The world's most stable de facto one-party state is not in the third world but in the first world: Japan.
The range of candidates disqualified on account of lack of money in the USA is wider than the range of candidates disqualified on account of insufficient Islamic credentials in Iran.
Politics in Iran, even as it is, seems to me to be much livelier than in Japan or the USA.
There are Iranians in Iran who feel that electoral politics doesn't matter, and they boycott and argue for a referendum on the Constitution. The boycotters have yet to win a big enthusiastic following for their idea, mainly because they are out of touch with -- or rather opposed to -- Iran's working people and their concerns, and their boycott merely helps the Leader:
<blockquote>The boycotters, the civilized ones, believe that the only path to change in Iran is through a general referendum on the constitution of the Islamic Republic. When asked how this might be possible, regime-change advocates outline a program of civil disobedience which, if massive, would coerce the ruling coterie to relinquish its power and accept the terms and results of the referendum. Unfortunately, tark-e `adat mujeb-e maraz-ast, old habits die hard. One of the principal shortcomings in Iranian political culture is the lack of enduring, persistent, and patient mobilization from below. The old political left (Islamic or secular) subscribed to a Jacobin form of politics, passionately believing that social change could only be realized top-down by decapitating the state's head. While many boycotters don't endorse violence, they still hold out hope for the single blow, the referendum, that would terminate the Islamic regime. ("The Donkey and the Date: Iran's Upcoming Municipal Elections," 9-10 December 2006, <http://www.counterpunch.com/ghamari12092006.html>)</blockquote> -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>