Agha Ashtar,
If you don’t mind I’ll change my style of response a bit. Instead of using quotes, I’ll put what you said in a different color for the sake of fluidity.
If you truly believe that the IRI officials see no conflict between being a Moslem and an Iranian; that is encouraging. For me though, the jury is still out on this one.
I agree. But I don’t see what this has to do with religion having a purely personal goal as opposed to both personal and social.
Ashtar jon, the point is you can not institutionalize a religion! A people may choose NOT to be religious! Why does that have to be the tenets of a government? What other than 24 hour “Amreh Beh Maaroof and Nahyeh Az Monkar” CAN a religious government do? This would be like having a government in Iran that passed laws designed to promote our pure Persian-ness while discouraging our religious side! There’s an immense gift in Islam and we’re still stuck in teaching and learning its alefba!!
The correct statement should read: “then IRI IS in fact forcing something onto SOME people!”
But that is the nature of all human societies who live by certain rules. There will always be some people who will feel forced to live by the rules of others. Whether a nudist woman who is forced to wear clothing in the US or a liberal woman who is forced to cover her hair in Iran, both are people who have something forced onto them.
Fine, if it’s rule of law you want, I’m with you. But, then let’s make sure EVERYONE follows the rules! Let’s keep the government accountable for what it does as well. Let’s get rid of the Evin prison and stop the beatings and killings of young kids like Baatebi. Let’s also stop IRI’s intimidation and imprisonment of writers like Ganji! While we’re at it, why not also bring to justice those responsible for Dr. Forouhar’s murder and try those who killed Zahra Kazemi!
The liberal democracy is all nice and dandy for countries like UK that are as you say: “powerful, wealthy, and secure…” And they will practice it only so long as they don’t feel any inside or outside threat to their basic constitution, government, culture, and way of life. The very second that they feel a threat from any place all these nice and happy slogans go out the window. You don’t have to go far in history to see the example. Just look at US and Patriot Act or Bush eavesdropping on its own citizens or monitoring what books they read. And this is by the world’s only superpower and the champion and model of freedom and democracy when it feels a little threat from a bunch of ragtag towel-heads half way across the world hiding in caves.
I share your view of how the West would react if faced with what Iran is facing. But, that doesn’t excuse Bush and Blair’s behavior. And, neither should we aspire to be like them. We may not be able to be a Swedish liberal democracy, but we CAN be a uniquely Iranian one, only if our government could respect the rule of law you mentioned before.
And you expect a liberal democracy in an Iran? A country that is filled with dissident groups that constantly want to overthrow any government that doesn’t have them in power, is rampant with separatist groups, has immediate neighbors that are itching to take its territories, has distant neighbors who can’t wait to bomb the shit out of it, and then has the world’s powers who have their eyes set on its natural resources.
A liberal democracy does not have to be wimpy democracy. A government replete with people’s love and respect has a much better chance of keeping the separatist movements at bay and aggressors out. A people’s love is stronger than fear, and respect much more lasting that force.
The reason that Liberal Democracy doesn’t work in a country like Iran is not because of “Islam” in Islamic Republic. There was no “Islam” in Pahlavi’s Iran but it too had to resort to tough restrictions and limit certain civil rights to be able to keep a government together long enough to do some good for the country.
Agreed! Shah’s monarchy was no Sweden either. Repression does not discriminate across ideologies. It has always been cynical thirst for power that permeates such behavior. But, that does not mean we should not aim for it!
In fact, given all the threats that Iran faces (which I would argue that no other country in the world faces as many threats as Iran does), I would argue that it is in relative terms and by comparison the most liberal and democratic country in the world. You impose only half the threats that Iran faces on any Western European country and I bet they would force their citizens to get permission to talk much less be as vocal and politically active as they are in Iran.
I’m not so sure about that. Freedom can be viewed in relative terms, but that still does not excuse IRI’s behavior in killing journalists and beating students. We’re not, or should not be, aiming for the lowest common denominator.
Let those who constantly criticize IR practice what they preach and stop advertising their own religion. If they can live with not advertising their religion I assure you they won’t have any problem living in Iran.
My religion is Islam and I’d like to criticize IRI. Should I have been arrested and jailed if I lived in Iran?
Both have to some extent. But the real culprits have been other issues and factors such illiteracy, foreign intervention, etc.
Illiteracy and foreign intervention have played their parts, but if we’re going to criticize the people of Iran for their lack of appreciation for whomever in power, then let’s also lay some blame on the people running the country. You can’t say people are this way and that, all the while forgetting about the government’s role in this backwardness.
I don’t want to spend too much time defending the Mullahs. Like any other group there are good ones and there are bad ones. But throughout history there have been Mullahs who were the champions of mobilizing people to pick up the Iranian flag in the name of Islam where the “non-religious” people dropped it. From “nehzat e sar beh dArAn” to “delirAn e tangestAn” to “the constitutional revolution” to even Mossadegh’s drive to nationalize oil the Mullahs were behind mobilizing people where others failed. As for Mossadegh, please don’t try to twist the history by shifting the blame away from the foreign-backed coup. The only way Tabatabaei facilitated Mossadegh’s fall was by withdrawing his support for him which goes to show the Mullah’s importance in Mossadegh succeeding in the first place.
It’s easy to paint everyone with the same brush from decades ago but the real art which require the same patience that reform takes is separating the good from the bad.
Agreed. But, it seems to me, all the good ones either get killed or marginalized. We saw Ayatollah Taleghani die – and many say killed – we saw Ayatollah Shariatmadari told to remain quite, and witnessed Ayatollah Montazeri completely marginalized.
And, now, we see Ahmadinejad and gang have banned Karrbi’s Saba TV based out of UAE. Mr. Karrubi has this to say in this regard: “Shall, anyone who wants to create a radio or tv station anywhere in the world, be in conformity with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic?”
Giving them more rights is like working for “child-labor” laws or “women’s rights”. It requires working within the framework of the law and doesn’t require a whole new revolution and regime change.
No one is advocating another revolution, just accountability from our own government. The fights to enact child labor laws or granting women to vote took place when children working for 12 hours a day and women not voting was the culture of the time. Are you saying it is in IRI’s culture to marginalize minorities? Other than being a repressive policy, don’t you think that is a dangerous attitude to have when, as you said yourself, Iran is rife with separatist movements?
Again, I don’t understand what it means to “side with ANY Moslem against his own country-man.” The Iraqis were Muslims but Khalkhali sided with the Iranian-Armenian soldiers who were fighting for Iran.
Choosing a non-Iranian Muslim over a non-Muslim Iranian or vise versa for me has to do with who is right and who is wrong in the specific issue.
Again, I don’t understand what it means to choose Islam over Iran or choose Iran over Islam.
In a fight for survival, it is debatable whether Khalkhali backed the Iranian-Arminian soldier out of patriotism or out of a need for someone to defend the system of rule he was a part of.
There’s a reason that in most nations you have to have been born in that country to be the president of the country. The implicit, and explicit, principle is this: an Iranian native can always be presumably entrusted to defend Iran’s inetersts more so than a foreigner. THIS is why loyalty to an Iranian MUST ALWAYS come before loyalty to a non-Iranian, regardless of the religion.
With all due respect, and I don't mean to include you in this by any means (in fact I'm probably included in this), all these exiled dissidents who keep saying Iran, Iran and claim that they would choose Iran over Islam in a heartbeat, have already chosen a comfortable life, opportunity to go to a Western university, and even the opportunity to show their hair in public over living in Iran. They take sides with foreign politicians against an Iranian president. And they choose non-Iranian music, dress, and culture over Iranian ones any day. So excuse me if I don’t understand what it means when people say choosing Iran over Islam or vise versa.
No Offence taken my man. But, I wonder, would those living comfortably in America not put their talents to good use inside Iran if they were given the opportunity? I think the tide was indeed turning with Kahatmi’s reforms.Bu Majlesseh Khobregan and the IRI establishment time and again rebuffed attempts by the people to embrace their government in return for some basic freedoms and the rule of law.
I agree. There is no where in IRI constitution that says otherwise. If this idea is not properly practiced or implemented then all it takes is voting for people who will respect that idea. Don’t tell me it’s not possible because Khatami showed that it is possible to get elected twice and appoint people who at least partly believe in that idea. His reform could have continued if enough people had opted to be patient and vote for someone like Morin instead of listening to the advice of exiled dissidents who can’t even put their own affairs in order. LOL
You get no arguments from me there. Anyone who did not vote only has himself to blame for Mr. Ahmadinejad’s policy of shooting form the hip.
But, let’s be honest my man, how many times did Khatami fail the people when he should have made a stand against the establishment?
Your novel idea was put into practice 26 years ago when the great majority opted to choose Islamic Republic constitution and government. But the same people whom you’re asking to be allowed to have their voices heard today opted not to listen to the voices of people and have done everything in their power for the past 26 years to silence those voices.
Ashtar jon, are you genuinely telling me that you don’t see the strife among normal, everyday Iranians for a change? Has it been the puny LA opposition that has caused this strife or the people inside Iran?
I don’t think Khatami’s reform movement died. It simply lost a round of elections. To say that Khatami’s reform movement died is like saying that Democrats died in US politics because they lost the senate and presidency twice in a row.
For the sake of staving off another bloody revolution I hope you’re right!
And what dark-age repressive policies are you talking about? Some newspapers were being shot during Khatami and the same policy continues today. They get shot down for the same reason that US media is NOT ALLOWED to air or publish the “terrorist” statements in their entirety for the fear of spreading propaganda or hidden messages. In case you haven’t noticed there are certain powers that openly have allocated money to facilitate the downfall of the regime in Iran. In case you missed it CIA was exposed for paying Iraqi newspapers to publish false stories against the insurgents and in favor of US forces (mind you this is in a country that they control) what do you think they would do with the press in a country like Iran?
I’m talking about the plight of Ganji, batebi, Kazemi, and Forouhar. All these people had legitimate complaints and all were brutally silenced.
Again, using GW’s America as the standard would be setting a very low bar for ourselves. A free, involved society is much more likely to defend a regime than one intimidated into obeying. Right now in Iran there is no shortage of people who foolishly wish for America to attack to get rid of the Mullahs. This is the portion of the population that will not come to IRI’s defense, should the Mullahs be threatened with losing power.
What say you that all Iranians honestly give that constitution a chance and honestly support it instead of trying to undermine it every chance they get and then if it doesn’t work try to change it within the framework of the law. Or I’m willing to accept another constitution and referendum if you stipulate in it a clause that allows for another referendum every time that a bunch of Iranians are not happy with their government.
The bunch of Iranians to whom you are referring happen to be large enough to have voted Khatami into power twice! I’m not talking about LA TVs here!
Such as? Can you please give me some examples of these freedoms that Ahmadinejad has squandered
For example, Kahatami went to great lengths to improve Iran’s status and prestige in the world. He made new allinces Iran had never had before and moderated IRIs belligerent tone and posture in the world community. We can now see Ahmadinejad squandering what Kahatami had built. I won’t even mention AN’s systematic reversal of the reform movement.
They have a reason to pick a fight with Iran not because of “death to this and down with that” but rather because they can not afford to allow a strong and independent Iran become their rival in the region. It’s for the same reason that US could not allow a popular and successful communist Cuba flourish right at its doorstep.
Delay is not a solution to problem. Like I said before they are picking a fight at this time not because of anything new that Ahamdinejad may have said (he merely quoted what Khomeini said 25 years ago). But they are picking a fight today and setting him as excuse because they’ve been delaying their plans for some time now.
And I propose to you that delaying IS a solution; delaying along with intelligent statesmanship and wise actions and words. Howe come Khatami’s Iran was not bullied around? Yes, W had a big hand in it, but Ahmadinijad is adding fuel to the fire!
Then I’m afraid you don’t understand the nature of the bully. Do you honestly think that these powers would rush in to a war because of a statement by someone like Ahmadinejad? They have grand plans and go by preset timetables. When they are ready to attack they will and they will use whatever excuse they can find and if they can’t find anything they will suffice to point out national security as the cause.
Believe me ashtar jon, if anyone knows the nature of the bully, it is me! Powers that be do have a grand plan. It’s called hegemony over Iran. However, within these bullies’ governments there are pro-war factions that either get the upper hand when Ahmadinejad makes such comments, paving the way for public sentiment for war, or pushed aside when Iran’s president speaks wisely, all the while using his smarts to attain what he wants: nuclear technology.
None of what you mentioned are the fault of either the constitution or the official policy of the government. Building one dam (out of hundreds that have been built) in a place that would jeopardize a historical heritage is just a result of poor planning by a few designers and officials in charge and one can hardly implicate an entire government and system for it. Same thing happens all around the world, knowingly drilling in the US wildlife to constructing roads through historic sites in China these are all byproducts of poor planning or necessities of economics and expansion.
And the selling of women (of whatever nationality to anyone) is a byproduct of poverty, ignorance, and poor culture. I think it’s a tad unfair to accuse the government of facilitating these actions when it is doing all it can to improve the economy in the face of international pressure and sanctions.
And failing to aid earth quake victims? You have to be realistic my friend. I don’t want to give US (and New Orleans) as an example to say that because it happens in US then it’s OK to happen elsewhere. But I want to point out the reality of the problem of giving relief to victims of natural disasters with huge magnitudes. One can not simply go around and accuse every government in the world of not caring about its citizens. If there are delays in relief or reconstructions it has to do with financial as well as logistic and other constraints.
Like I said time and again, I agree and even the officials in Iran agree that there are many problems. But these problems are hardly a justification to change the entire system and rebuild everything from scratch.
What about the advent of widespread heroin addiction, or the explosion in prostitution, or the double digit unemployment, hyper inflation, the chain murders, the corruption of the Agha Zadeha, the siphoning of Iran’s national wealth through the many foundations accountable to no one? Do these qualify as non reform-able? Supporting the reform movement doesn’t mean forever unconditional devotion. A huge – and some say the majority -- of Iranians want to see serious addressing of these concerns! I don’t want another revolution either, but that’s where Iran is headed if IRI does not actually reform.
Until such time that it becomes part of our culture to respect and work within the framework of the law instead of trying to take the easy way out by changing everything as soon as something doesn’t suit our fancy IMHO the people will continue to be doomed and damning whatever government is in power with them.
Amen! Let’s also make sure IRI is held accountable to the same stanfards
