TEHRAN – The Hoover Institution, affiliated with Stanford University in the United States, has been one of the main centers of anti-Iranian discourse production in recent decades. 

Since the Cold War, this think tank has had the mission of shaping U.S. policy toward independent countries through its analyses and recommendations. Its recent report on the cultural revolution and the leadership of Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei also falls exactly within this framework: portraying the ideology of the Islamic Revolution as ineffective and attempting to depict the thoughts of Iran’s Leader as irrelevant.

Yet, this report is less a scientific analysis than it is an unintended admission of the West’s fear of the Islamic Republic’s soft power. The authors try to depict a crisis-stricken image of Iran, while developments inside the country, in the region, and even in the West itself show another reality: the Islamic Revolution and its leadership remain inspirational and the standard-bearers of resistance against domination and Zionism.

The redefining of independence

The Islamic Revolution of 1979 was not merely a governmental change; it was the rebirth of an Iranian-Islamic identity that had been marginalized for decades under Western dependency. The Shah’s blind imitation of the West dragged national culture into decadence and consumerism. With Imam Khomeini’s leadership, the Iranian people broke these chains and redefined independence not only in politics but also in culture and thought.
Imam Khomeini warned from the very beginning that if culture did not achieve independence, political and economic independence would not endure either. For this reason, he placed cultural revolution at the forefront of priorities. Ayatollah Khamenei has continued this path, repeatedly stressing that “culture is the foundation of everything” and that if society’s culture is not reformed, politics and the economy will also be damaged.

Contrary to Western propaganda, this outlook is not about suppressing culture but about liberation from intellectual and cultural colonialism—the same colonialism that through media, universities, entertainment industries, and consumerism has captured the lifestyles of nations.

The Hoover analysis is filled with contradictions. In one section, it claims that the ideology of the Islamic Republic holds no appeal for the majority of the people, yet it simultaneously warns that Iran’s Leader, through vast cultural institutions and “hidden” budgets, is exporting this ideology to the West. If the ideology of the Islamic Republic has truly failed and is ineffective, then why such significant concern and warning?

Another example involves the distortion of the Leader’s metaphor about “weeding out.” In reality, this expression refers to cultural purification and safeguarding values, a process undertaken by every political system. In the U.S. and Europe, the slightest criticism of Zionism or opposition to global capitalism is quickly censored. When French police attack anti-war demonstrations or American media suppresses news of Israeli crimes, is this not also a form of “cultural weeding”? The Hoover Institution’s contradictions reveal that its real problem lies not with the method but with the very principle of Iran’s cultural independence.

What cultural revolution has got Iran 

Over the past four and a half decades, Iran's cultural revolution has yielded significant achievements and milestones across various sectors.

1. Science and technology: Iran today ranks among the top 15 countries in global scientific production. In fields such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, stem cells, nuclear medicine, and defense industries, it is among the leaders in the region and the world. These achievements are not the result of imports but of nurturing a young, committed, and self-confident generation. 

Despite all sanctions and pressures, Iran’s universities and research centers have succeeded in localizing the cycle of knowledge and technology production.

2. The consolidation of Resistance: The Islamic Revolution has transformed the discourse of resistance against colonialism and Zionism into an inspiration for other nations. 

Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hashd al-Shaabi in Iraq, Ansarullah in Yemen, and other regional Resistance movements are all heirs to the cultural legacy of the Islamic Revolution. These groups are not merely military movements but embody a new cultural and ideological identity that the Islamic Revolution taught them: independence, dignity, and steadfastness against great powers.

3. Islamic awakening and Beyond West Asia: The waves of Islamic Awakening in the 1980s and 1990s were inspired by Iran’s Islamic Revolution. Later, this awakening could also be seen in justice-seeking movements in Latin America, where independence-seeking leaders such as Chávez and Morales openly referred to Iran and its leadership as a model for resistance. 

Even in Europe and the U.S., movements such as “Occupy Wall Street” and anti-capitalist protests unconsciously fed off that same global wave of justice-seeking ignited by the Islamic Revolution.

4. Global support for Palestine: In recent years, especially after the Gaza wars, massive demonstrations in support of Palestine have emerged in Europe and the U.S. Scenes where Iranian flags and portraits of Ayatollah Khamenei are held by young Europeans and Americans highlight Iran’s position as the standard-bearer of resistance against oppression. This is a phenomenon that even Western media have been unable to hide: Iran has become a symbol of global resistance.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s personal influence 

Ayatollah Khamenei is not merely a political leader; he is an intellectual, cultural, and ideological authority for an entire community. His charismatic personality has extended beyond Iran’s borders. His steadfastness against Western and Zionist hegemony is the main reason behind the anger of think tanks like Hoover.

This charismatic influence is especially visible among younger generations. Contrary to Western assumptions that Iran’s Generation Z is detached from the Revolution, recent events proved otherwise. Young people—with appearances different from traditional norms—showed devotion to the Leader at critical moments. After the 12-day war between the Zionist regime and Iran, a wave of solidarity and unity swept the country; young people expressed their support for the Resistance by reposting images of the Leader on social media.

In the Islamic world as well, Ayatollah Khamenei is recognized as the “spiritual leader of resistance.” His influence can be compared with charismatic leaders of history like Gandhi in India or Nasser in Egypt, with the difference that he has managed to extend this influence beyond national borders and turn it into a global movement. This unique position is what forces institutions like Hoover to attempt character assassination through biased reports.

Over the past decades, the West has spent billions of dollars on cultural projects against Iran—from satellite TV channels and media campaigns to economic sanctions and infiltration of cyberspace. But what was the result? Iranian society continues to insist on independence and justice, and instead of surrendering, the younger generation has turned toward resistance.

At the regional level too, U.S. and Israeli projects have failed one after another. The occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan not only failed to establish lasting dominance but also strengthened the discourse of resistance. Today, not only in the Middle East but also in Latin America and Africa, anti-American and anti-Zionist voices are louder. All of these are reflections of the Islamic Revolution’s soft power.

The Hoover report repeatedly talks about freedom and democracy, but why does it remain silent about widespread repression in the West? Why, when American students demonstrate against the Gaza war, are they met with police violence? Why do major Western media censor the slightest criticism of Israel?

This is the cultural hypocrisy of the West: freedom for themselves, repression for others. While Iran, despite its internal challenges, has managed to preserve its political and cultural independence and not allow its values to be sacrificed for foreign interests.

Ultimately, the Hoover report is less a scientific critique than an unintended admission of the power of the Islamic Revolution and Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership. If Iran’s cultural revolution were truly ineffective, there would be no need for this volume of analyses, warnings, and counter-budgets. The reality is that the West fears Iran’s cultural influence and the charisma of its Leader.

Today, the Islamic Revolution is the global standard-bearer of resistance against oppression and Zionism. Ayatollah Khamenei is not only the political leader of Iran but also the intellectual and cultural authority of generations worldwide who seek justice and freedom. This reality paves the way for a bright future for Iran and free nations, and ensures the West’s inevitable defeat.