Ba'athism - please explain

How does it relate to social rights, secularism and women’s rights ? Now and in the past ?
For example, is it true that even under Saddam’s Ba’ath party, women had more chance of a career than they do now ?

The Ba’athist regime was more secular, certainly, than the Iraqi governments post Gulf War II. The current regime (and regimes since the US invasion) have all embraced Sharia law (which is favored by an overwhelming majority of the population BTW…this isn’t something being imposed on them, but something they choose, seemingly). There is, as usual, a Wiki article on this:

Is that more or less what you were looking for?

The Ba’ath Party in Syria was founded by the Syrian philosopher Michel Aflaq, a Greek Orthodox Christian and proponent of Arab nationalism, along with a fellow Syrian politician Salah al-Din Bitar. The Ba’athist movement promotes “secular Arab nationalism, Arab socialism, pan-Arabism, and militarism”.

The late Hafez al-Assad, who seized power in Syria in a military coup in 1970, declared the Ba’ath party “the leader of state and society”, although he did constitutionally establish that the President of the state must be a Muslim. His son and successor Bashar al-Assad is the regional secretary of the Syrian branch of the Ba’ath Party.

The Iraqi wing of the Ba’athists entered on their long period of dominance in Iraq under Saddam Hussein in 1968.

So it’s not surprising that anti-secularism is a core feature of Islamist insurgency in Iraq and Syria. The more nationalist/secularist/socialist Ba’ath ideology facilitated easier coexistence for Muslims and non-Muslims, along with more openness to modernist ideas such as rights for women, etc. But that meant that modernist ideas in the eyes of many Syrian and Iraqi Muslims became tainted by association with all the oppression and tyranny inflicted by Ba’athist dictatorships.

This perspective from a Great Debates thread of 2002 may be of interest.

Iran was also more secular under the Shah. Similar forces and dynamic to what happened in Iraq.

There’s some good stuff there XT thanks.

WikiP says

France struggles to ban religious clothing even now.

I get the impression that the many in the West think the Middle East has always been entirely populated by medieval hillbilly rugheads forcing their women into chadors, because the news is dominated by the Taliban and ISIS, which isn’t actually the case and modernism had considerable foothold in many places.

I had absolutely no idea about the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran. This action gets absolutely no attention in British culture. No documentaries, no war films, nothing.

Shah or no shah, chador or no chador, Iranian women are a goddamned juggernaut of progress and learning.

Iranian “literacy rate for women at age groups 15-19 to 25-29” increased dramatically between 1966 and 1996, i.e. under both the Shah, Khomeini and Khamenei (source).

Indeed, there are now more women studying at Iranian universities than there are men:

That goes against the stereotype of Islamic societies - although obviously it’s not by itself a sign of social equality.
Could be part of a global trend, lemme see…

http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Pages/women-higher-education.aspx

On paper, their platform actually sounds quite progressive, but they didn’t put in safeguards to prevent a dictator from seizing power and bringing in a reign of terror. In that sense, they got what they deserved.

The grapes of Ba’ath…

That is awesome, but really this is not really strange at all. In many countries women outnumber men in higher education. To use a regional example, Saudi Arabia.

https://www.saudiembassy.net/about/country-information/education/higher_education.aspx
So my point is this is not unique to Iran and Iranian women.