4 ms·

> The interesting one to watch out for is how often democracies form with the support of an existing democracy The more interesting one is how often a democrac

> The interesting one to watch out for is how often democracies form with the support of an existing democracy The more interesting one is how often a democracy can survive against democratic superpower wishes. I.e, during the cold war era, the US helped taking down more democratic governments than the USSR itself. That is a bit of ironic remark. People tend to forget that the US didn't like democracies outside its sphere of influence in the last century. I am sure this legacy gets blind eye when people usually talk about democracy and why many people doesn't like it. The scars are still alive til this day (Iran is the prime example here).

philwelch 3y ago
Iran had already ceased to be a democracy by the time the coup happened. That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup, which had a ton of popular support at the time. Mossadegh was essentially a dictator ruling by means of emergency powers at the time he was overthrown, and even before that point, he had also interfered with the 1952 parliamentary election by stopping the counting of votes once the minimum quorum of MP’s had been elected.
- bluish29 3y ago
  > That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup Are you suggesting that the CIA was worried about democracy in Iran so they ousted him to give the absolute power to the king?
  - SinjonSuarez 3y ago
    They just happened to ignore the fact that mossadegh nationalized oil right before the us and uk led the coup
  - philwelch 3y ago
    No, and if you hadn’t disingenuously quoted me out of context, that would have been obvious. The complete sentence you should have quoted was: “That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup, which had a ton of popular support at the time.” By which I meant popular support within Iran. It turns out that Iranians have agency of their own and don’t just do whatever the CIA tells them to do. In fact the role of the CIA in the 1953 coup has been deliberately overstated by multiple sides, including the CIA itself: https://web.archive.org/web/20150603235034/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2014-06-16/what-really-happened-iran https://web.archive.org/web/20150603235034/https://www.forei... But even if you still want to blame the CIA, they still needed enough supporters inside of Iran who were angry at Mossadegh, and one of the reasons they were angry at Mossadegh is because he had turned himself into a dictator.
    - bluish29 3y ago
      I quoted the important part of your point. Adding that it did have popular support is a fact that is not established. The CIA and US media propaganda spread false reports about the situation then and still to this day. i.e this article you attached is a pure piece of western propaganda. And even if that was a reason, the reason why US abd CIA involved is much more obvious. It is the oil right getting nationalized. All other points are just cover up. Edit: I replied before you edit your comment
      - philwelch 3y ago
        I’m not arguing about why the US and UK supported the coup. I’m pointing out that Iran was no longer a democracy when the coup happened regardless. I’m also pointing out that if Iran had remained democratic, the shah and the military would have had no reason to carry out the coup whether or not the US wanted it to happen. > The CIA and US media propaganda spread false reports about the situation then and still to this day. i.e this article you attached is a pure piece of western propaganda. That claim is completely inconsistent with the CIA and US government repeatedly and publicly claiming responsibility/taking credit for the coup.

philwelch 3y ago

Iran had already ceased to be a democracy by the time the coup happened. That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup, which had a ton of popular support at the time. Mossadegh was essentially a dictator ruling by means of emergency powers at the time he was overthrown, and even before that point, he had also interfered with the 1952 parliamentary election by stopping the counting of votes once the minimum quorum of MP’s had been elected.

bluish29 3y ago
> That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup Are you suggesting that the CIA was worried about democracy in Iran so they ousted him to give the absolute power to the king?
- SinjonSuarez 3y ago
  They just happened to ignore the fact that mossadegh nationalized oil right before the us and uk led the coup
- philwelch 3y ago
  No, and if you hadn’t disingenuously quoted me out of context, that would have been obvious. The complete sentence you should have quoted was: “That was actually one of the precipitating causes for the coup, which had a ton of popular support at the time.” By which I meant popular support within Iran. It turns out that Iranians have agency of their own and don’t just do whatever the CIA tells them to do. In fact the role of the CIA in the 1953 coup has been deliberately overstated by multiple sides, including the CIA itself: https://web.archive.org/web/20150603235034/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2014-06-16/what-really-happened-iran https://web.archive.org/web/20150603235034/https://www.forei... But even if you still want to blame the CIA, they still needed enough supporters inside of Iran who were angry at Mossadegh, and one of the reasons they were angry at Mossadegh is because he had turned himself into a dictator.
  - bluish29 3y ago
    I quoted the important part of your point. Adding that it did have popular support is a fact that is not established. The CIA and US media propaganda spread false reports about the situation then and still to this day. i.e this article you attached is a pure piece of western propaganda. And even if that was a reason, the reason why US abd CIA involved is much more obvious. It is the oil right getting nationalized. All other points are just cover up. Edit: I replied before you edit your comment
    - philwelch 3y ago
      I’m not arguing about why the US and UK supported the coup. I’m pointing out that Iran was no longer a democracy when the coup happened regardless. I’m also pointing out that if Iran had remained democratic, the shah and the military would have had no reason to carry out the coup whether or not the US wanted it to happen. > The CIA and US media propaganda spread false reports about the situation then and still to this day. i.e this article you attached is a pure piece of western propaganda. That claim is completely inconsistent with the CIA and US government repeatedly and publicly claiming responsibility/taking credit for the coup.