THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION AND OIL In late 1978, workers in Iranian's oil sector went on strike, resulting in a 7% reduction in global crude production. Despite alternative producers increasing their supply, it still meant a loss of global crude supply of at least 4%. The price of crude oil went up from $13 per barrel in mid-1979 to $34 per barrel in mid-1980. The long term impact was a deregulation in the oil sector as governments scrambled to get new sources of crude online as quickly as possible. Large fields had already been discovered in the North Sea, Alaska, and Mexico in the 1960's. However it was the combination of of a religious revolution, nationalism, and domestic pressure that forced deregulation. Simply put, the Iranian revolution and the resulting oil shocks it caused have helped shaped the way oil markets operate today.

IRANIAN PROTESTS AND 40 DAY MOURNING CYCLE During the 1978-79 Iranian Revolution the protests, one of its unique characteristics was its incorporation of the Shia 40-day mourning cycle, as a commemoration for the dead become a political demonstration. Which resulted in a confrontation with the security services, leading to activists and protestors dying. And then another 40 day mourning cycle began. The first such demonstration in the 40-day cycle occurred in February 1978 to commemorate the Qom protesters killed by security forces, the second demonstration in March, then in May, June, and July. Protests escalated further after two incidents in August and September that involved high numbers of civilian deaths. The vast number of deaths in this recent round of protests started on January 8, and the 40 days from that date is the start of Ramadan.

The U.S has begun a bombing Iran. Explosions have bee reported taking place in Qom, Bandar Abbas, Tehran and Pakdasht.

1. Nobody cares if it was technically AI or not that took their job; 2. The wider economy is visibly screwed already.

Pivot to AI

The job losses are real — but the AI excuse is fake

Both of these statements are true: Across the whole US economy, there’s not really a visible effect of AI on hiring and job mix; Some sectors...

Vladimir Putin’s forces have advanced between 15 and 70 metres per day since early 2024, slower than many campaigns during the First World War Moscow’s offensive on Chasiv Yar which began in Feb 2024, has seen Putin’s forces advance at an average rate of 15 metres per day, slower than a snail.

The next naval war may be decided not by the ship that looks the most impressive, but by the side that can lose ships and keep fighting. The Defiant is clearly intended to be a tool of statecraft, a physical manifestation of American resolve reminiscent of the Great White Fleet of the early 20th Century. The Trump administration’s drive to revive domestic shipbuilding is admirable, but the plan calls for 250,000 new workers to be recruited in the next decade, a figure that is unlikely to be achieved

Navy Lookout - Independent Royal Navy news and analysis

The strategic logic and industrial peril of Trump’s battleship plan for the US Navy - Navy Lookout

The announcement of the Defiant-class battleship signals a sharp reorientation of US naval force structure, moving away from distributed lethality ...

idk, idc & idgaf.

“China takes advantage of our liberal institutions — and our comparatively open economies — only to undermine them.”

UnHerd

How China co-opted the green movement

Defense requires speed. Defense requires authority. Defense requires decisions that do not depend on a fresh round of consensus at the moment of crisis. The EU cannot do that. And it seems neither can NATO. It cannot be redesigned into that without becoming something else. For defense purposes, it is broken. The system invites international conflict because it signals hesitation. Adversaries do not need to guess. They can just download the meeting notes. NATO, it is now obvious, is the military version of the EU. Without the US at the helm, it’s just another deliberative body.

Who’s Responsible for European Security?

by Benjamin Cook (intro by Tom Cooper)

The Shah had his secret police, but you knew who they were. You could recognize them. Whereas Khomeini said, we are going to create a secret police of thirty million, which was more or less the whole population. An important part of this huge mistake [during the revolution] was the confusion around Khomeini as a religious leader. What many people missed was that he was not just religious. He had a political religious ideology that he wanted to impose. Khomeini had this whole theory of religion taking power over society. Khomeini attacked this idea of giving the women the right to vote, saying that women are supposed to stay at home. It was a misogynistic attack, but none of the left groups took it seriously, or even criticized him for that. He was always who he was. All the opposition groups were happy with him because he was radically against the Shah. There’s a common misconception that he was lying and got people to believe him. But we must take responsibility. We lied to ourselves.

How Iran’s Theocrats Allied With — and Then Crushed — the Left

Sociologist Chahla Chafiq was a 25-year-old Marxist activist during the 1979 Iranian revolution. Now in exile in France, she looks back on the tens...