly Developed" country with higher living standards than Turkey

http://www.ir.undp.org/content/iran/en/home/presscenter/articles/2013/03/14/global-launch-of-the-2013-human-development-report-2013-.html

The UN made a comparative graph of Iran's development compared to other countries
http://www.ir.undp.org/content/dam/iran/img/News/March%202013/14%20March%202013-%20Global%20launch%20of%20the%202013%20Human%20Development%20Report%202013/iran-trend%20hdr2013.jpg

Here's a book on the topic
https://www.amazon.com/Social-Revolution-Politics-Welfare-State/dp/0520280822/

Despite high educational attainment, women are still underrepresented in the workplace, this has a lot to do with a social system of values that encourages families and women as mothers however women in Iran aren't marrying as young nor having as many babies and are instead becoming independent http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-iran-unmarried-snap-story.html

Oh and BTW as far as having modern cancer wards etc, Iran has a long history in medicine and medical education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_Gondishapur and social emphasis on higher ed

>Yes, that's true, some nationalist Kurds take it to that point, especially on the day of Nevruz (which is a Zoroastarian holiday) they prepare big fire and jump over it, they want to preserve the tradition. The Turkish government is based on Turkish nationalism and this is seen as a "separative movement" hence the celebrations are mostly escalating to clashes between the police and the Kurd in the region. However, as far as I know, non-Muslim Kurds have their own religion killed Yezidi, which resembles Zoroastarianism, but like a Kurdish version or I don't know. Maybe you know better than I do.

That's kind of sad actually, Nowruz is dearly celebrated in Iran and I'm happy that Kurds in Turkey remember it as well. But the fact that it causes problems is sad. I will be honest with you here, reading some of the comments Kurds and Turks make against each other online, I'm not sure there is scenario in the future where they can peacefully coexist within the same borders. The situation was never this bad in Iran. I was once in r/Turkey, and there was a video posted of a kid being beaten up because he held a Turkish flag, a kurd had commented something in lines of "good, he's a traitor". This level of hatred and animosity is fucked up. I mean really fucked up, I don't even hate ISIS that much.

Oh and nope, I've got no clue about Yazidis.


>All in all I believe 300 made us know about the big Persian empire which ruled Middle-East, Anatolia, Iran, Egypt. We came to know that it even went to Europe. So these lands saw such a vast empire, this we got to know.

Well then that's cool, there is a saying in Persian عدو شود سبب خیر اگر خدا خواهد, which means "an enemy might end up doing you a favor if God wills it so. Maybe we've been depicted so negatively by Hollywood that we've become a bit paranoid.

I don't think they actually had an agenda, I think they were more trying to create an all powerful enemy which the hero stands up to. Ancient Greece was a great civilization, not Sparta though, Sparta was shit-tier! Read this book if you want to know why: http://www.amazon.com/The-Shadow-Sparta-Stephen-Hodkinson/dp/0415104130


>It's not about Saudi Arabia, it is about "who will have the control over the resources?" thing. Turkey sides with the US, which sides with Arabs. Hence, the cooperation is as the US-Qatar-Turkey versus Russia-Iran-Iraq-Syria. I am sure you heard of the pipeline which is going to be built after the Syrian war, that is the big picture. Erdoğan himself doesn't give a fuck about Saudis, but he does whatever it takes to reach the resources. If it means to ally the Saudis.

I don't thing it's actually about oil either, I think Erdogan wants to help create a kurdish puppet state in Iraq to cut off the supply and support to Turkey's kurds. It's actually a good plan, but I don't it's going to work, you have no friends in Iraq, America or Nato won't help you carve up a part of another country, Russia will help us prevent it, your men have no reason to die in a barren desert over oil which is becoming cheaper than water, we have every reason to fight such a war.

You see,Iraqis are brave Arabs, they're not a bunch of useless cunts like the Khalijis or the Saudis, if we leave them alone, if we let them out of sphere of influence, they come up with a new Saddam or a new Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. So we will keep them in a semi-protectorate state of existence for as long as we can.

No because I've saved up a maple syrup supply.

Also by sheer weight of numbers one of these days they will launch one ICBM by accident and flatten a city and then nobody will be laughing, not even the aliens.

So your point is: my version of what it means to be Iranian is more correct than yours; hence cutting off your head is ok. Your way of thinking is toxic, I'll leave it here since it will amount to nothing but mud-slinging at this point.

Look up this book please.

Because the Zionist claim on Greater Israel is hardly a secret. In fact they initially rejected the 1948 Partition plan since it didn't give them all of the "Greater Israel" that they demanded which included Jordan. Anyone who knows anything about history knows this.
That's why to this day Israel is not declared her borders. Ben Gurion spefically said that it would go from Damascus to the Sinai, and the Litani https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0887282350/

Futhermore the idea that Israel is "just trying to protect itself" is already discredited by even Israeli historian given access to the new documentation, who point out that Israel rejected multiple peace offers by the same neighbors in favor of conflict and expansionism
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The%20War%20of%20the%20Israeli%20Historians.html

Access. Read this book

Love me more than the others : selected poetry of Iraj Mirza

I suggest reading a meta analysis of Iranian nationalism, to give you a more complete picture of how different, competing nationalisms formed Iran throughout the modern period.


Imaging Iran: The Tragedy of Subaltern Nationalism delves into this, and explains why despite there being a romantic nationalism that has existed since the time of Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzadeh, it has never been able to hegemonize itself with any ruling Iranian state. No Iranian government has yet been able to create a government that fully matches the desires, culture, and mythologies of Iranians. The IR has come close, but if it fails to pursue reforms, it'll go down the same path as other governments.


Since you already have some familiarity with nationalist writers, I think you'll appreciate this analysis.


Edit: Added book link

>Come on now. You dont think Pahlavi had anything to do with it? You dont think he was colluding? He just somehow landed into power again by chance?

Of course he might have also wanted to be in power. But the US and UK had much more interest in having the Shah back in place to keep business as usual. Operation AJAX was a foreign operation, not an inside job. They had a big interest in keeping oil prices down. But since prices of other commodities increased by more than 400% it was not possible for Iran and other OPEC members to keep it that way.

>Also, you fail to mention that all members of OPEC started upping the price in the 70s....not just the Shah. In fact, it was Saudi Arabia leading the way, and Iran following.

Sorry, but stop pretending that you know anything about the 70s economics. It's so wrong in so many places. Just read the article that was mentioned a while ago. Saudi Arabia did the opposite, they did not increase the oil price vote and started to pump more and caused a crash in oil prices.

>As I said, Saudi Arabia upped the price, but the US didnt overthrow them, did they?

I think the discussion is over for me. You have no clue about economics in the 70s. I did my master thesis regarding the oil crisis in the 70s. It is a fascinating time in so many levels. But what you are saying is utterly wrong. Saudi Arabia did not vote for a price hike and unilaterally flooded the market. They betrayed the OPEC cartel.

>In fact, the raising of oil prices benefited the US most of all. All the money was in dollars which boosted their economy and currency to make it the worldwide standard. Not only that, all the extra money the OPEC members were making was sent right back to American banks so American companies could use it to invest in their businesses and give predatory loans abroad. Its called Petrodollar Recycling.

Dude, stop with that BS. Iran did not invest in US bonds. Iran invested those oil revenues domestically or in US military equipment. But US bonds? Wrong. It was even wrong from Iran to invest oil revenues directly in the country, which caused a massive inflation. Read about the Dutch Disease.

Saudi Arabia started as of the late 70s with US bonds. You did not even understand the link about Petrodollar Recycling. Please read the book: The Hidden Hand of American Hegemony. US bonds were a topic as of the late 70s to get the money back from oil-producing countries. This is what Saudi Arabia is doing for the last 40 years and accumulated around $170 billion dollars in US bonds, and around $750 billion in US assets.

>So not only did it help boost the US economy, it also helped US dominate weaker economies in the Global South (who actually struggled with higher oil prices) and force them into roles of dependency on US loans (money which came from OPEC members excess oil money).

WTF, you have no clue about economics. Now it is clear. The US was 70% dependent on OPEC oil during the 70s. It caused the oil crisis during '73 and later in '79. If the oil price increases it has a negative effect on the economic growth. This is economics 1+1. Whenever the price of oil jumped, importing nations needed to adjust/lower their economic growth forecast. For example when the oil price increased by more than 380%. The US and western economies were suffering.

And why the hell are you talking about Global South?! The Global South is able to produce oil! They were not struggling due high oil prices. Stop with your Bullshit. You are telling so many lies or sciolism that is even worse than fake news.

Educate yourself, please!

If you are trying to reply, back your statements with sources.