Why Americans Should Root for a More Liberal Iran: Lessons from History and Recent Turmoil

In late February 2026, U.S.-Israeli strikes reportedly took out Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several top military officials. The news sent shockwaves through the world, but inside Iran, reactions were anything but uniform. While some mourned, others danced in the streets, toppling statues and sharing jubilant videos on social media. This divide isn't just a snapshot of current chaos—it's a window into Iran's deep-seated struggles between repression and reform.

As an American, you might wonder: Why should we care? The answer boils down to this: A more liberal Iran, reminiscent of its pre-1979 era under the Shah, would be better for global stability, human rights, and even U.S. interests than the conservative theocracy that's dominated since the Islamic Revolution. Let's break it down, drawing from Iran's history and the raw emotions spilling out today.

A Tale of Two Irans: Pre- and Post-1979

To understand the stakes, we need a quick history lesson. Before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran under Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was a secular monarchy. Women could drive, vote, dress as they pleased, and pursue careers as doctors, engineers, or professors. Society in urban areas embraced Western influences, with visible cultural freedoms like music, fashion, and social mixing. But don't romanticize it—the Shah's rule was authoritarian. His secret police, SAVAK, cracked down on dissent, elections were rigged, and political opposition was stifled. It was no democracy, but socially, it offered breathing room.

Fast-forward to post-1979: The revolution installed a theocratic system under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, later succeeded by Khamenei. Power centralized in the unelected Supreme Leader, who oversees the military, judiciary, media, and more. Strict Islamic laws enforced hijab mandates, limited free speech, and curtailed personal freedoms. Protests—like those in 2009, 2017, 2019, and 2022—were met with brutal force from groups like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), resulting in thousands of deaths, arrests, and torture allegations.

Economically, sanctions, corruption, and isolation have fueled inflation, unemployment, and hardship, while the elite live lavishly.

Both eras were authoritarian, but the key difference? Pre-1979 leaned secular and socially open; post-1979 is religiously rigid and repressive. The recent strikes have amplified calls for reverting to that earlier liberalism—and that's something Americans should champion.

Why Some Iranians Are Celebrating the Regime's Downfall

The jubilation in parts of Iran isn't about bloodlust; it's about hope. Many, especially the young (Iran's median age is in the early 30s), see the deaths as a crack in the regime's armor. Here's why:

Repression and Lost Freedoms: The system stifles political expression, rigs elections, and enforces religious laws that feel outdated to a globally connected generation. For them, Khamenei's death symbolizes the end of an era of control.
Violent Crackdowns: Memories of security forces gunning down protesters linger. Celebrants point to the IRGC's role in these atrocities, viewing the strikes as overdue justice.
Economic Misery: Blame falls on the leadership for mismanaging resources amid sanctions and corruption. Ordinary Iranians struggle while officials thrive—removing them sparks dreams of economic revival.
Generational Clash: Born after 1979, many youth reject the theocracy's strictures. They crave secularism, not sermons from aging clerics.

Videos from cities show people dancing and sharing memes, not mourning. It's a sign that beneath the surface, a push for liberalization simmers.

But not everyone's popping champagne. Iran is polarized—large crowds mourned Khamenei, decrying the strikes as foreign aggression and vowing retaliation. This split underscores the society's fractures.

Who Opposes a Liberal Turn—and Why It Matters

A return to pre-1979 liberalism terrifies certain groups, whose resistance highlights why change is so elusive:

The Clerical Elite: Hardline religious leaders see Sharia as sacred. They fear losing control and view Western influences as moral decay.
The IRGC and Power Brokers: This powerful military-economic machine was built to defend the revolution. A secular shift could dismantle their influence and perks.
Religious Conservatives: Some citizens genuinely prefer traditional values, seeing the old monarchy as authoritarian and Western-puppeted. They support gender roles and resist "decadence."
System Beneficiaries: Government insiders, religious foundations, and connected businesses thrive under the status quo. Change threatens their status.
Historical Skeptics: Many recall the Shah's era as elitist and disconnected, fueling anti-Western sentiment.

These groups aren't a monolith—Iran has three camps: die-hard regime supporters, reformers wanting tweaks, and radicals pushing for full secularism. Women's rights aren't the sole issue, but they're emblematic: Pre-1979, women thrived socially; today, despite high education rates (women dominate universities and fields like medicine and engineering), mandatory hijab and restrictions symbolize broader control.

Why Americans Should Want Iran to Liberalize

Now, the crux: Why should you, as an American, prefer a liberal Iran over the conservative theocracy? It's not just altruism—it's self-interest.

Reduced Global Threats: The current regime sponsors proxy militias, funds terrorism, and pursues nuclear ambitions, escalating tensions in the Middle East. A liberal Iran could pivot toward diplomacy, easing conflicts that drag in U.S. forces and resources.
Human Rights Alignment: America champions freedoms like speech, assembly, and gender equality. Supporting Iranian liberalization aligns with our values, boosting U.S. soft power. Imagine Iranian women voting freely again—it's a win for global progress.
Economic Opportunities: Lifting sanctions on a reformed Iran could open markets for trade, tech, and energy. Iran's educated youth (women included) could drive innovation, benefiting global economies, including ours.
Regional Stability: A less aggressive Iran means fewer refugee crises, less oil price volatility, and a calmer Middle East. Think fewer U.S. tax dollars on military interventions.
Countering Authoritarianism: Both pre- and post-1979 were authoritarian, but liberalism allows more personal freedoms and potential for democratic evolution. It manages dissent better than theocracy, reducing the powder keg of unrest we've seen explode in protests.

Contrast this with a conservative Iran: It perpetuates isolation, human rights abuses, and antagonism toward the West. That's a recipe for endless conflict.