Amir Taheri: differenze tra le versioni
Contenuto cancellato Contenuto aggiunto
→The Unknown Life of the Shah: fix e possibili modifiche. |
→The Unknown Life of the Shah: modifico. |
||
Riga 120:
:''Reza Shah's belief that most of Iran's ills stemmed from its "Arabsadeghi" (literally: being hit by Arabisation) had brought ancient Iran back into official political discourse as the cornerstone of a new national identity. With Reza Shah forced into exile, the re-Iranisation effort had been abandoned in the chaos and confusion of war and political crisis. Mohammad-Reza Shah's own Islamic beliefs made him a far less enthusiastic "re-Iraniser" than his father had been. But in the 1960s Mohammad-Reza Shah rediscovered Persian nationalism as a potentially attractive alternative to two ideologies that, he was convinced, threatened Iran's well-being and independence: mullah-dominated shi'ism and Soviet-sponsored Communism.'' (p. 173)
*Lo Scià Mohammad Reza credeva che niente fosse troppo per l'Iran e si era persuaso che, purché la nazione lo seguisse con convinzione, il cielo
:''Mohammad-Reza Shah believed that nothing was too good for Iran and had persuaded himself that, provided the nation followed him with conviction, the sky was the limit of what could be achieved. His idealism, his activisim, his thirst for achievement and his belief that the machinery of government could be employed as an instrument of radical change reflected his Western education and outlook. Traditionally, however the Iranian Shahs, with few exceptions, saw their task as one of managing society, not changing it. They represented society's inertia. What is known as "constructivism" – the idea that a society can be reshaped in accordance with plans worked out by its leaders – was alien to them. They shared the belief of the common folk that government was, at best, a necessary evil. All that most Iranians had traditionally wanted from their government was that they be left alone to go about their business in peace. The government was a monster that took from them without ever giving anything back. It could not be trusted and was to be cheated at every available opportunity.'' (p. 175)
|