Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Do you support Bachar al-Assad (2)

POST REPLY

Do you support Bachar al-Assad ?

Yes
46
69%
No
14
21%
Other
7
10%
 
Total votes : 67
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 24 Apr 2014, 22:30
Comrade-like Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hadjjar has declared that he will run in the presidential elections.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 26 Apr 2014, 11:48
Good article from Al Akhbar:

http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/gu ... ance-syria


Quote:
As a contribution to the debate on this subject, I wish to offer a few guidelines on the subject, taking into consideration that in reality there are no leftists who support Bashar Al-Assad, unless you count individual leftists in Lebanon as evidence:

1) There is not a single leftist Syrian rebel group. Not one.
2) There is not a single leftist demand or request or slogan by either the Syrian armed groups or by the Syrian exile opposition.
3) There are no Syrian leftist intellectuals in the “revolution”: those who are identified as “leftists” in the Syrian “revolution” are in fact former leftists. And remember that some of the most vocal right-wingers in the Lebanese March 14 movement are themselves former leftists-turned sectarian right-wingers.
4) The sponsors of the Syrian rebels and of the Syrian exile opposition are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and the US. Those can’t count as leftist regimes.
5) The Syrian regime is not a leftist regime; Hafidh Al-Assad coup in 1970 was launched against the leftist leadership of Salah Jadid.
6) Bashar Al-Assad did not lead Syria in a leftist direction: in fact, he took the country further to the right, especially in economic policy.
7) Ahmad Al-Jarba was selected by Saudi regime and the US to lead the Syrian National Coalition for his tribal and polygamous credentials and not for any leftist credentials.
There is no Syrian “revolution”: there is no serious academic or other justification for the invocation of the word “revolution”. The word is bandied about very much in the Ba`thist tradition as a mere word used to rationalize and legitimize political activities that don’t belong to revolutionary activity.
9) Having the support of Western leftists does not make an event or a movement in a developing country leftist.
10) There isn’t a single leftist current in Islamist and Jihadi groups and movements.
11) Neither the Russian camp nor the American camp is leftist, but you can always bet that the US leads a more rightist and reactionary camp than any other country in the world.
12) March 14 is a reactionary movement in Lebanon and its rhetoric and sponsors are the same as those of the March 14 of Syria (i.e. Syrian rebels and the Syrian exile opposition).
13) Arab leftists (throughout the Arab world) are far more opposed to the Syrian rebels than to the other side (with the exception of Trotskyists).
14) Hizbullah is not a leftist political party. It never was a leftist political party and never will be given its ideology and rhetoric, although it sometimes borrows from the political rhetoric of Third World leftism.
15) The support that Bashar Al-Assad receives from some leftist regimes (like in Venezuela) does not make him a leftist.
16) The Syrian rebels don’t count one leftist regime among their supporters and sponsors.
17) Wars of “humanitarian intervention” are an imperialist project, and not a leftist project.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 6211
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Aug 2004, 20:49
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Embalmed
Post 26 Apr 2014, 12:55
Quote:
9) Having the support of Western leftists does not make an event or a movement in a developing country leftist.


This is why I am wary of plenty of "Hands off Iran" campaigns as many members ignore that the Islamic Republic is actually quite a horrible and repressive place to live, and again, many are Trots are pointed out in point #13.

Surely there are non-combatant leftists in Syria who offer their limited support to Assad as he is the only force that is holding the integrity of the state and national boundaries intact, limited insofar as they don't really like his policies, but he's the only realistic option - it is quite apparent that the old dictum "socialism or barbarism" should be "Assadism or barbarism" in this case.
Image

"Phil Spector is haunting Europe" -Dr. Karl H. Marx
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 04 May 2014, 18:56
Erichs_Pastry_Chef wrote:

This is why I am wary of plenty of "Hands off Iran" campaigns as many members ignore that the Islamic Republic is actually quite a horrible and repressive place to live, and again, many are Trots are pointed out in point #13.

Surely there are non-combatant leftists in Syria who offer their limited support to Assad as he is the only force that is holding the integrity of the state and national boundaries intact, limited insofar as they don't really like his policies, but he's the only realistic option - it is quite apparent that the old dictum "socialism or barbarism" should be "Assadism or barbarism" in this case.


Well, that is the IS an organization whose credibility has been 0 from the 1970's at least.

Honestly I don't see how a leftist wouldn't support Assad in this case. Sure, yeah, maybe he sucks. Not more than some Al-Qaeda affiliate who will just shoot random people for being suspected as unfaithful

At the same time, most Trots have silly defence campaigns, and compared to the ridiculous North Korean apologism present on this very board it looks almost exactly to be the same.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 04 May 2014, 20:11
The ridiculous thing is to say that there is North Korean apologism there.

Good luck to almost comrade Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hadjjar for his election.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 05 May 2014, 01:58
OP-Bagration wrote:
The ridiculous thing is to say that there is North Korean apologism there.

Good luck to almost comrade Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hadjjar for his election.


And yet you were not 5 weeks ago defending the propaganda made by the state itself that Kim Jong Ils birth literally caused the sun to come out.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14444
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 05 May 2014, 04:10
Countering cultural chauvinism isn't apologism.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 05 May 2014, 11:51
Dagoth Ur wrote:
Countering cultural chauvinism isn't apologism.


Praising propaganda as ridiculous as Opus Dei because "they're socialist!" most certainly is
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 05 May 2014, 12:04
OP, would you mind explaining your position further? Now you are against Assad, or more pro-Assad than the rebels but still against him? I'm confused.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1277
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Party Member
Post 05 May 2014, 14:05
Erichs_Pastry_Chef wrote:
The Islamic Republic of Iran is actually quite a horrible and repressive place to live.


Complete and utter nonsense! Iran is in fact right now by far one of the best places in the middle east to live in. Its centrally planned economy (even with sanctions choking it for more than thirty years) is in the the worlds top twenty in both PPP and GDP. The Tehran stock exchange has been for more than ten years one of the best performing in the world.

Scientific research in Iran is one of the fastest growing in the world and in 2011 ranked #1 in that regard. The list goes on and on. Just imagine how much more powerful and prosperous Iran would be without the constant barrage of international sanctions.

I personally for almost 10 years studied with and befriended more than 100 Iranian students getting their higher education abroad. First of all I'd like to say that Iranian people are some of the most laid back, chilled, unreligious, open minded, and sophisticated people in the middle east.

Do not let the whole "Islamic Republic" fool you. Iranians take their religion far less seriously than do most of the Arabs. A huge portion of them will tell you that they are in fact not Muslims and that Islam was forced upon them by the Arabs under the sword. They are more proud of their Persian and Zoroastrian history than they are about their Islamic history. Iranian men can be often seen wearing the Faravahar "guardian angel" around their necks as a symbol of pride in their Zoroastrian religion. I myself was gifted one by Iranians.

You seem to have mistaken Iran for Saudi Arabia where nothing is tolerated other than strict adherence to their version of Islam. It is illegal for foreigners to practice their religion in Saudi Arabia and you can't be a Saudi citizen if you're not Muslim.

Iran in contrast allows religious minorities to practice their religion and exempts them from certain laws that a Muslim Iranian citizen is liable to. In other words an Iranian non Muslim has more rights in certain aspects than does an Iranian Muslim. An example would be the consuming and production of alcoholic beverages among non Muslim communities. Nevertheless even though alcohol is prohibited among the Muslim community, alcoholism in Iran is among the highest in the middle east and opiate addiction is the highest in the entire world to which the penalty in Iran is a mere slap on the wrist as opposed to other Arab countries where even foreigners would go to jail for.

There is freedom to practice and change religions in Iran whereby that would be punishable by death in Saudi Arabia. An interesting fact that most people are not aware of is that Iran houses the biggest population of Jews in the entire Muslim world. Even the former hard line president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would meet with Jewish organisations in promotion of Iranian-Jewish cooperation.

I even dated an Iranian girl in college. Some of the Iranian guys who knew her would would jokingly slap me on the shoulder and say "Remember! No sex before you convert to Islam!". In Arab countries even as democratic and free as Lebanon, courtship even between Muslims of different sects is forbidden.

Women's lives in Iran are better than in most other middle eastern countries. There are more female university students than there are male. Job opportunities for women are also among the highest in the middle east.

On the other hand, months can pass without even seeing a single woman (fully covered in a burqa of course) if you were a foreign worker in Saudi Arabia.

The Iranians I knew would of course criticise a lot of their governments internal and external policies (as do citizens of all countries everywhere) but it almost never extended to outright opposition or the need to overthrow them. Iranians elect most of their leaders after all. Needless to say, Iran does have a lot of internal problems that need addressing as do most other countries.

Even though I personally don't agree with a lot of Iran's internal policies; I am at the same time grateful for all the support it has given Lebanon and now Syria in its battle against Jihadists.

On a broader note I see a lot of people on this site resort to slandering countries as "shit holes" and "miserable places to live in" much too hastily. I would advise some people to do more research or even actually visit the countries before insulting other peoples homes.

It is also in many cases a matter of opinion as to what constitutes a "great or miserable place to live in" depending on ones perspective, socio-economic standing, and personal beliefs at any one time or place. This makes arguing the state of affairs in any one place or time a lot more subjective than most analysts would like to admit. Let's not forget that national and self interests also play a role in clouding objective judgement.


somewhat wrote:
Kim Jong Ils birth literally caused the sun to come out.


You seem to take such nonsense more seriously than do the North Koreans themselves. There is absolutely no official North Korean document stating the sort of mumbo jumbo you seem to believe in. They have an official holiday known as "The Day of the Sun" to celebrate their founders birthday in metaphor to the same way the rising sun begins the new day. You either misinterpreted the whole idea or read another one of those ridiculous myths in some irrelevant book and took is as fact. You make the mistake of judging the entire country without a comprehensive understanding of Asian cultures, myths and metaphors.

These kind of myths can be found in every country if you make it your aim to find them. An example would be the American myth about their founding president George Washington never to have told a lie in his life. In Japan the emperor is believed to be the last remaining descendant of their Sun Goddess. Many Jews believe that Israel was promised to them by their own version of God. The list can go on endlessly.

Only the insane and the ignorant believe such myths literally. Only the bored take such myths seriously. Only the foolish use such myths as reference to slander entire nations. If you want to criticise North Korea you should use serious analytical sources as reference and not what is used mainly for entertainment purposes like "rising suns, illegal jazz and bad hairdos". The joke is actually on all those clowns who believe such nonsense and not on the North Korean people.

soviet78 posted a very good paper that demonstrates the inherent bias in western analysis of the DPRK.

North Koreans have enough legitimate problems to be taken seriously without the myths and the slander. Nevertheless they demand respect for being able to stay united and steadfast against all imperialist aggression in contrast to the fools in Ukraine and in Syria who have taken upon themselves to destroy their country for a lot less.

I salute the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's strength, courage and indefatigability! They are one of the last bastions of dignity against imperialist oppression. Contrary to popular belief, they do have a lot to be proud of. Even after the fall of the U.S.S.R. they held on to their beliefs united and decided to tackle all their problems and woes in their own ways.

Every country has its own problems. Making their problems bigger than they actually are and magnifying them to ridiculous and laughable proportions just because "their ways" are not "our ways" achieves nothing but make the slanderer look like a fool or a clown at best.

It all makes for good entertainment to me all the same so I say keep it coming.
Image


My laws shall act more pleasure than command,
And with my prick I'll govern all the land.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 06 May 2014, 00:58
Quote:
OP, would you mind explaining your position further? Now you are against Assad, or more pro-Assad than the rebels but still against him? I'm confused.

Bachar isn't a communist, he is a bourgeois nationalist, and he represents a dangerous party, the Ba'ath party. It isn't the worst party, and it can be an ally sometimes, but it's still dangerous. Communists should remain cautious and do everything possible to improve their own position in Syria. Bachar will win this election, so it's very important for us tu have a strong communist vote, so that Assad understands that even though this war made him powerful, he was also backed by a strong popular movement and must make concessions and share power. Of course we are communists, so we mustn't abandon the idea of a revolution in Syria, of preparing a revolution. But in the present situation, our Syrian communist friends will probably explain to the population that a vote for a former communist isn't a vote against Bachar, it's a vote to make Bachar less dangerous, more "social".
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 06 May 2014, 17:19
Yeqon, how does all that you told us about average Iranian citizens change the objective fact that the Islamic "Republic"(lol) of Iran is one of worst and most repressive and undemocratic countries in the M. East? For Frag sake it's a theocracy that doesn't even pretend to be a caricature of bourgeois democracy, where men are forbidden to drink or wear ties(!) and where women all have to wear that hijab or whatever on the street. How can a country where homosexuals for example are routinely hanged ( even minors ) be anything but a repressive shithole.
It's a state founded on murder of communists and democrats, a bastard child of a hijacked revolution. That the average Iranian doesn't necessarily agree with the politics of the Iranian ruling class is another matter.
Jesus Christ.
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 06 May 2014, 19:50
Loz wrote:
Yeqon, how does all that you told us about average Iranian citizens change the objective fact that the Islamic "Republic"(lol) of Iran is one of worst and most repressive and undemocratic countries in the M. East? For Frag sake it's a theocracy that doesn't even pretend to be a caricature of bourgeois democracy, where men are forbidden to drink or wear ties(!) and where women all have to wear that hijab or whatever on the street. How can a country where homosexuals for example are routinely hanged ( even minors ) be anything but a repressive shithole.
It's a state founded on murder of communists and democrats, a bastard child of a hijacked revolution. That the average Iranian doesn't necessarily agree with the politics of the Iranian ruling class is another matter.
Jesus Christ.


Shh, no tears

Only apologism now
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 06 May 2014, 20:53
Iran is certainly not "one of worst and most repressive and undemocratic countries in the M. East". Actually it's one of the most democratic countries in the region, and it's also a country that is somewhat tolerant regarding religion even though the regime is a theocracy. Israel for example is probably democratic regarding politics, but it's not democratic regarding "races" and religion. Ask the Arabs.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1277
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Party Member
Post 07 May 2014, 14:33
Loz wrote:
Yeqon, how does all that you told us about average Iranian citizens change the objective fact that the Islamic "Republic"(lol) of Iran is one of worst and most repressive and undemocratic countries in the M. East? For Frag sake it's a theocracy that doesn't even pretend to be a caricature of bourgeois democracy, where men are forbidden to drink or wear ties(!) and where women all have to wear that hijab or whatever on the street. How can a country where homosexuals for example are routinely hanged ( even minors ) be anything but a repressive shithole.
It's a state founded on murder of communists and democrats, a bastard child of a hijacked revolution. That the average Iranian doesn't necessarily agree with the politics of the Iranian ruling class is another matter.
Jesus Christ.



The opinions and mentality of people from the same country reflect to a large extent their country's state of affairs. They are more capable of objectively judging Iran because they feel the weight of "repression" on their shoulders. The fact that they were foreign students living in democratic countries which they use as reference for comparison makes their opinions all the more reliable.



Then there's what I said about freedom of religion in Iran which in itself is a form of freedom of expression; and the fact that the Iranian president is elected by the people; and that the parliament is elected by the people, the fact that women can seek whatever life and educational opportunities they want, the fact that alcohol prohibition for Muslim citizens is not taken seriously (the penalty for driving drunk in Iran is revoking your licence and nothing more), the fact that non Muslims citizens are almost completely exempt from all forms of Islamic law; the fact that its citizens are allowed to travel, emigrate, and seek education anywhere they want with absolutely no restrictions; all that and it is still completely undemocratic and repressive?!

Like usual you chose to ignore the facts that contest your biased opinions which in fact much too often are based on emotion rahter than on logic.

To be quite honest I cannot remember the last time you thought of any country being anything but a shithole when in fact a lot of the time your knowledge of the countries' histories and state of affairs doesn't seem to exceed high school level.

You slander countries with such subjective and vague insults like "shitholes" and "repressive" without backing it up with anything close to serious analytical or rational thoughts. Your posts have begun to border on insanity.

The fact that you think Iran is one of the MOST UNDEMOCRATIC and REPRESSIVE in the MIDDLE EAST (Middle East = one of the most undemocratic regions on earth bloated with Kings, Dictators, Sharia Law, Military Regimes, State of Emergency, Civil War, Terrorism) demonstrates your complete lack of understanding in middle eastern affairs as well as your complete inability to use one item of reference to objectively analyse and judge another.

Iranian Citizens are some of the happiest in the Middle East full stop. Iran is NOT a theocracy! It works within a vague framework of theocracy. In a theocracy the supreme religious ruler cannot be contested or challenged. In Iran by contrast even the supreme ruler is elected by an assembly who are in turn elected by the people. The supreme ruler can even be removed and all his activities must be supervised by the assembly.

I see you have decided to join comrade somewhat in Lala Land over your belief that men in Iran are persecuted for wearing neckties. It's kind of like youtube commentators who base their entire life's philosophies after watching a 3 minute video. Infantilism on a grand scale or just plain old borderline insanity. The next thing you know you and somewhat will be using UFO sightings as facts and base your philosophies on that. May God have mercy on both your souls.

Women's choice of attire in Iran is one of the most relaxed in the middle east contrary to ignorant popular belief. There is absolutely no requirement for women to wear a Hijab in Iran once again demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge in Iranian law. By law women are required to wear a simple headscarf like these.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


......as you can see reveals hair and all which I think can be sexy as frag! Iranian women are also famous for using makeup and dying their hair for thousands of years. Even Alexander the Great who preferred men more than women found them so irresistible he had to marry at least two Persian women.

The Hijab is but a matter of choice in Iran as opposed to other middle eastern countries where women's only choice is this:

Image



Even your statement on homosexuals wasn't accurate. In fact no one in Iran has ever been officially executed for homosexuality. Every time you try to research specific cases the details and circumstances are always extremely vague and quite often include rape or murder. In western media they are always "allegedly" executed for homosexuality.

Even the circumstances which would be needed to prove homosexuality AND merit the death penalty by Iranian law is so outrageous it makes it almost impossible to prove; otherwise the penalty for homosexuality is flogging which in itself happens extremely rarely.

Quote:
"(Articles 108 to 113) Sodomy is proved either if a person confesses four times on four separate occasions to having committed sodomy or by the testimony of four righteous men who were first hand witnesses to the act."


Is that serious?

I'm not saying there weren't cases of injustice towards homosexuals in Iran but the information available in no way prove without a reasonable doubt that "homosexuals are routinely hanged". In fact very few Iranians will ever see a public execution in their life and I personally have never met one.

Iran is a country of great political and historical significance. They have enough internal problems that would merit an entire discussion on its own. Then again so does every other country and like in every country, it is their problems to solve and their right to judge; not ours.
Last edited by Yeqon on 07 May 2014, 15:04, edited 1 time in total.
Image


My laws shall act more pleasure than command,
And with my prick I'll govern all the land.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 07 May 2014, 15:01
somewhat wrote:
Shh, no tears

Only apologism now


Yeqon went out of his way to make a long, detailed post about Iranian social and cultural realities and this is the best you can come up with?

Thanks once again Yeqon for the informative and detailed post. It's important for the Left to have a complete and accurate understanding of reality, complete with personal accounts from people on the ground, and not to adhere, in this case, to the same stereotypes our enemies use. I can only add that I had a professor from Iran in university (he was one of the best, most grounded, most intelligent profs I had) and that he was saying very similar things to what Yeqon has said here, which was surprising to many of us because it was the height of the 'Iran is next' frenzy. To put it bluntly, it's obvious from first-hand accounts that Iran is a very complicated country, and forming assumptions on the country based on a brief encyclopedia entry would be foolish.

...

OP wrote:
Bachar isn't a communist, he is a bourgeois nationalist, and he represents a dangerous party, the Ba'ath party. It isn't the worst party, and it can be an ally sometimes, but it's still dangerous. Communists should remain cautious and do everything possible to improve their own position in Syria. Bachar will win this election, so it's very important for us tu have a strong communist vote, so that Assad understands that even though this war made him powerful, he was also backed by a strong popular movement and must make concessions and share power. Of course we are communists, so we mustn't abandon the idea of a revolution in Syria, of preparing a revolution. But in the present situation, our Syrian communist friends will probably explain to the population that a vote for a former communist isn't a vote against Bachar, it's a vote to make Bachar less dangerous, more "social".


I see, and agree completely. Thanks for clarifying.


P.S. Thanks for the paper I posted should be reserved for a fellow comrade of mine, as he's the one that recommended it to me first.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 07 May 2014, 16:45
More of a general comment, but I just don't understand the whole "shithole" terminology at all. It sounds more like shit analysis to me. It's just the level of discussion of leftists who are angry at the world: this is shit, that is shit, frag this, frag that, frag Washington, frag Moscow, everything sucks, etc. The politics of scatology.

It's too simple in any case. The current state that this or that country is in also carries within it the elements of its opposite. For instance, at the surface level (with the added filter of western media reporting), the verdict about Iran is easy: clothing police, no sexual freedom, a religious state, in short, a "shithole". But all these things also carry their own negation within them. For example, having to wear the veil automatically presents you with new means to flout the regulations, like in the pictures where the veil is worn over a very elaborate and very visible hairstyle. This, of course, undermines the reason for the institution of the dress code in the first place.

And of course sometimes these things can suddenly turn to their opposite very quickly. Under the shah, the veil was banned, while the Islamic revolution made it mandatory. Who is to say what's going to happen next? In any case, the point is that here we see the dynamic, the contradictions, etc. Things change because they carry their own negations within them. The banning of the veil clashed with people wanting to either wear or impose it, and this created the new situation of it being mandatory. Now that situation clashes with people not wanting to cover up, and perhaps (optimistically speaking) this will create new circumstances where people are free to decide this (what that kind of formal "freedom" would entail in a society like Iran's is another discussion).

But other people only see what's on the surface: shit = shit, and it will never be anything but. Clothing restrictions in Iran, clothing restrictions in Saudi Arabia, same shit. There is either restriction or freedom, and there is no interaction between them, no struggle. It's just either-or, black-and-white, and we need to choose now, and any change from restriction to freedom will be mechanical, a forward movement.

This way of thinking doesn't reflect reality to me, but it's something that a lot of leftists struggle with because their sympathy for leftism stems from an analysis of what is "shit" about this world. Which is good, but we can't leave it at that, otherwise we will at some point make the wrong judgement calls about concrete situations based on these thinking errors.

If people learn the differences between these ways of thinking, then we can develop an analysis of places like Iran that goes beyond the scatological.
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 07 May 2014, 18:18
I'd be amazed if any amount of evidence or information convinced anyone.

You folks love the Islamic Republic of Iran and will support it no matter how much "evil western propaganda" "myths" "lies" etc is put forth to "falsely" contradict it.

There's no point writing an essay as it will simply degenerate into the essays on the rest of this board where those with their own entrenched positions dig in

Of course I'd point out the Tudeh Party was massacred en masse and remain in exile in your supposedly free anti-imperialist country but, hey, having a Supreme Religious Leader is NOT a theocracy!
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 07 May 2014, 19:03
somewhat wrote:
You folks love the Islamic Republic of Iran and will support it no matter how much "evil western propaganda" "myths" "lies" etc is put forth to "falsely" contradict it.


And here I thought I was able to hide it, but the Grand Inquisitor has detected my true motives without even asking. Oh well.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1277
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Party Member
Post 07 May 2014, 19:31
somewhat wrote:

You folks love the Islamic Republic of Iran and will support it no matter how much "evil western propaganda" "myths" "lies" etc is put forth to "falsely" contradict it.


You and Yami are actually the only people ever use the phrase "evil western propaganda" on this board.

I previously wrote:
I personally don't agree with a lot of Iran's internal policies.


Oh yeah I'm a big fan of all things religious! Especially Islamic fundamentalists!


somewhat wrote:
Of course I'd point out the Tudeh Party was massacred en masse and remain in exile


WHAT! You actually began using historical fact in your defense instead of the bogeyman?! Bravo! This is indeed progress! Keep it up a few more times and you just might turn into someone worthy of serious debate.
Last edited by Yeqon on 07 May 2014, 20:17, edited 1 time in total.
Image


My laws shall act more pleasure than command,
And with my prick I'll govern all the land.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron