The Common Denominator Among Conservative Parties in Courtship of Voters

 The Common Denominator Among Conservative Parties in Courtship of Voters – House of Intellectual

Conservative political parties, as their name suggests, are typically inclined towards maintaining the status quo. They often resist change, as any alteration in circumstances can disrupt existing hierarchies and create new power structures. Such changes can shift the balance of power within and globally, leading to profound implications.

Conservative parties often employ the 'crowd mentality technique,' as described by Gustave Le Bon, to influence voters and sustain their political power.

**Crowd Mentality**

"Crowd mentality," also known as herd or mob mentality, refers to individuals' tendency to adopt a group's beliefs, behaviours, and attitudes, often at the expense of their judgment or individuality.

**Definition:**

Crowd mentality illustrates how people in a group, large or small, can be influenced to behave in ways they might not otherwise, often deviating from their values or comfort zones.

**Psychological Factors**

- **Conformity:** Individuals are often swayed by the opinions and actions of others, especially in group settings.

- **Deindividuation:** In a crowd, individuals may feel a sense of anonymity and reduced responsibility, leading to less restraint and more impulsive behaviour.

- **Emotional Contagion:** Emotions can spread rapidly within a crowd, amplifying excitement, anger, or fear.

**Examples**

- **Social Trends:** Adopting a fashion style or following a trend simply because others are doing so.

Financial Markets involve Making investment decisions based on the actions of other investors rather than conducting independent research.

- **Political Activism:** Participating in protests or demonstrations, even if one initially disagrees with the cause, simply because others are involved.

- **Everyday Situations:** Following the flow of traffic, choosing a popular restaurant, or lining up in a certain way, even if it seems illogical, just because others are doing it, are all examples of crowd mentality in action.

**Consequences**

- **Harmful Outcomes:** Crowd mentality can lead to destructive behaviours, such as riots or mob violence, where individuals act in ways they usually would not. This underscores the importance of individual critical thinking in resisting the adverse effects of crowd influence.

- **Irrational Decisions:** Due to group influence, people may make poor choices or fall victim to misinformation.

- **Suppression of Individuality:** Crowd mentality can stifle independent thought and critical analysis, as individuals prioritize conformity over their judgment.

**Counteracting Crowd Mentality**

One of the most empowering ways to resist the influence of crowd mentality is through critical thinking. By embracing your individuality and reflecting on your beliefs and values, you can resist the urge to follow the crowd unthinkingly. Developing critical thinking skills is not just important; it is empowering. It is the key to resisting conformity and making independent decisions. By honing your critical thinking skills, you can take control of your decisions and resist the influence of the crowd, feeling more confident and in control of your choices.

Seek Diverse Perspectives: Do not limit yourself to the opinions of those around you. Actively seek out different viewpoints. This open-minded approach can enrich your understanding and help you resist the influence of the crowd, broadening your perspective and enhancing your knowledge. By embracing diverse perspectives, you can enrich your understanding and feel less isolated and more connected in your decision-making process.

Be Aware of Your Surroundings: Recognize when a group is influencing you. Strive to make conscious decisions instead of reacting impulsively. This awareness can help you maintain control over your actions and resist the pull of the crowd, making you feel more in control and empowered in your decision-making process.

Conservative political parties often exploit fear as a powerful tool to draw public attention to issues related to lawbreakers, social disorder, and threats to life. For instance, they may highlight instances of violent crime or instances of social unrest to create a sense of fear and urgency. They may manipulate statistics, such as crime rates or immigration numbers, to give their claims credibility. This fear-based strategy creates a sense of urgency and importance in voters, making them more likely to accept the party's proposed solutions without conducting personal research. Fear is often used to divert attention from other pressing issues or to create a sense of crisis that necessitates immediate action.

The concept of fear encompasses a wide range of topics. Politicians often broaden the conversation to question whether the public should fear all criminals.

While the criminal justice system is intended to address law violations, conservative parties' fear-based strategies can perpetuate a culture of fear, leading to societal divisions and a focus on punishment rather than prevention. By constantly highlighting lawbreakers' threats, these parties create a sense of 'us versus them,' further deepening societal rifts. Police officers arrest those who break the law, and accused individuals are brought before the judicial system to face prosecution. This fear can lead to a society that punishes those who break the law, often holding their past actions against them indefinitely.

Once a person is convicted of an offence, they receive a criminal record that can follow them for the rest of their life, making it difficult to reintegrate into society. This societal punishment of those who break the law, often holding their past actions against them indefinitely, is a significant issue that needs to be addressed.

However, individuals with criminal records can still find employment in jobs that do not require background checks.

Ultimately, conservative political parties fail to propose policies that improve the quality of life. Instead, they use fear to persuade people to vote for their party. In the face of such fear-based strategies, individuals must exercise critical thinking and resist the influence of the crowd, thereby making informed and independent decisions.

Book Title: The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the Final Days of Imperial Iran

 Book Report: The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the Final Days of Imperial Iran – House of Intellectual

Book Description:

Book Title: The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the Final Days of Imperial Iran 

Author: Andrew Scott Cooper

Publisher: Picador Henry Holt and Company New York 

Date Published: 2018

Copyright: Andrew Scott Cooper/2018

Number of Pages:587

Define Book Report: 

A report is a written summary and analysis of a book's content, illustrating your understanding of its main ideas, characters, plot, setting, and themes. The purpose of a book report is to provide sufficient information to help readers determine whether the book is enjoyable or beneficial to them.

Book Report: The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the Final Days of Imperial Iran 

What went wrong with Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi's vision for Iran? Why did Iranians revolt against the Pahlavi Dynasty? Did people not recognize that Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi pulled Iran out of the dark ages and brought it into the light?

During the Pahlavi Dynasty, Iranians viewed the Qajar Dynasty through a lens shaped by their textbooks, movies, and art featuring figures like Naser al-Din Shah and Prime Minister Amir Kabir. This portrayal, which depicted the Qajar Dynasty as a golden age of prosperity and progress, created an idealized image of Iran that influenced how Iranians viewed their history and potential. The Qajar Dynasty's portrayal was significant as it shaped Iranians' collective memory and national identity, influencing their perception of their history and potential.

However, a reality check came in 2024 when images from the Qajar Dynasty were leaked to the public. These photos, which revealed a society where superstitions were used to cure illnesses while European countries were advancing in medicine, shattered the idealized image textbooks, movies, and art had created. They sparked a wave of intrigue and disbelief among the public, challenging their perception of Iran's history and potential.

Another aspect of Iranian ignorance was the lack of experience with the Industrial Revolution—a significant technological and societal transformation that occurred mainly in the 18th and 19th centuries. This era shifted economies from agrarian to industrial, marked by mass production, urbanization, and new technologies such as the steam engine. The profound impact of this revolution on Iranian society was a revelation, enlightening them about the rapid advancements in the Western world and sparking a new understanding of progress. This understanding was a key factor in Iran's subsequent social and economic reforms.

The story of the Industrial Revolution began with the invention of gunpowder, which diminished the feudal lords' ability to provide safety for their serfs behind castle walls. As the steam engine emerged, the dynamics of capitalism transformed, prompting feudal lords to drive their serfs off the land. These serfs moved to nearby towns, where they worked in factories under poor conditions, often labouring 16 to 18 hours a day in hazardous environments that posed risks of serious injury or death. The sacrifices made by these workers, including children who were compelled to work like adults, evoke a strong sense of empathy for their plight.

Reza Pahlavi employed political strategies to establish the Pahlavi Dynasty while dismantling the Qajar Dynasty. He dedicated Iran's valuable resources to elevate the country to the standards of Western nations.

However, Western powers like England and Russia thwarted Reza Pahlavi's vision for Iran. They invaded the country under the pretext that the King was collaborating with Nazi Germany. This situation was pivotal; Crown Prince Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ascended to the Peacock Throne by appeasing the occupying forces. Reza Pahlavi was exiled to South Africa, where he died in Johannesburg in 1944. The role of Western powers in this period was significant, as their actions had a profound impact on the political landscape of Iran, leading to the ascension of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to the throne. The influence of these external forces on a nation's destiny is a powerful theme in this narrative of Iran's history, underscoring the complex power dynamics that shape the course of nations.

In 1963, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi introduced the White Revolution. This policy, a series of economic and social reforms, aimed to modernize Iran and reduce the influence of traditional elites. It abolished the feudal system, promoted welfare liberalism, and implemented land reforms that redistributed land from large landowners to the rural poor. Instead of migrating to cities for work, former serfs became landowners, and factory owners were required to share profits with their employees, marking a significant shift in Iran's social and economic landscape. The White Revolution's impact on Iran's social and economic landscape was profound, as it led to a redistribution of wealth and power and a shift in the traditional social hierarchy. This was a monumental moment in Iran's history, a turning point that reshaped the country's social and economic fabric and left an indelible mark on the nation's history.

On page 217, Andrew Scott Cooper critiques Mohammad Reza Shah's White Revolution, describing it as a social contract between the King and the people aimed at improving their quality of life, as referenced in Newsweek. However, this initiative ultimately widened the income gap between the wealthy and the poor, exacerbating social divisions among different classes. The author mentions Her Imperial Majesty Farah Pahlavi, who informed the King that his White Revolution had not significantly impacted the White Revolution.

Historically, during this period, revolutionary individuals noted that many Iranians were indifferent to the struggles of a few marginalized individuals, such as Patrick Ali, Catherine Adl, and Bahman Hojat, who had confrontations with law enforcement. A small group of revolutionaries set the Cinema Rex on fire, which shifted public opinion against the Shah.

At the time, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was ill, and Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi was unprepared to assume leadership.

As a result, the leadership failed to maintain control over the kingdom, leading to the collapse of the Pahlavi Dynasty. This is a stark reminder of the profound impact of leadership decisions on the course of history. The weight of these leadership failures, the gravity of the situation, and the lessons to be learned from them are all palpable in this account of Iran's history, serving as a cautionary tale of the consequences of leadership missteps.

Carter and Trump: Both Pursued a Policy of Destruction

 

What we are experiencing today under Trump is reminiscent of what we dealt with during Jimmy Carter's presidency in 1978. Western media manipulated the Iranian people, while Mohammad Reza Shah promised them reforms. Carter publicly supported the Shah, which only fueled Iranian anger. The U.S. has a talent for stirring unrest around the world.

Donald Trump is Pure Evil

Trump, who was elected to office, has displayed a series of harmful actions both domestically and internationally.

On March 21st, 2025, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) published an article stating President Trump shut down the federal Board of Education. This abrupt move had an immediate and significant impact on the education system in the United States, directly affecting our children's future. The following day, March 22nd, 2025, CBC reported that Trump was misinformed about the trade deal between Canada and the United States. If not corrected swiftly, this misunderstanding could have profound economic implications for both countries, potentially affecting our livelihoods. These examples illustrate Trump's harmful actions during his presidency, which should cause immediate concern for everyone.

Trump's geopolitical ambitions, such as discussing the idea of conquering Greenland, could have significant implications and potentially lead to conflict with Denmark—a prospect that should not just worry us but alarm us all. His expressed interest in capturing Canada and Panama could destabilize the entire North American region and further increase the potential for conflict and instability. This situation should raise alarm and highlight the dangers of Trump's actions.

Additionally, he initiated an economic war with European countries by imposing corporate tariffs to incentivize them to relocate to the United States.

Trump's policies do not reflect a commitment to the welfare of others. He acts selfishly and creates fear among ordinary people, which rightfully breeds resentment and underscores the dire need for change due to his actions' severe and immediate negative impact.

Trump's behaviour has been described as "evil." This term refers to actions or qualities that are morally wrong, harmful, or wicked, and it is not used lightly. Such grave accusations should be reserved for the most egregious behaviours. Whether in domestic or foreign matters, Trump's actions have been viewed as evil, reflecting qualities that cause pain and suffering, contradicting the principles of kindness, compassion, and fairness.

Every action is guided by a moral compass—a set of beliefs or values that influence ethical decisions, judgments, and behaviour, forming an internal sense of right and wrong.

Trump's decisions often follow a winners-and-losers mentality, in which he wins while others lose. This mindset can lead to actions that violate established moral codes and principles, resulting in harm, injustice, or suffering for others.

In this context, evil can be understood as anything that inflicts pain, destruction, or misfortune, intentionally or unintentionally. Trump's policies have caused untold suffering, from the economic conflict with European countries to the shutdown of the federal Board of Education, leaving many in despair. The financial war with European countries could lead to increased inflation, disrupted supply chains, higher interest rates, and potentially a global recession, with the EU's export-driven economies facing significant strain and the possibility of realigning the global economy. These are abstract concepts and real economic impacts that people will feel in their daily lives.

**Economic Impacts:**

**Inflation:**  

Disruptions in global supply chains and increased resource demand due to conflict may lead to higher prices for goods and services, particularly in the energy and food sectors.

**Supply Chain Disruptions:**  

Economic warfare could target key trade routes, disrupting the flow of goods and materials, resulting in shortages and increased costs.

**Higher Interest Rates:**  

Central banks might raise interest rates to combat inflation. This could slow economic growth and increase borrowing costs for businesses and consumers.

**Recession:**  

Rising inflation, disrupted supply chains, and higher interest rates could plunge the global economy—especially the Eurozone—into a recession.

**Reduced Investment:**  

Uncertainty and fear of further economic shocks may lead to a decline in business investment, further dampening economic growth.

**Trade War:**  

Imposing tariffs and other trade barriers could spark a trade war, further damaging global trade and economic relations.

**Economic Strain on Export-Driven Economies:**  

European economies that rely heavily on exports may face significant economic strain as trade disruptions and tariffs reduce demand for their goods.

**Geopolitical Realignment:**  

An economic conflict could lead to a realignment of global power dynamics, with countries seeking closer ties with alternative partners to counter the economic dominance of certain nations.

**Increased Debt:**  

Governments might need to increase spending to support their economies and populations during a crisis, potentially resulting in higher debt levels.

**Social Unrest:**  

Economic hardships could lead to social unrest and instability as people struggle with rising prices and job losses.

**Deglobalization:**  

The economic conflict could accelerate the trend toward deglobalization, with countries prioritizing domestic production and reducing their reliance on global trade.

The shutdown of the federal Board of Education could have significant consequences. While states have primary control over their school systems, including their curricula, the federal department is crucial in enforcing laws prohibiting discrimination in education and managing funding to enhance educational achievement.

What Trump has brought to the people of the U.S. and the world can be characterized as wickedness and depravity. Evil can describe a character flaw or a state of being, indicating a lack of moral integrity or a tendency toward harmful actions. In Trump's case, his actions and policies consistently demonstrate a disregard for ethical values and an inclination toward conduct that harms others—this should justly anger us all.

Evil can manifest in various forms, including violence, cruelty, oppression, corruption, and injustice. Public opinion in the United States has shifted from focusing on freedom and democracy to harbouring animosity toward other nations. This change is partly due to Trump's belief that international trade is not based on the principle of mutual benefit; instead, he perceives the U.S. as the loser in these economic exchanges.

Trump appears to be using religion as a tool to persuade Americans that he is a person of faith, raising critical philosophical questions. Philosophers and theologians have long explored the nature of evil, its origins, and its relationship to good, leading to discussions about free will, determinism, and theodicy (the problem of reconciling the existence of evil with an all-powerful, benevolent God).

For example, Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for unlimited access to Ukraine's natural resources. This request does not reflect the characteristics of an actual person of faith, as the Bible emphasizes the values of sharing and generosity. Believers are called to share their resources and love with others, especially those in need, as a reflection of God's grace. As stated in 1 Timothy 6:17-19: "Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way, they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life."

Trump embodies a form of systemic evil that threatens to undermine both the United States and the world at large. The term "systemic evil," as discussed by theorists such as Hannah Arendt, refers to harm that arises from individual actions combined with the structures and systems in which people operate. Trump is pressuring Ukraine to negotiate peace with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has a history of violating treaties and waging war against vulnerable nations.

In conclusion, Trump appears to lack remorse or guilt, exhibiting traits consistent with antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy. This can result in an inability to empathize or regret his actions, potentially leading to manipulative or cruel behaviour. He prioritizes his glorification, believing he can protect U.S. businesses by imposing tariffs on other nations while cutting back on social programs domestically. However, his actions do not benefit the country at home or abroad; instead, they sow chaos within the nation and escalate tensions with the rest of the world. Ultimately, the American people will pay a high price for Trump's misguided domestic and foreign policies, and it may take more than 50 years to rectify the damage caused by these decisions.

Medusa is the Mullah’s Turban

 A Persian expression conveys a strong message about the role of mullahs in Iranian society: if a person lifts a mullah's beard, it reveals the inscription "Made in England" underneath. This idea has echoed throughout Iranian political culture from the Safavid Dynasty.

I wish Iranians had acted more prudently in the 1970s and not naively followed Khomeini, whom some call "Made in England." If Iranians had made wiser choices back then, Iran could have become a developed nation today. Unfortunately, they did not act wisely, allowing England to deceive them again.

England employed numerous underhanded tactics against Iran and the Iranian people to seize land and transfer it to Russia during "The Great Game." Additionally, no Iranian should forget the military invasion of Iran by England and Russia during World War II, even as Iran maintained its stance as a neutral state and wished to avoid involvement in the conflict.

Until the 1970s, England pursued a foreign policy aimed at undermining Iran. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) played a significant role by providing a platform for Khomeini, which helped incite chaos and unrest in the country. The BBC was aware of Khomeini's dubious past.

Khomeini's history of criminal activity dates back to 1963 when Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi initiated the White Revolution in Iran—this series of reforms aimed to modernize the country with parliamentary approval. Khomeini opposed the White Revolution because it sought to elevate Iran towards an era reminiscent of Cyrus the Great. He preferred that Iranians remain in intellectual darkness, allowing the mullahs to dictate their lives. The mullahs, guided by their dogmatic and superstitious doctrines, focused on trivial theological debates rather than addressing the nation's real challenges.

The BBC and other foreign political actors knew Khomeini had no peaceful intentions for Iran. They would not have supported him instigating the 1979 Revolution if they had thought otherwise.

I could hear Khomeini on the BBC radio; he encouraged Iranians to set on public fire properties, attack the soldiers randomly, and attack the military bases to destroy the army. He asked people to attack women and children whose husbands were military officers and kill SAVAK agents. He called for vandalism and torching Iran. Iranians followed him because the BBC said that Khomeini appeared on the moon. Iranians came out of their homes at night and looked at the moon. They clearly stated that they saw Khomeini's image on the moon. Iranians did not ask themselves this question. Mohammad claimed to be the prophet of Allah; he never performed a miracle. How could Khomeini perform a miracle of this magnitude as his image appeared on the moon? Because the King spoke English, French and German. People said Khomeini spoke five languages. 

Many people viewed Khomeini as a divine figure and Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as a tyrant. They felt encouraged to sacrifice themselves for Khomeini's elusive promise of social justice.

US President Jimmy Carter played a significant role in the upheaval in Iran. Many referred to Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as a puppet of the US, demanding that the King abandon the Peacock Throne. When Jimmy Carter's voice was broadcast on the BBC, expressing support for the King to maintain his power in Iran, it incited outrage among the Iranian people. They erupted in chants of "Death to the King."

Later, Jimmy Carter accused the Shah of failing to uphold human rights, which further fueled Iranian anger. The frustration boiled over, and once again, Iranians flooded the streets, setting fire to anything around them.

On January 17, 1979, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi decided not to cling to power at the expense of his people's bloodshed. He left Iran with no intention of returning.

The Jimmy Carter Administration began to portray Khomeini as a divine figure positioned at God's right hand. On February 8, 1979, Andrew Young, the chief United States delegate to the United Nations, praised Islam as "a vibrant cultural force in today's world." He stated that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Iranian Islamic leader, would ultimately be recognized as "a saint."

Mr. Young expressed views that go significantly further than those of the Carter Administration, stating that it would be "impossible to establish a fundamentalist Islamic state" in Iran because "too much Western idealism has infiltrated that movement."

During an hour-long meeting with the New York Forum, a group of reporters at the City University Graduate Center, he emphasized that "Islam is a vibrant cultural force in today's world, not something that died with the Middle Ages." He noted that Islam has been "revitalized by young people with Western educations" and added, "I do not think the Ayatollah realizes the power he is in control of."1

England and the United States adorned Khomeini's image with a veneer of divine approval, causing Iranians to overlook the dangers beneath his facade. On February 1, 1979, when Khomeini returned to Iran after fifteen years of exile, an American reporter asked him, "How do you feel about returning to Iran?" Khomeini replied, "Nothing."

He did not immediately remove his turban. Instead, he went to the Refah School and kept himself out of public view. He summoned Generals Mehdi Rahimi, Nasiri, Naji, and Khosrowdad there. Khomeini removed his turban and revealed the metaphorical "snakes" on his head to these military leaders. In a ruthless display of power, he compromised their lives to secure his position as a statesman of Persia, showing a complete lack of remorse.

Iranians were busy cheering for their newfound leader, Khomeini, who was primarily focused on silencing dissent among his people. Many Iranians believed that by remaining silent, their troubles would eventually fade away.

On January 7, 1980, Western nations portrayed Khomeini as a beloved, almost divine figure. TIME magazine even featured his picture, naming him "Man of the Year." Meanwhile, the US propaganda machine supported Khomeini despite his ruthlessness.

Khomeini embraced his role as the statesman of Persia, walking around shamelessly despite the metaphorical "snakes" he carried with him—his oppressive actions. He ordered the execution of countless Iranians in prison simply because they did not share his views. Those who chose not to oppose him were sent to fight in the Iran-Iraq War, where many lost their lives. Khomeini initiated the war to export his revolution to the world, encouraging Iraqi Shia Muslims to rise against Saddam Hussein. However, his plans backfired as Saddam Hussein renounced the 1975 Algeria Accord and launched a massive military attack on Iran. Khomeini repeatedly urged Iranians to go to war and sacrifice their lives for Islam.

Eventually, Khomeini realized he could not defeat Saddam Hussein and accepted a peace treaty with him. Not one to embrace humility, Khomeini felt degraded by his inability to win the war against Iraq without foreign assistance. He then passed his leadership to Ali Khamenei, donning the metaphorical "snakes" that represented his oppressive rule. Khamenei continued the legacy of violence, eliminating anyone who stood in his way.

In conclusion, a strong Iran poses a threat to Western nations. These countries have adopted a policy aimed at ensuring that the regime in Iran remains in power, which results in Iran's continued weakness as young people are either killed or flee the country for a better life.

The story of Medusa requires a hero to save Iran and its people from relentless violence. However, Perseus will not come to the rescue; he is waiting for the Iranians to step forward and become the heroes of their destiny.

Endnote:

1. The New York Times. (1979, February 9). Andrew Young chided for praising Ayatollah. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/1979/02/09/archives/andrew-young-chided-for-praising-ayatollah.html