Dr. Iraj Abedini, Psychologist, Sweden
Abstract. Drawing on Hannah Arendt’s theory of modern totalitarianism, Freud and Jung’s concept of the father complex, and Lacan’s idea of the return of the repressed, this article examines the latent authoritarian potential in Reza Pahlavi’s political discourse. It argues that, despite a liberal vocabulary and democratic slogans, his language reproduces features of soft fascism. Only genuinely organized, secular, and democratic forces with transparent public programs and institutional safeguards can block the risk of authoritarian restoration during Iran’s transition.
Keywords: Soft fascism; Reza Pahlavi; father complex; return of the repressed; Arendt; Iranian politics; democratic transition
Executive Summary
Iran’s modern history shows a pattern. Vague promises at moments of change invite authoritarian outcomes. Reza Pahlavi’s current discourse repeats that pattern. It frames unity as an answer to crisis and defers institutional design to an undefined future. This text identifies the psychological and linguistic mechanisms that make such discourse attractive and risky. It then outlines guardrails that secular and democratic actors must install before any transition. The message is simple. Protect the rules before the vote. Institutional clarity must come first.
Introduction: Historical Experience and the Return of Patterns
Iran’s modern history is marked by revolutions that promised liberation but delivered repression. The 1979 Revolution overthrew the monarchy. Ayatollah Khomeini told the nation that the people’s vote was the criterion in 1978. Within months the promise collapsed under the machinery of a theocratic regime (Khomeini 1978). The experience shows a hard lesson. Ambiguity at a turning point is a gift to authoritarianism.
In 2025, Reza Pahlavi repeats a similar structure in a different tone. He says that liberation comes first and the ballot will settle the rest later. In a political context shaped by disappointment and crisis, this message sounds reasonable. Arendt reminds us that modern authoritarian movements grow through mass mobilization built on emotionally charged but deliberately vague promises (Arendt 1951). Citizens place their hopes into an undefined future. Organized elites are best placed to capture that future when the moment arrives.
From Symbol to System: The Structural Role of Reza Pahlavi
Reza Pahlavi does not fit the mold of the charismatic authoritarian leader. He has not built a durable organization in four decades. This does not make him harmless. Modern authoritarian systems can elevate symbolic figureheads who serve as rallying points for networks that prefer a compliant front. Two overlapping currents sustain his appeal. The first is nostalgia for a royal past. The second is a nationalist longing for stability after years of crisis. By staying noncommittal about the constitutional order, executive limits, and institutional checks, he maximizes reach. That strategic vagueness creates a vacuum. In a transition, disciplined actors with resources can fill that vacuum. They do so with rules that favor concentrated power. Scholarship on modern authoritarianism shows how illiberal projects thrive on weak leaders who are strong symbols (Diamond 2019; Rupnik 1989). The symbol gathers mass consent. The network writes the rules.
Psycho-Political Dynamics: Father Complex and Return of the Repressed
Psychoanalytic theory helps explain the appeal. Freud’s concept of the father complex describes ambivalence toward paternal authority. There is reverence and dependency. There is also resentment (Freud 1913). Jung’s work on archetypes shows that the figure of the father and the king persists in the collective imagination (Jung 1959). Iran lived under centralized kingship for centuries. The monarchy’s fall did not erase the image of the paternal ruler.
Lacan’s idea of the return of the repressed explains the political effect. What a society expels can reappear in a transformed form. The monarchy as an institution fell in 1979. Its residue remained. It can return in the language of liberal democracy (Lacan 1964). The vocabulary looks modern. The expectation of rescue by a singular figure remains older than the words that now clothe it.
Linguistic Markers of Soft Fascism
Arendt’s framework helps identify early signs of authoritarian restoration that hide inside democratic language (Arendt 1951). Several markers appear in this discourse:
- Deliberate ambiguity – Foundational questions are postponed.
- Savior rhetoric without binding institutions – Unity and national salvation are promised, but concrete guarantees against executive overreach are missing.
- Pluralism recast as division – Diversity of voices is treated as a problem to be managed later.
- Deferral of accountability – A future referendum will solve everything, with no design for media freedom, campaign finance rules, or independent electoral administration.
- Instrumental nationalism – Appeals to pride deflect scrutiny of institutional design.
This is how soft fascism advances. It does not announce itself. It grows in the shadows of transition when stability becomes a higher good than liberty. By the time the architecture of concentrated power is visible, reversing it is costly and slow.
Guardrails for a Democratic Transition: Role of Genuine Secular-Democratic Forces
In stark contrast to Pahlavi’s ambiguous and personality-driven approach, only organized, secular, and democratic force – publicly committed to a transparent, rights-based program – can structurally and normatively block the resurgence of authoritarianism. Such a program must include:
- Pluralistic republic with free elections and popular sovereignty – prevents monopolization of power by any individual or charismatic clique.
- Freedom of expression, press, political parties, associations, and unrestricted internet access – transparency and accountability undermine fascist consolidation.
- Full gender equality and abolition of all religious and gender-based discrimination – fascism thrives on hierarchy and exclusion; this principle eliminates its social base.
- Separation of religion and state, and full religious freedom – blocks any ideological monopoly.
- Justice for political prisoners massacred in Iran, abolition of torture and the death penalty – dismantles the culture of impunity that sustains authoritarian regimes.
- An independent judiciary based on international standards – institutional legal control over power.
- Autonomy for ethnic groups and an end to systemic oppression of national minorities – denies fascism the ethnic scapegoating it exploits for mass mobilization.
- Social justice and equal economic opportunities – removes class-based resentment that authoritarian populists often weaponize.
- A non-nuclear, peace-seeking Iran – prevents militarized authoritarianism.
These principles, consistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, structurally immunize any future Iranian polity against fascism – whether clerical or monarchic.
Risks and Scenarios
These scenarios describe the risk of authoritarian restoration during Iran’s political transition:
- Rapid collapse – If the regime falls suddenly, the absence of agreed rules and democratic structures creates a vacuum. Well-resourced networks can quickly dominate media channels, control logistics, and position themselves to write interim laws, shaping the future order before public debate can take place.
- Unity fracture – Even if opposition groups remain united through the fall of the regime, disagreements during constitution making can fracture that unity. In such a moment, a symbolic figure—especially one with broad name recognition but no detailed program—can step into the leadership void, consolidating power without strong institutional limits.
- External pressure – International actors, prioritizing stability over democratic safeguards, may push for a swift transfer of power to a familiar figure who promises order. In this rush, crucial institutional protections could be sacrificed, leaving the system vulnerable to authoritarian drift.
In each scenario, a narrow elite gains the ability to shape the foundational rules of governance in ways that will be extremely difficult to reverse. The common risk across them all is the absence of well-prepared, principled, secular-democratic forces with clear programs, organizational discipline, and the leverage to influence the transition.
Conclusion
Iran’s choice is clear. The country can repeat the cycle of authoritarian restoration or break it by protecting institutions before the moment of change. Reza Pahlavi’s discourse, presented as democratic and unifying, contains structural weaknesses that invite soft fascism. Recognizing these patterns is an act of civic defense. The defense must be built now. A transparent, inclusive, institution-centered transition is the path that honors the demand for freedom and justice. The footsteps of fascism are quiet. They arrive not with a clerical turban. They arrive with a royal blue tie.
References
Arendt, H. (1951). The Origins of Totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace & Company.
Diamond, L. (2019). Ill Winds: Saving Democracy from Russian Rage, Chinese Ambition, and American Complacency. Penguin Press.
Freud, S. (1913). Totem and Taboo. Moffat, Yard and Company.
Jung, C. G. (1959). The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Princeton University Press.
Khomeini, R. (1978). Interviews in Neauphle-le-Château.
Lacan, J. (1964). The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (A. Sheridan, Trans.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Rupnik, J. (1989). The Other Europe. Pantheon Books.