On this day in 1953, the U.S. and British governments initiated a coup d'état against the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh. Mosaddegh had been preparing to nationalize Iran's British-owned oil fields.

Mosaddegh had sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), later re-named British Petroleum, and to limit the company's control over Iranian oil reserves. When the AIOC refused to cooperate with the Iranian government, the parliament voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry and to expel foreign corporate representatives from the country.

In response, the British began a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically and engaged in subterfuge to undermine Mosaddegh's government.

Judging Mosaddegh to be unreliable and fearing a communist takeover, Winston Churchill and the Eisenhower administration overthrew Iran's government. The coup action was also supported by the Iranian clergy, who opposed Mosaddegh's secularism.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) hired mobsters to stage pro-Shah riots and paid people to travel to Tehran and take over the streets of the city. Between 200 and 300 people were killed in the ensuing mayhem.

Mosaddegh was arrested, tried, and convicted of treason by the Shah's military court. Many of his supporters were imprisoned, several received the death penalty. Mosaddegh himself lived the rest of his life under house arrest, dying in 1967.

After the coup, the Shah ruled as a monarch for the next 26 years until he was overthrown in the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iran Coup

The Iranian coup, 1953 libcom

50 Years After the CIA’s First Overthrow of a Democratically Elected Foreign Government We Take a Look at the 1953 US Backed Coup in Iran

Megathreads and spaces to hang out:

reminders:

  • 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
  • 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes struggle sessions over upbears
  • 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
  • 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can go here nerd

Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):

Aid:

Theory:

  • Cromalin [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    literally nothing Alec Guiness says matches up with the prequels, at all. It is clear that the backstory was originally that he met Anakin Skywalker as an adult, and convinced him to leave home and go fight in the Clone Wars for an unspoken ideological reason (I like to imagine that Obi Wan wanted to free clone slaves), and trained him in the Jedi arts while they did that.

    man, imagine if they just hadn't done any more official star wars stuff after the original trilogy? or if lucas was interested in cohesive stories instead of just adding whatever cool new stuff he came up with. i guess if that was the case darth vader wouldn't be luke's father, but it's an interesting hypothetical to imagine what that version of the prequels was like.

    • ssjmarx [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Leia also wouldn't be Luke's sister lmao.

      I mean stuff changes as you make it all the time in film, but it feels like the changes to Star Wars generally made things worse. The best thing Lucas could have done in the late 90s was get the Star Wars cast together for a late sequel trilogy based on the Thrawn novels or something like that. Hamill, Fisher and Ford in their 40s would have killed it in a way they didn't in the Disney trilogy.

      • Cromalin [she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        i don't think the original trilogy is perfect or anything, and i do generally like the prequels and some of the disney stuff, even if they aren't very good. but man, there's something about the original trilogy that just works in ways the other stuff doesn't.

        i think part of it is that every major project post prequels was made with a bunch of people who clearly worship the original trilogy, but that's definitely not the whole problem. the mandalorian had some good stuff, and it's certainly possible for disney to make good star wars stuff, but idk. maybe andor will manage it.

        • ssjmarx [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          I stand by my belief that if the Rise of Skywalker had been good and paid off the ideas set up in The Last Jedi it would have tied the whole sequel trilogy in a bow and at least made it sit somewhere between the Prequels and the Originals in quality.

          But really it comes down to the fact that they rushed it out the door without a plan. Ironically it's the same trap that WB fell into with the Justice League films where they tried to immediately copy Marvel without doing any of the buildup and world creation that Marvel did - Disney wanted to turn on the Star Wars money faucet as fast as possible and sacrificed laying the proper groundwork to do it.

          • Cromalin [she/her]
            ·
            2 years ago

            yeah, but rise of skywalker was so bad it retroactively made the first 2 way worse. i think tv shows that aren't too closely related to any of the main characters of the trilogy films is the way to go for right now, both financially and artistically. keeps star wars relevant without the baggage theatrical releases have. in a few years once the stink of rise of skywalker wears off then you've got several years worth of planning on your new movies.