The question is that can you realistically change the government even through protest? If yes then how will your policy differ compared to Khomeni and what structural reform you want to implement.
In Lebanon, it's almost there as the Parliament will soon fall due to losing a third of its members, so the presidency will fall. What is left is Hezbollah's militia to be disbanded, which most likely going to have some armed conflict.
In Iran, it depends, the government could fall due to massive uprisings as the movement is growing, but we will for sure see a number of revolutionary guards staying loyal and fighting any new government, so there will also be limited conflict taking place between them and the army.
Noting that the army in both Iran and Lebanon are with the people, not with the government.
And in both countries, the problem and the conflict comes from armed militias in the form of Hezbollah and the revolutionary guards.
And noting that the existence of both is counter to the constitution since in Lebanon, Hezbollah's militia should've began integration with the army as is the case with all militias in the post-civil war period, and in Iran, the revolutionary guards should've disbanded and began integrating with the general security forces of the country with the armed elements in the army and the security elements with the national security services.
(The revolutionary guards are the result of the Iran-Iraq war, and should've began integration afterwords).
The current living standard decrease is mostly related due to the sanctions.
The sanctions simply sped up the process. Corruption would've gotten the country there anyways.
The removal of these programs helping to improve living standards began before the sanctions, an example would be the various programs established in the late 90s to end homelessness across the nation by building state provided apartment complexes given out and maintained for free to homeless and poor people, those programs were being cut down all the way back since 2009 and became almost completely gone by 2016 with the excuse being funding the war in Syria and fighting ISIS.
So blaming everything on sanctions is nothing more than an excuse that doesn't stand ground in reality. The government has been underfunding various social programs and redirecting funds towards funding militias in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Libya, along with funding various political movements all across.
The oil sanctions doesn't justify the situation since the oil prices globally, which would remain low due to the oil boom in various countries (the US primarily), are not high enough to actually balance the budget between funding these programs and improving the country, all while funding all these arms outside.
I understand that Iranians want a better life but will the sanctions go away if you replace Khomeni and what are you willing to sacrifice to make them go away? As corrupt as the current regime is, it showed that it is not perhaps totally corrupt when the sanctions were not in place to the extent that they are now. Your industrial and resource base is kinda useless if you are under sanctions from US and de facto EU. Who will buy your stuff?
What sacrafices? It's all about diplomacy, and on the diplomatic front, the reformest movement has been pushing for peace with Saudi Arabia, the US, Israel, and Europe all the way back since the 90s.
And the people already have more than sufficient technical expertise to kick start an industrial revolution in the country.
Is stopping the nuclear program fine?
Nuclear weapons?yes, as they're counter to the principles and values we're pushing. Nuclear energy and research? No, but we already agreed on international monitoring and international cooperation nuclear tech research.
Removing support for Yemen and Hezbollah?
Hezbollah will fall before the clerical government.
And Yemen is already going through a peace process to establish a federal system in the country, the only obstacle is the Iranian pressure, once gone the houthis will have no choice but to be active in the peace process.
But what if they ask to privatise the oil sector?
Wont happen, but oil is an ineffective sector to rebuild the economy due to its prices as we're seeing in Venezuela, Russia, and Saudi Arabia; As such, once the industrial sectors are running (The basis already exist, only needing an expansion in the consumer goods part), then oil will become an even more minor part of the Iranian economy, meaning it's not going to be a problem negotiating on it.
Further noting that the Arab parts of Iran, Al Ahvaz which most of the oil is in, are also demanding full autonomy, which are part of the decentralized federal structures based on autonomy and self-governance in the various sections of Iran, that the movement is pushing for.
So even if oil came on the negotiating table, it won't be part of the central government's resources but rather part of the non-Iranian governments inside any future federation that has full self-governance due to them being mainly remnants of the empire and not an actual part of the country.
You can expect that the Arabs, Kurds, Balochis, Azaris, and many others to have full self-governance and be only part of Iran in terms of the army and intelligence services and as trading partners, but not under the same economic management or policy.
Basically, multiple systems, one country, similar to how Hong Kong was in China, that would be the state of Iran under any new system established since those are foundational demands to solve the long-running issues and disputes going on since the fall of the empire.