No Fear

thexmaster,

yes, i also questioned the manner that IR has come to power. Didn't you get a hint when reading the thread?

Khaleh Mosheh,

Do you like Ghandi?

Didn't he have a quote such as the oppressed is just as responsible as the opressor for the injustice?

Huh... he also said forgiveness is a virtue that must be offered by the strong.

I do not label myself as federalist, but believe in principles..

such as 1. an elected government w/o pre-screening of candidates; 2. separation of religion and government; 3. freedom of speech/information/religions, and 4. full implementation of the UN charter of human rights. 

Any government that supports the above basic rules is ok, whether monarchy, republic or federalism.  But, given the diversity of religions, races and languages in Iran, federalism may well be a way to go. 

National treasures belong to the people of Iran and not just a region.  However, the Iranian-Arabs have been so deprived/oppressed in the past 31 years that a comprehensive re-conciliation effort needs to be initiated by any new government.

I do agree that Iranians need to kick IRI-ways out from within rather than foreign intervention.  However, I do disagree with some of your principles such as rule of majority, religious tendencies and the unquestionable rule of AN.

"I am anti revolutionary and despise violence. "

If you are anti-revolutionary, then you should be against the IRI which came into power through a violent revolution.  If you despise violence, you should be vehemently opposing the IRI and its violent and deceitful tactics throughout not the just the past year, but since its inception which has helped it stay in power.  However, ever since i've been here I haven't seen you once denounce this regime...only sidetrack and whitewash all their crimes like a good cheerleader. 

Rosie,

Good to see you here.

Reforms are still possible without a democratic process, but it will be initiated by the government or caused by a power struggle within the establishment.

Ofcourse, i favor a reform movement which has been initiated by the majority of Iranians through electorial process.

Having said that, i believe there were no fraud during last year elections. The party which lost the election, had won it before numerous times. Its only natural to think that people no longer believed in the reform slogan they were chanting and supported another candidate which offered real changes and reforms.

PS: Thank you for your unbiased link you provided on " no one thanked me" thread.

afshinazad,

I hear you and understand you perfectly.

We as a nation need to grasp and understand democratic ideas as a whole before we can elect a democratic government.  Am i right?

It would be nice if the government also presents the people with the appropiate political openness that these ideas could be debated. Would you support a government that would provide you with a relative freedoms so we can debate these democratic rights?

Should we take these steps , one at a time?

Bavafa,

Everybody wants a free and democratic and independent Iran.

Even the IR came to power with the same slogan as you just mentioned. ( Indepence , Freedom, Islamic Republic ).

Do you think you can get the masses out on the street with the same slogan that was used 30 years ago?

Oh , i see.... you will say Independence! freedom ! democratic Iran!

The only difference in this is the replacement of " democracy" with " Islamic". And for that to happen, you don't need a revolution.  Infact, revolutions rarely offer democracies.

The solution is

kicking the IRI out of Iran through non-violent resistance. IRI is non reformable. 

thexmaster,

You are right. I am anti revolutionary and despise violence.

The "respectful activism" which you laugh about, is currently underway in Iran. I have embraced this approach since its a lot more civil than the violent solutions offered by others. It helps to unite us as a nation and to be more tolerable to one another. You can not forcibly remove your opponent and expect not to be removed by force, yourself.

شی مانی تن؟

این چی میگه ؟ 

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikxtk595SMw

MM,

Are you a federalist by any chance? It does seem to address the ethnic minority issue that you rightly brought up, but it could also cause grave economical problems if over %90 of our GDP is generated in one province.

You don't seem revolutionary enough to me. We might have more in common than you think.

No fear, I am not advocating

an armed anything. My point is, as I've stated before, that at least to me, the ruling clergy will not just get up and go because people do not want them. Well, except like in 1979, if somebody installs somebody, but that is not likely now.

A military coup in my mind will not work unless there's legimate desire on the part of the coup leaders to relinquish power and form an interim democratic government until the situation is normalized. Not gonna happen in Iran as the clever mullahs quickly dismantled the traditional military soon after 1979 and replaced it with a number of their corrupt and incompetent relatives serving as heads of the IRGC.

I am not saying violent is the answer here as pointed out by other posters that there are other countries who were able to unseat their opressors peacefully. I hope to see (like nothing better, actually) Iran and Iranians (again, the masses) supporting such movement and the regime and their goons quietly disappearing into the night while a bloodless "revo"... I say..... "revolution is celebrated??

But I must ask, are you trying to feel the pulse of the diaspora for the regime? Is that the most recent assignment? You still have AN's photo as your avatar, have had many pro-AN and pro-regime posts and are now checking to see the best way to unseat the divine?

What gives?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Amir1973,

Yes, i see that some of the militaristic governments which had a more rapid transitions to become developed, were pro americans. Afterall, US offered favourable trade laws and support to these countries in return to turn their countries in to nuclear armed bases during the cold war ( Except Taiwan , i think ). A high risk scenerio which paid off nicely for these countries. The downside could have been a complete wipeout in the event of a thirld world war.

In regards to Syria and North Korea militaristic governments, the problem to their progress is the leftist and socialist solutions they have chosen and adopted as their guidelines. Don't get me started here.

Iran could very well be on its way to experience some sort of military governance ( Directly or indirectly ) in the near future. It does not share the characteristics of Leftist military governments.  Their current representation in our government is following the free market formulas. However, they are at odds with US over our nuclear programs. I think south american militaristic past governments could be a good case study to see where ( If ) we are heading in the near future.

The issue of electoral fraud

completely frames the question of whether reforms are possible (or very best case scenario, how long they would take and how substantive they could be) . Presumably, No Fear, you believe there was no fraud. Correct?

NOFEAR

What is your definition of revolution?

1-If every province has the rights like american states, there would be no separation.

2-If every ethnic and religion respected and have the same right and could have chance to elected as a president or other form, there would be no separation.

but really do we Iranian understand what is it we want to do and who is really going to betray the country and the nation at end.there are so much mistrust among us and our problem is no the religion or cleric , our problem is loyalty and trust and working for country and nations interest not the personal interest,this is our history and we can not wipe the religion from peoples mind, our christian freind in iran told my father why your brother can not enter to your home if your are not there or why you people when you have the guest separate the man from women. you see these small things are our basic problem and if Iranian people haven't solve that yet, it would be hard to respect the others right and etc.we need some house cleaning to do and never goverment is strong enough to push the nation around if the nation is united and there is a trust and this is first step of democracy.

let's work to unite the all and let's work for the country and the nation nad let's educate eachother not to insult one another and every oppinion is good oppinion, only if we could listen first. freedom is not easy to get and it is not easy to keep it and it is not cheep and it is very costly.?!

No Fear, are you kidding me?

What ideology better then, a free, democratic and independent Iran.

It will address the mass Muslim population as I don't believe Islam is contrary to freedom unless you ask a Mullah for it to define it for you. In addition to freedom, Democratic and independent is the main aspiration for vast majority of Iranians as they are highly nationalistic. It will also be supported by any sane and morally matured world.

Mehrdad

COP,

If you advocate an armed struggle to overthrow your opponent, consider yourself " extreme " in your revolutionary views.

Once you advocate such a solution for such a fundamental question, you belong to that ideology. Its not a " one time" deal.

Now the question is, what type of aggressive ( Possibly violent ) ideology can lead a revolution in Iran while being Anti Islamic, and be able to unite all iranians?

Have you considered a military coup?  Would you support a military coup ( Velvet revolution ) if it violently ( Or peacefully ) removed key religious figures from the government? Would that be a step in the right direction?

Every revolution requires an " Ideology".

What ideology were people pushing during the 1906 revolution?  Or the velvet revolution?  Or the cedar revolution?   You don't need an ideology.  You need a goal. 

Evolution of the mass culture & the society is the solution!

perhaps one day...

Bavafa,

Every revolution requires an " Ideology".

What do you think that ideology is ?  This ideology must be able to cover and unite most political and cultural groups. It should also have a solution for our muslim majority masses.

If you have found that ideology, try to study its effects and historical occurances during revolutions. How did it turnout?  How does this ideology can address the 5 points i have raised in this thread?

No Fear of Coping out

I've easily refuted your absurd claims, such as your claim that revolutions require violence which is clearly untrue.  Your other arguments are lazy and make absolutely no sense such as this 'historical gap'.   I have explained my reasoning clearly.  I've seen your 'contributions' and you have absolutely no wish for this regime to leave, violently or peacefully. 

Your solution of "respectful activism" is a laughable under such climate of fear and paranoia created by the regime.  You want people to vote from a list that has been purged of anyone seen as a 'threat', and hope maybe one of them has enough balls to 'criticize' a system that doesn't even respect its own laws and citizens, and answers critics with threats, beatings, arrest, rape and murder.   Seriously, are you for real?  I think people like you are just biding your time.  Things have quiet down a bit, so now you can talk of gradual reform.  

a few flaws in your arguments:

The leadership in many communist countries just went away due to the collapse of the system/economy with minimal bloodshed.  If it was not because of the oil money, IRI would have collapsed a while ago. 

The current and past leaders of IRI have committed so many murders and thieveries that a whole new generation of leaders, free from the past injustices, need to emerge before the past can be forgiven/forgotten.  The time-line for the emergence of these new leaders is prohibitive. 

The point of reference of the reformers, vis-à-vis the law, is still the 7th century hadith/fable, and that is a big problem when it comes to establishing a civil society that respects all religions/races/gender.  If minorities feel that their religion, language, race and gender is respected by the central government, the need for separation is minimized.

However, I do agree that before any new round of government, the opposition needs to unite under a new set of rules (constitution) rather than leave it to a bunch of zealots to write it as an after-thought.  Like the Old Persian proverb says: If you let the donkey lead the way, you end up in the pasture.

No Fear,

Its interesting that the list of countries that you mentioned as rightwings, were also a bit militaristic. If we add south korea, turkey, Taiwan to it as well, you will notice that many of these countries have become "developed" by experiencing periods of military rules.

Almost all militaristic governments have tendencies towards being " technocratic" with less emphasis on religion.

Are we heading in that direction?

I don't know for certain what direction IRI is heading in (at best, I could make an educated guess). I generally don't try to make specific predictions, because human events are so unpredictable. IRI could last 1, 10 or 50 years--who knows (though I think the consequences of that would be devastating for Iran). I have an opinion on what should happen but don't know what will.

That being said, South Korea, Turkey, and Taiwan have, to my mind, one thing in common: they were pro-American dictatorships that democratized and liberalized. They weren't run by military men for that entire period (civilian politicians and generals shared the task). Anti-American dictatorships led by military men (e.g. Syria) or with a strong military component in leadership (e.g. North Korea) haven't done particularly well. Perhaps, the Pahlavi regime might have gone the way of those pro-American dictatorships you mentioned, if not for the disaster of '79. I'm not in favor of a military dictatorship. I'm in favor of a free and democratic regime which has decent relations with its neighbors and with the U.S. It is inconceivable to me that the IRI could "reform" or "evolve" in that direction.

No Fear, interesting

how you've become all progressive here in the last few weeks.

You said:

"I have notice you mentioned " as people" we need "to overcome"  our religious and cultural boundaries in order to have real changes. Can't you build upon this idea to become less revolutionary and more proactive towards a " transitional period" or " reform"? It does seem like a more correct answer to the issue you have raised."

I am not all that revolutionary, I must add. All I want for Iran is a NON-RELIGIOUS Regime that puts IRAN FIRST. Something the mullahs will never agree to - that is not so revolutionary, is it? Being proactive with these people is impossible. That's how people are raped, killed, maimed or otherwise eliminated.......by wanting to be proactive.

For that reason, this is the ONLY time that I believe "The Right to Bear Arms" would have come handy for Iranians.........Too bad there's no NRA in Iran.

Also, I call it bullshit, because it is bullshit. Outdated 7th century "ideology" and 75 cents (make it 750 toman) won't even get you a cup of hot sugary tea these days.  As the Iranian history of the last 104 years tells us, you cannot have the clergy and demand a constitution which would most definitely violate the Sharia Law and its doctrine. The clergy will not compromise without brute force. Is that the transition you're talking about?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Troneg,

Every revolution requires an " Ideology".

What do you think that ideology is ?  This ideology must be able to cover and unite most political and cultural groups. It should also have a solution for our muslim majority masses.

If you have found that ideology, try to study its effects and historical occurances during revolutions. How did it turnout?  How does this ideology can address the 5 points i have raised in this thread?

with permssion, using "thexmaster" format

Any revolution is required to display a new round of violence against the previous ruling class

As the yanks say, freedom is not free and if that is the price people have to pay to gain their true freedom, then so be it. Plus, the ruling class will determine that and will be responsible for the subsequent violence.

In any revolution, there are always " opportunists " who will ride the wave of revolution and will take control of strategic positions.

So, what would be the alternative, take another 31 years of misery so not a few "opportunist" take advantage of the situation. Those are already doing it, so there is nothing new or different then alternative.

During revolutions, "separatists" movements tend to increase their efforts to take advantage of the lack of a central government which can crush their movements

That is certainly possible, but it is also possible that the promise of a free and democratic society will address their concern and nullify their "separatists" aspirations, right?

Every revolution creates a " Historical gap " between the past and the present. This means that all the valuable and costly experiences which we gained living under an oligarchic class could be lost.

I don't buy that

In order for a revolution to succeed, all political and social groups need to be united, otherwise the revolution will encounter strong resistance from groups oppose to it.

True, that is why we all (those who believe in a free, democratic and independent Iran) need urgently to unite.

Our democratic rights must be gained through peaceful and respectful activism

True, though if the ruling regime did not yield to the peaceful and respectful nature of the peoples demand for freedom, then an uprising would be justified.

Mehrdad

COP,

I totally agree that the religious ruling class is incapable of governance and must leave politics.

However, while you acknowledge the "masses" as the driving force of a revolution, are you aware that these masses are also muslims? How hard would it be to gain the support of the masses while calling their religion bullshit? 

Besides, having a strong "persian" nationalistic slogan, can really create problems for us with the separatists during a revolution. Have you gave this any thought?

I have notice you mentioned " as people" we need "to overcome"  our religious and cultural boundaries in order to have real changes. Can't you build upon this idea to become less revolutionary and more proactive towards a " transitional period" or " reform"? It does seem like a more correct answer to the issue you have raised.

No Fear No Escape

Bozak namir bahar myad kombozeh ba khiar Myad

Nice deviation for changing direction No Fear.

The issu is not president, the issu is Velayat Faghieh ! You can put any "khar" at presidency, as soon as a Molah is top of him the story continue.

No Fear you could start fearing because the question is not if Revolution is a solution or not, after events happend last year the question is When the revolution will arrive.

Timer is started and nobody can stop it! Listne its tic tac

thexmaster

You have mostly expressed your rejection of my views but have done very little to explain why and to give supporting reasons.

I searched your contributions to findout more about your political stance and found no contributions.

You really need to expand your ideas more, than declaring whats right or wrong in your opinion. Sincerely.

Escape,

I don't think any form of government can be permanent. Just look at the current power struggle in Iran, when the dust settles down, there is no way IR would be the same as before. Too many taboos are broken now ( and more are needed to be broken ).

This is what activism is all about. We need to elect ( Even if our choices are limited ) a candidate who at the very least, can challenge the political norm ( Taboo breaker ) and has a higher tolerance for opposing views to be expressed in a civil manner ( respectfully ). This is when more intellectuals, groups , activists, others can push the envelope and demand more ( Thus educating the masses ).

And we have to repeat this cycle every four years to gradually change the characteristic of IR.

This is the Non revolutionary approach which I support.