this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)
Ask Lemmygrad
1370 readers
13 users here now
A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The MEK (Mujahideen-e Khalq) was militant faction during the Iranian revolution.
They were inspired by the ideas of Ali Shariati (though that's not saying a lot because basically every faction of the revolution was inspired by him to some extent). They attempted to synthesize a form of radical Shi'ism with Marxism, marrying the two concepts for their struggle. They'd take a more explicitly Marxist turn in the 1970s creating a schism, however whether they were MLs I'm not quite sure. They had support amongst leftist students and urban intelligencia, making them largely middle class and based on Tehran. After the Iranian Revolution, many of them who'd been political prisoners were freed once the Islamic Republic was established.
After the Iranian revolution they competed for power with Khomeini's Islamist factions, wanting to be the group to control of the post revolutionary Iranian Republic. They had sympathizers in the first government of of the Islamic Republic like the first prime minister, Mehdi Bazargan, but due to not being the chief force in power instead of Khomeini, they would blow up the parliament building killing 100s of officials in 1981.
The MEK determined that the task after the overthrow of the Shah was to seize state power. So they allied and cooperated with Sadaam's invasion of Iran as a way to potentially topple the Islamic Republic and take power themselves. They would go on to perform multiple terror attacks and attacks on IRGC forces along with other military operations to achieve this goal.
It should be mentioned that they're analysis was incorrect. They deemed that imperialism had been defeated after the fall of the Shah, and that the next step in the interest of the Iranian working class would taking power from the Islamic Republic. However, the Islamic Republic was a popular mobilization of the Iranian people, and Iraq was being used as a proxy for the US in its invasion of Iran. By siding with Iraq, the MEK misinterpreted the primary contradiction which was faced by the Iranian working class, that being defense against US imperialism.
The MEK was banned after the 1981 bombing, subsequently allied with Sadaam (and therefore the US), which completely destroyed its image in the minds of Iranians even until now. Due to their Marxist principles, and association with Communism, the Islamic Republic cracked down on ALL Communist adjacent factions that existed prior to the revolution. This has led there to be basically no socialist organization within Iran for nearly 50 years now, and most people associate Communism with the MEK.
There's also something to be said about the leader of the MEK at the time, Massoud Rajivi may have fostered a bit of cult of personality but I couldn't find many details about it beyond vague posturing. His wife, Maryam Rajavi, now runs the MEK, but she's since distanced the organization from their Marxist roots, claiming to just be a "secular democratic group".
They used to be funded and armed by Sadaam's Iraq, but have basically been getting all their support from the West since the invasion of Iraq.
They're just another puppet of the imperialists now completely removed from any of the revolutionary ideals they once held. They operate kinda like the Kurdish separatists in that respect.
There's more I could say, but to be brief, the MEK should be a cautionary tale for Marxists everywhere. Recognizing the primary contradiction of your soceity can mean the difference between the survival of your movement or the death of Communism in your soceity for half a century and on going.
I wonder which other movement which called themselves Marxist allied themselves with a reactionary tool of Imperialism during an existential war to overthrow a big bad guy newly in charge of their country as a result of a revolution which they deemed to be wrong kind of revolution.
spoiler
I'm talking about Trotsky's collaboration with the Nazis to overthrow Stalin through a German military defeat of the Soviet Union, in case someone didn't get the parallel.The MEK are a really good synchronization with Trots. They were once a genuine theoretical current that existed due to disagreements on post revolutionary governance. They would quickly tailspin into nothing but an insurgency used on behalf of imperialists. This shift occurred due to the state defensively exiling these elements, which severed them entirely from the popular struggle more then their initial political miscalculation. As the years continue, and the old leaders die or remain removed from the popular struggle, the movement further disintegrates into an unrecognizable shell, now being entirely puppeted by imperialists. It's terminal trajectory just being another tool that the capitlist class uses to disrupt domestic revolutionary action. Trots steal class conscious workers from the revolutionary struggle, while MEK diaspora provide a facade that makes anti-imperialists support US intervention.
This is good to know. If we see "MEK good guys" in the news, we know it's probably USA/adjacent. Thanks!
Yes, though I don't expect to see much of it nowadays. The empire has basically centralized it's support of the Iranian opposition into the Pahlavists. The MEK, for all their faults, is still staunchly anti-shah and anti-monarchist. Many of the former MEK affiliates in Southern California for example, have switched their position to be pro-goverment recently due to the US aggression against Iran and the fascistic responses from Pahlavists.
My relatives here in Socal, who've had friends that were actual MEK supporters for their entire lives have, have even given me anecdotes of their friends now being entirely pro government and supporting the Islamic Republic since the 12 Day War.
The MEK themselves are still western puppets (though they are increasingly neglected on the propaganda pipeline as of late) but many of their sympathizers have actually turned to our side. It's really a massive shift among the diaspora that isn't being publicly displayed from social media. Pahlavists have managed, in an almost poetic fashion, to unite disparate elements of diaspora culture. There aren't any more 3rd way opposition or fence sitters here, either they are Pahlavist bootlickers or Islamic Republic defenders.
Basically, if someone tells you they hold or held sympathies for the MEK, I'd suggest you further interrogate their opinion. You'll find a very stark contrast of eitheir the lunatic diaspora or the anti-war diaspora. Pahlavists have been building these bot farms and narrative echo chambers for years, so they appear as if they are monolithic within the diaspora. The rest of us are trying to figure out how to counter organize against these brown shirts' narrative, and are extremely behind on united front media.
We might begin seeing the MEK get held up as an opposition group again if a Democrat administration comes to power, but I honestly think they are done in their role. The empire wanted and needed a centralized subservient zionist opposition, and Pahlavi is the only one that can fit that role, so all the others are being thrown out.
Welllll... I'm glad to see there's less confusion among the diaspora, and hoping most are Republic defenders; I'm guessing some went Pahlavist, which is unfortunate.
Sound advice. I will keep it in mind. Thank you.
Wow! What a cautionary tale of the necessity of theory, dialectical analysis, vanguard party before action, despite how urgent the situation! Thank you! 🫡
Edit: Hope this was helpful!
Yes it is extremely informative and made the folly of impatience stand out in bas relief!