Iran, The U.S., And Demonstrations

What must we think of Moussawi, a former prime minister? He is an odd hero for these young demonstrators, given that while he was prime minister the regime carried out some of their most brutal policies. But why did he incite the demonstrations? He is a seasoned politician. He must have known that the regime could have acted only as it did. And once the demonstrations happened the regime could not have reversed itself about the outcome of the election without inflaming the revolution. If he really thought the vote had been stolen from him this was certainly not the way to have the vote reviewed. One demonstration might have been effective. Had the regime not responded then, the mullahs might have lost credibility. Phony elections do not look good. Look how the credibility of the United States government took a plunge right after the phony election of 2000. It has never recovered. Moussawi's having announced that he had won only three hours after the vote is suspicious, as is his continual support for the demonstrations given Iran's immanent peril, and how such action could only benefit him if there is indeed a revolution. It is hard to believe he has Iran's best interests at heart, and it is only a small step from there to thinking that the United States is somehow supporting his effort. For he surely knows that if there is a revolution the U.S. will be there with money and a lot of other help in support of a candidate they can "work with." That is just how the color revolutions the United States did engineer worked. Moussawi can only gain if the regime is overthrown, and to overthrow the regime in the present situation is to hand the country to its enemies. How is this not treason?

Within the United States the response has been, as usual, cretinous. Everybody, left and right, seems to want to support the demonstrators. After all, the regime is barbarous. Look at what they make their women wear! The right, at least, is thinking straight, if pathetically short term. They want the Iranian regime to fall so that the United States can pick up the pieces and regain control of the Middle East. It is at this point a pathetic dope-hope. The Iranians will never allow a puppet regime to rule after what they have been through. The right, knowing they can't go to war with Iran, hope to grab it this way without war, but civil war would follow any installation of a politician with even the slightest American taint. If chaos led to civil war the Iranians would close the Straits of Hormuz, and the world as we know it would end, probably in a mushroom cloud.

The left however, seems to be hooked on its commitment to democracy. The demonstrators are sincere. They truly want change, openness, the chance to dance, sing, and have sex. They love the United States and honestly, truly want Iran to open up. The girls want to show their hair. The demonstrators are fighting a repressive regime. They want to be like us. It's all about democracy and free choice.

People who think this way seem to be completely unaware that "democracy" is no longer a word to conjure with. To many people the word "democracy" means "United States domination." I suspect the Russians will not soon forget how, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States looted their country in the name of democracy. Nor will the people who live in the countries that enjoyed color revolutions, such as Georgia and Ukraine, likely forget just what has happened to them after they embraced democracy. Even in the United States democracy is beginning to lose its color around the gills as first one president steals two elections and then another one betrays his supporters. Greed is good applies to politicians too, and they sell out in droves.

Democracy equates with gangster capitalism. The truth is that democracy is easily manipulated. Elections in the United States and elsewhere have shown that clearly. As long as most people can't think for themselves, money can win elections and when that doesn't work you can use fraud. Allow the average politician to think he is joining the "happy few" and he will trot right along behind like a spaniel, gobbling up the tidbits tossed his way. Representatives represent money, not people. A glance at congressional elections shows that the candidate with the most money and best organization almost always wins.

...

http://www.swans.com/library/art15/mdolin45.html

having a say in who sits on the Supreme Council--something less likely to happen. However, the real action is all behind closed doors at this point, aided by the kids in the street getting beaten, shot, and jailed shaming them into action.

The hard liners who took over after Khomeini went to his eternal reward pleased the well off by keeping things carefully controlled. However, the narrow minded religious hard liners are now seen to have backed the country into a corner with sanctions from the rest of the world while squandering oil revenue that could have been used to make the lives of the well off even more well off. These were not wise things to do.

This is why this is happening now, why it doesn't really matter if the election were stolen, which it probably was. This schism is one that is occurring at the top and always has, with the eldest statesman Montazeri issuing a harsh fatwa against the ruling hardliners just today.

Demonstrations are now being planned for Ahmedinejad's inauguration day and again on the 40th day after the murder of Neda Soltani, July 30. It will be interesting to see if either of those coincides with a coup at the top.