The Mystery of Fire and Authority: The Meaning of Burning the Islamic Republic’s Leader’s Image in Protest S. Rouzbeh ۱۴۰۴/۰۸/۱۵ Following the death of Omid Sarlak, a young man from Aligudarz, after a video was published showing him setting fire to Ali Khamenei’s image, a wave of anger and grief swept through the public. Reports said he was found hours later in his car with a gunshot wound. Local officials raised the possibility of suicide, but direct chants against the Islamic Republic’s leader were heard at his funeral, and new videos of people burning the leader’s image circulated widely. This event raises a central question: why do people burn a leader’s image, and what does this act signify? S. Rouzbeh – The death of Omid Sarlak, a young man from Aligudarz, after a video was published showing him setting fire to Ali Khamenei’s image, sparked a wave of anger and grief. According to reports, hours later he was found in his car with a gunshot wound. Local officials raised the possibility of suicide, but direct chants against the Islamic Republic’s leader were heard at his funeral, and new videos of people burning the leader’s image circulated widely. This event raises a central question: why do people burn a leader’s image, and what does this act signify? Illustration by S. Rouzbeh 1. The story of the recent protest wave In recent days, international media and social networks have reported that Omid Sarlak’s body was found in Aligudarz and that vehement chants were heard at his funeral. At the same time, a wave of videos showing the leader’s image being set on fire was recirculated. This chain of events turned image-burning into a central symbol of protest. By contrast, media close to the government emphasised the account of suicide and the uncertainty surrounding the case. 2. The symbolic meaning of image-burning Setting fire to the leader’s image undermines the sanctity of a symbol of power. It is akin to the tradition of iconoclasm (Iconoclasm), historically practised in religious and political contexts to diminish a sacred aura and evoke the “symbolic death of authority”. In the language of the social sciences, this act is a form of “symbolic punishment” that targets the prestige and standing of power in the public sphere. 2.1 Decommodifying power: This act seeks to lower the leader’s image from a “sacred and publicly respected commodity”, reproduced in government offices, religious sites and the media, to an “ordinary and destructible object”. This visual destruction neutralises the value invested in the symbol in the public mind and, in a sense, demonstrates the “ineffectiveness of the symbol” in advancing the government’s policies. 3. Psychological and social mechanisms 3.1 Moral anger and collective mourning: When a society experiences a suspicious death or systematic humiliation, simple, repeatable, performative acts can become rituals for releasing anger and mourning, rebuilding a sense of “us”. 3.2 Reclaiming agency: In an atmosphere of repression, through a risky but brief act, a citizen turns a sense of powerlessness into personal choice and shows others that choice is still possible. This is the meaning of protest rituals in the streets. 3.3 Costly signal of courage: When the risks of arrest and threats are high, carrying out such an act publicly signals that an individual or protest group is willing to bear the cost. This signal can encourage others to join. 3.4 Breaking preference falsification and triggering a cascade: In societies where many people conceal their true preferences, a conspicuous act can break the silence and create a “protest cascade”. This is the logic economists and sociologists have described in explaining how collective fear can collapse. 4. A global comparison Image-burning or effigy burning (Effigy Burning) has a global history as a tool of protest. From British traditions on Guy Fawkes Night to many contemporary protests in which effigies or symbols of leaders are burned, effigy-burning is a familiar way of expressing political anger. Recent examples also show how the burning of symbols at ceremonies or gatherings can become a site of confrontation between competing narratives. 5. Why this act spreads so quickly Setting fire to the leader’s image is simple, easy to record and easy to share. A few seconds of video can convey a protest message without the need for a lengthy statement, and can be replicated across platforms. As a result, image-burning becomes a visual language for “declaring non-compliance”, one that can more easily break through the barrier of censorship. 6. Legal risks and costs in Iran In Iran, “insulting the leader” is criminalised, and Article 514 of the Islamic Penal Code provides for a prison sentence of six months to two years. For this reason, image-burning is a high-risk act and may be treated as a pretext for security-related prosecution. Any fair analysis must acknowledge this reality. 7. What does this act say? 1) It declares the symbolic death of authority: the message is that authority is no longer sacred or natural. 2) It builds solidarity and collective courage: a visible ritual for breaking fear and making oneself seen. 3) It accelerates the protest cascade by lowering the psychological cost of others joining in. 4) It attracts public and media attention: a clear, controversial image that challenges the official narrative. Final conclusion Burning Khamenei’s image is a symbolic declaration against the aura of sanctity surrounding power, at a time when millions of his photographs are displayed in government offices, school textbooks and on the walls of cities. This radical act directly targets the ruling establishment’s symbolic capital. The main reason for its intensity is that a large part of the public has concluded that all the problems in their lives and in their children’s future are bound up with this autocratic leader and the power structure beneath him. By stirring moral outrage, creating a ritual of solidarity, sending a costly signal of courage and breaking the spiral of silence, this act becomes a visual language of protest in an age of censorship, showing that people have turned away not only from political authority but also from symbolic authority. This points to the repression of a people who can no longer contain their anger and are in a state of internal explosion. Source: https://srouzbeh.com/en/posts/archive-8ef53389-8d97-84cf-e89c-d874f8b8f47a Please credit the author and link to this edition.