No Fear

There Lies your problem

In my opinion, in last year's election , we witnessed the clash between IR version 1.0 with IR version 2.0. While IR version 1.0 is a ideological system which represents the powerful ruling class and their families, IR version 2.0 is less ideological and is more nationalistic.

You see? right there when you see an IR 1.0 vs 2.0 locking horns, lies the problem.  being less ideological is pretty much like having traces of a group of cells that give rise to cancer still circulating in tissues and blood stream, meaning there can always be a relapse! It is a temporary remission. 

Right Amir?:)

MRX1 & Amir1973,

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 normally

ignore the regime's chest beaters as is the case with the username calling himself no fear (or is it sargord, IMF, or perhaps even....Q)!

A revolution will not materialize unless the people of Iran - the masses, I give you that - realize that the (non-existent) divine is incapable of governnace.

Nevermind all the obvious corruption, nepotism, and ...and associated with this regime; they simply cannot rule. They are a bunch of preachers and the best they can do is give sermons about what arab killed another arab in so and so desert 14 centuries ago and watch Persians cry about it and slash themselves 14 centuries later in a different land.

Until we, as people, can overcome this kind of bullshit, we continue to be repressed by these anti nationalists masquarading as our "leeeeders".....

It is shameful to say the least.

CoP 

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

The only

thing you are right about is the country can not afford another revoultion as it would lead to chaos, civil war and disintegeration of the country, thanks to 30 years of political, social, cultural and economical repression by IRI be it Version 1 or version 2 or what ever version it is now.

The challange is to chnge the system with as least damage as possible, but since the cockroaches ruling Iran are not simply going to leave peacefully in the end either blood has to be shed or some coup by by some rev guard against another and if we get ucky in the end we may end up with some ghadafi type or sadam type running the show.

Running around defintions a bit

  1.A Revolution would be a momentary disaster but the current disaster seems to be permanent.

2. Revolution's are about change and change brings opportunity,we're all opportunist's.People who need opportunity will create their own.

3.This one is exactly the point.You misunderstand the need for Revolution,Opportunity is needed with the current Govt,Separatist's movement's are not tended to and taken care of.

4.You're right,Iran will have to pay the price again,this time hopefully without Ruling Islam or a more practical way to Rule with that Religion.Which I don't believe is possible. 

5.Every successful Revolution has overthrown a opposition ruling Govt and the people have come together to form a 'better,more perfect union'...

Thanks I did enjoy this and think you made some good points but I do believe you tend to run around definitions and not see the real meaning.Maybe you are right and Democratic rights can be gained from peaceful and respectful activism.But is that allowed in Iran?

....

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

Non-sense

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_revolution

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

A poor reason not to have a revolution. There will always be opportunists during peace, transitition and war.  But if the goal of the new system is to have a rule of law, there will be far less problems.

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

If a government comes into power that treats these ethnic groups fairly and doesn't neglect them like the current government, there would be less of a need to seperate.

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.

Say what?  That is a ridiculous reason, and im starting to think you're stretching your points.   The mullahs have homes of the Shah open to the public, so people don't forget that he was this extravegant tyrant. They still talk about him.  Last time I was in Iran, they had large posters of him up in a park with captions of his crimes.  

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.

Not true.  Revolutions tend to involve a very small  percentage of the population (like 1-2%, though the 79 revolutiuon had more). This clearly  cannot contitutate all political and social groups. I think the problem here is when you say 'every revolution', you're just thinking of the 79 revolution.  The next one, if there is one, may not play out the same way.  

Our democratic rights must be gained through peaceful and respectful
activism

What is respectful?  To follow within the law?  They have tried, but since the authorities do not follow their own laws and change it as they please, it's not as easy as you make it sound. 

Whatever you want to call it, be it a revolution, reawakening, uprising...the only solution is drastic change.   How can you gradually change a system that has a military controlling most of the economy?  They have alot to lose, and they won't give up control to "respectful" activism.   

Look at all the good Regime Change has achieved

1) Right wing regimes: Germany, Japan, Italy, right-wing regimes in Latin America (e.g. Argentina, etc), South Africa

2) Left wing regimes: Cambodia, Eastern bloc and USSR

IRI V2 is nationalistic as NAZI had been

It is a fascist govenment. All democrates should fight against it as they could.

All points you mentionned is already happenning with this government, war, separatist ...

Only people how are eploiting poor people are against changes and revolution. Ahmadinejad and his Basiji's felows are exploiting poor people today, nobody is dupe even if you try hard.