Yes, but it wasn't just the Marxists. Plenty of liberals in Iran and even in the West were hopeful that the revolution would produce a better, democratic system. But Iranian-US relations took a nosedive after Carter, on the advice of Kissinger, allowed the shah to flee to the states, which sent a clear message to the Iranians that they planned to reinstate him like they had before. In response, some revolutionaries (acting independently but later endorsed) took the US embassy hostage. Then, Reagan's campaign sabotaged peace talks in order to win the election, and the hostages were released immediately following his inauguration.
It's quite possible that the clerics always intended to implement an authoritarian state and to betray the leftists and liberals, but at the very least, the breakdown of relations with the US provided a clear justification for why they were doing it.
As for why the clerics were able to lead the revolution in the first place, it's because the shah's secret police spent decades hunting down leftists, while they didn't consider the clerics nearly as much of a threat.
I believe I have. The past 100+ years of Iranian history has been about Western powers subverting any attempt at democracy for the sake of economic/imperialist interests. Nobody wanted the Iranians to be free because then they'd have to actually pay a fair price for their oil.
Yes, but it wasn't just the Marxists. Plenty of liberals in Iran and even in the West were hopeful that the revolution would produce a better, democratic system. But Iranian-US relations took a nosedive after Carter, on the advice of Kissinger, allowed the shah to flee to the states, which sent a clear message to the Iranians that they planned to reinstate him like they had before. In response, some revolutionaries (acting independently but later endorsed) took the US embassy hostage. Then, Reagan's campaign sabotaged peace talks in order to win the election, and the hostages were released immediately following his inauguration.
It's quite possible that the clerics always intended to implement an authoritarian state and to betray the leftists and liberals, but at the very least, the breakdown of relations with the US provided a clear justification for why they were doing it.
As for why the clerics were able to lead the revolution in the first place, it's because the shah's secret police spent decades hunting down leftists, while they didn't consider the clerics nearly as much of a threat.
thanks, have you seen this article from late last year?
How a Chase Bank Chairman Helped the Deposed Shah of Iran Enter the U.S.
I believe I have. The past 100+ years of Iranian history has been about Western powers subverting any attempt at democracy for the sake of economic/imperialist interests. Nobody wanted the Iranians to be free because then they'd have to actually pay a fair price for their oil.