[mullingitover]

Iran is already a parliamentary democracy, the aspect that’s criticized is the fact that candidates must be approved by their religious council. The Ayatollah didn’t/doesn’t exercise direct executive control over the country, so his removal wouldn’t create an immediate leadership vacuum.

For as much as the far right in the US likes to criticize Iran, ultimately their only real complaint about their ‘theocracy with democratic characteristics’ is that it isn’t Christian.

[goalieca]

I think you’re out to lunch on what the Iranian government has been doing. They’ve armed Islamic groups all over the Middle East, they armed the Houthis who have been shooting at civilian ships transiting through the straight of Hormuz, they’ve supplied Russia with the drones and arms for the Ukraine invasion, .. and the list goes on and on.

[mullingitover]

Yes, this is all true, but totally irrelevant to the question I was addressing.

Iran's system of government doesn't really directly relate to their geopolitical strategy. You can have the most awesome democratic system at home and commit absolutely evil atrocities abroad. Just ask Kissinger (or maybe Khamenei can ask him now?).

[_DeadFred_]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran

"is the de facto head of state and the highest political and religious authority of Iran (above the president). The armed forces, judiciary, state radio and television, and other key government organizations such as the Guardian Council and Expediency Discernment Council are subject to the supreme leader."

[CLPadvocate]

where did you get this bullshit from?

by every definition of democracy, Iran is very close to the worst end of the scale - just as an example https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/democracy...