IRDC.IR: That government was, firstly, corrupt: financially corrupt; ethically corrupt; and corrupt in administrative affairs. In the financial corruption, it suffices to remind that the Shah himself and his family were involved in most of the major economic transactions of the country.
He and his brothers and sisters were among those who accumulated the most of personal wealth. In his sixteen or seventeen-year kingdom, Reza Khan accumulated important wealth. It is interesting to know that some of the cities of this country, in bill of sale, were wholly properties of Reza Khan! For example, the city of Fariman was Reza Khan's property! The best of estate and lands in this country belonged to him.
He was interested in these things and in jewelry. Of course, his children had a wider taste; they loved and gathered every kind of capital! The best proof to that is that when they left the country, billions of dollars of their wealth were accumulated in foreign banks!
A political system that was so financially corrupt at its head, look how military-oriented it was and what it did to the people! They were also morally corrupt. Trafficking gangs were under the control of his [Shah’s] brothers and sisters. In terms of ethical and sexual issues, there were cases that telling and hearing them will make a man sweat in shame. Of course, some of the memories of these type were written and published by their circle of friends, associates and relatives later. In terms of administrations, they were corrupts, too. While choosing leaders, they did not consider qualifications; they considered the individuals’ affiliations to themselves, as well as orders by foreign intelligence and security services and appointed individuals based on such criteria. You see; a government that does bribery at its head, makes a fortune, smuggles, and betrays the people: what sort of a government it would be.
If anyone wants to describe these facts with proofs and documents, they would be compiled into books. They were dependent. Their dependence emerged from the fact that they were cut off from the people. In order to maintain their own regime, they felt obliged to rely on foreigners… They had no respect for people's opinions, for the people's wishes, for the people's faiths, for the religion of the people and for the culture of the people; they had no friendly relationship with the people. They had established a hostile relationship with the people: like the relationship between a lord and the peasants; like the relationship between a master and the servants; So, It had the qualities of a monarchy! Monarchy means this: an absolute rule that has no commitment to the people. The Pahlavis lived in our country for fifty years in such a manner.