A secular Iran?

Whenever something tumultuous occurs on the world stage, pundits from all corners of the ideological spectrum make extemporaneous pronouncements regarding the political consequences of the event in question. And it’s only natural. There is no one way to interpret uprisings, invasions, and coup d’états; their implications are multi-dimensional and usually immensely complex. Thus it should come as no surprise that the situation in Iran right now is eliciting a wide array of commentarial reaction.

What’s unique here, however, is that there is very little to squabble over among these commentators. A seemingly rigged election, violent government crackdowns, outright media exclusion; everyone has something to cheer about. That includes secular progressives.

At the heart of the uprising is a deeply-rooted discontent with theocracy, especially on the part of younger Iranians. When the Supreme Leader (just that title is disconcerting) appoints each presidential candidate, there is no true democracy. When homosexuality is punishable by death based on Koranic principles, a vibrant electorate cannot flourish. There is no doubt that the population of Iran remains deeply religious, but the first cracks in theocracy’s unrelenting grip have begun to emerge.

Because when a people demands such sweeping reform, they are also demanding pluralism; they are demanding that their government be representative of what is a deceptively progressive culture. That means tolerance of a free expression of ideas, which inevitably includes secularism. The type of government that the people of Iran seek is one that would foster a marketplace of ideas. As we’ve seen in the West, the existence of such an environment ensures the rise of secular thought. There is no reason to think the same could not be true for the Middle East.

It’s a long term goal. But the turmoil of recent weeks proves that Islam and Iran may not be so inextricably bound.