Following the Islamic Revolution of Iran, contradictory political factions emerged that neither align with any established ideology nor possess exclusive theoretical foundations, as their formation centered around competing interests, resource allocation, and situational interpretations of Shia political Islam. This reality—coupled with incomplete imitation of Eastern-Western paradigms—has intensified paradigmatic ambiguity within Iran’s political structure. If sustained, it risks marginalizing the Islamic Revolution’s ideals or coercively steering society toward liberal-democratic models. Consequently, this study’s central question examines the coherent theoretical and ideological foundations of each faction within Shia political Islam. Employing Discourse Theory as its framework, the research first identifies four principal factions—Revolutionary, Conservative, Reformist, and Moderate—through Iran’s socio-political cleavages. It then argues that their operational failures stem from the absence of cohesive theoretical underpinnings in Iran’s political factionalism. In the absence of rigorous discourse formation, this deficit not only exacerbates theoretical chaos but also fosters political coalitions contingent upon shifting domestic/international conditions and immediate interests—rather than fidelity to consistent principles.