First off I'd just like to say thank you for taking the time to quote my post at length and go over your thoughts piece by piece. Yes Iran was predominantly rural and very poor especially prior to the secularizing but brutal modernizing regime that came into power from the 1921 coup. Very funny to hear an antidote about the conspiracy's theory's of the Monarchists in your family I've heard of that conspiracy theory myself. I believe even the Shah and those around him thought the US wanted him out of power by the late 70's. Which of course is not true as Iran under the Shah was a crucial satellite for intelligence penetration into the Soviet Union and the fluffy liberal Carter administration held out with his regime until the end.

But I do think you reiterated a common trope that is largely not true.

"all while the Islamist officials and their families indulge themselves lavishly" I remember reading Robert Frisks interview with the First Supreme Leader in his book The Great War For Civilization which took place in the old city of Qom. Along with Qom's almost idealist image of an pre modern pious city it is actually true that the first Ayatollah and his successors lived/live in a very small home, with little material wealth or amenity's. Fisk crudely refers to this as the "...orientel desire to show the poverty of their leaders" but nevertheless there is truth to this observation. Sure by now there are certainly Imams enriching themselves as the regime ages past the more politically charged years right after 79. But MEK and former members ( like your family in the Imperial Iranian Army although it did number in the hundreds of thousands to be clear as a fairly normal middle class profession) and beneficiaries of the Shahs regime use this trope, when in reality it is much more of a self tell then totally true(the Shah and his crony's ran away with billions much like the Philippines Marcos). Much less Iranian officials -especially the Islamist- have lavish offshore wealth when compared to most so called "developing" country's.

"The only other exception (aside from my parent) is a grand-uncle who was a high-ranking officer go from practically worshiping the Shah to despising him once he started having troops open fire on protestors in the 70s. So it’s not all ideology and there could definitely be seeds for a socialist revolution if the Islamists didn’t purge Leftists and salt the earth as thoroughly as they did."

Very interesting and I'm sure as the regime became more desperate and reverted to more and more extreme brutality's in the face of such massive discontent lead by charismatic ideologues, some within the military and intelligence sectors fell out of love with the Monarchs rule. Its also worth pointing out that at the same time the Shahs last ditch effort with the White Revolution alienated the middle classes. And there were Communists taking part in 79( US de classified cables between Washington, its diplomats and intelligence agents show some even raved about "far left" and "crypto communist" allied with an behind the Mullahs).I digress though for it needs reiterating that it would be near impossible to overstate the savagery of the Shahs regime. SAVAK(kings secret police) was the equivalent in many ways to the Gestapo and I mean that explicitly. SAVAK was controlled by a man very close to the monarch named Col. Nimatullah Nassiri and at one point employed up to 60,000 agents. It is a credible estimate that at times SAVAK had up to a third of the the Iranian adult male population either as agents or as occasional paid informants often used for blackmail. They included diplomats , civil servants, actors , writers, mullahs , oil executives, workers etc. There is little reason to go over the specifics of the brutality of the torture done by this octopus, but suffice to say even Amnesty International referred to the King Of Kings as the "worst torturer on the planet" [paraphrase].

Why do I bring this up? While yes outlawing left party's , killing the communist and others who had even helped their revolt "salted the earth" , why were so many executed after the Revolution? Simply religious fanaticism? Well yes that's part of it but not really a satisfying answer. A Machiavellian attempt to solidify power? I don't think so. I think much of it was having trials for who they saw as agents of this regime of torture, they viewed the Shahs evil as extending through secularism(Iran's 20th century modernizing regimes were anti Islam to the extent of banning Hijabs at one point). So suffice to say the earth was salted from the start. And the 8 year genocidal war executed by Iraq and the United States right after salted it more. It will take even more decades for this trauma to heal and for secular politics to not be tainted in the eyes of many Iranians.

And look man lets be real. Liberals, reactionary's and fail son spooks are always gonna call us "tankies" and other kinds of slurs. There is no appeasing these people, there is only convincing them to turn or accept they are the "enemy" if you will. Again I don't see many leftist praising the regime of the Islamic Republic. And again I don't even think it is really "corrupt" outside of generalizing pedantic's as anti communist and illiberal that it indeed is. And there just aren't many Iranian "communist" around to have solidarity with although yes we could do better. The uncomfortable fact is that Iranian Marxists in terms of a movement are often rubbing shoulders with the MEK. Which is a self proclaimed "Marxist-Leninist" cult as I'm sure you know.

And I'm not going to mince words but ill try to keep it short because my friend I think we are on opposing sides of the barricade here. Yes, It would take an ignoramus to not understand that Russian communist's know that the Russian Federation is a "lesser evil" compared to NATO, the child of Nazis and The Empire that lives to balkanize and rape and destroy their [Russian's of various ethnicitys] entire society. Who are these leftist cheering "bourgeoisie interest"? Are you saying Russia's very survival in this current moment is just in the interests of the Russian "bourgeoise"? That it is just "bourgeoise" interest to fight Nazis? That it is just "bourgeoise" interest to not be ethnically cleansed by a coup regime and have homes and schools in Donbass not be bombed as they were for 8 years ? That it is just "bourgeoise" interest to have a multi lateral world system? That the Africans and Iranians cheering on Russia finally fighting back against this imperial monster is just "bourgeoise" interest? Should I go on? Are the people who voted in Crimea to be apart of Russia and away from a society that hates and abuses them and does not develop their infrastructure just "bourgeoise" interests? No, I am sorry my friend I draw the line here, again we are on opposing sides of the barricade.

Even the way you fraise it: "It’s just that the Russian Bourgeoisie’s interests (not getting encircled and looted by the West) just so happen to align with Russians and the Global South as a whole for the moment."

Okay id put it differently but even if that's how you want to articulate it, then we should side with what aligns with the interests of the Global South regardless. Accident of selfish actors or not. In regards to the "protestors in 1956 Hungary and 1989 China" I have already gone on too long so I will just say yes obviously there's complexity's and nuance and those are tragic events in many ways but I once more draw the line in the sand, those were cases of Socialist states fighting back for survival against reactionary's especially in the case of Hungary, for with Tiananmen many were just students who wanted some reform yes but it was lead by provocateurs and spiraled way, way out of control very quickly.

Lastly I will simply say I appreciate this exchange and it really gets the juices flowing to have these kind of in depth back and fourths I hope your day is awesome!