76
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by RamrodBaguette@hexbear.net to c/slop@hexbear.net

For context:

Yeah, we can totally trust a bunch of hateful gusano sellouts to bring glorious liberal parliamentary democracy to Iran. Them pissing all over the Constitutional Revolution’s legacy and thinking some glorified warlord and his spawn have a God-given right to override democratic decision-making, via the only representative avenue the filthy common folk had to express themselves, is entirely incidental (trust them also to bring up the fact that Mossadegh eventually dissolved the Majlis without a hint of irony).

Not to say Mossadegh did everything right (he trusted the US not to screw him over, after all) but to these parasites trying to smear him, his unforgivable crime was attempting to run an actual liberal democratic government and asserting Iran’s sovereignty over its own resources, like a certain other country the empire is in the process of besieging. Also Mossadegh becoming more well-known figure throws a wrench into the image of the Pahlavi family being glorified as national modernizers planting the seeds of “European-style” democracy.

I’ve seen some lib Westoids parrot this and it makes complete sense. It absolves them of the responsibility for helping strangle a fledgling liberal democracy in its cradle and supporting the modern day ideological descendants of its butchers. It also helps them sidestep the fact that the legitimacy of the Iranian government is rooted in their perceived liberal nationalism and anti-imperialism just as much as it is in the Islamic faith. Makes it easy to swallow the slop that the Mullahs and their IRGC enforcers are insane fanatics who must be prevented from having WMDs (which definitely exist) or any real military capabilities if not immediately toppled at all costs.

top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] kotak_doost@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

Oh you trust someone called MOSSAD-degh?

Checkmate nationalists.

[-] CarlosDanger@hexbear.net 3 points 6 days ago

f**k those satl-e-an talabs

[-] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 29 points 1 week ago

Isn't the UK prime minister a similar situation? Appointed by the king?

[-] reaper_cushions@hexbear.net 19 points 1 week ago

This is the case in all European countries with royal heads of state, meaning Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain etc.

[-] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Formally/de jure yep

De facto they likely couldn't go against the results of a generally election without pushback from parliament and the public(regardless of the extent of their real hard power over the state they still have massive influence over most of it's organs, including those they're officially head of such as the military and Anglican church), so monarchists use this to excuse them from responsibility for any war crimes etc committed by the rest of the state, similar to the people who argue Hirohito had no responsibility for Japanese actions during WWII

[-] Soot@hexbear.net 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

A few times in the 19th and 20th centuries, the UK monarch has appointed a PM without a corresponding election or Parliamentary vote. But only in the 1800s did they specifically go against a vote.

As you say, they still exercise their power in very real, other ways. The UK monarch has been shown to secretly vet, veto and amend laws all the time, at least around a thousand over the past few decades. And those are just the times we've found out.

[-] Carl@hexbear.net 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It would be interesting to see that come to a head, but with how reactionary the UK government already is, what could the monarchy possibly gain from opposing it? Now that I think about it though we would definitely see the Crown testing its powers if a leftist government ever got in.

[-] Soot@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago

we would definitely see the Crown testing its powers if a leftist government ever got in

We certainly saw the Crown test a lot of unofficial powers when Corbyn, an anti-monarchist, was a potential PM.

[-] buckykat@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago

The David Weber fantasy of the woke Crown allied with the Commons against the greedy and venal Lords

[-] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

Ah, good Tsar and bad Boyars. Timeless classic.

[-] buckykat@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

I hadn't heard that term for it, so I did a little search. Fun how NATOpedia seems to think it's almost exclusively a defect of the Slavic brainpan.

Also not even all lords, just a few bad apples.

[-] cornishon@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 week ago

You'd think so, and I don't think anyone of them tried, but as a counterpoint: Macron (who is as close as you can get to a King of France without being one at this point) did pretty much that multiple times and nothing happened.

[-] LeZero@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

Yeah but that's because in France, the president is the head of the executive, not the prime minister. The PM is chosen by the president, but every executive functions reside with the president, who also can dissolve parliament and call a new election or sack the current PM to choose another from the majority party in the legislative assembly.

[-] AstroStelar@hexbear.net 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Appointed by the very same Shah they love so much, no less. Wikipedia profile for Mossadegh: "Prime Minister of Iran - In office under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi"

[-] RamrodBaguette@hexbear.net 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Two things:

  1. Either they indirectly admit the Shah was a fool for appointing a "traitor" (as they call him), showing his poor judge of character and lack of ability to rule

  2. or they admit the Shah had no choice but to appoint Mossadegh owing to his massive popularity (through the National Front)

Most will avoid, but I've interacted with a couple of them who admit #2, but also admit that they think working class Iranians, then and now, are dumb plebs who will follow any "demagogue" and need the strong hand of their preferred autocrat to get them to achieve "greatness".

[-] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

Most will avoid, but I've interacted with a couple of them who admit #2, but also admit that they think working class Iranians, then and now, are dumb plebs who will follow any "demagogue" and need the strong hand of their preferred autocrat to get them to achieve "greatness".

how-compelling

[-] AstroStelar@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

they think working class Iranians, then and now, are dumb plebs who will follow any "demagogue" and need the strong hand of their preferred autocrat to get them to achieve "greatness".

It is fascinating how consistently liberals talk like this when their politics are proven unpopular.

[-] demeritum@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 1 week ago

There were Iranian gusanso claiming that 90%! of Iran was atheist and thats why they should use a pre-islamic flag of iran.

[-] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago

You can't just add -oid to everything.

[-] demeritum@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 1 week ago
[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago

Oh yeah? Just watch me Hexbearoid!

[-] Zuzak@hexbear.net 1 points 6 days ago

Actually, the proper term is Hexbearianoid 🤓

[-] EstraDoll@hexbear.net 12 points 1 week ago

I sure can, WokePalpatinoid

[-] lil_tank@hexbear.net 10 points 1 week ago

Your commentoid isn't going to stop me

[-] mickey@hexbear.net 3 points 6 days ago

World Jewussy

Christendomussy

The Ummahussy

[-] RamrodBaguette@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

There are very few adequate substitutes for the disdain I feel for my supposed countrymen.

[-] miz@hexbear.net 12 points 1 week ago
[-] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 11 points 1 week ago

Ive been saying he was democratically elected for like 20 years now and Im not going to change just because some dipshit nerd wants to reinvent the past

[-] corvidenjoyer@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

Im confused? Are they this supposed British election is a good thing or bad thing?

this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
76 points (100.0% liked)

Slop.

794 readers
482 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS