Fighting Words

GOM GASHTEGHI

A women taking off her pants in IRR or another human being put her/him self on fire in the western world  should have someting in common : GOMGASHTEGHI.                      Maziar

we still need to define

we still need to define where these freedoms ends.

Any society -modern or not- regulates the interaction amongst its citizens. This is fundamental definition of a 'society'. The key here, is that we can not reach a regulated modern society unless each and every citizen is able to exercise its freedom of expression. How do you know women walking around without pants will not be the norm in free Iran unless you provide the total freedom for all citizens, enabling them to reach a reasonable social interaction?!

I answered you in a way to show you how your PERSONAL values are irrelevant to the issue at hand. Because the issue first and foremost is to enable the rights of each and every citizen to express their PERSONAL views. They then come to a reasonable regulated interaction. Since you my dear, are not the only person possessing a brain. 

Thanks for the interesting blog benross.

Mention the word "Revolution" and every multiple user ID lackey of Islamic regime, hiding "fearlessly"  in the west, bombarding us with the usual clap trap, 24/7, shakes with "fear", and howls even lauder in anger and frustration!

I LIKE IT :) 

Benross,

A women takes off her pants in the middle of the street in Iran ( obviously exercising a form of freedom of expression ) and we have people on this board calling it a strong statement ! 

Is this a fruit of modernity?

Do you think cultural issues should not be an obstacle to freedom of expression?  do you see my point?  we still need to define where these freedoms ends.

I am not against such rights

I am not against such rights or freedoms, but i believe the set of rights and freedom has a lot to do with our historical background and culture.

You are wrong. Freedom of expression and freedom of association are the fruits of modernity. Modernity happened to be developed in the West first. But it eventually affected the whole world. The cultural issues can never ever be an obstacle to freedom of expression. What you are mistaken is that different cultures use their freedom of expression differently. This difference is never ever a justification for limiting freedom of expression. Let alone completely ignoring it as IRI does.

The definition of Freedom is very broad.

Do you mean you will use the definition of human rights and freedom chosen and adopted by western countries as your standard of rights and freedom? Whats next?  The replacement of our constitution with the constitution of Sweden?

I am not against such rights or freedoms, but i believe the set of rights and freedom has a lot to do with our historical background and culture. Western countries adopted these rights and freedom based on their cultures too. Some still don't recognize the right to choose partners among gays and lesbians or their freedom to wear whatever you want in public places.

This is why democracy ( Public opinion ) has a lot to with how we set our OWN freedoms and rights boundaries.

Time is needed for ideas to take shape. Debates must be encouraged for us to realize as a nation, how comfortable are we with others exercising their freedoms. A good rule of thumb would be that " My freedoms ends where your freedoms begins".

We need politicians who are taboo breakers and can change the political and cultural norms in our society. Those who encourage debates and question traditional approaches.

You can not introduce freedoms like a shot of B12 in our society. You need more pragmatic approaches to lay the foundation first, then let our people decide where do draw the lines.

Now we are getting somewhere!

Now we are getting somewhere!

It is about FREEDOM

Democracy is not just balloting & voting, it has many requirements. Some are: Freedom of Expression & Media. Equality of sexes, creeds & religions before law. Freedom of religion. Freedom to from political parties.

Democracy is just a process and without FREEDOM Democracy does not make sense. Therefore, FIRST we need to guarantee FREEDOM, THEN we can bring about Democratic rule.

This is why FIRST we have to REMOVE Islamic Republic, whose very constitution is anti-freedom & equality, THEN we can bring about Democratic rule.

Let us not make another costly mistake & assume majority vote in favor of Mousavi under Islamic Republic is DEMOCRACY!

Abarmard,

Thank you for your interesting input and your pragmatic views.

It seems we share many common goals and the method ( Non revolutionary ) to get there.

We just differ on who we think is more capable to lead us in that direction.

vildemose

Thanks for asking. This is very important indeed. Please read the comment in its entirety.
What are positive about Iran are education, health, and service accessibility that are unheard of in many other economically developed nations in South East Asia. Revolution means turning social classes upside down. Just think before Khatami how music in the country was treated. The laws have become much more relaxed, relatively speaking to earlier days of revolution. This is a proof that it will continue being so. 
Another positive is that the importance of public opinion and support that regime feels. You would never explain and discuss your actions to the public (by many interviews on daily basis, that some criticize the core of the Islamic Republic that has gone astray from concepts of independence, freedom, and republic part of the Islamic Republic)  if you did not care for public opinion. Something that is unheard of in the dictatorial systems. For whatever reason, the system cares to have followers. Reformers view this as a huge leverage. This perhaps is the main reason for Mousavi being "free" rather than killed. Dictator would have killed him.

Forget the events after the election for a moment and think how easily people after Khatami were able to display their dissatisfaction with many policies. The policy continued up until the recent election. The system had started to feel secure enough to allow these displays because they were not based on revolutionaries and systematic changes, but gradual and within the system reforms. They don't feel threaten if they trust that people support the system but not some policies. This is reformable and this is a fact.
There are no trustful analyses that Iranian system is set to go this way. The various official, semi official and "official" political parties have proven to those who listen that there are not one-directional thinking in the country and its political direction. However, we might witness one side gaining momentum and the other fights to gain more power. Far ahead of many developing nations in terms of political establishments, even though most of them have been born only a decade or so ago.

Besides stupidity of some social rules and restrictions, that will fail again, Iranian problems will gradually fade if the economy from the members of "International free trade" community deal with the Islamic Republic. But they won't because they are worried. Their worries are not based on "terrorism" or Nuclear energy concerns, as they advertise, but they know that Iran has much potential. These potentials are not related to the government of Iran but the Iranians. Within this "corrupt" and "religious” system, Iranians will find away to stand tall in the world's stage. I have no doubt.
Reforms are very much possible. Whoever says it is not, doesn't know that the only thing that stays the same is Change. She doesn't know that the children of those hard core Mullahs that once were the lower class and now are the ruling parties, are worldlier than some of us here at Iranian.com. 

This is exactly what history teaches us. It tells us that revolutionaries become the elites, and the new revolutionaries form from the same old groups that are now uneducated and "under" class. However this is not true in Iran today, hence the voices of this Diaspora revolutionaries can not be trusted or communicated with the majority of the population residing inside Iran. Today we perceive change in two levels, gradual and sudden. Those who advocate sudden changes have no children or close links to Iran and would benefit from sudden change because they can get their country back. I only promote what I am capable of doing. I will not go on street and put my life in danger so my kids might not have a father. I will look for the next best option, slowly but surely option. I will focus on small steps and care for small gains and hope for the next a few decades rather than tomorrow. Reformists look at the system and flaws and try to address them. They don't like uncertainties that come with uncertain and undefined "new" system. What I know, I can work with to fix, what I don't know is scary.

Finally, all these problems today is a direct link to lack of democratic experiences. Iranians do not have any history of democracy. When are we suppose to learn? Reformists are the best route to allow this gradual change that sets the slowest group to understand democracy as a bottleneck, which assigns the speed of our democratic progress. I am certain there are better ways, but this is our situation that we need to work with.

Hope this makes sense because it is an important matter. I tried to shorten my comment so it won't be boring, therefore I skipped some parts.

Abarmard: please provide

Abarmard: please provide your reasoned-argument in response to the blog. If you believe IRI military religious dictatorship can be reformed, please provide examples, proof, reasoned arguments instead of waxing in generalization. The author of this blog provided his/her reasonings why the IRI cannot be reformed. What is your reasoning and logical argument that IRI given its track record and behavior can be reformed? I haven't seen you give us one logical argument with specifics related to IRI system of governance to even mildly convince or prove your position. Please be generous and share your vast knowledge of this possibility of IRI reformability  coming to fruition.

Please give us at least one tangible mechanism or process through which this evolution is possible.

Jamshid

Great reasoning.  "Geda parvari" culture indeed.  The way it works is that they bring the country to zero by bringing it to the precipice of the stone age-culturally, socially, economically and industrially--and then give you little bits of all of those at a time, to bring you back up to a stage that you should have been at already 31 years ago.  That, in turn, will make you feel good by seeing "progress" and by being "satisfied" with what you get.  In a way, it is as brilliant as it is evil.

Mr. Jamshid

What I want or don't want won't change the realities. I wish that I wake up tomorrow and we are all free and happy. All my writings are available for you to see that I have always believed that gradual change is the best path for Iran. That comes from our history and location, where we have many issues from internal, different ethnicity, and regional similarities (that we can bank on) and etc., which can be a burden for our growth. We are not going to be left alone. Shah could have not stayed in power if he was to advance Iran. Today is not different. Best path is people path.

It's not my personality to sit and dream based on possibilities that are far from realities. Today we are living under this system and we can either work to move forward or axe the roots and start over. There is nothing moozi about not wanting to start over. I brought real life examples to make a point that the roots of the argument the writer makes is flawed

Hope this clarifies.

Regime supporters arguments...

Regime supporter #1  asks: "Why iri cannot be reformed? because you say so?"

He then adds some naaz va ghamish to his question and says, "once you prove that no one is beyond reform and once you prove that reform does not come progressively and in stages then i will go to work to answer your question."

You are aboslutely right! By the same rule, let's keep all the child molestors and murdering rapists free, because no court can prove that they are beyond reform and that the said reform does not come in stages.

Brilliant! The same logic than that of murdering rapists. The June events of last year and 31 years of failed reforms proves once and for all that this regime is not reformable, unless we wait 200 years, which is exactly what regime supporters want.

In defense of the IRI, abarmard writes, "Turkey, China, and Vietnam to name a few have been reformed"

Excuse me, but didn't you first said that not all dictatorships are the same? We had dictatorship under the Pahlavis too, but at least the country was moving forward and progressing at unmatched rates. Even Vietnam or Turkey don't have as many maximum corrupt and thief people running the country.

You really want "khodis" to continue being at helm in Iran, don't you?

He further writes, "Iran actually is more democratic and capitalistic than China, surprised?"

To which I say, ey vaay, moosh bokhoreh to ro, ke enghadr haghir va gedaa parvari!

Again, we have an individual who wants us to be proud that we are just a bit better than some of the worst dictatorships in the world. As though we Iranians can't deserve anything better.

Today Iran could have been ahead of the likes of Spain and South Korea! But thanks to the IRI and thanks to its "omate haghir parvar" which includes people like you, we are told to be content with being a "bit" better than china or vietnam.

Abarmard, if you care to know, anytime of the day, I could respect even a misled but honest basiji a thousand times more than a "moozi" like you.

One cannot “reform” dictatorships?

This is news to me. I do not agree.

Firstly let's agree that all dictatorships are not created equal. Egypt, Saudi, Marrakesh, N. Korea are all dictatorship with different levels of control. Iran is no different.

Turkey, China, and Vietnam to name a few have been reformed. China and Vietnam are still more dictatorial than Turkey, but the social change is taking affect to form a new policies that are more relaxed. Iran actually is more democratic and capitalistic (ownership rights) than China, surprised? Iran is dealing with Islamic Social policies that takes away its attractiveness, that is another debate. Also Iran has many other political issues, specially concerns from the Western world (being located in the ME) you knew that of course.

" The only battles that

" The only battles that they ever saw was with their "aftabeh" when the spigot was blocked. "

LOL - thanks for the laugh.

On a more serious note, it is very true that the Nazi's where nationalistic and wanted to spread "German glory" while the last thing on the minds of the alliance of reesh-o pashm is Iran. Their only interest is the spread of shiaism, collection of wealth, wholesale opression of women and those who disagree with them and on and on... 

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Sparrowlake

I disagree that the IRI is similar to the Nazis.  The only thing that they have in common with the Nazis is the fact that both regimes are / were ruled by  murderous nut jobs.   I order to realize the difference, one must compare Hitler's character to mullahs' collective character.  Hitler valued German nationalism over anything else.  If you really look at his persona, you will see that he was not a materialistic person.  He wanted to prove German superiority and German might and he was willing to do it at all costs.  He also had balls.  He was not afraid of going to war (he lied and volunteered to fight in WWI, was gassed in the battlefront and won the German cross even though he wasn't even German).  He could have easily stopped the war at any time he wanted before attacking the USSR and be content with all the territory (and the resulting wealth) that he had accumulated.  But he did not do so.  He continued the  war for German glory at the expense of sacrificing himself (and his nation).  Now  compare that to Khomeini and Khamenei.  The only battles that they ever saw was with their "aftabeh" when the spigot was blocked.  

 In sum, mullahs are materialistic.  For the past 31 years they have been more concerned with accumulating wealth and building up bank accounts than to actually build up a serious military force (like Germany did under Hitler).  So, they neither have the courage, the will or the means to fight a world dominating war.  They are more like North Korea.  A petty, nutty little dictatorship hell bent on getting its hands on a few crude nukes to scare its own people into submission.   And just like North Korea, there is no chance that they will be reformed.   

Vildemose

You are correct in saying:

 The narrow definition of the Islamic Republic holds within it the precedence of a particular ideology, namely Khomeini's version of  shia Islam, over republic. Can this ideology be reformed? Are sharia laws reformable? Is the IRI constitution reformable?NO and NO and NO.

The IRI has never been a republic.  In reality, the IRI is a continuation of monarchy in Iran.  Velayat Faghih is the new name for the king.  In fact, VF has the same exact powers as the Shah. So, how is it ANY different than any other monarchy in Iran's history?

PS/ Thank you for your response to "Darveesh".  I wouldn't respond to him.  he's here to be an annoyance.   And he should know that despite his newly created username, I know who he is.  

Oktaby and Jamshid

Oktaby:

It will have to be a violent revolution or a war. Both will be massively bloody and dangerous to Iran's territorial integrity and that may well be the ultimate gift of islamic tyranny and IRR. 

Absolutely.  Not only I believe that breaking Iran apart may be a dangerous consequence of a war that the IRI  instigates, or a violenet revolution (as the only choice that the IRI leaves the Iranian people), but I also believe that the IRI may intentionally break the country apart for three reasons: 1) as part of its much hyped "asymmetrical warfare", 2) as revenge for being overthrown and 3) in order to create a safe haven- or a domain --for itself to remain alive in case it is overthrown--something akin to what the "Northern Alliance" did under the Taliban.  So, the IRI may gather its remaining loyalists and pick a hard to reach territory inside Iran to make its last stand.

 In the second, I don't want to contemplate; even though it is just another  tool for IRR and with increasing pressure,  useful in totally destroying any opposition to 'evolve' to dream state of islam-istan (there are news of activity at Hormuz) so war's first fan is IRR as displayed by their flaunting. Empty as it may turn out to be. 

Agree again.   I have blogged about this issue before.  IRI and its supporters are the biggest warmongers out there.  A limited conflict with the U.S. or Israel, where they can survive (and in their minds "win") will  bee enormously beneficial to them.  That is why they are doing their darnest to  start such a conflict.  But the U.S. should not fall into that trap and engage in a conflict on IRI's terms.  BTW, here is my blog on the issue:

 //iranian.com/main/blog/onlyiran/meet-iri-supporting-warmongers

Jamshid:

 If 31 years isn't slow enough, I don't know what is. And where are we after 31 years of "reforms"? Back to 1981, back to square one, that's where.

very true.  As I mention in the blog, the IRI has just reverted back to the 1980's.  How much longer will take for the reform?  A hundred years? 

A comparision with Egypt not very convincing

The only reason I say this is that Murbarek regime has culivated that as "president" there is freedom even if its limited.  They are not at war or attempting to help fanatical organizations. People in US and West consider it "relatively safe" .  The regime is not militant. It does not want to blow up every non islamic state just for the heck of it.

The best comparision of Iran leadership today is Adolf Hitler in 1935. Lets  hope they are not allowed to be around for 1939.

But not much hope for that. the men in Iran that want freedom all deicided to flee rather then fight for it. Not all, but enough. the modern world allows escape easier then the past

Hilter ended badly because the people  failed to use force before he invaded others. Iranian people are doing the same.  The outcome will be the same

once you prove that no one

once you prove that no one is beyond reform and once you prove that reform does not come progressively and in stages then i will go to work to answer your question.

She just did prove it through reasoned and analytical argumentations. Just read her blog and if you have any counter-points to refute her arguments, please be generous and share. 

I happen to have written a blog about it.

should that be enough proof? Your blog?

but out if curiosity?...Who are you?

Moshk an nist  ke attar begoyad

Moshk an ast ke khod beboyad.

absolutely

once you prove that no one is beyond reform and once you prove that reform does not come progressively and in stages then i will go to work to answer your question.

Fair enough?

why iri cannot be reformed????

because you say so?

What a coincidence that you ask this question.  I happen to have written a blog about it.  Coming to think of it, you just commented on that blog.  I guess it's about time that you read it!!! 

Darveesh: Can you describe

Darveesh: Can you describe why you think the IRI is reformable?

why iri cannot be reformed????.......

because you say so?

James

My email is nich6527@vandals.uidaho.edu

James

Last year's election showed that IRI can't be reformed. Also reformists held presidency from 1997 to 2005 and parliament from 2000 to 2004 and they accomplished nothing.

Do you know any Iranians
in Boise Idaho that I could work with? Also selling some Iran shirts at //www.zazzle.com/m1a2abramsJames
One
of them has Pat Bagley's cartoon of Ahmadinejad destroying Cyrus the
Great's declaration of independence with option of pre 1979 Iran flag on
the back. The other shirt is Neda with Muhammad Mossadegh's quote I
would have sinned if I sat silently with option of pre 1979 Iran flag on
the back. Also have a shirt that has quotes from Khomeini like I feel
nothing which he said when he came back to Iran. Do you know anyone at a
clothing company like American appeal that would be willing to promote
these shirts?Also would donate some of the profit to a group like
support Iranian.com

It's fundamental to each and every brick of its foundation

It's a Theocracy. By definition divine law cannot be reformed

Mr Theo is everywhere. Mrs Theo sometimes drops her headscarf...

Every fascism is an index of a failed revolution - Walter Benjamin

The question of reformability

The question of reformability of IRI was answered to the doubters once and for all in June of last year. The IRI is not reformable, period. This issue is closed and not subject to any further debates.

Reform is dead in Iran. Just as Khomeinism is. It could be said that the events of last June was a blessing in disguise, which exposed the reformists' argument for a "slow" change within the system.

If 31 years isn't slow enough, I don't know what is. And where are we after 31 years of "reforms"? Back to 1981, back to square one, that's where.

Reform is dead, but only after wasting so much time.