Your opinion of what's going on in Iran

[OmahaBlueDog]

One segment of the population seems transfixed by the events in Tehran, while another segment seems removed from it. Where do you come down?

[rug]

1. I'm stll looking for the left in all of this.

[rurallib]

3. What? Can you explain please?

[rug]

4. Mousavi still pays allegiance to Khomeni.

While there are tremnendous protests against a stolen election, Mousavi doesn't represent the left at all. I son't see a coherent movement.

[tsuki]

5. Yes, Mousavi is part of the same party. Just like Dubcek was

a part of the same Communist Party that Novotny belonged to.

[Spider Jerusalem]

7. Fucksake.

That's an enormously stupid, fuckwitted thing to say. Why the hell does it matter if there's a 'left' or not? Left/right (in the terms of Western politics) aren't the issue in Iran; what is at issue is that a significant number of the Iranian people feel betrayed by their government, feel that their votes have been stolen, and that the small concessions to democratic rights they have have been violated. Somehow I fail to see why there even needs to be a 'leftist' position (although Mousavi as a reformist is a more liberal choice than Ahmadenijad) for one to sympathise with those Iranians who want their voice heard and their votes properly counted.

[Swede]

9. Couldn't have said it better.

[sodom]

19. really, is the foul language appropriate

doesnt that type of response violate the forum rules? it will be interesting to see if the moderators allow this to slip by.


suggesting that mousavi is a liberal is kind of funny, since he was the one who executed thousands of people for membership or association with leftist and liberal political parties.

[Joe the Revelator]

21. We're (mostly) adults here. As I'm against censorship in all forms, the word "fuck" does not bother

me and if you're a mature adult, it shouldn't bother you.

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. No, it doesn't violate the forum rules.

I've been a member of this forum for quite some time now; I'm well aware of what does and doesn't violate the rules, thanks. And I didn't say that Mousavi was a liberal, did I? I said that as a reformist, he's more liberal in comparison to Ahmadenijad (which in the context of Iranian politics is the only useful comparison). Reading comprehension: FAIL.

[sodom]

42. content and civility?

i would have to disagree with your assessment of the rules of the forum. telling someone thats a "fuckwitted thing to say" doesnt exactly seem to jive with those rules.

the only reason i pointed it out was because ive noticed posts with unpopular opinions that have used inflammatory language get deleted, while posts with inflammatory language that express opinions that may be considered popular do not.

there seems to be a double standard. in the past where ive expressed an unpopular opinion ive had posts deleted for solely using the word fuck. and i really havnt made that many posts, so it really seems like this is the rule and not the exception. there just seems to be some inconsistency with the way this forum is moderated.

and as far as your post...you got me, i knew what you meant when i first read it. it just pissed me off.

the way i view it, unless the iranian people as a whole adopt a cultural view that doesnt result in the oppression of women, gays, and minorities either political or ethnic i really dont care in the slightest about their plight. and it really bothers me when i see americans who are vehemently against ahmadinejad, for good reason, supporting the iranian protesters who are for mousavi. if you were a liberal or a democrat...leftist ,in any sense of the word, under mousavi previous regime, he would have had you jailed and executed.

[WillyT]

27. LOL !!! - Language Complaints...

From a person named "sodom"???

:rofl:

Thanks for the chuckle.

:hi:

[rug]

25. That's an enormously stupid, fuckwitted thing to say.

Of course it makes a difference. For one thing, without some coherent organization and goal, the government will kill hundreds of protesters for nothing. Feeling betrayed by the government and massing in the streets for what you cluelessly call a more liberal choice will do nothing to eliminate the theocratic, oil cartel controlled government that benefits propertied interests both east and west. Tienanman Square was larger and lasted longer with no lasting result. Show me some goal, some coherent entity to achieve that goal and I'll gladly say this is more than a romantic (western) democratic event cheered on from your keyboard.

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. The coherent goal is pretty obvious

Perhaps you've not been paying attention to the demands of the protestors?

They want a legitimate counting of their votes, or a new election. This seems like a coherent goal to me. Coherent organisation? There are the opposition parties, who have presented a united front on the issue; noted religious scholars, who have stood with the opposition...really, how you can say there's NOT a coherent organisation or goal is a bit puzzling. And I'm not saying it's romantic. It's not. It's bloody and ugly and violent, but for Iran it may also be necessary (remember what Gandhi said about the impossibility of peaceful revolution leading to the inevitability of violent revolution).

And, I'm also talking in terms of Iranian politics here; a reformist like Mousavi, who is not by any means a 'leftist' as we in the West would recognise the term, is still, within that context, a more liberal choice than Ahmadenijad. Incremental change from within is to be welcomed, I should think, because it's an absurdist fantasy to think that anything like open secular Western liberalism is suddenly going to take root in Iran; you'd have to be deluded to expect it.

[Oregone]

33. Thats a useless goal for anyone with half a brain

"They want a legitimate counting of their votes, or a new election."

1) The election is symbolic. The Supreme Leader has the constitutional right to overrule any voters results.

2) The election is symbolic. All the choices are bad choices.

The election is fucking irrelevant because their government sucks. If a bunch of kids are dying because some movement wants a new election, and not a new government, than its a shitty goal, as judged by this Westerner

[Spider Jerusalem]

37. Since you aren't Iranian, then it's not really your place to say whether it's a worthy goal or not.

Several million Iranians seem to think it is. To the point where they're putting their lives on the line for it. And the past few days have seen Khameini seriously undermining his own authority and credibility by open partisanship on behalf of Ahmadenijad; the endgame isn't yet in sight in Iran, and it may well lead to a new government.

[Oregone]

38. Nor yours (or anyone here)

Revolution for the sake of revolutions isn't automatically wonderful.

And BTW, I do not necessarily agree that the goal you stated is in fact the real one. That was merely my response to the one you posed (which to this irrelevant Westerner, makes little sense, since the government is the problem, not the catalystic election).

[sandnsea]

35. Distinctly different opinion

than "looking for the left". I too hope the Iranians find a means of truly removing all the oppressors and that all this death and mayhen isn't for nothing. That doesn't mean they need to have the equivalent of Huge Chavez for there to be progress over what they've got.

[EFerrari]

20. We'll know more if this core group is joined by others.

I don't see a movement either but then, it's hard to tell what you're looking at.

[Posteritatis]

40. If it was unambiguous conservatives protesting a stolen election I'd back their protests too (nt)

[Zynx]

44. Left and right around the world do not conform to U.S. sensibilities.

For that I am actually thankful.

[Aloha Spirit]

10. They're not allowed to have a left.

[Odin2005]

18. Politics is not a simple "left-right" spectrum, and it is even less so in non-Western countries.

[rug]

26. A "left-right" spectrum is not a simple Bush/Obama electoral choice.

It is rooted in economic and state power. Of course Iran is part of it.

[Odin2005]

41. I disagree. Left and Right are relative terms.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8388877

Since political attitudes will shift over time, and generally in reaction to previous generations, the relative weighting of the various political archetypes should change over time. The question is, in what way?

It is my contention that, in order to maintain cohesion, a society will only conflict along a single axis at a time. Along a different axis, 90 degrees to that of the conflict, there will be a strong bias toward one side. For example, if the main conflicts are lower left versus upper right, then there will be a bias toward either the upper left or lower right with the remaining position being relegated to the political fringe. Sometimes the conflict axis could be orthogonal to the chart and sometimes diagonal.

Thus, at any given moment there is an "arc of respectability" among political opinions that stretches from one end of the chart to the other with a bend that curves toward the bias (and that bias defines the political center). This arc also has recently corresponded to what people generally mean when they talk about "left" versus "right."

Our current definitions of "left" and "right" today are partly a relic of the ideological alignment of the country just after the Great Depression and WW2...



and partly a description of the ideological alignment of the Western World following the political movements of the 60s and 70s...



Note the clockwise shift, resulting in the "right" becoming more "authoritarian" and the left becoming more "libertarian". "Radical" Greens on one end and "Theo-Conservative" Christian Conservatives on the other, Paleo-Conservatives like Pat Buchanan becoming relegated to "curmudgeon" status.

by 2030 the alignment will shift to a libertarian-authoritarian axis with a Progressive center.






"left" and "right" are relative terms.

[Trajan]

22. Humanity should trump party ...

Right ?

[rug]

28. Of course. And the party that best serves humanity is from the left.

[BlooInBloo]

2. I'm watching as best I can. To hell with the rest of y'all.

[jschurchin]

6. I am hopeful for

the Iranian people. However in the final analysis, it is their country and their fight for a honest election.
It really is none of our business.

[Oregone]

8. Brave Fight for Freedom! Put Mousavi in charge of the repressive theocracy!

[ThomWV]

11. A theocracy is being shown to be a fraud, in place only by tyrannical imposition

[CaliforniaPeggy]

12. I chose "other."

A combo of a brave fight, and more chaos in that part of the world. It makes me sad to see it.

[OmahaBlueDog]

13. My Dear California Peggy

It is so nice to run into you outside the friendly confines of the lounge, where we are usually discussing poetry.

I am vexed by this. Part of me really hopes that a more just and outward looking Iran could emerge from this situation, but another part of me is just "over" anything having to do with the Middle East.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

15. It is nice to talk with you here!

And I understand all too well just what you're saying. Is it ever going to get better? I want it to...and I want the awful news to STOP.

[zeemike]

14. Other...it is just some of the same

That has been going on for centuries.
Fueled by hope for change the people revolt against an oppressive government.

Our own country was created in that manner. And a few years later, probably encouraged by our success, the French did the same.
Standing up to power can be contagious.

[Odin2005]

16. Ahmadinutjob and the Supreme Looser have been shown to be electrion-rigging tyrants.

And the people of Iran aren't gonna take it anymore.

[OKNancy]

17. I think it's gone past just an election protest

Shame on people who picked "we have our own problems". Even though we can't do much sitting here at our computers, at least we can care. We can think about it, talk about it with our friends and relatives. My conservative Mother-in-law has a whole new view about Iran now.. due to watching CNN and talking with my husband.

[ThomWV]

24. Not only do I think you are right I also think its the inevitable end of the current Theocracy

It might be replaced with another, but they have gone to far to go back on both sides. The families and friends of the dead and wounded won't forget and the thugs will feel empowered and not only continue the violence they will increase it. When the "anti's" have nowhere to hide and have to fight then the Government will crumble. The Supreme Leader is a fraud who is relying on the street mobs to do what his military will not - keep him in power. It may work for a little while but not long.

[Bjorn Against]

30. It is a brave fight for freedom and I applaud the protesters but also worry about the US role

It is great to see the protesters trying to take their country back, but it does bother me greatly to think about how the neo-cons in the US are going to take advantage of this situation. I know there are many neo-cons rubbing their hands together in the hopes that this will lead to a war in Iran which will allow them to get their troops in to steal Iran's oil. The protests are good for democracy, but the neo-cons plans are very undemocratic.

[Doctor_J]

31. A. The sad part is that the world used to look to the US for this sort of

demonstration of democracy. Now we're in a fascist/religious state and fucking Iran is the beacon of hope.

[Joe the Revelator]

34. Thats not really true. Iran's last revolution was 30 years ago, we've gone 230 without one

France has had more revolutions in that time frame than us. We're a relatively apathetic culture.

[The empressof all]

32. This is not a left/right either or situation.

This is a giant baby step towards moving away from Theocracy. Defying the Supreme Leader and exercising personal autonomy is a major statement for the Iranian people. Those Mullahs must be stunned and amazed.

[me b zola]

36. Other

I really don't know what is going on. Of course it is wonderful for people to stand up against brutal police forces to say that they want more freedoms. But I keep having a nagging feeling of Cheney's silent hand creating chaos and making an extremely difficult situation in the ME even more difficult for President Obama to work for peace. I'm just watching, hoping for the best.

[billyoc]

39. lol @freedom.

[Douglas Carpenter]

43. kicked