Muhammad Idrees Ahmad writes:
The comments by Gabriel of JSF are based on a strawman argument… The debate is not divided as neatly between those supporting
the struggle in the streets of Tehran and others supporting their repression. The
struggle has been to support the demands for expanded freedoms of one
without prejudicing the democratic rights of the others. That is to
say, to support the emancipatory struggle of the protesters, which in
its essence is a civil rights struggle, while respecting the democratic
choice of the majority, which may indeed be Ahmadinejad.
Here is what I wrote in an introduction to an earlier post ("The Bomb-Iran contingent's newfound concern for the Iranian people"):
Let me once again make my position on the protests clear: I
wholeheartedly support them to the extent that they are engaged in an
emancipatory struggle to expand their rights and freedoms; I also
support their call for transparency, and I absolutely condemn the
despicable police brutality being unleashed against them. But that
doesn’t mean I would accept the disenfranchisement of the millions who
voted for Ahmadinejad just because they can’t Twitter or speak English.
Here's my demurral. Great movements are minority movements. The movement of the Jews to liberate their people from the Israel lobby is being led by a minority of Jews. Solidarity in Poland was also a minority. Anti-slavery in the U.S.–a minority. Minorities spearhead popular movements. It's one thing to question the election in Iran, as we questioned the 2000 American election, and another to support an insurgent movement because it stands for great principles, like, Don't flog bloggers.
I agree. And that is why I support the protests as a civil rights
struggle. And that should be crucial distinction: whether to think of
this as a battle over a stolen election, in which case the protesters
are on shakier ground, or to see this as an emancipatory struggle for
civil rights and expanded freedoms, in which case not only would they
not be encroaching on the demcratic rights of others (hence avoiding
the dangers of polarization), they may indeed bring many Ahmadinejad
supporters on their side. Because according to the New America
Foundation/TFT poll, the majority (supporters of both candidates) not
only supported reforms in general, they also wanted curbs on clerical
authority (they wanted the position of supreme leader subject to a
democratic vote, rather than selection).
One other thing. Supporting Ahmadinejad has become a cover for some on the left for bashing Israel, attacking the lobby, criticizing the role of Jewish power in the American establishment. I think that's dangerous.
This post is exactly why many claim that the Jewish obsession with "minorities" and "civil rights struggle" makes Jews as a group, rather than just Zionists, a negative influence. The other and the enemy are always clearly defined, whether Iran, Europe, the United States, or any other place is the topic. Everyone knows that Jews can be victims, but it is alarming how many Jews seem to believe that they can't possibly impact other groups in a negative manner. I freely admit that I'm no humanitarian, but it is funny to watch someone as wrapped up as Phil is with his own Jewishness delude himself about his true impact and possibly even his own motivations.
Support greater civil rights and electoral transparency in Iran without supporting neo-con and Israeli aggression against Iran. Both more civil rights and less US interference are needed in Iran. Americans should be protesting the presence of US special forces in Iran as energetically as Iranians protest their presidential election results, but Americans are cowards.
Congress approved the funds to infiltrate Iran a couple of years ago; congress is now supporting interference. Thus congress is doing exactly the opposite of what it has done all along in the I-P conflict. Obama may be ahead of congress both as to how to handle Iran effectively and how to handle Israel effectively; in the first case Obama has decided not to officially say much about the Iran government crackdown following the street protests over a stolen election, and in the case of the GAZA massacre, he chose to ignore it completely. In both cases, risking the appearance of insensitivity–hopefully because he has a long term plan to realistically effect change with Iran and Palestine that will have some real glue.
The real change Obama needs to effect is to US policy. Removing the US infiltrators from Iran, apologizing to the Iranians, paying reparations for whatever damages the infiltrators incurred and trying them for war crimes would be the best way to effect change with Iran. Blowing up mosques is the worst way to effect change with Iran.
I want to go on record. I deeply, deeply, deeply appreciate Mohhamad of Vancouver, the guy getting the PhD from NYU, and the Denver guy, for posting their passionate views of what they were sure I and others didn’t know about Iranian politics. All three of you underscored what I didn’t know and caused me to read subsequent docs and articles with a more critical eye. You are essential to my learning, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart. I mean this sincerely. I mean: really sincerely. Thank you.
M. Idress, I appreciate that you support the protesters demand for rights while also concerned that nobody is disenfrenchised. I agree with that, and I also hope that the protest develops in a manner that offers an inclusive platform, although I would reserve judgment about who is actually disenfrachised, i think we all know less than we think we know. I think you are naive however not to see that the argument forwarded by Petras and others in the name of "anti-imperialism," couched in simplistic class terms, that seek to discredit the protesters as a reactionary force that only servers U.S. Israeli interests by weakening the champion of the people, ahmadinejad. This language, which in a different way was also used by Khameini, (and which is the mirror image of the islamophobic rhetoric,) which paints the protesters as a foreign/Western force, i.e., traitors, that is opposed to Iranian/Islam, i.e. "the people," is rhetoric that legitimizes murder, and if you spend time on line you know that some are making that justification explicit and you also know that the possibility of this ending in mass murder is far from academic.
"Supporting Ahmadinejad has become a cover for some on the left for bashing Israel, attacking the lobby, criticizing the role of Jewish power in the American establishment. I think that's dangerous" BRILLIANT!
The sophistry of modern Americans conservatism equates defense against slander with support.
'Support the Iranian protesters even if they represent a minority ' doesnt sovereignty mean anything to you people? Here is what your predecessors did back in 1953: 'Stephen Kinzer’s book, All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, tells the story of the overthrow of Iran’s democratically-elected leader, Mohammed Mosaddeq, by the CIA and the British MI6 in 1953. The CIA bribed Iranian government officials, businessmen, and reporters, and paid Iranians to demonstrate in the streets.' http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_560... as for the iranians in the street…they are going to be in for abig surprise,when they find their protests end up being hijacked by the same people, who got rid of Mossadegh..
'Weiss adds: One other thing. Supporting Ahmadinejad has become a cover for some on the left for bashing Israel, attacking the lobby, criticizing the role of Jewish power in the American establishment. I think that's dangerous' did i miss somthing here phil? Are you the same Weiss who wrote that revealing statement? How is this dangerous? and in what way?
doesn't sovereignty mean anything to you people? So YOU are an Iranian patriot, and the protesters are then traitors or just bad Iranians who don't care as much as you do about Iranian sovereignty, which is of course your natural right to call them on that being that you are such a died in the wool Iranian. Aren't you a bit projecting? Are you sure you don't prefer the crowd at LGF? it's their territory. Try posting there and see if they don't immediately get it.
For those who are interested in hearing other perspectives besides the anti-government ones: An Exclusive Interview with a Pro-Ahmadinejad Cleric in Qom, Iran http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-excl...