Authoritarianism and Political Repression
Despite his modernizing ambitions, Reza Shah ruled as an autocrat. Political parties were dissolved, independent newspapers were shut down, and dissent was ruthlessly suppressed. The Majlis became largely symbolic, functioning as a rubber-stamp body rather than an independent legislative institution.
Many members of the “new intelligentsia,” often educated in Europe, criticized Reza Shah as an “oriental despot” rather than a genuine reformer. They argued that his modernization benefited primarily the landed elite and failed to address the needs of Iran’s vast peasant population. Land reform was notably absent from his agenda, leaving rural inequalities largely intact.
Nevertheless, some contemporaries, such as historian Ahmad Kasravi, defended Reza Shah’s harsh methods as necessary given the chaotic conditions of early twentieth-century Iran. Kasravi argued that only a strong, centralized authority could rescue the country from disintegration and foreign domination.
