I agree with the concept, but I think "iron fist" may be too strong. I think humans need guidelines, discipline and then punishment if they can't live a correct life. They also need forgiveness once they acknowledge the error of their ways. Perhaps we are all teenagers all the time -- until we grow up, of course.
I've never been remotely interested in any form of totalitarianism, but, I understand some of the reasons for conversion. Western culture detests men, at least heterosexual men. The high number of female converts is both surprising and intriguing to me. I know that many of the technological advances of the west are incredible, but the self-absorbed epicureanism of the west is ultimately unfulfilling. I still think of Andy Warhol as the ultimate 20th Century man. He was rich, and indulged in every sensual vice, bedding both male and female celebrities, followed by an adoring throng, and ultimately, he was totally bored. Life, to him, seemed to be a mildly amusing television program. There was probably nothing he found worth fighting for, or living for.
I agree, and I definitely don't mean 'anarchy' when I say 'freedom'.
My point was that while most Americans are, theoretically, glad that they're in a country that is free, many would rather have a benevolent guiding force organize their lives and the lives of everyone else. Real freedom is scary, messy, and unpleasant, and I think that, push comes to shove, a large segment of humanity feels they aren't up to it. Others feel that they know better, and that their views should be mandatory and undebatable.
I suppose my point is that individuals anywhere may be ready for freedom, but societies need to be raised for it. A society lacking a firm belief in the inherent supeiority of liberty tends to gravitate towards strong leaders or visionary religions.