Iran at 47: How the Promises of the 1979 Revolution Curled Back on Themselves

In 1979, millions of Iranians rose up with a simple, powerful slogan: independence, freedom, and social justice. Nearly five decades later, those ideals remain unrealised for large sections of society. Instead, the Islamic Republic that emerged from the revolution is widely seen inside Iran as a system that has delivered political repression, economic precarity, and growing isolation abroad. The latest nationwide protests — beginning from Tehran’s Grand Bazaar and spreading rapidly across cities and towns — reflect not a sudden rupture, but the slow unravelling of revolutionary legitimacy.

What the 1979 revolution promised — and what followed

The revolution that overthrew the Shah was meant to free Iran from foreign domination, restore political and civil liberties, and build a more just economic order. Independence, however, has translated into a shift rather than an end to dependency. While ties with the United States were severed, Iran has grown increasingly reliant on China and Russia — often on unequal terms that many Iranians see as humiliating rather than sovereign.

Freedom has fared worse. Political dissent is criminalised, lifestyles are regulated, and surveillance extends into private life. Social justice, the third pillar of the revolution, has been hollowed out by entrenched corruption that spans elite power structures and everyday bureaucracy. For many Iranians, the revolution’s ideals survive only as historical memory.

Economic distress and the widening gap with the state

Daily life for most Iranians has become a struggle shaped by chronic inflation, currency collapse, unemployment, and deep economic insecurity. While official narratives emphasise resistance and self-reliance, lived reality points to shrinking livelihoods and a growing chasm between rulers and society.

This economic squeeze explains the persistence of protest. Over the past two decades, demonstrations have erupted repeatedly — over prices, wages, fuel, water, and rights. Each wave has been violently suppressed, yet none have extinguished dissent. Instead, protests have reappeared in more radical and politically explicit forms.

Why the Grand Bazaar matters this time

The current wave carries special symbolism because it began with strikes and protests in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar. Historically, the bazaar was a financial and social backbone of the 1979 revolution and a pillar of support for the Islamic Republic.

Its mobilisation signals a profound shift: groups once considered regime loyalists are now openly dissenting. From there, protests spread nationwide, quickly moving beyond sectoral grievances to direct political slogans — a pattern suggesting erosion of the regime’s social base, not just episodic anger.

Repression as routine governance

The state’s response has followed a familiar script refined over four decades: internet shutdowns, communication blackouts, electricity cuts, and mass arrests. The objective is to create an information vacuum — to isolate protesters domestically and obscure violence internationally.

Persian-language media abroad report large numbers of deaths, figures difficult to independently verify amid blackouts but consistent with the scale of repression. Despite this, protests have continued, in some areas escalating into direct confrontations between citizens and security forces — a sign that fear is no longer an effective deterrent.

Iran as a domestic and regional destabiliser

Beyond its internal crisis, the Islamic Republic has become a focal point of regional instability. Its nuclear programme, ballistic missile development, and support for proxy groups have placed it at the centre of Middle Eastern tensions. Domestically, any call for reform is dismissed as foreign manipulation — a narrative that has worn thin among a population facing worsening living conditions.

This dual role — repression at home and confrontation abroad — has reinforced the perception that the system is an obstacle not only to Iranian freedoms but also to regional stability.

The role of the United States and external pressure

Statements of support for protesters by Donald Trump have sharpened expectations. For many Iranians, the credibility of international condemnation hinges on whether words are followed by action. A purely symbolic response would signal to Tehran that repression carries manageable costs.

More forceful options — from targeting military infrastructure to directly weakening the core instruments of repression — carry risks of escalation, including harsher domestic crackdowns. Yet inaction, protesters argue, risks normalising violence and deepening despair. The dilemma underscores a long-standing truth: sustainable change cannot be imposed from outside, but external pressure can shape the balance of power within.

Opposition fragmentation and the leadership vacuum

Inside Iran, the regime’s capacity to repress is slowly eroding, even if its intent remains firm. Internationally, Russia’s preoccupation with Ukraine limits its ability to fully back Tehran. Yet the Achilles’ heel of the protest movement is internal fragmentation.

The divide between republicans and monarchists has prevented unified leadership. Monarchist support has coalesced around Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s last shah, who enjoys strong media visibility. Republicans, however, fear replacing one form of authoritarianism with another. Their most prominent figure, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, has been under house arrest for years, leaving the movement without a central organiser.

What will shape Iran’s trajectory next

Iran’s future hinges on three variables: the response of foreign powers, the opposition’s ability to overcome fragmentation, and the level of violence society can endure. Another decisive factor is the condition of the regime’s ageing supreme leader. His death or removal could expose deep fissures within the system and trigger a power struggle with unpredictable consequences.

What is already clear is that the Islamic Republic has lost moral legitimacy for a significant portion of its population. Whether that loss translates into political change — or prolonged instability — will depend on choices made both inside and outside Iran in the months ahead.