BOYCOTT

To Parham

Well, perhaps the reason why you don't see the differences is that you don't live in Iran or haven't been there for a very long time. But people who have lived in Iran during both Khatami and Ahmadinejad can very well testify to those differences. And that's why today they are massively supporting Mousavi and that's why the entire cultural body of Iran, including the artists, people in cinema, literature, women rights activists, student leaders, labor unions, and every one who is actually living in IRAN, are calling for people to participate. I am sure you don't think of them as "fools" who are being "played", do you?

And no, I don't agree with you that voting in the elections is "supporting the tyranny behind". That's an absurd notion that has been somehow planted in the minds of Iranians. For one, if there ARE elections it means that the system is not totally "tyrannical" and there is room for progress. Saddam Hossein ruled Iraq for 30 years and his day one was not different from his last day. And that, despite all the "international contexts" that you were mentioning. Now HIS elections, where he got 100% of the votes every time, were a sham, not the Iranian elections where you have someone talking about the "dialogue among civilizations" at one end and someone organization the holocaust denial conference at the other. You just can't say that people's votes don't make any difference in that case.

And the reason I asked if you vote on the U.S elections is that I wanted to know if you boycott argument also applies there, or if it is just for Iran.

Ali1234

You make those differences sound like such a big deal. Seriously, look at the history of the implementation of anything during so-called "reformist" years, and you'll see what i mean. The real difference lies in the social aspects of each period, which makes people believe (otherwise gives the illusion) that a lot of things are different. Otherwise, they're not. Check!

Look, it's simple, all this voting does is just sublimate the tyranny behind it, Don't you see that?

As for your question about whether I vote in the US, for one thing I wonder why you wonder (!), and for the next thing, you're assuming here too, as I don't even live in the US at all!

to Parham

Well, you have a very deterministic and defeatist approach towards politics. You are analyzing everything at the macro level and failing to see the impact of micro policies on people's lives and even on that "global context" itself.

As Marx said : "Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly found, given and transmitted from the past"

You ask, why there should have been murders in the first place? Well I am sure you can put that one into context too, and find a thousand related pieces for that puzzle. But does that mean that I, as an Iranian citizen, should overlook my responsibilities TODAY and allow an incompetent fundamentalist to become head of the government and make decisions that have disastrous impacts on my everyday life?

I definitely don't share your deterministic view. I believe that no matter what the international context is and no matter what the overall ideology of the I.R is, a more qualified and liberal administration is still more beneficial to the Iranian people, both in short term and long term.

And I am curious to know; do you vote in the U.S elections? Does your argument of the "global context" also apply to the U.S? Has your voting in the U.S had any impact on this countries foreign policies for example?

کشور در هرج و مرج است

معلوم نيست مردمی که ميدانند اين رئيس جمهور باشد يا نباشد هيچ چيز تغيير نخواهد کرد برای چه رای ميدهند !؟ شايد هم راي دهندگان خود نيزنميدانند.
اينجا دو مسئله شبيه به هم داريم:
-1-- کانديداهائی که خود نميدانند چکار بايد کنند. نه متخصص در رشته اي. نه تسلط به زبان انگليسی يا فرانسه .نه قدرت تصميم گيری بدون تکيه به ولی فقيه.نه حمايت مردمی .
-2 -- مردمی رای دهنده که خود نيز نميدانند چرا به يک رئيس جمهور متکی به رئيس جمهور مادام العمر (ولي فقيه) رای ميدهند.

Amir 1234

Well that should apply to your reasoning as well though, shouldn't it?
I'll try to explain one more time in easy language: EVERYTHING is placed in context, there is NO selection. For example, one could also say that the chain murders were committed during Khatami's period because the soft rhetoric made it easier to get away with it. But that's not the question.
The question is why should there have been murders in the first place. Meaning they would have happened during Khatami's period OR a "hardliner's" period anyway -- again, meaning Khatami's presence didn't really stop anything -- meaning even more that Khatami's presence made it easier to get away with them (think: international reaction).
The truth is "ashe kashke khalate, bokhori pate, nakhori pate"! Just that a softliner gov. makes it easier for a lot of things to happen.
This voting thing and the two "streams" (hardliners/softliners as I call them) just sublimate the tyranny/dictatorship.
I hope one day you'll see that, if you are not just willingly closing your eyes and ears.

Boycotting the elections, why in earth?

Even if you are a die hard anti IRI who are very active in overthrowing IRI then why would you boycot the elections? It is a good tool for you to vote in to power someone that you benefit from.

Elections in Iran is not a show of democracy since there are many restrictions on who you can vote on, but that does not mean that all the contestants are exactly the same. IRI could not even care less if all the regime critics do not vote either, then they can choose who to put in Majlis and as president.

Some people say: "It is better if Ahmaghinejad stays in power since it would mean the death of IRI since it cannot get any worse". I assure you it can get much worse than today. The Isolationistic and extreme Shia policies of Ahmaghinejad would run Iran into a catastrophy if you ask me. But that does not make IRI to go away, much as the first Iraq USA war did not make Saddam Hussain to go away but made Iraqi people suffer more.

Some people say Khatami and Ahmaghinejad are the same. I would ask Iranians outside the country during the first mandate of Khatami when both the government and majles was in hand of reformists, how was Irans contacts with outside world and how do they look like today? How was Iran pictured in the western press then and how is it now? I remember reading papers in europe describing Iran "the most democratic in islamic world" a "role model for islamic countries" and so on, but today you can not find one single positive word. So even if you do not see any changes it does not mean they were none.

/Bidar bash ke ma bekhabim

To Parham

It seems like you put historical events in and out of context by sheer convenience; When talking about the rising economy during Khatami, or the hundreds of newspapers and magazines that opened in that era, all the social freedoms that were granted, all the sociopolitical movements that flourished, the improvement of foreign relations..etc you put them in all kinds of different contexts and associate them with all sorts of external events and justifications, ranging from the Mykonos trial to the global economy. And you go as far as reducing to almost nothing, the role of the president and his administration is policy makings.

But when talking about the negative events, you suddenly stop caring about the "context" anymore; and it is under Khatami's "era" that decedents were murdered (regardless of which side Khatami was on, and the fact that his own allies and supporters, such as Hajarian, were among the victims. And regardless of how hard he fought to, at least, partially dismantle some of Vezarte etelaat's terrorist cells)...and it was during Khatami's "era" that newspapers were closed (regardless of the fact that ALL of them were newspapers supporting the reform movement), and it was during Mousavi's Prime ministry that the mass executions happened (again regardless of any "context" and situation in which he had to work at that time).

How is that for an objective political analysis?!!

I really don't get the Iranians mentality about elections. They twist and over-analyze the concept so much that they end up losing all common sense and coming up with totally irrational conclusions. To me, it is plain and simple; a more qualified and more liberal administration IS better than a fundamentalist incompetent one, anyway you look at it. I don't want my country's economy and foreign politics to be managed by an administration that has absolutely no qualifications. And whoever claims that there is no difference between Ahmadinejad's and Mousavi's administration simply has no clue about Iranian politics.

Ali1234

I don't really need to do a research on anyone's economic policies! I think you're referring to that publicity video spread by the Mousavi people, where they compare inflation and other figures during Khatami's presidency as compared to Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad's.
For one thing, the official Central Bank data (where those figures are from) are usually not correct (or exact) and that's the way it has always been. The best source to look at for figures concerning Iran is always the Economist Intelligence Unit's country report or, in case you can get your hands on one, the unofficial Central Bank report, made for "in-house" use.

But anyway, I do agree that policies that were adopted and implemented during Ahmadinejad's presidency were sometimes out of this world... However, again please also consider the fact that a lot of decisions are taken in the majles and NOT the government body, and Iran wasn't blessed with the best majles(es) these past few years either.

BUT, the point that I would like to make about the comparisons that fly abound during election time is one shouldn't forget the setting and/or context in which each government has been run in the past. I'll explain: When Rafsanjani took over, the war with Iraq had just ended and the country was just going to embark on a long boom. So there is no surprise if during Rafsanjani's presidency period we had a "positive" economic out-turn. I'm putting the word positive under quotation marks because if you did analyze the economy back then, you'd see the lacks even at the time. When Khatami took over, the indicators were all beginning to look good, the foreign reserves were getting filled and with the global economic outlook, there was no reason the trend wouldn't continue, which it did. Also keep in mind the majleses that carried from one presidency to another, which are instrumental in the economic outlook -- meaning it's not all "this president" and "that president". That is an extremely simplistic way to look at things which carries from being used to having "this Shah" being good and "that Shah" being bad!
But don't worry, I recently heard the same reasoning from a Sharif University student who's in Berkeley, which made me think he should stick to engineering instead!
Anyway, to get on with the story, you know the rest (I hope) -- when Ahmadinejad took over, Bush had invaded Iraq, the world was going towards one of the worst crises it has ever known (which we are experiencing right now), and even though the price of oil went up drastically, with it, a lot of other factors changed which also influenced the economy of Iran. If you want, we'll discuss those, but that will be a LONG discussion! So it's NOT all Ahmadinejad's (or his cabinet's) fault as some would have you believe. But again, I'm not saying that there was no mismanagement. There was, and there was even more than there ever was mismanagement during Khatami or Rafsanjani's eras. Just don't go down the statistics road like that, because they can make Donald Duck look like Mickey Mouse.

Now, politically, let's also put all these gentlemen in the context of historical events. When Khatami was taking over, the Mykonos trials were just over and the Islamic Republic was under very heavy pressure internationally. Khatami only served as a bridge to alleviate that pressure that could have broken the IR's back through sanctions and other means that could have come its way. True, the "rap" changed, they began talking about "civil society" etc. but really, how much of it was put into effect?
I always challenge anyone who praises Khatami as a "reformer" to name even ONE reform accomplshed during his time, and believe me, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE can ever come up with ONE reform. You know why? Because there weren't ANY! It was ALL rhetoric. And you know what the rhetoric did? It raised the expectations of the people without actually giving in on any of them. In fact, the chain murders happened during Khatami's period and there never was a result for ANY of the court stories that ensued. True, more newspapers opened during his period, but never was there a time either where as many newspapers were closed. And I could go on and on...

And again, wasn't it him who came out and openly said he was only a "tadarokatchi" in the end? So now it was the students who didn't respect him that day? Please...

And what do you mean we Iranians are ungrateful, etc. It's every Iranian's DUTY to put anyone attempting to govern it under question. More, it's those people's DUTY to reply with a SOUND answer.

So talking about having a responsibility towards our country, you see, I think one of us doesn't have his values straight. You cite the mass killings of 67 ('88), yet you fail to say who was pm then and who refused to say anything about those mass killings, ever.

As to voting -- seriously, I won't vote for ANYONE unless it is a totally democratic process, never even mind the fact that the people who are set to get elected could actually be judged for crimes against humanity one day. You may not realize that, but that's the case.
Do open your eyes! Please!

To Parham

These statistics are from the Iranian Central Bank itself. I don't think there is any disagreement about the damage that Ahmadinejad caused to the economy. I suggest you do a research on Khatami's economic policies vs Ahmadinejad's. I think this alone is a good reason to vote.

As for the social and political changes that Khatami brought, it suffices to compare the I.R rhetoric before and after Khatami.

There was a time (like summer 67) when the regime would execute thousands of political activists in a month and no one could say a damn thing. Today even the more ultra-conservative and fundamentalist elements of the regime have to compete in elections AND they MUST promise more democracy and social freedoms in order to get elected. Who can forget the day when Khatami sat in the university hall, and as the President of the Islamic Republic, took all kinds of harsh criticism and plain insults from students for 3 hours?! Do you think that might have set a precedent and been an important step towards changing the totalitarian mentality in the I.R and even among people themselves? Do you think that 8 more years of such acts of tolerance would be more beneficial to Iran than the holocaust denials and antagonistic approach of Ahmadinejad?

And who can deny Khatami's role in changing the entire vocabulary of the I.R? For the first time after the revolution (and even before it) somone introduced the concepts of "mardom salari"(democracy), "jame'e madani" (civil society), "tasamoh va tasahol" (tolerance)in the Iranian political vocabulary from AN OFFICIAL position of power. Does that deserve the support of those of us who pretend to be all fore democracy and freedom?

All the NGOs and socio-political movements and almost all the activist figures that we know today, were totally unknown or non-existent before Khatami. Even those like Ganji who are now criticizing him.

We Iranians tend to be very ungrateful towards those who have served us and we tend to categorically deny and dismiss all of someone's achievements if everything did not go exactly the way we wanted it.

Anyway, I am not trying to convince to start liking Khatami, I just hope you realize that there IS a difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavia and reconsider your boycotting stand. We also have a responsibility towards our country.

سی سال راًی دادن شما را بکجا رساند؟

بعد به شعورتون توهین نمیشه که در انتصابات شرکت کنید، ولی شرکت نکردن باعث توهین میشه؟؟ عجب!٫

تصحیح

قبل از اینکه کسی بخواهد ایراد بگیرد، چون میدونم خیلی ها توی فورم ها دوست دارند ایراد های بنی اسرائیلی روی چیزایی مثل دیکته بگیرند، باید بگم میدونم نسل رو با ث نمی نویسند و با س مینویسند، و این یک تایپوی نا خواسته بود!

حجاب در ایران

حالا که حافضه ضعیف سیاسی مردم مانع یاد آوری سی سال پیش میشه ميخواهم به نسل بعد از انقلاب بگم که این آقای موسوی همان شخصی است که با امضای خود به عنوان نخست وزیر حجاب اسلامی زنان را برای اولین بار در تاریخ ایران رسمأ به شکل قانون قابل اجرا کرد. اسناد رسمی نشان میدهد که حجاب در ایران بدون دخالت هیچ حکم یا توصیه ای از بالا و تنها به دستور ایشان از حالت عرف شکل قانون به خود گرفت.

سی سال تحریم ما را به کجا رساند؟

این همه تحریم انتخابات کردیم به کجا رسیدیم؟ جز اینکه سال به سال اوضاع ما وخیم تر و وخیم تر شد؟ چرا باید تحریم کنیم، که نشون بدیم چند نفر به جمهوری اسلامی میگن اَخ؟ چند نفر راضی نیستند چند نفر مخالفند؟ خوب ما چه نشون بدیم چه ندیم، که آقایون بالادست خودشون کار خودشون رو میکنند. اونا هم خوب میدانند که کی با حکومت هست و کی علیه! باید تحریم کنیم که صلاحیت و موجودیت ندیم به رژیم؟ خوب چه خوشتون بیاد چه نه، صبح بخیر، جمهوری اسلامی هست. تا ما نتونیم بقبولانیم به خودمون که جمهوری اسلامی وجود داره، چطوری میخوایم اونو حذف کنیم یا تغییر بدیم یا تصحیح کنیم یا هر چی؟ چطور میخواید چیزی رو تغییر بدید که اصلاً از نظرتون عملاً وجود نداره؟! کسی که به من بگه باید انتخابات رو تحریم کرد، به شعور من و امثال من، توهین کرده، چون داره میگه که همین یه شانسی که هر چهار سال یک بار برایمون پیش میاد که بدون رفتن به زندان و کتک خوردن و دست گیر شدن و ممنوع الخروج و ورود شدن ، نظرمون رو بگیم، و شرکت کنیم توی رژیمی که قبل از اینکه ما پا توی دنیا بزاریم، برامون انتخاب کردند. اگر نسل انقلابیون در انتخابشون اشتباه کردند، انتظار نداشته باشند که ماها ، نثل بعد از انقلابی ها، نثل بعد از جنگی ها، اشتباهایشان رو کور کورانه تکرار کنیم! آری، سکوت، سرشار از ناگفته هاست. ناگفته هایی که هیچ وقت شنیده نخواهند شد.

Ali1234

- Please give me a source for your figures!
- Name the political changes you're referring to.

In any case, the real issue is not whether it should be Ahmadinejad or a Khatami be-alike. The real question is a lot more fundamental than that in my opinion.

To Parham

During Khatami the inflation went down from 18.5% when her took office to 10.5% the day he left. Since Ahmadinejad took office, the inflation went from 10.5% to 25%.

Do you think this is a good reason to vote for a more qualified president, if you care about your country?

I don't even need to talk about all the social and political changes that happened during Khatami's presidency.

I can not believe that we still have to convince some intelligent people that a more qualified president is better than a incompetent fundamentalist one!!

Mehdi

That's exactly what I was trying to make you see. There was no reform.
Based on historical data, I can tell you that there will be no reform this time either.
Based on 30-year longitudinal observations(!), I can tell you "sage zard baradare shoghale".

We'll have to disagree.

Parham: With al due respect

Mehdi

You couldn't name that one reform now, could you?

What I'm saying is there will (probably) be a difference in the social aspects of how Iranian society will be dealt with. The rest will be just illusion.

There might be more social freedoms, but then at the same time that will expose more people, just like it did last time (with Khatami).

Expectations will rise, but when it comes to supporting those raised expectations, there will be let-down, just like last time.

There will probably be more soft rhetoric, but nothing concrete to go with it. In other words, you won't see the beef, only the smoke that'll burn your eyes. Just like last time.

People unfortunately have short memory. They've already forgotten that last speech and q/a by Khatami at the university of Tehran and the state of mind that ruled Iran then. They've had so much worse (or seemingly worse, actually) that they're considering him almost like a hero.

And then there are those who will sell their compatriots short so they can do whatever it is they want to do under less restrictions.

I just hope there won't be any serial murder(s) of intellectuals or the likes of them this time. We'll see!

Parham: Are you sayinge it makes no difference who is elected?

You are saying these people are exact duplicate of each other? You are saying that if Khatami had not been elected and had not done what he did, it would have made absolutely no difference? I think you'd have  ahard time even convincing the CIA, never mind Iranians. 

Mehdi

Name ONE (yes, only one) reform accomplished by Khatami during his eight-year tenure.

Al those who support boycotting misrepresent the facts

In fact it is practically impossible to find an opposition group or person who is fairl honest and truthful. I always find gross misrepresentation of facts and outright falsehood spread by such people in or der to get a revolution going. 

Are you seriously suggesting that if people vote for a more moderate guy it makes no difference? And your reasoning is that Khatami didn't completely change the regime and therefore no matter what he accompliched is meaningless?

Amazing! That's all I can say. 

Vote? Joke?

انتخابات دروغین رژيم را تحریم کنید
شرکت در انتخابات یعنی توهین به شعور و شخصیت خود به عنوان یک انسان دارای عقل و خرد .
براستی چرا باید در انتخاباتی شرکت کرد که در مرحله اول تعدادی آخوند دست چین شده توسط خامنه ای در شورای نگهبان افرادی را از بین کاندیداها جدا میکنن و به عنوان نامزد ریاست جمهوری به مردم معرفی میکنن یعنی مردم شما قدرت تشخیص ندارید.
بعد از انتخاب شدن رئیس جمهور حتی اگر این شخص 70میلیون رای هم آورده باشند تا حکمشان توسط این مردک خامنه ای تنفیض نشود رای 70 میلیون باطل است !! و توهینی از این بالاتر که شخص خامنه ای بارها گفته این مهم نیست که به چه کسی رای میدهید این مهم است که در انتخابات شرکت کنید یعنی شما شرکت کنید ما خودمون انتخاب میکنیم !! پس شرکت در انتخابات دروغین رژیم توهین به انسانیت و شعور خود است.

No Go

Please not again one of these annoying and boring articles for boycotting the elections. You want a secular, democatic country? Move your ass and do something for it. Go and vote.

You think these elections are a show? Maybe reading this article helps a bit: //www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic.... Now, on the 20th anniversary of the bloody suppression of the protesters, Zhao’s memoirs — painstakingly reconstructed from hours of tape recordings smuggled out by supporters — provide a unique glimpse of the deep divisions within the Chinese leadership.

بابا تو دیگه کی هستی ؟

سلام آقای نوری علاء عرض کنم حضور با سعادتتان ، من وقتی نوشته های شما را می خوانم به یاد دوران دانشجویی خود در ایران می افتم. آن موقع تنها وسیله تکثیر جزوات دستگاههای پلی کوپی بودند. دانشجویانی که می خواستند به هر مناسبتی ، اطلاعیه ای را صادر کنند، از همه مساحت یک ورق کاغذ A4 استفاده کرده و در همان یک صفحه ، زمین و زمان را به هم می دوختند. از امپریالیسم و کمونیسم و سرمایه داری تا صهیونیسم و به قول بعضی ها روماتیسم را می آوردند. الان هم نوشته های شما به نظر من یادگار آن دوران است. در هر مقاله ای با وجود آنکه عنوان مشخصی دارد، آن قدر تز و آنتی تز و نظریه های اثبات نشده و درد دل و دوا و شفاء و تنقیه و سودا و بلغم قاطی می کنید که تمام نشریه بو می گیرد. جنابعالی که عنوان مقاله خود " من رای دادم، اما به حساب نیامد گذاشته اید" چرا خودتان به نظرات و به اصطلاح کامنت هایی که در انتهای به اصطلاح مقالاتتان می آید، اصلاً پاسخ نمی دهید. شما به نظر من بهتر است به جای مقاله سیاسی داستان و قصه بنویسید در آن صورت کسی بر شما خرده نخواهد گرفت. مثل همان دانشجویان جوان ، بیشتر در صدد هستید عناوین معلومات(؟) خود را به رخ خوانندگان خود بکشید تا اینکه با آنها درگیر، بحثی سازنده شوید.

Boycotting Iranian elections will not prove...

as a useful tool for a show of strength by the "people in bondage".  Such an ill-advised boycott only guarantees Ahmadinejad's winning the coming elections. Those who snooze will sure lose. Ahmadinejad and his followers are praying that more people heed the call to boycott the elections because they know that's the only way the can win.

موافق

فقط چرا «بایکوت» و «بویکات» نه؟