When the Islamic Revolution emerged, it hit back the aggressor, like a firm fist striking at his chest... It pushed him back and stopped the aggression. During the early years after the revolution you suddenly saw huge changes in the people's behavior over a short period of time: Sacrifice became widespread. Avarice was less commonplace. Cooperation became the norm. People became more attracted to religion. There was less wastefulness. People were more content with what they had. This is culture, Islamic culture. The youth started working and putting in a lot of effort. Many, used to living in cities, left for rural zones. Their motto was: "Let's work. Let's produce." Pseudo-employments that had plagued the economic lives of the people started to disappear. This was one or two years after the revolution. This was the time when the enemy's relentless efforts to spread moral corruption had been stopped and an attraction and attention to Islam had instead started to grow. Once again, the Islamic culture, morals, behaviors, and conduct that was rooted in our people's hearts was revived. It was, of course, not deep. The depth comes after a few years of practice. But such an opportunity did not present itself and the aggression gradually restarted. The [cultural] assault started in the middle of the war [Saddam’s US-backed war on Iran] with propaganda, and wrong and distorted talk. The residues and remainders in our—the people’s—minds and spirits also played a role in the propaganda’s effectiveness. Nevertheless, the atmosphere created by the war still acted like a wall against it until the war ended. After the war, this new front set to work seriously. The enemy calculated that the Islamic Republic cannot be vanquished through military invasion. The last calculation of the sort had gone all wrong. They realized that economic sanctions would not be effective either. A nation under economic embargo would never be defeated if it is a content, patient, and confident nation relying on God. It would never be defeated! We have experienced that in the past through the ups and downs in history, so have other nations. It is not exclusively our experience. The enemy realized they had to bombard our base. If I want to use a metaphor, a military unit engaged in battle with the enemy is dependent on its base for food, reinforcements, arms and equipment and needs to receive supportive letters from friends and families. As long as the base is intact, the force at the battlefield can fight. If the enemy bombards the base, resulting in a loss of food, equipment, and reinforcements, cutting the flow of "Thank you" letters, and removing the support and admiration of family from the equation, then how will the fighters at the front master the energy to combat?
They may try for a few days, but will eventually perish. Our base, in the Iranian nation's fight against global imperialism's bullying, was our culture. Our support zone was Islamic ethics, reliance on God, faith, and passion for Islam. The devotion of a mother whose four sons have been martyred, yet she says she has given them away for Islam and is happy with it. I have met with these families, been to their homes, and met their parents, and I am not narrating something I have only heard, but something I have witnessed myself. There was a family with both their sons martyred. Or another family with all three of their sons martyred. This is a grave loss. Their pain is unbearable. These parents could have gone crazy with pain. Yet, the mother, who is more passionate [like all mothers], claims mightily: "We have given them away for Islam and have nothing to reclaim." How amazing!
So this is the effect that Islam can have. This is the effect of having faith in God, and the enemy realized this. Parents would tell their young sons: "You are still 16, or 17. Focus on your studies. Go out, and enjoy your life. Your brother went away to fight and was martyred." The young man says: "No, I have a responsibility towards Islam." This is what we have read in the wills of our martyrs, and have heard from their parents and family. This is the effect of Islam.
---
The one who took the biggest step in favor of the Western culture—that is, in reality, the West’s hegemony over Iran—and in favor of the British colonization, was Reza-Khan. You see, this kind of action is perceived so disgraceful today if a king completely changes the national dressing culture of a country. For instance, if you travel to India or different parts of the world, nations have their proper forms of dress; and they are proud of it, and they don’t feel ashamed of it. But in Iran, they suddenly banned the [national] costumes! Why? Because, they said, it was not possible to become an academic with this type of clothing. Amazing! Our most prominent scientists -- Iranian scientists whose work is still being taught in Europe-- grew under the same culture and in the same environment. How can the clothing tradition have an impact [on their scholarly work]? This is a nonsensical remark! They suggested such a nonsensical reason, and changed the clothing tradition of a nation, removing women’s chadors.
They argued that “a woman cannot become an academic, or a scientist, and take part in social activities while wearing a chador.” My question is: “By removing the chador, in our country, what percentage of women took part in social activities?” Were women given opportunities to take part in social activities during the reign of Reza Khan and his son?! Men were not given opportunities either, nor would women be given opportunities. When women of Iran entered the arena of social activity, powerfully raising the country in their vigorous hands, and encouraging men to follow them into the arenas of fighting, they did so while wearing chadors.
What negative effect can chador have?! How can clothing prevent a woman’s or a man’s activity? The important thing is how a person’s heart is; how their mind is, how their faith is, how their personality is, what motivations are created for their social or scientific activity.
This ignorant bully --Reza Khan-- came to power and yielded to the enemies. He suddenly changed the dressing culture of the country, he changed many of the traditions, and he banned the religion! He did actions that we all have heard--which took place during the Pahlavi regime, through coercion and bullying. He became popular in the eyes of the Westerners—that is the colonizers.
August 12, 1992
Comment