No Theocracy Can Long Endure
by It was a foregone conclusion, born of delusion, proving the absolute necessity of division between church and state.
It was a revolution in which there was a built-in failure, not because of the fact that it was the voice of the people that wanted a change of government they abhored, but because of the fact that no theocratic government could, in any sense of the word, endure indefinitely. There is no question that the majority of Iranians that voted to set up such a state of affairs, had brought it upon themselves. They should have known better and forseen its consequences.
Why has it taken so long for millions of Iranians to realize that the cost of electing a bunch of fanatics in government would prove to be an anomaly that might take a long time to correct? The answer is: sheer complacency. Theocracy cannot in and of itself fit into this modern age of politics, unlike the theocracy of the past, be it Islam, Judaism or Christianity.
When the majority of those in Iran had opted to elect a theocratic government, they did so, out of desperation, as a consequence of the failure of a so-called sovereign despot whose reign was judged to be repulsive. However, the motive behind the people’s decision to elect a bunch of theocrats whose views were a total departure from any democracy in which equality of the sexes is paramount and in which conformity to modernity in general is essential, was terribly misguided. At the time when such a government was elected, did the electorate believe that the political climate in the wake of a theocracy, would provide them a normalization of needs in line with those of other nations, both East and West?
Perhaps, in the not-too-distant future, a radical change from an antiquated ideology would prove to be yet another revolution, minus the fanaticism that is pesently prevalent.
Liked it
