Musings of a former chicken

Ali jon, again?

Obviously I couldn't convince you the last time we had a talk about the Toudeh Party ;-)
The context of my comment was the term :Left, and I talked about the Communism. So I said the Toudeh Pary were the first and the best  communist party in Iran.
The first, in term of life. Means really they were the first party communist which have been founded in Iran (of course the name Toudeh has been created later, because the communist party has been banned many times by Reza Shah, your favorite :))
And of course they were and stayed the best communist party (I would say the only one) of Iran.
They were the only communist party which has adopted and practiced  the  theory of Marxism-Leninism in its true meaning. This is what I had to say in response to your question and we won't go farther than that because this is not the topic of Fred's blog. We can continue this discussion in a new blog if you want.
With the apologize to Fred, I just post here a link for your information:

//www.iranchamber.com/history/tudeh/tudeh_par...

1st & Best

S jaan:

You say:" They may did some mistakes, but still they were the first and the best!"

May I ask, you consider them( the Tudeh Party, I presume) the 1st in what, and the best  in what context ?

Respectfully,

Ali P.

BTW

I forgot to mention this:

Maurice du Verget was not a Toudeh y!

And that book Osoule Elme Siasat, is not a Toudeh publication!

FYMI:

I am not a Toudeh y nor I am publicizing their ideas. I don't even know where they are today and what they say. Also to your big disappointment, some 30 years ago, as a sympathizer, I had many differences of views with them, which lead me to be "Tahrim" by the Toudehy group....and I left them without any gurdge.

But for I am forever grateful for what I had learned from their publication at that time. They may did some mistakes, but still they were the first and the best!
Now you can insult the Toudeh Party as much as you want, honestly you just tire yourself. I don't care at all :)

Then you did your homework very bad

The emphasyse is on "Change" or better yet "Social Change".

And as I said before, it doesn't limit itself to the Wikipedia's definition of "Left" and "Right".

Re-do your homework:

Maurice du Veger: osoul elme siasat

Translated by : Abolfazl Ghaazi 

FYI

In politics, Left, left-wing and leftist are generally used to describe support for social changes to create a more egalitarian society.

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

ps. The infamy and treachery of the Tudeh party to the leftist causes is self evident and precludes the need for doing “homework”.

two great comments fromLoverOfLiberty and Souri

I very much like comments by LoverofLiberty where he writes:"...

The fact of the matter is, change does not come from the so-called "reasonable person."  Change, instead, comes from the unreasonable person...the person who is unwilling to compromise and is willing to put their life on the line in order to see that change is carried out.  "

Also entire Souri's comment is good explanantion on how "Left" and "Leftist" terms get misused by some bloggers.

You don't know what you talk about

First you need to do your homework. Learn about the terms your are using constantly. Whom are you calling "Leftist"?

What is "Left" and who are the "Leftists"?

I had already told this to Mr Kashani, too. Don't use the terms about which you have no or little clue!

What you mean by "Leftits"? Do you mean the Communists?

There are very specific meanings for the terms "Left" and "Right" and "Radical"....etc etc.

If you come here to type your two blogs/day as duty for your own sake of being amused, it is okay. You can say whatever please you and some cheerleaders will come to congrats you for the "very informative non-sense blog".

But if you want to write as an expert on politics, please first get your facts straight and know what you talk about.

The Communists are also among the leftists, but "Left" does not limit itself to  the Communism!

Same goes for calling the pro IRI, the Leftists! They are not!

Sorry to disappoint you but they are the "Right wings". Yet again, if you look at the IRI as an entire entity, there are "Left wings" and "Right wings" among them.

It is so funny that as our Shaikh, you say the obvious facts: Shireh ra khord o goft Shirini ast!

you said :

"... among whom many fronting themselves as dedicated Anti-Imperialist, Anti-Capitalist and pro social justice activists with lefty pedigree..."

If they call themselves the Anti-Imperialism and AN also calls himself the Anti-Imperialism, then why it seems so odd to you that they align themselves with AN, on that matter?

Fred,

As the saying goes, Fred, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Historically speaking, I think it is simply untrue that so-called "peace movements" lead to peace or support policies that bring peace.  More often than not, it is the opposite that occurs.  And, usually this is because such movements don't understand the nature of their adversary...that usually being that, if you give them an inch, they will see that as a sign of weakness, and they will take a mile.

The fact of the matter is, change does not come from the so-called "reasonable person."  Change, instead, comes from the unreasonable person...the person who is unwilling to compromise and is willing to put their life on the line in order to see that change is carried out. 

With regards to the "leftists" you spoke about, perhaps they have great intentions to try to change the regime from within.  However, I seriously doubt that they can change a tiger (the Iranian regime) into a kitten simply by stroking it.