Iranian Liberal Democrat

Maziar

I wish it was as you say. But 0 military would have meant 100% taken by Saddam or some other enemy. Iran is in a rough neighborhood. There are some who will take if given a chance. That is why unfortunately Iran needs a military.

I am not talking IRI. I am talking about the whole thing.

50 billion dollars question

personally as an Iranian  I want a country with 0 zero military budget,50% on rebuilding the country and creating jobs and 100% on health and education for all.      Maziar

MM

I like your points. We all know the 1979 poll is both 30 years old and for promises not delivered. So in short: a politician "Khomeini" lied and people fell for it. In a democracy he would be voted out next time. In IRI we got stuck with him and his sucessors. The one thing I like to add to the 13 points is a ban on death penalty. It has been around for too long. It serves mostly as a political terror tool. People are better of without it.

VPK - another way to pose your question

is to ask everyone how many of the below principals one agrees or disagrees with.

1. Territorial Integrity, Independence and Sovereignty of Iran.

2. Respect for independence and integrity of other countries and promoting peace with all nations and countries.

3. Government of the People, By the People and For the People.

4. Three Independent Branches of Executive, Legislative and Judiciary of the government with limited terms and full accountability and transparency.

5. No Official Religions and ideologies.

6. Full separation of Religion and State at all government levels without any exceptions.

7. Exclusion of clergy, religious groups, parties and organizations from government.

8. Freedom of Expression, Information, Religions, Beliefs, Media and Assembly.

9. Equal social and legal rights and opportunity for all Iranians.

10. Gender Equality without any exceptions.

11. Presumption of innocence until proven guilty. No political prisoners and prisoners of conscious.

12. Full guarantee and legal protection of all human, political, ethnic, economic, social, religious and cultural rights within the scopes of the constitution.

13. Conservation and improvement of environment.

IRI supporters will have trouble with several of the above core-pricipals and we can discuss issues instead of being stuck on what percentage of people attempted to vote for a group of pre-selected candidates; candidates who were pre-selected by a group of un-elected self-righteous religious zealots.

IRI-supporters will then tell us that 98% voted for these zealots back in 1979, but then we can argue which campaign promises were those votes based on: The version given under an apple tree or the version that was written after the formation of IRI.

Iraninans opinion

I hear a lot of discussion on whether Iranians support IRI. The IRI supporters of course argue they do and cite polls and factors to support it.

For a moment lets put aside any polls valid or not. Instead I want to pose a fundamental question. Do Iranians like to live under a repressive dictatorship? Or do they prefer to live in an open democracy.

Now to answer this. We note that there are many millions of Iranians living in the West. They function great; they fit in the societies well; they have no problem with democracy; they do not abuse the freedom and openness; they handle the freedoms quite well. In fact they seem to like it! This is not just Iranians who moved here 30 years ago. I see this in Iranians who are here for a visit or just immigrated. Therefore I think we can safely reason that Iranians do like democracy and prosper in it.

Now this is not a scientific poll. But just look at Iranians in the West and it is obvious.

Q, you are not selling rug or boloor, dude :-)

Q,

ziad joosh nazan.

In your initial post, you were wrong on many points. My post is here and your post is here. People can read both and judge for themselves. You have a looooooooooong history on this site of writing garbage after garbage after garbage. That is why you remind me of Saddam’s Minister of intelligence.

1. On the 1997 participation rate. Once in a blue moon you are right. This is one of them. I had quoted Farhi. This is the link to that source, which is not working any longer.

//www.asiasociety.org/publications/update_iran.html

Farideh Farhi was wrong. You can google this phrase and see what you get:

Farideh Farhi On Election Day, nearly 88 percent of eligible voters went to the polls

because the original publication is no longer available, it will send you

https://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/shibds/ciaods/DS?entityID=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ciaonet.org%2Fshibboleth&return=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ciaonet.org%2FShibboleth.sso%2FDS%3FSAMLDS%3D1%26target%3Dcookie%253A9c62bc0d

where a copy of this might be available

Farideh Farhi, "Political Paralysis: Iran’s 2001 Election and the Future of Reform"

or you can send her an email and ask to check her article and let you know whether or not she made the mistake.

Then YOU should apologize to me for writing that I lied.  I did NOT lie.  I accurately quoted someone who made an error.

In sum, nope, I did not lie. Farhi made a mistake. And I quoted her.

But thank you for the correction (your rudeness and insults aside).

2. The dude from the Council of Guardians explicitly says that over 3 million votes were irregular. This means that somehow more than 3 million votes appear as counted that do not exist. This is "FAKE vote." This is part of the 50 cities having more than 100% eligible votes. So either Ministry of Interior simply added more than 3 million votes in Tehran, or the Basij, or IRGC, or local officials placed fake ballots into the boxes in those cities with over 100% eligible votes.

This is what YOU wrote: "Even if we somehow discount the majority of those over- votes, we are still talking about 70-75%.."

Either the official figure of 85% is accurate or it is false. Here in YOUR own words you are choneh mizani. You are not selling rug or boloor, dude. Either the figures that the regime provides on elections, inflation, unemployment are accurate or they are cooked up.

Let me reiterate what I wrote in my conclusion. My conclusion stands. You want to believe the LIES of Ahmadinejad and Khomeini, go ahead.

In conclusion, the data are released by the Ministry of Interior. And monitored by the Council of Guardians. They can cook up any garbage they so desire just like the inflation rates and unemployment rates. None of the data released by a regime known for its lies and deceptions from Khomeini to Ahmadinejad can be trusted. Fundamentalists are a bunch of liars and charlatans.

Q

Yes I did understand exactly the scenario you put out. Note that I said it is unlikely not impossible.

If what you said happened then B; C; D; E and F would have a corresponding *undercount*. In addition why would so many people go to a different city to vote. Was there a big gathering of people from out of town in cities with 100+ votes? What was going on.

You are playing contortions with logic to prove these is a possibility. Sure there is a possibility but not a likelihood. The far more plausible one is vote rigging. Don't tell me it does not happen; it happens everywhere;  all the time! 

VPK

VPK, you didn't understand

If 100% of people voted. Something that has *never* happened. Only recorded ones are fake elections under dictatorships like IRI.
Then on top of that additional people somehow qualified and voted to push the numbers over the maximum!

sigh...

The situation is like this:

There is a population of 10 eligable voters in city A.

On election day, 6 out of the 10 vote.
Then 5 other people from cities B,C,D,E,F come into city A, and vote also. This is legal in Iran and is plausible in n very high turnout election like this. (some people were being bussed in, some came to larger provintial centers to demonstrate, or await the results).

The result appears as though 11 people voted in a city that has only 10 voters. Hence over 100%, but not exhausted the cities voter population. The true turnout in city A is only 60%.

Suspicious? maybe, but plausible. No evidence proving fraud just by this, which is why Green candidate election monitors are not disputing turnout numbers, only the tallying at the ministry of interior in Tehran (among other complaints logdged about the election frauds).

Kazemzadeh, you are being VERY evasive and dishonest

You cannot accept your own biases and unfortunately, are using a facade of rationality to pretend you have any valid points. This is so obvious to anyone who would take the time to read what has happened below.

Before I get into this, let me say I find your conduct to be quite sad, and your personal attack is only to be expected being that you have been proven wrong substantially.

The two points (among the dozens of mine) that you chose even respond are both wrong and irrelevant to the apoint. However, they do reveal a lot about you.

point 1

You say:
YOU are wrong even on basic facts. According to the regime’s own data, the turnout was HIGHER in 1997 than in 2009.

No, I'm afraid you are wrong.
The official results for 1997 presidential election is over 79% turnout, rounded to 80% not 88%, as was announced to the world by the minitry of interior and reported by world media. This means it was lower than the 2009 election turnout:

the election was notable for the second highest turnout in Iran's political history - after the nationwide referendum over the establishment of the Islamic Republic in December 1979. The official figures provided by the interior ministry declare that over 42 million people (nearly 85% of the eligible voters) took part - an estimate which itself must be subject to the same scrutiny as any other, but which is echoed in other calculations. In any event, the only other election turnout that compares is the 1997 election that resulted in a landslide win for the reformist candidate, Mohammad Khatami, who won over 70% of the votes on an 80% turnout.
[source: Farhang Jahanpour, Open Democracy, June 23/09]

Official press accounts:

PBS:
In May 1997, Iranians went to the polls in droves. Nearly 80 percent of eligible voters participated, and fully 70 percent of them voted for Khatami, giving him and his reform agenda a resounding endorsement. Even in Qom, the center of theological training in Iran and a conservative stronghold, 70 percent of voters cast their ballots for Khatami.
//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/tehr...

BBC:
Voter turnout hit a record high at 80% in the 1997 elections which delivered a landslide victory for reformist President Mohammad Khatami.
//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8051750.stm

New York Times
a record 80 percent -- worked in their favor. President Khatami, who has invigorated Iran's political life with his talk of creating a civil society and the rule of law, was swept into office in 1997 on the strength of a tremendous turnout by Iran's young people and women.
//www.nytimes.com/2000/02/21/world/iran-refor...

Farsi Sources:
//www.hamshahrionline.ir/news-82636.aspx
//fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AA%D8...

Last, but not least, YOUR OWN SOURCE FARIDEH FARHI
Electoral manipulation – or engineering as it is sometimes called in the country – is not uncommon in Iran. It is part and parcel of a competitive process and has become increasingly sophisticated in recent years in order to prevent a repeat of the 1997 election, when reformist Mohammad Khatami won by a landslide. At that time, the unprecedented number of people participating in the election (79%) effectively prevented large-scale fiddling with the ballots,.
//www.ssrc.org/features/pages/social-scientis...

point 2

MK: see within a few hours, you go from undisputed 85% to 70-75% participation!!!!! You should realize we are talking about voter participation compared with eligible voters. This is NOT you trying to sell me carpet or boloor. This is about what percentage of eligible voters actually voted in the election. The FACT that you dropped your undisputed participation rate by 10-15 percentage in few hours, is evidence that there are NO RELIABLE data.

No, my jumpy friend. The turnout is 85% undisputed by anyone on either side of the debates, including all the Greens, and all the analysts that I quoted below. You are playing with words.

Read what I said.

Even if we somehow discount the majority of those over- votes, we are still talking about 70-75%, still a very high participation rate,

I said "even if" we are to take your argument that the "3 Million" votes should not count. Even if, you know what that means? IF!!!

I did not "drop my numbers". All the offical sources say 85%. You lied already when you said that the GC has considered 3 Million votes "fake". I proved that this was not true, but in having a logical discussion, I said even if it were true, it still a very high turnout.

You are extremely dishonest and evasive in even simple argumentation. The 1997 voter turnout number is not up for dispute. This has been published for years and can be checked easily. Your own source does not say what you claim and even if she did, you lied when you siad this was "regime's own numbers". There are only two possibilities.

Either you are extremely ignorant of these "basic facts" or you are a pathological liar. I'm forced to think the latter after everything you have pulled, all the dishonest evasion and selective responses with false "evidence."

It's clear you have no interest in the truth, only to "appear" authoritive and promote your own biases in guise of research.

Extremely saddened by this doctor Kazemzadeh.

MM

Dear MM,

On the 2003 poll. After a few weeks, the Amir Kabir students were forced to remove the poll from their website. The Daftar Tahkim Vahdat was part of the reformist faction and Khatami was president in 2003, so they had some immunity.

The summer 2010 poll was conducted by the Jihad Daneshgai for some security-intelligence agency in IRI. Somehow the results of the poll were leaked to Kalame, which belongs to Mousavi. Mousavi’s group did not conduct the poll. They only published it.

You ask an excellent question. The poll does not make the goal specific. They wanted to know if the people belives that the regime had destroyed the Green Movement and the protest movement or people think that despite calm, the opposition is still strong. The answer was that the people believed that the opposition was still strong. The gradual method is about the method and not the goal. This would include those like Mousavi, Karrubi, Khatami and Rafsanjani, who want to gradually change some aspects of the status quo. It also includes those who want to establish a secular democratic republic but wish to use gradual methods of struggle.

MM: Did voting for gradual changes have anything to do with the violent reaction of IRI to the 88 protestors?

MK: It is hard to make any inferences on this. Some might think that because the protests did not overthrow the system, then lets use the non-violent gradual method. But also some might think, hey the non-violent method against the hard-liners did not work, so we have to use other methods. The poll did not ask specific questions that would help answer your question. And due to the terribly violent and dictatorial nature of the IRI, people would not trust to share such information about themselves.

On this very site, only a few us use their own real names. Most posters who oppose the fundamentalist regime use pseudonyms. Why? Because they do not want the fundamentalist regime to know their names. And we are somewhat safe from the regime. One could not ask the people inside to risk their lives with this fascistic regime. When Abtahi, or Rafsanjani’s close associates are not safe, how could one expect the rest of the population to be safe from torture, rape from these violent gang.

Best,

MK

Divaneh, VPK, Yousef, and Q

Divaneh jaan,

Thanks. I agree with everything you wrote.

You have a fantastic sense of humor. And I enjoy reading your posts.

Best regards,

Masoud

======================

VPK,

Q reminds me of Saddam’s Minister of Information

//www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

There are some people on this site like Q and Farah Rusta, whose minds are immune from evidence and logic. At least the Iraqi dude was funny. Our own Ministers of Mis-Information, Q and FR, are just mean.

I would say that the IRI is worse than the Shah’s regime. Our people deserve democracy and freedom. There is no reason why our people have to suffer from one form of brutal dictatorship or another.

Best,

MK

===============================

Yousef jaan,

I fully agree with you. Yes, thousands upon thousands of our people said "marg bar asl velayat faqih" [Death to the Principle of Velayat Faqih], again and again.

Best regards,

Masoud

===============================

Q,

There are, as usual, many errors of fact and interpretation in your post.

Q: "...we have literally dozens of analysis who have looked at this elections. From Chatham house to polling experts in the US. We really don't need you to speculate about all these turnout numbers. The reality is that while most of these professional analysis agreed with us that there was fraud in the tallying, not one of them concluded that the "turnout" was lower than reported. All the evidence suggest it was the largest tunrout since the early 80s."

MK: According to the regime’s own official data, in the presidential elections of 1997, nearly 88 percent of eligible voters participated, and of these, about 70 percent voted for Khatami. [source Farideh Farhi, "Political Paralysis: Iran’s 2001 Election and the Future of Reform," an Asia Society Publication, (2001) ]. YOU are wrong even on basic facts. According to the regime’s own data, the turnout was HIGHER in 1997 than in 2009. Now both these data could be false. In my opinion, none of the data by the fundamentalist regime is reliable; period.

this is what YOU wrote in earlier:

Q1: "One has to be careful making any inference other than what is directly stated and verified. For example, it is undisputed that 85% of the people voted in the election between two factions..."

Q2: "Even if we somehow discount the majority of those over- votes, we are still talking about 70-75%, still a very high participation rate, which as you admit above may be a strategic calculation on the part of the voters, but does ont dispute the high turnout.."

MK: see within a few hours, you go from undisputed 85% to 70-75% participation!!!!! You should realize we are talking about voter participation compared with eligible voters. This is NOT you trying to sell me carpet or boloor. This is about what percentage of eligible voters actually voted in the election. The FACT that you dropped your undisputed participation rate by 10-15 percentage in few hours, is evidence that there are NO RELIABLE data. In other words, the participation rate could be 60% or 50% or 45% or 40%. The regime could simply count any vote as two votes in order to buy legitimacy for an anti-democratic, anti-free "election."

This problem was also present in the 2005 election, when Karrubi said that he was in 2nd place when they were counting votes and so he went to sleep. When he woke up, he was in 3rd place. Karrubi said that he believes that Mojtaba Khamenei and others cheated. Rafsanjani also complained in 2005.

In conclusion, the data are released by the Ministry of Interior. And monitored by the Council of Guardians. They can cook up any garbage they so desire just like the inflation rates and unemployment rates. None of the data released by a regime known for its lies and deceptions from Khomeini to Ahmadinejad can be trusted. Fundamentalists are a bunch of liars and charlatans.

MK - A few questions and a comment.

Did anything happen to the 2003 polsters?

In Mousavi's pole, what was the final goal(s) of gradual changes?  i.e., gradual reforms towards Monarchy/secular democracy, ................ or was it towards the manifesto that Mousavi published a while back after the 88 elections?  And, over how long?

Did voting for gradual changes have anything to do with the violent reaction of IRI to the 88 protestors?

I agree on your assessment of the telephone pole, and thanks for your post.

on Ashura, millions of iranians demonstarted against Islamist

regime and said loud & cleare what they wanted :

Death to Islamic regime, Death to Dictator

I heard it because I was there. You heard it Masoud because you listen to and speak the truth. The sad, old islamist agents on this blog did not hear it because they were far away in LA and their peanut sized brains are wired to hear and say lies.

Thank you for great post sharing the data backing what we already know Dear Masoud

Dr Kazemzadeh

IMHO the reason Shah fell was that Carter withdrew USA support for him. Of course Iranian people were unhappy with the Shah and wanted freedom. But without active participation of Carter the Shah would not have fallen.

Iranian people wanted what Khomeini *promised* not what he *delivered*. I think Iranian people still want freedom. Personally I don't care if it is a parliamentary or presidential system. All that is open for discussion. I just don't want a dictatorship. Having said that I still think Shah was better than the IRI. Some people think that my position makes me a Monarchist. No as you yourself said "the lesser of evils". 

In any event; I am with you and fully support a secular democracy. With a bill of rights that protects the people against the worst excesses of the majority.

VPK

Q

Kheili chene mizani; chai khatmi ke goftam bokhor ba eftar barat khobeh. Feshare khon ro payin miyareh. Mekham zendeh bashi va sarnegoon shodaneh jomhoriyeh islami ro ba do cheshme khodet bebini.

You have not refuted Dr Kazemzadeh's arguments. In fact you are posing theoretical possibilities.

Regarding Polls: The Iranian people are not stupid. They know that answering a poll may have dire consequences. Specially if the answer is against the government. The Shah and SAVAK taught us that lesson. Khomeini and Khamenei reinforced it.The IRI is hanging people three at a time. Stoning women on false charges. Then you got the nerve to tell us people are not afraid to say what is on their minds! 

Regarding  roofs. There are some people who go out in the day. Many more people were willing to on on rooftops. What is the problem?

Regarding Mousavi and Karrubi. Dr. Kazemizadeh is right. People are supporting these because they are not as bad as the others.

Regarding the > 100 % turnout. Yes:

•  If 100% of people voted. Something that has *never* happened. Only recorded ones are fake elections under dictatorships like IRI.
• Then on top of that additional people somehow qualified and voted to push the numbers over the maximum!

But we all know that the above is like chances of rolling double sixes 100 times in a row. You need loaded dice: aka IRI.

Now to the point. Why are you supporting the IRI. You as well as the rest of us know it is a dictatorship. We know it has been and is very bad for Iran. In fact it may become the excuse for an attack on Iran. What is so wrong with having a secular democracy.  No body is going to keep you from practicing Islam. The only difference will be an end fo indiscriminate hangings; stoning; isolation; and forced Islam. Why do you oppose these if as you claim you are in support of Iranian people.

Future is bright

Dear MK, thanks for your timely blog. The findings in these small samples confirms my own observations of Iranians that I encounter. Poll is as meaningless in Iran as the vote. To argue with regime supporters over the validity of such data is like debating the harms and benefits of drug with drug dealers. They have their own narrow interest and brains matching their petty views.

I agree with your response to Mehman that there is normally a small minority of the society who is politically active and the bulk of the society usually follows at a later stage. That is why this small minority are maimed and killed by dictatorships such as IRI and its predecessor. To prevent that larger movement.

Sorry Kazemzadeh, you will have to try again

I don't see anything you're saying as "a large number of errors", and I find it very hypocritical of you to rehash this one year old debate but leave out information that you know are true. The bottom line is that my point about the election turnout is valid and yours at best relies on "selective indicators" that you have chosen to make your point.

1. You may have a valid argument here if people were not getting killed in the streets or being hit and arrested. By contrast I have never heard of a single person being arrested for answering a poll. If you have such statistics please share them, but I sincerely doubt they are anywhere close. This is clear proof that participating in the post-election demonstrations was a more dangerous activity. Also, numerous monarchist and Tehrangelesi TV stations routinely play phone conversations with people inside Iran who are cursing the regime.

You conviniently left off my point that if the fear of answering anonymous polls was so high, you would have seen a very high 90%-100% agreement iwth the government on those polls. That is not what they show, however. Why would IRI want to settle for "only" 6 in 10 people being happy living under it (That's what one of the polls found) You see this doesn't make sense and you angrily call it "garbage" because you can't explain it any other way.

Lastly, you insult our intelligence when you pretend you don't know that well over 50% of all political polling calls (really most polls in general) conducted in US and Europe are also rejected and it was pointed out by the pollsters a few days after the release that the rejection rate of Iranians was actually lower than those in other countries. So please.... spare us the sophistry.

2. People went to the roofs at nights and to streets at days. Your argument makes no logical sense. If you are part of the millions who went to street during the day, then you are not afraid to go the rooftop as you are implying.

3. Those who voted at Iranian.com voted because they argued that Mousavi and Karrubi were lesser of the evils compared to Ahmadinejad who was worse.

This is what we call a "hasty generalization". Not only do you not know if that's what the people at Iranian.com did, but also even if that is what they did, that is still a valid vote: a decision to make due with "lesser of two evils" instead of rejecting the whole election. These are calculations that voters in the US do all the time, does that mean their votes are not valid either?

Many of them want to have a secular democratic republic, but the choice was between reformists and Ahmadinejad, and large numbers really wanted Ahmadinejad out, so they did not listen to us and participated in the election.

Well so are you now saying "large numbers" in Iran really did vote?

I find it fascinating that you are making your own advocacy the prime reason for why people voted or didn't vote. In your universe, is it not possible to have listened to your argument, rejected it and voted for Mousavi anyway?

4. I'll come back to this below.

5. I find it very disingenuous of you, Kazemzadeh to selectively quote GC out of context. Yes, they said 50 cities had over 100% voters but that's completely legal because people travelled to those cities to vote as opposed to their own small towns and villages. This is entirely consistent with the conservative busloads of people who were brought to the polls. In fact Greens did the same. This was never a serious point of contention anywhere outside of FOX News because the audience simply didn't understand the fact that people can go vote anywhere. I would have thought you would have the integrity to mention this, even if you still think it was fraudulant, as some anlayists do. Instead you lie when you say that the GC said 3 Million votes are "fake". Why do you have to stoop this low for what is otherwise a good exchange?

Abbas Ali Kadkhodaei, the spokesman for the 12-member Guardian Council denied claims by another losing candidate, Mohsen Rezai, that irregularities had occurred in up to 170 voting districts.
“Statistics provided by the candidates, who claim more than 100 percent of those eligible have cast their ballot in 80 to 170 cities are not accurate — the incident has happened in only 50 cities,” Mr. Kadkhodaei said.
But he said that a voter turnout in excess of the registered voting list was a “normal phenomenon” because people could legally vote in areas other than those in which they were registered.
//www.business-spotlight.it/showPage.php?temp...

Even if we somehow discount the majority of those over- votes, we are still talking about 70-75%, still a very high participation rate, which as you admit above may be a strategic calculation on the part of the voters, but does ont dispute the high turnout.

You also forget that 10s of 1000s of election monitors working for Mousavi and Karroubi and Rezai did not dispute the turnout rates. The oppostion's main dispute with the counting is with the tallying at the interior ministry where all monitors were kicked out, not with the turnout.

Kazemzadeh, we have literally dozens of analysis who have looked at this elections. From Chatham house to polling experts in the US. We really don't need you to speculate about all these turnout numbers. The reality is that while most of these professional analysis agreed with us that there was fraud in the tallying, not one of them concluded that the "turnout" was lower than reported. All the evidence suggest it was the largest tunrout since the early 80s.

We had the largest recorded demonstrations with "where is my vote" signs since the 1979 revolution. The first-ever televized debates had captured the majority of the apathetic people in Iran. We all know from basic political science that lesser-informed voters vote for the status quo. We had rivaling rallys and demonstrations in Tehran Esfehan, Tabriz, Shiraz weeks before the elections. Here in the US people were lined up for blocks to vote. The Youtube videos of large crowds in Iran were played endlessly on all the world media. Are you seriously saying this was not a very high turnout election ?

Unless you are saying this, my point stands.

Your issue with the number of GC-allowed candidates is of course valid. But your conclusion that this negates (or tells us we don't know how many voted) for Khatami is nothing but self-serving delusion. We aren't stupid. We know what a high-turnout vote looks like. We know what the atmosphere and the vibrance is in such an event, as opposed to say a very low turnout event like when Rafsanjani was elected. No scholars (except for MEK) are disputign that election after election large majorities of Iranians walk to the polls and vote.

It may be unpleasant for your politics, but wishing it away won't make it so.

4. I did NOT say that the polls I used were meaningless. They are indications, and when we have several then we could see the bigger picture.

This is where you play fast and loose with the facts and logic. The "indications" are all biased in your favor. I have plenty of indications that for example, say that the 85% voting number is accurate as I stated them above. You want to rely on an old college vote simply to make your case in your favor and have concocted these "indications" so that you can claim you are somehow scientific about polls that you yourself say are not accurate.

I have "indications" too and they should be just as valid as yours:

- Large majorty of Iranians have been voting the last few elections.
- Largest demonstrations since the 1979 revolutions were in favor of Mousavi.
- Khatami and the reform movement were undisputedly popular with the people, winning landslide elections.
- Dispite your criticism that GC makes or breaks elections, when GC tried to eliminate two candidates in 2005, it was met with such uproar that it was forced to reinstate them, meaning if there was a very popular candidate even GC couldn't stop them. (indeed it happened with Mousavi).
- The IC poll indicates that even here in the US people preferred Mousavi. You dispute the poll saying it was a "lesser of 2 evils" argument, but this makes no sense for an online poll that does not actually contribute to the real results. Indeed 25% of the people voted for "I will not participate". If people felt trapped to vote a certain way in the real election, they weren't trapped on the online poll! How do you explain this?

You would like us to believe that the undemocratic nature of GC makes the entire election invalid. This assumption is based on the premise that "some" other guy could have won these elections but because of GC, he/she was not allowed to stand. But you have failed time and time again to come up with even a single name that could have passed the laugh-test as a serious candidate for Iran.

Lastly, you are playing with numbers and making up "indications" to suit your own needs. You can't have your cake and eat it too, Kazemzadeh. Either you throw out all "less than perfect" polls, or you use them. Or if you want to use your "indications" to make a conclusion on even a bad poll, that makes them as good as anybody else's "indications."

Saddam Hussein also won his elections as did communists in Eastern European communist regimes.
And neither had very high turnouts which quite naturally meant nobody cared enough to either dispute or protest these elections. Just like most of the Middle East today.

So, once again, I ask you, where is your proof that "only a small minority" wants IRI (hardliner or reformist)?

I ask this fully admitting that the percentage of people who have lost faith in the system has increased since the elections. But your argument is that such faith was never there to begin with and didn't exist before 2009 either.

Mehman, Q, and "monarchist" comrade

Dear Mehman,

I do agree with you that a good proportion of the population is NOT interested in politics. That is the case in most societies. Many simply do not care (not only in Iran but other places).

Most people in Iran do not get involved in politics. If they did, the Shah’s regime would not have lasted that long. If they did, the fundamentalist regime would not have lasted that long. Most people in the world do not get involved in politics around the world.

The Shah was overthrown when ONLY 2 to 4 million came to the streets. One of the main reasons the Shah left was because of the oil workers’ strikes that convinced the U.S. to tell the Shah to leave.

I also agree with you that many people are simply uninformed or misinformed. Daee jaan Napelon syndrom is one of the worst aspects of our political culture.

I do not see anything in your post to disagree with.

Political activities are carried out by a minority of population. When on June 15, 2009, about 3 million people came to the streets in Tehran (total population of 10 to 12 million), that was massive popular participation. And despite massive repression, the people participated in so many other events.

Best regards and best wishes,

Masoud

=================================

Q,

There are a lot of errors in your post.

1. There is a huge difference between 3 million coming to the streets on June 15, 2009 where one person is a part of a million plus crowd, his/her name and house are not easily known. But when someone CALLS YOUR HOME, you could realistically assume that they know your phone and thus could get your name and home address. It is assumed by many that the regime intelligence agencies listen to phone conversations. Therefore, in a brutal violent dictatorship like the one in Iran, it would not be safe to be honest on telephone and say that you oppose the fundamentalist regime and want it overthrown and replaced with a secular liberal democracy.

Phone interviews that sargord included are garbage, period. Not because I agree or disagree with the results, but due to the nature of the fundamentalist regime and the methodology used. Even its own data showing that less than 35% cooperated means that 65% did not.　

2. People go on the roofs at night, precisely because they are afraid that if they go on the streets, they will be arrested, tortured, raped, sodomized, and possibly killed. Heloooooooo. To be on the roof at night is a safe place to show one’s opposition.

3. Those who voted at Iranian.com voted because they argued that Mousavi and Karrubi were lesser of the evils compared to Ahmadinejad who was worse. The participants at Iranian.com like many in Iran voted in the election to keep Ahmadinejad out. There was and is intense hatred for Ahmadinejad among vast numbers of the people. Many of them want to have a secular democratic republic, but the choice was between reformists and Ahmadinejad, and large numbers really wanted Ahmadinejad out, so they did not listen to us and participated in the election. And when the fundamentalist regime did not even respect its own rules and the candidates that its own Council of Guardians had approved, then they came out to the streets. And when the regime used so much violence, their demands were raised to above those of the reformists within the fundamentalist oligarchy and they demanded IRANIAN REPUBLIC (i.e., a secular and democratic republic).

4. I did NOT say that the polls I used were meaningless. They are indications, and when we have several then we could see the bigger picture.

5. Q wrote: "One has to be careful making any inference other than what is directly stated and verified. For example, it is undisputed that 85% of the people voted in the election between two factions..."

MK: I strongly dispute that 85% of the eligible voters participated. That number is FALSE using even the data provided by the Council of Guardians.

Even the hard-line controlled Council of Guardians conceded that in 50 cities, the votes cast were over 100% of eligible voters. The Council of Guardians’ spokesman said that the irregularity was "over 3 million." But added that: "it has yet to be determined whether the amount is decisive in the election result."

source: "Guardian Council: Over 100% voted in 50 cities," PressTV, June 21, 2009

The data provided on the election was false. The Council of Guardians admits that over 3 million votes were fake. But you, Q, still insist that 85% of eligible voters participated. You are kas-e dagh-tar az ash.

The data on Ahmadinejad’s votes are FALSE. The data on Mousavi’s votes are FALSE. The data on Karrubi’s votes are FALSE. The data on participation is FALSE. The data on inflation rate is FALSE. The data on unemployment rate is FALSE.

Ahmadinejad saying that Iran is the freest country in the world is FALSE.

Khamenei saying that the election was correct is FALSE.

On Khatami’s votes. There was no free and democratic election in Iran in 1997 or 2001. The Iranian people do not have the right to vote for whomever we want. The fundamentalist regime’s Council of Guardians allows a few members of the fundamentalist oligarchy to run. Yes, Khatami is less bad than Nategh Nouri or Mohsen Rezaee, or Ahmadinejad.

When we have a free and democratic election in Iran, then you will see who will win and who will lose. One may argue that the primary reason that the fundamentalist regime officials (both hard-line and reformists factions) are afraid of free and democratic elections is because they KNOW that they will lose to the democratic opposition.

Saddam Hussein also won his elections as did communists in Eastern European communist regimes.

I hope this is helpful.

MK

================================ 

Comrade,

Are you sure you are not a monarchist pretending to be a comrade?

;-)

Monarchy and democracy

it is the best of both worlds. That's why Iranians want it. I really believe based on my experience.

What a rush? Booyé kabaabé yaa daaran khar daagh mikonand?

What is the true logic for the posting of this Mosaddegh-shoving (no disrespect intended) blog of yours, my learned friend?

Whom are we exactly trying to fool here? 

IRI will not budge, and no American politician will sway an inch because of this data, scientific or not.

It seems you've got nervous only because of another semi-polling blog in Farsi about the desired shape of the future regime in Iran.

If I may I'd like to remind us all, again, that today is the time and day of unity. These childish acts of hasty exhibition of partisanship will only solidify the current regime in Tehran.

Your hero, has a certain place in our society, and history which should be regarded much higher than this level of petty politics. 

Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.

Kazemzadeh,

yes, I have to agree with Sargord, don't be selective. All polls are biased, you can't throw away only the ones that you don't like.

Also, the fact that people were willing to come to the street in huge numbers counters your point that people are "afraid" to speak out. Afraid to talk to a pollster on the phone (who does not ask for names) but don't have a problem going on the roofs at night and shouting Allaho Akbar?

If what you say was the dominate "culture", then these polls should have been 100% pro Government, right?

While I (just now) found out about Aynak's poll, you should mention that only about 20-30 people have voted there.

Also, you forgot our own pre-election poll here with over 1500 votes.

//iranian.com/main/polls/2009/jun/who-wou...

Lastly, its very interesting that you (correctly) admit all these polls are ultimately meaningless and only a fair national vote can be definitive, so then one has to ask, how the hell can you make this statement with a straight face?

The supporters of the IRI (hard-liners plus reformists) constitute a small minority of the population.

based on what exactly??? "elme gheib"?

The fair way to look at this is that all the polls do contain some degree of truth, and some noise. One has to be careful making any inference other than what is directly stated and verified. For example, it is undisputed that 85% of the people voted in the election between two factions that you claim are a "small minority", as 70% had supported Khatami for 2 terms. I'd love to hear your explanation.

Intelligentsia vs. Common People

Dr. Kazemzadeh Aziz,

I think there is a huge difference between the common people and the university-educated people in Iran. I don't know how long you have been away from the country. If the years are more than 15, you might have forgotten the sense of what I am talking about.

First, I totally agree with the general outcome of the polls that you have mentioned which are in favor of a democratic republic, but the point I want to make is something else:

There is a huge difference of knowledge and political inclination in Iran between the intelligentsia and the common people. I was able to grasp this gap due to the years that I lived in Iran and conversed with the common people.

We have some defined political goals and ideals but the common people have a different understanding. The more I talk about this the less you will believe me unless you have actually lived in Iran (and not just visited for a week or a month) recently and spent a considerable amount of time with the common people.

I just give you one example among hundreds which I encountered and which frustrated me a lot and gave me a dark sense of realism:

About 10 years ago, the day when Hajarian was assassinated and hospitalized I was complaining against the assassination and the anti-reformist right wingers in several taxi rides that I took in Tehran going to different places and to my utter astonishment many people (both passenger and taxi driver) asked me indifferently who Hajarian was?!

A few of them asked me whether he was a 'good or bad guy'?! I asked a few times: "aren't you guys listening to the news every day?" The people were so uninterested in what we were so eagerly interested that it made me very much disappointed!

This event and hundreds like it made me realize that the common people in Iran are living in an entirely different world than the university-educated and political people.

Most polls that you are talking about are fully acceptable by me and you and most educated people, but I have doubts whether the majority of common people iranians constituting about 70% of the population would think and vote like us.

Thank you,

Mehman

MP

MP,

Of course as I mentioned at the beginning of this blog, that the definitive answer would only come through the free referendum. This blog was on whether or not there is some way to make an educated GUESS about the support base of various alternatives. So, I presented several indications, which put together along with our observations do provide some indications.

I.  The supporters of the IRI (hard-liners plus reformists) constitute a small minority of the population. I can and do agree that university students are more liberal and more active than their parents. So, we have the Amir Kabir data. But you also saw that I increased the percentages of the IRI hard-liners from 6% to 10-15 %. You also saw that I increased the percentage of IRI reformists from 4% to 10-15 %. I did take into account that students are more liberal than the general population.

II.  These indications also indicate that a majority supports a secular democratic republic. One could take 25% from the 85% support from the Amir Kabir poll and we could still get the minimum I gave as 60% for secular democratic republic.

These show that we could, and should, do all we can to get rid of the fundamentalist regime as soon as possible. That in the post-fundamentalist Iran, we have a consensus on the form of political system (democratic secular republic). In other word, the main obstacle to democracy is the existence of the IRI. That if we could do something that would weaken the regime (e.g., economic sanctions such as banning of all purchase of crude oil from the fundamentalist regime), then the regime would collapse and we will have democracy and freedom.

III.  These also clearly show that no matter what poll one looks at, ALL of them show that the monarchists constitute a small minority of the Iranian people. Again this is shown inside and outside Iran. This has a REAL POLITICAL impact.

The monarchists have no chance whatsoever to win in any free elections in Iran. Therefore, their presence (and activities) harms the democratic opposition. In other words, their presence HELPS the fundamentalist regime.

IV.  Not all Iranians like Dr. Mossadegh. Shahollahis and Hezbollahis do not. And this is Khomeini on Mossadegh:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ6NXRLKsWs

V.   If these indications are correct, there are several lessons on what we should or should not do. And thus this blog.

MK

MK

1. I never said they werent garbage. Infact I would add that another reason it is garbage its because the majority of phone responders tend to be the elderly. younger iranians these days carry mobile phones.

2. Again, just because its a safe choice does not mean that it represents the majority opinion.

3. Poll 1 is significant but does not represent majority views. Students are more politically active, are generally more liberal than their parents.

4. Again this is the Tehran, only a portion of the whole population. Tehranis are more connected to the outside world, are better informed. But lets assume everything you say is correct, it still does not reach the conclusion that you make in your original post. In fact, its closest to my guess. And if we assume that outside Tehran they are more conservative then its safe to say that my guess could be a good estimate of iranian public opinion.

5. you are forgetting that back in 2000, internet penetration in Iran was minimal (under 1 million). The only people with access were technologically savvy people (university staff and students were amongst the first to get internet), highly connected to the outside world and quite modern. As for the poll itself, it does not say much other than that Iranians of all background love and have loved mossadeq above all, which shouldn't be surprising to iranian observers.

6. fair enough but again, does not say anything about majority of iranian views.

so basically we are back to my own view, that we dont really have any reliable evidence of what iranians want exactly.

More Detailed Explanations

MP,

1. As I mentioned due to the extreme violent and brutal nature of the IRI, the phone poll are garbage.

2. The best available choice would be those safe methods. The ones I mentioned are deemed safe by the respondents.

3. The poll 1 that is mentioned is significant. It was conducted by the Dafter Tahkiam Vahdat, which is affiliated was part of the reformists within the IRI. The fact they those who conducted the poll, came in last with 4% is an indication that it was not messed with. Students at Amir Kabir come from a wide variety of social backgrounds. Basically, they are those who scored well in concure exam. Almost all Iranians from all social classes and all cities have access to high school education. Other than those who deserve to be there for the grades, there are Basij "sahmiehee" who were given a seat although their grades did not qualify them to be there. In sum, the Amir Kabir student poll is probably one of the best way we could estimate the opinion of "smart" individuals from a very wide social class background in Iran.

4. The Poll #2 was actually conducted by the Jihad Daneshgai (University Jihad) for the regime (or more accurately the hard-line faction). Somehow the results was leaked to Kaleme. The "population" for the poll was the residents of Tehran. The poll was conducted during summer 2010.

The views of Tehranis are not exactly like others. But Tehran’s population is between 10 and 12 million. Iran’s population is around 70 million. So, Tehran is about 1/7 of the total population. Now, less than 1/3 of the population is rural. So to some extent the result for Tehran would also apply to other large cities. The people in some cities such as Sanandaj, or Shiraz might be more hostile to the fundamentalist regime than those in Tehran. And many in Gilan, Mazandaran, and Azerbaijan are also more hostile to the hard-liners and more likely to support the secular democratic opposition. So, the result in Tehran is not too far from what most Iranians think. The result was that 15% of the respondents in Tehran said they were happy with the status quo. I think, the methodology of the poll was in person. In other words, they gave the questionnaire to some person walking in the streets and asked them to fill it. Again, this is safer than phone interviews, but still one might reasonable be worried that his or her answers may not be safe. And in actuality this poll was done FOR the hard-line segment of the regime, presumably the Ministry of Intelligence or IRGC or some other official entity.

What is amazing is that 34.6% of actual pedestrians were willing to write on a form that they were against the whole regime. They took a risk and could have possibly endanger their lives. So, the actual percentages should be higher; those who want to replace the fundamentalist regime with a secular democracy or other opposition groups (monarchy, PMOI, communists, etc).

5. On the "Iranian of the Century" poll at Iranian.com. JJ could correct me, but I think that in 2000, the reformist faction in power had NOT blocked access to Iranian.com, therefore, those inside might have participated in the poll.

Some groups are more "hyper-active" than others. For example, the fundamentalist regime has paid individuals (now they are called Cyber Army of the IRGC or Basij) to propagate their side. Monarchists also are louder than their actual numbers would indicate.

The social base of the moderate pro-democracy tend to be least loud. They would vote in actual elections, but are not highly active. There is a tendency among those on the extremes to be more louder than those who are moderate and in the middle. That is why JM had always done very well in free elections, but we do not do very well in street fights.

So, the actual votes by actual people for poll 3 might be lower for monarchists and fundamentalists (reformists and hard-line alike). In other words, Mossadegh would probably get more votes than others if we are allowed a real election in Iran TODAY.

6. In poll #4 in the blog by Aynak, it is a poll by the posters at Iranian.com. It shows that many posters who had NOT indicated what they were for actually voting for the secular democratic republican alternative. They do indicate the opinions of the highly educated Iranians abroad. If it shows that our views are consistent with the opinions of Amir Kabir students, then this would be wonderful for the prospects of democracy in Iran.

Conclusion

All these do show that the regime constitutes a small minority of the population. And that there is a MAJORITY that agrees with one particular form of political system. If the results of these more-or-less consistent polls are accurate, this is wonderful for the future of Iran.

It does show that the overwhelming majority of the Iranian people want to get rid of the fundamentalist regime. There are some differences on the means: some want to use non-violent gradual change while some want a quick break.

MK

flawed surveys

More like, what do a fraction of iranians with access to the internet want? (keeping in mind that less than a third of iranians have access to the internet)

Also lets not ignore the fact that iranians outside Iran have access to these polls as well. most users of iranian.com are outsiders so naturally all these polls are skewed to more liberal, secular options.

as for your point no. 6, that too is flawed. you cant simply conclude that "thousands upon thousands of Iranians" chanted such slogans based on few youtube videos. I'm not saying its not possible that thousands (even more) dont support such slogans. All I'm saying is that yours is a flawed methodology.

As for the gist of the question, I have no idea what iranians want. There are no reliable scientific polls on what the majority of iranians inside Iran want. and anyone claiming to know what majority of iranians want is lying and pushing their own agenda... if I were to guess however, I would say a more or less neck and neck fight between some sort of islamist flavored democracy and secular alternatives. trends could change of course if secularists had equal the opportunity to campaign (which clearly, they dont right now)

Fatal Flaws in the World Opinion Polls which make them FALSE

Fatal Flaws in the World Opinion Polls which make them false.

1. Iran is ruled by a terribly violent group that imprisons, tortured, assassinates, and executes those who oppose the fundamentalist terrorist regime. Therefore, a sane Iranian inside Iran would not be honestly answering questions on sensitive issues on the phone with a stranger, when one might suspect that the interviewer might be from the Ministry of Intelligence or IRGC trying to find out his or her political views. Many people also might worry that the regime might be monitoring the phone call.

2. We have to look at the response rates. On page 32 of the file you gave

//www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb10/I...

it says

2,886 number of respondent they call

691 qualified respondent is not available

106 could not speak Persian

2,089 number that they actually want to talk with

1,086 REFUSE to answer them.

1,003 answer their questions

so according to their own data, ONLY 34.8% of the people they called cooperated.

In the U.S. or other countries where on could say they like or hate the President of their country and nothing will happen to them, if an Iranian would say that they hated Supreme Leader of the fundamentalist regime, he or she could go to prison, be tortured, be raped or sodomized, or killed.

In the U.S. culture, one may not answer a telephone poll because the person rather watch tv or eat. But in our culture, when the phone calls, we talk on the phone in the middle of dinner or tv. Many even bring them damn phone to the shower. So, one could not compare response rate in the U.S. with those of in Iran. The response rate alone should make this poll false.

On those polls conducted by the University of Tehran, one should throw them in trash. The fundamentalist terrorist regime does not allow honest polls by scholars.

In conclusion, those who want democracy and freedom, by and large WOULD NOT ANSWER SUCH POLLS.

only those who are terribly IGNORANT of conditions in Iran could trust such methodologies. In sum, such telephone polls are worthless in brutal dictatorial regimes.

"Sargord"

You have on many, many occasions cited these so-called "polls" (is this the 10th time you have linked to this tripe on Iranian.com alone, not to mention the times you've done so on other websites employing your other cyber identities). Such "polls" conducted in authoritarian regimes are as worthless as the "elections" that gave Saddam, Kim Jong Il, etc 99% of the vote--why not take those "election" results at face value while we're at it? Why do West-residing IRI Groupies like yourself expect Iranians who live in democratic countries to be so imbecilic as to believe these worthless and unreliable polls? Cheers  :-)

Here is an excerpt from a blog written by an Iranian progressive which captures the sheer absurdity of such "polls" very well:

"Imagine you are one of the Iranian samples, and you receive this rather strange international call, in Iran, in the aftermath of all the horrors you just witnessed first hand, of things done to people who had peacefully expressed disagreement with the government. You have just witnessed what the government does to anybody who dares voice a dissenting idea. Additionally, you are well aware of the fact that the government has some of the best technologies with which to listen in on everything going on, thanks to the Chinese and the Russian benefactors of the regime. At least that is your assumption, and it is a safe one if you understand the kind of society you live in. Given that it is a phone conversation on your registered phone and that the government keeps pretty good tabs on things like that, you take it for granted in fact that any critical opinion voiced by you about the government, over this very recordable phone line, comes with a well-documented and operational probability of facing at least some harassment, and quite possibly arrest, senseless beatings, possible rape, or dying of 'meningitis' in prison (as in, from the repeated pounding you will receive to your cranium, from truncheons in skilled hands of paid thugs, a death that will be reported by prison authorities as, 'death from meningitis').

So, now, you tell me, dear reader, what kind of answers would you give to this person who claims is calling you on behalf of some 'polling agency' in 'Washington, DC', or whatever? Knowing that the government is particularly interested in international calls. And, again, fully aware of the price of an out-of-line answer." 

Why haven't you provided the

Why haven't you provided the results of polls recently collected by World Public Opinion.org? Their methodologies are far more scientific and analytical than the highly amateurish attempts you cite here.

Could it be the results are far too inconvenient for your seditious fantasies? 

//www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/652.php?lb=brme&pnt=652&nid=&id=