Unheard Voice

50 Responses to “The revolution will bypass your filters”

1. fug says:

   June 16, 2009 at 5:33 pm

   bit more complicated though.

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

   [Reply]
2. Live tweets from the election in Iran | Mojo Evolution says:

   June 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm

   [...] PM mohaiemen – http://unheardvoice.net/blog/2009/06/17/iran-filters/ From today’s Daily Star (Bangladesh) #iranelection [...]
3. Bonbibi says:

   June 19, 2009 at 3:49 pm

   You really think new technology is the voice of the people?? Is it possible to say this when only a third of the population has access to the internet?

   If Ahmedinejad is so unpopular in Iran why haven’t we been hearing anything against him in the months leading to the elections??

   [Reply]
4. jyoti says:

   June 20, 2009 at 5:33 am

   Bonbibi, I take your point two-thirds of the people not having internet. Overall, I have mixed feelings about what is going on in Iran, so won’t (yet) say anything about whether Ahmedinejad is popular or not.

   But your second question — how come we hadn’t heard much — is rather odd.

   Firstly, one would hardly characterise Iran’s press/media as free — they operate under restriction even at the best of times (this isn’t a value judgment, just a statement of fact). Secondly, even in countries like Bangladesh with stronger history of elections (or indeed even India), it is hard to pick election results. Maybe I hung out in the wrong circle, but after being in Dhaka for a month, on 27-28 Dec I thought/heard that BNP was closing the gap. Should I then say, ‘if AL was so damn popular, why didn’t we hear about it?. What about the Congress re-election?

   One reason we fail to pick up these things is because the silent majority don’t engage in political activity/discussion (even in a politicised culture like ours) everyday. But they know what they like, and they patiently wait for 3/4/5 years to express their views. It’s when that right is under threat do they come out and protest.

   Again, I am not saying Iranian election was rigged. But ‘how come we didn’t hear about it’ strikes me as a poor argument.

   [Reply]
5. fug says:

   June 20, 2009 at 7:19 am

   “How comes you dont hear?” is a funny question to ask when we must know that the ear and the eye are unevenly positioned.

   iImagine if a large bunch of posh-ish dhakan bubblemeistars congregated near parliament, they would be covered much more extensively thatn twitterless mufasulites expressing the Spirit of the Ganj (incidently farsi for storehouse) elsewhere?

   Undoubtedly folks have diverse aspirations in iran, but the occidental media is clearly wetting itself in hope that its desires are reached. Iranian protesters are aware of how their actions are being spun and many detest the tabloidisation of their political struggle. the worst thing is to appropriate another’s voice, typical orientalist thing to do, represent them (via participatory technobabble) because they cant themselves.

   how typical, a stolen american election in the US, over a million anti iraq war protesters totally ignored and systematically marginalised in the UK, followed by total press snobbery, bias and security forces complicity in undermining g20 protests. Yet still the west is the best and only way.

   Truth is that white liberals like to see their mirror images abroad because it gives them great gratification. The evolution of democratic architecture in the east is only valued when it takes a certain form and makes certain conclusions.

   Today it seemed as if everybody was listening to ayatulla khatami’s friday khutba. Truly a great jumma attendance. The british diplomats came in for explicit criticism in this khutba for their incessant meddling. I wonder if they were daft enough to try and pull a bangladesh.

   on a technology and society note, why is the electronic voice taken with too much weight? how has it been coached? how can this be balanced? are web technologies an unredeemable force of neoliberalism or is it ‘how you use it?’

   [Reply]
6. jyoti says:

   June 20, 2009 at 10:04 am

   Fug, the answer to your last question — are web technologies an unredeemable force of neoliberalism or is it ‘how you use it’? — surely is how we use it. Naeem can be accused of a lot of things, but promoting neoliberalism surely ain’t one of them.

   I agree with your broader point that far too often (though not always — there are exceptions) ‘the evolution of democratic architecture in the east is only valued when it takes a certain form and makes certain conclusions’.

   But in the current context, as far as I can tell, the protesters are decidedly NOT reaching conclusions that will have been reached by western liberals. I don’t see anyone calling for an end to the Islamic Republic. The commonest slogan in the streets is Allah Akbar. The protesters’ demand is not to overthrow the establishment of vilayat-e-faqih, but that the establishment redeems its pledges. And the demand is couched in the language of the Islamic revolution. No one here is talking about remaking Iran into the western mould. No matter how this plays out, it WILL be an easternd democratic architecture evolving in its own way.

   Naeem, you didn’t talk about another uprising in another eastern capital, almost exactly 20 years ago. Tehran isn’t Tiananmen, but they do have one thing in common. Much like the Iranian protestors are chanting Allah Akbar, Tiananmen protesters were singing the International — they too were making their demands in the language of their revolution.

   Whatever your feeling is about the issue, surely we all agree that Tiananmen’s ending is not repeated in Tehran today.

   [Reply]
7. Bonbibi says:

   June 20, 2009 at 2:57 pm

   Jyoti, I take your critique; but what I wanted to point out through my semi-rhetorical question is that Ahmedinejad is still a hero for the majority of Iranians, just as he was for mofussil Bangladeshis and I can totally understand why despite my personal misgivings against him.

   The issue that disturbs me is why a facebook-less majority is suddenly mistakenly seen as the voice of a twittering minority? In Fug’s words, isn’t this urban uprising against Ahmedinejad feeding the Occident’s wet dream?? This is what I have a problem with.

   [Reply]
8. jyoti says:

   June 20, 2009 at 3:51 pm

   But Bonbibi, is it really feeding the Occident’s wet dream? Since when did the Occident sign up to Allah Akbar?

   At the risk of making this very contentious, isn’t the idea that ‘Moussavi’s supporters are affirming some Occidentalist fantasy’ akin to saying ‘Bangladesh’s emergence confirmed Akhand Bharat’? We rejected Pakistan, but this didn’t mean we wanted to join India. Similarly, Moussavi’s supporters reject Ahmedinejad, but this doesn’t mean they reject Islamic Republic.

   Again, my point is not that Ahmedinejad isn’t popular or the election was rigged.

   [Reply]
9. dilbor says:

   June 21, 2009 at 7:56 am

   Here is the transcript of Ayatollah Ali Khamaeni’s jummah kutbha. It is not an official transcript and extracted from a opposition supporter’s website ( some expletive by translator removed ). Even then, you will find it quite different than what this speech was portrayed in western media. Here it is…..

   http://pastebay.com/23186

   [Reply]
10. farah says:

    June 21, 2009 at 11:00 am

    http://www.PetitionOnline.com/deshiran/

    [Reply]
11. fug says:

    June 21, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    http://www.khamenei.de/books/iqbal.htm

    Here is another speech of his on Iqbal as the poet-Philosopher of Islamic Resurgence. As Bangladeshi’s the link to Iranian society is not oneway, nor should it be mediated through the lens of shadda power.

    My feeling is that web 2 geektavists have long been empowered into incompetance. Maybe they cannot see it in their selves, but in other societies it becomes clearer. I wonder how common this realisation is.

    [Reply]
12. jyoti says:

    June 22, 2009 at 4:17 pm

    I don’t know how popular Mr Ahmedinejad is, or whether the election was rigged, or how representative of the wider population the protestors are. But I do know that foreign meddlers don’t have the moral courage to die for what they believe in. And I do know that a government that is confident about public support doesn’t resort to killing its own people.

    It’s not just western liberals who project their views on other people. To see the news coming out of Iran as something concocted by ‘white folks’ suggests more about the chips on the viewer’s shoulders than anything else.

    [Reply]
13. Bonbibi says:

    June 22, 2009 at 5:30 pm

    Jyoti, I agree with your last comment but what initially annoyed me was the way the western media got so excited about what really was a demand for a vote recount by a well-connected group who thought Ahmedinejad had rigged the elections. No, ‘the Occident’ hasn’t signed up to Allah Akbar but it saw in what was initially a ‘non-revolt’ as a ‘revolt’ and started projecting all kinds of wet-dreams about Iranians wanting ‘freedom’..

    Its the projection of fantasies on to local issues that I deplore and hence this line of Naeem’s that I had difficulty stomaching: ‘But the technology is only an empowering tool, the power is still from people.’ For me, one cannot mix up a twittering minority for a the majority. However, if we do see villagers (like they did in the 1971 war of independence in BD) also join their Tehran facebooking brothers then yes, I’ll agree there is a real revolution against Ahmedinejad on. Until then, I’m afraid, we will have to look beyond the projections of the various camps: the western liberals on the one hand who demonise Ahmedinejad who repeatedly scratches them the wrong way and the fugsters who always come up with conspiracy theories about shada power.

    (I’ld also like to point out to the UV powers that be that the page repeatedly crashes as I send my comment )

    [Reply]
14. fugstar says:

    June 23, 2009 at 5:49 am

    The colour(lessness) of the doublespeak surrounding the media circus around this is as clear as the eurocentric absurdity of modern human rights culture trasplanted onto the moon. if it is not clear than one may have succumbed to the construction of a peculiar commonsense.

    ‘foreign meddlers’ do not have to die for what they beleive in to cause harm. If internal parties, or components of internal parties are foolish or desperate enough, they can be easily used.

    inshAllah internal negotiation will continue to unfold towards the outcome of most justice and honesty.

    Its no conspiracy that these foreign interests have royally messed up Iran before (1953) and constantly over the past 30 years. ‘Dreams from my father’ and a few speeches do not undo so many years of sin. The west’s manufactured virtuosity does not infact resist despite the righteous indignation spewing forth from every two bit commentator, even the ones who routinely ‘flatter’ iranian intellectualism.

    Beware of the flatterers even more than the others.

    Conspiracy? Too easy i think, maybe its no suprise that ‘fair and lovely’ of the mind and schooling preceded the ‘fair and lovely’ of the cosmetic market place.

    The BBC Persian channel’s behaviour in the months leading upto the election, esp in demonising ahmadinejad is evidence enough. Thats my government mouthpiece acting there and im certainly not surprised.

    [Reply]
15. jyoti says:

    June 23, 2009 at 10:19 am

    Bonbibi, agree that there is a lot of projection going on from a lot of people that is best overlooked. Let’s agree with Fug that ‘internal negotiation will continue to unfold towards the outcome of most justice and honesty’.

    Fug, so we come to the ‘eurocentrism of rights’. Ah well, we do speak different languages, and there isn’t much else to be said on that issue. To each their own.

    However, for someone who talks a lot about respect/dignity, I find your glebe characterisation of the protesters quite hypocritical. Since neither of us are actually in Iran, it’s pointless to argue whether the protesters are ‘being used’. You’re welcome to your beliefs, but by making broad characterisation, you’re being guilty of the same sin that you accuse ‘white liberals’ of.

    (Of course if you have solid 1st hand knowledge of Iran that the rest of us are unaware of, then do share.)

    [Reply]
16. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 12:35 pm

    Responses to Bonbibi, Jyoti & Fug.

    Read URLs below:

    “1906:First parliament; 1921:Reza Shah dictatorship; 1951:Sovereignty; 1953:Coup; 1979:Shah ouster; 1999:Student Uprising; 2009: X”

    “2005 elections were held in two rounds. In 1st round voter turnout was 63%, but went down to 48% in 2nd round. So, Ahmadinejad’s 61% in 2nd round back then, was from only 48% of the voters. That is NOT equal to the same percentage of 85% the government says participated this year.”

    http://www.iranian.com/main/2009/jun/cant-keep-good-people-down

    “How could this be a middle-class uprising if the overwhelming majority supporting it are in fact jobless 15- 29 year-olds who still live with their parents — who cannot even afford to rent an apartment, let alone marry and raise a family and join the middle class in a principally oil-based economy?” – Hamid Dabashi (author of “Iran: A People Interrupted”)

    1. A major constituency of Moussavi is also the urban poor and particularly the war veterans who have no respect for Ahmadinejad, believing he had an inglorious war record, but are full of unsurpassed admiration for Moussavi because of his role as a fiercely dedicated prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).
    2. Is it possible that rural Iran where less than 35 percent of the country’s population lives, provided Ahmadinejad the 63 percent of the vote he claims to have won?
    3. 63 % of university entrants are women, but only 12 % of the labor force. 51 % are out of a job.
    4. Young people ages 15-29 make up 35 % of the population but account for 70 % of the unemployed.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/22/dabashi.iran.myths/index.html

    [Reply]
17. jyoti says:

    June 23, 2009 at 1:45 pm

    Naeem, I don’t know enough about Iran to take a position about whether votes were rigged or not. You cite some numbers, which appeals to me a lot more than better airy-fairy vibe/mojo/spirits. Another relevant number might be that Iran is experienced 26% inflation in 2008, and even this year, when prices have come off around the world, it’s experiencing nearly 20% inflation. If we think rice prices played a major role in undoing 1/11 and bringing in AL — and I believe both — then we should be open to the idea that prices may well have played a role in undermining Ahmedinejad.

    But my point was not to argue that the election was rigged or fair. My point was, and remains, that we don’t really know what is going on (largely because of the regime’s action I might add). As such, glorifying the protests as a revolution in the making might be premature at best, and ‘projecting our biases’ at worst. But at the same time, trivialising them as ‘foreign meddling’/'white people’s lies’ is also ‘projecting biases’.

    [Reply]
18. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 2:28 pm

    @Jyoti, I wrote the op-ed based on analysis from Iranian friends, from media reading, and from my intuition & political leaning. When you write “glorifying the protests”, do you mean my op-ed, or media coverage. If latter, do you mean European media, American media, Northern blogosophere, Southern blogosphere, Iranian twitterers, Southern twitterers, Northern twitterers, Iranians in diaspora? Not all POVs are “glorifying”.

    [Reply]
19. Bonbibi says:

    June 23, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    Naeem,
    I agree with you that the sudden increase in support for Ahmedinejad (17 million in 2005 to 24 million in 2009) seems to lend credibility to the belief that the voting was rigged. However, what I’ve been trying to say from the start is that you could have argued ‘for’ the protest but called it by its name instead of trying to say that this was an uprising by the ‘people’ when all you do to prove that is to highlight the twittering and facebooking activity around it.

    You know I am one which remains skeptical about mistaking the few well-connected for the faceless majority. It’s a bit like ‘Ei Poth Amadero’ – fantastic venture where you even had Najma Akhter and a few garments workers to lend it a working class flavour, but in no way can you say that the crowd in there was not a majority of middle class (if not ‘elite’) liberals. There is nothing wrong with this, only let’s not kid ourselves into thinking they represent the ‘people’. (Not that I necessarily agree with the ‘people’ representing me, but that’s another issue).

    Hamid Dabashi’s point ‘How could this be a middle-class uprising if the overwhelming majority supporting it are in fact jobless 15- 29 year-olds who still live with their parents — who cannot even afford to rent an apartment, let alone marry and raise a family and join the middle class in a principally oil-based economy?’ which you use to give credibility to your own argument that this is not a middle class uprising makes little sense. The middle class is a loose group referring to those between the labouring masses and the ruling elite.
    Class does not only have to do with economic returns only but also with a socio-cultural understanding of one’s positionality within society. Middle class: importance of education (usually achievement of tertiary education), a kind of upbringing (the mandatory bua, no living in a jhupri), social networks (Aziz market for the more intellectually inclined, Mango and Cozmo for the ‘comfortable’), manners (bhadrota and going for ‘secure’ jobs) and values (we are unemployed but never shall we morph into a rickshawala, construction worker, fisher, soil-tiller).
    So the 15-29 may make up 35% of the population and account for 70% of the unemployed but that does not mean they are not middle class. Anyway, my point from the start is the problem I had with the kind of projection you were giving this rebellion and the stuff you based your piece on. You may have a lot of Iranian friends but can you talk for the Iranian ‘people’ when 2/3rds of them are not even connected to your wires?

    [Reply]
20. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    June 24th, Wear GREEN In Support Of Iranian Protestors

    I am an Iranian student here in Bangladesh to learn about this country, her people, and her history. On June 12th I voted in the Iranian elections, at the Iranian embassy in Dhaka. I was proud to play a part in an historic Iranian election, proud to ride a wave of hope that was sweeping our world. The days that followed revealed a government in opposition to our people. The government that was charged with representing us, the police who were sworn to protect us, have instead prevented us from expressing our political opinion through protests– which is our democratic right.

    No matter what your political beliefs, or what you think of the Iran election, no government has the right to treat it’s citizens this way. No government has the right to fire on us with live ammunition as we march peacefully in the streets, to drop chemicals on our heads from helicopters, to beat us because we defy their demands to stay home. No one has the right to imprison us without cause, without trial or charges, for no other crime than saying and writing what we believe. My grandfather was pulled from his hospital bed in Tehran and taken to jail for his political views. His colleagues are still in prison, scores of Iranian students have been killed and there is no end in sight.

    I call on the people of Bangladesh, the sons and daughters of the Mukhti Bahini, democracy activists and freedom fighters to stand with us. I am asking you, as a fellow human being, not to ignore the suffering of students in Iran. A show of solidarity from Dhaka would show students in Iran that we have heard their voice and that we stand with them against oppression, no matter the form or the place.

    Please join us, as we make our voices heard. We will be forming a human chain and wearing green in solidarity with the students marching on the streets of Iran.

    Date: June 24th
    Time: 5:30 pm
    Place: Shahbagh, in front of Jatiyo Jadughar (National Museum)

    Wear GREEN in support

    NOTES TO EDITORS:

    For information, contact Saydia Gulrukh on (+88) 0191 340 0075 or (+88) Fariha Karim on 01745 770 851

    [Reply]
21. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    @Bonbibi, None of the people involved in EY POTH AMADERO (micro, local, temporary movement for rights of women on streets of Dhaka), from Iffat Nawaz to Asif Saleh to Anousheh to Nazma Akhter, have argued or represented, or are under mis-perception, that it is a mass movement.

    [Reply]
22. Bonbibi says:

    June 23, 2009 at 3:55 pm

    Hey, careful – I have never talked about the Iran uprising being or not being a ‘mass movement’. All I have highlighted is:

    1) your use of certain ‘tools’ (technology twitter facebook) to call it so when vast majority unconnected.

    2) easy projections of BBC and its ilk about Iranians wating ‘freedom’ when all it initially was about was opposition party supporters thinking the election was rigged.

    3) saying its not ‘middle class’ (Hamid Dabashi and presumably you as you quote him) to further your argument is lame. Used the poth example maybe erroneously but it was just to make my point about class.

    Using this one ‘mistake’ to discard my whole argument or refuse to engage with it is of course your free choice.

    [Reply]
23. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 5:18 pm

    @Bonbibi,
    My op-ed does not argue that the use of certain tools makes it more or less a mass movement.

    Rather the argument was:
    1. Use of techology means that “the attrition confrontation plays out differently”
    2. “The internet is continuing to be the equaliser, making a solo vlogger the equivalent of the state’s Information Ministry.”

    These facts stand true with Iran’s unwired levels, a fact I was aware of when I wrote the op-ed.

    [Reply]
24. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 5:36 pm

    @Bonbibi wrote:
    1. “I have never talked about the Iran uprising being or not being a ‘mass movement’.”

    You wrote “For me, one cannot mix up a twittering minority for a the majority.”, and then you went on to make point about unwired levels. I interpreted that as saying
    a) Use of net is very limited and does not indicate mass movement (I disagree as to how limited it is, and certainly impact far greater than use, but that’s a separate discussion)
    b) This is just a wired movement, not yet spread to rural areas, etc.

    Having interpreted your position as a) and b), I then posted the Dabashi analysis.

    If I misinterpreted your words, I stand corrected. What exactly do you think the Iran uprising is? How would you characterise it?

    2. “easy projections of BBC and its ilk about Iranians wating ‘freedom’ when all it initially was about was opposition party supporters thinking the election was rigged.”

    That’s the BBC’s problem. I used the phrase “election fraud” at beginning of my op-ed.

    3. “saying its not ‘middle class’ to further your argument is lame.”

    See #1

    4. “Used the poth example maybe erroneously but it was just to make my point about class.”

    My rebuttal was to point out that no one involved in EY POTH has ever made claims of representing more than their class or their social/interest group.

    [Reply]
25. jyoti says:

    June 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm

    Naeem, I was referring to the mainstream western media. I think the protests we have seen are genuine. As much as I can tell, they are about a disputed election. But the mainstream western media has suggested that it is a revolution (or one in the making) against the Islamic Republic. I don’t think we know enough to make that call. In that respect, I echo Bonbibi’s comments. (And again, by the same token, to dismiss the protests as foolish actions by imperialists’ pawns, as Fug does, is also wrong).

    More generally, if it is not obvious from my blog and other writing, I have a rather conservative, almost Burkean, view of political revolution. I think most of what we call revolutions are glorified putsch by the most organised or ruthless (but not necessarily the most popular) faction at a time of political crisis. Bolsheviks were not the most popular Russian faction in Nov 1917, but they were the most organised one, and Lenin was the shrewdest tactician — hence his successful putsch became glorified as a revolution.

    I don’t wish that kind of revolution for Iran. I would rather a peaceful settlement to the crisis, and a gradual transformation to a pluralist country where human rights — which I hold to be universal and not culture specific — are respected.

    [Reply]
26. Bonbibi says:

    June 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm

    Hey Naeem, forget it – you refuse to look at the critique I’ve been levelling and keep focussing on inane details. I don’t see how Dabashi’s argument counters my # 1 and the rest of my argument and example on class and technology use.

    Anyway, here’s a piece on CIA involvement in Iran(http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts220609.htm) and it doesn’t surprise me at all. I don’t want to undermine the sincere participants but I also know that the US has been desperate to get their hands on Iranian oil for the last decade.

    I just wish, like Jyoti that there is a peaceful settlement to it all and that the Iranians stop being used as pawns for peoples’ various agendas.

    [Reply]
27. Bonbibi says:

    June 23, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    Here are more pieces:

    Iran Falling To US PSYOPS?
    By Paul Craig Roberts

    http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts220609A.htm

    Neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman let the cat out of the bag that there was an orchestrated “color revolution” in the works. Before the election, Timmerman wrote: “there’s talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran.” Why would protests be organized prior to a vote and announcement of the outcome? Organized protests waiting in the wings are not spontaneous responses to a stolen election

    Iran’s Election And US – Iranian Relations
    By Stephen Lendman

    http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman220609.htm

    Who can say if he, Ommni, or others are right or if Washington is plotting regime change, much like before in Iran and throughout the world. Thus far, events are fast moving with no clear outcome in sight. It remains to be seen whether Iranians or imperial America will prevail, then what happens next in this volatile part of the world

    Reformists Are Islamists Too
    “Ya Hossein, Mir-Hossein”
    By Ali Jawad

    http://www.countercurrents.org/jawad220609.htm

    The ‘Green Revolution’ is underway. Iranians have put aside their greatest fears, and now carry the destiny of the nation in their own hands. We are in 1979 all over again; only that now, it is the ‘mullahs’ who have become the fleeing Shah. Tensions on the Iranian streets have boiled over to a simple equation: “whose violence threshold is higher?”

    Ahmadinejad Re-elected: Israel
    And Obama’s Iran Puzzle
    By Ramzy Baroud

    http://www.countercurrents.org/baroud220609.htm

    The election victory of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is likely to complicate US President Barack Obama’s new approach to his country’s conflict with Iran. The reason behind the foreseen obstacle is neither the US nor Iran’s refusal to engage in future dialogue but rather Israel’s insistence on a hard-line approach to the problem

    The Iranian Conundrum: Theocracy,
    Martial Law or Democracy?
    By Taj Hashmi

    http://www.countercurrents.org/hashmi220609.htm

    One cannot deny that the grip of the clergy has been weakened; people have become restive and desperate for change, especially the bulk of the urban youth. In the event of a divided clergy’s failure to hold power any longer, a military takeover not people’s power or democracy seems to be the next alternative order in Iran

    Iranian Elections: The ‘Stolen Elections’ Hoax
    By James Petras

    http://www.countercurrents.org/petras200609.htm

    US commentators (left, right and center) who bought into the electoral fraud hoax are inadvertently providing Netanyahu and his American followers with the arguments and fabrications: Where they see religious wars, we see class wars; where they see electoral fraud, we see imperial destabilization

    If you find these articles useful, you may want to join its mailing list:
    http://www.countercurrents.org/subscribe.htm

    [Reply]
28. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 9:41 pm

    @Bonbibi, I didn’t think EY POTH AMADERO, BBC, or other phrases in your response were “inane detail”. For me it summarized (in my interpretation) the reasons+history for your critique of my op-ed, so I thought it was important to respond to those points.

    [Reply]
29. tacit says:

    June 23, 2009 at 9:47 pm

    I notice that the UV admins, theocratic rightwing freedom-hating ideologues that they are, have not changed the UV template to prominently feature the color green.

    http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/06/23/tomo/

    [Reply]
30. naeem says:

    June 23, 2009 at 10:14 pm

    @Tacit,
    Tom Tomorrow is on point, as usual.

    [Reply]
31. naeem says:

    June 24, 2009 at 12:37 am

    @Jyoti wrote: “I think most of what we call revolutions are glorified putsch by the most organised or ruthless faction at a time of political crisis….I don’t wish that kind of revolution for Iran.”

    Iran already had one such revolution. After 1979, the victorious Islamists’ first priority was to obliterate the Iranian Communists en masse.

    [Reply]
32. naeem says:

    June 24, 2009 at 1:08 am

    An interesting comment by Hal Niedzviecki:

    “By watching this and maybe even appending a comment or sending a tweet like “to Neda…we will remember your bravery” are we imagining we are somehow taking meaningful action which actually prevents us from taking meaningful action?”

    [Reply]
33. naeem says:

    June 24, 2009 at 1:12 am

    @Bonbibi,
    Perhaps the movement will spread to the villages.

    Just got this note from Mahdis Keshavarz: “[Iranian state] just got every rural kid who idolizes these guys to stand with the protesters.”

    Iran bans Soccer Players who Wore Green Wristbands
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/23/iran-football-protest-ban

    [Reply]
34. Kgazi says:

    June 24, 2009 at 2:35 am

    I must say when MILLIONS of Iraqi civilians were being blown out by US aggression, not one “graphic news ” was shown in US TV. But now when much less are being hurt by Police action against anti-election protest, US media is overflowing with Iranian videos.

    [Reply]
35. dilbor says:

    June 24, 2009 at 6:33 am

    CNN’s coverage has outrageous. At one point on Saturday’s protest, it reported as many as 150 dead. Later it retracted that story …
    Thanks to Bonbibi for the links. It was pretty much given that there would violence if the results went the other way…expectation was raised with Mussavi’s early declaration of win – even before polling closed. I was cracking up to hear Christiane Amanpour defending protesters’ crying out “Allahu Akbar” by saying they had to say it to give it Islamic cover )

    [Reply]
36. naeem says:

    June 24, 2009 at 9:30 am

    @kgazi & @dilbor
    Yes, the media coverage is biased, slanted, agenda-driven. We know and expect this (with some resignation). But does that delegitimize the events themselves? Don’t confuse the agenda of CNN with the agenda of the protesters. They are not the same. The protesters are trying very hard not to have their voices appropriated.

    Please read the FAQ posted above the article, and give comments.

    [Reply]
37. rumi says:

    June 24, 2009 at 9:35 am

    Question: What is the end goal here?

    Suppose the protesters succeed in toppling the current regime in Iran. What they will do next,

    1. Make Mousavi President. Will this make Iran a secular nation ala another France, or Swizerland or at least India?
    2. What will be democratic Iran’s view on Israel and US patronization of Israel? Will that be radically different from Jordan, Egypt or any gulf nation?
    3. How the democratic, tolerant, non-violent new Iranian govt handle / face a regrouped religious right under banner of Hizbullah?
    4. Will we be happy if Iran ends up having a Iraq style democratic government?
    5. How a post theocratic Iran will be different from Shah’s Iran?
    6. Who will stop spread of Iraq’s terrorism problem or invisible invasion of Muqtada Sadr into Iran and how they will do it? By launching a US-Iran joint war on terrorism?

    [Reply]
38. naeem says:

    June 24, 2009 at 9:47 am

    @Rumi wrote “what is the end goal here?”

    Please refer to our FAQ at top of this post. In particular:

    1. We do not know who won the elections, but there are enough irregularities in the election that a new election, with proper mechanism to prevent voter fraud is needed.

    2. We hope the Iranian protestors will be allowed to express their opinion freely, without repression.

    3. Our protest is against government oppression of citizens, which we speak out against everywhere it happens– whether in Iran, Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka or elsewhere.

    [Reply]
39. Iraner Gonotontro Mukti Paak! « solidarity workshop says:

    June 24, 2009 at 9:50 am

    [...] Live: Bloggers debate Iran situation on Unheard Voice [...]
40. Iraner Gonotontro Mukti Paak! « bricolage journal says:

    June 24, 2009 at 9:58 am

    [...] Live: Bloggers debate Iran situation on Unheard Voice [...]
41. Jyoti says:

    June 24, 2009 at 10:41 am

    Naeem: Iran already had one such revolution. After 1979, the victorious Islamists’ first priority was to obliterate the Iranian Communists en masse.

    —
    I know. And having lived through one ‘revolution’, I wonder if the average Iranian would want another one.

    [Reply]
42. Kgazi says:

    June 24, 2009 at 12:16 pm

    naeem, a) I am blaming the ‘imperialist agenda’ for that kind of selective ‘graphic news’ , not blaming the media.

    b) The Iranian authorities must be given a chance too. Millions of people marching on the streets is not exactly a ‘peafeful protest’ either, thats a national shutdown, and authoritie’s job is to uphold normal security and existence of normality. How else are they supposed to protect the public from a shutdown?

    [Reply]
43. Bonbibi says:

    June 25, 2009 at 4:12 pm

    @ Kgazi ‘the Iranian authorities must be given a chance too’ – a chance for what?? Did you know that they have now arrested filmmaker and journalist Maziar Bahari and the reformist intellectual Saeed Hajjarian?

    Even if I remain sceptical of Naeem’s text for the reasons mentioned above and even if I think there might be western involvement trying to destabilise the country, my heart goes out to those who genuinely want a more ‘just’ Iran. Let’s not forget that the post-Shah Iran Govt:

    1) still executes individuals for ‘enmity against god’ or ‘morality crimes’, ‘acts incompatible with chastity’ and has executed over 100,000 people in the last two decades.

    2) Any political party opposed to the government is banned and their members either killed, in exile or clandestinely active with great risk to themselves. Article 26 of the constitution states: ‘The formation of parties, societies, political or professional associations …is permitted provided they do not violate the principles of independence, freedom, national unity, the criteria of Islam, or the basis of the Islamic republic.’ This goes to show how superficial labels of ‘reformist’, ‘moderate’, ‘conservative’ and so on are in Iranian politics. Whoever comes to power will still uphold a theocracy.

    3) There is no freedom of association and organisation that is necessary for a fair election. Article 27 of the constitution states that ‘public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided … that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam.’ Article 24 of the constitution clearly stipulates: ‘publications and the press have freedom of expression except when it is detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam or the rights of the public.’ It keeps shutting down independent and free-thinking press and expression.

    4) A lot has been said about the fact that only a few of the many candidates were approved to run in the latest presidential election by the Guardian Council whose members are directly or indirectly selected by Khamenei. This doesn’t mean that many of those qualified are any better. Some of them are stalwarts of the government.

    5) The list of those selected reads like a most-wanted list! All are former or present government officials responsible for and linked to serious human rights violations during their various governmental positions. Here’s a short bio of them:

    * Mehdi Karroubi, Member of the State Expediency Council, former Majlis Speaker from 1989 to 1992 and 2000 to 2004. Secretary General and founding member of Militant Clerics Society one of the most reactionary organisations in Iran. He also headed the Imam Khomeini Relief Committee and the Martyrs Foundation, two state institutions which control much of the country’s assets.

    * Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He has been a top commander of the notorious Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps in particular responsible for murder of thousands of opponents during the dark days of mass killings in the early 80s. He was involved in planning an attempt on the life of author Salman Rushdie. He is a member of the central council of the Society of the Devotees of the Islamic Revolution.

    * Mohsen Rezai, Secretary of State Expediency Council; one of the founders and former Commander of Iran’s notorious Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps from 1981 to 1997. He is personally responsible for murdering many socialist and opponents of the Islamic Republic. He is wanted by Interpol for planning and undertaking acts of terrorism abroad.

    * Hossein Mousavi, has been prime minister and head of government for several years. He organised and carried out massacres and suppression of protests of the population in the 80s, in which hundreds of thousands were arrested and thousands executed. In his time in office a row of inhumane laws against women, the opposition and critics of the regime were introduced and used.

    6) Some say that if all those who had wanted to run for elections had been allowed to run, this could have been considered a real election. It can’t – because only those ‘distinguished men possessing trustworthiness and piety; and a convinced belief in the fundamental principles of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the official religion of the country’ can be elected according to Article 115 of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s constitution. This effectively excludes the vast majority of the population.

    7) Of course that means women are automatically and categorically excluded from running in the election. Again, Article 20 of the constitution states: ‘…both men and women, equally enjoy the protection of the law and enjoy all human, political, economic, social, and cultural rights’ but only in conformity with Islamic criteria.’

    The person who will be ‘elected’ today will have to swear that he ‘will guard the official religion of the country, the order of the Islamic Republic and the Constitution of the country’ and dedicate himself to the ‘the honour of the country, the propagation of religion and morality.’

    Will the person selected in this farce going to uphold a system which I know as a feminist and Leftist I would have difficulty living under??

    Sitting at the moment in a western state I refuse to go and march against Ahmedinejad. This is not because I support Ahmedinejad but because I think he is vilified by the western media and because I am at the moment in a western country. It also is because I don’t believe in Mousavi. In fact, I have no illusions about the Iranian Govt at all, but I don’t like how my Govt. (and I call ‘my’ the Govt.’s in whose state I stand today, tomorrow I shall call ‘my’ another Govt as I shall stand on some other soil; yes, I don’t believe in nationalism and patriotism) treats Iran and so by not demonstrating I’m making a statement against my Govt.

    However, I am not a cultural relativist. I believe in the fundamentals of human rights and refuse to see them as western (how can I when Islam was maybe the first religion to talk of women’s rights and bring in more equality between people; besides, vast regions of the world wouldn’t have converted to Islam if not for these reasons). I marched against Bush and Blair and their dirty war which killed thousands and I hope they’re tried for crimes against humanity someday soon. But that does not mean I can support Ahmedinejad or his system where as a woman or a minority I would be relegated to second class.

    I understand that the current events have been hijacked by the western media and in light of the current situation where the press is either muffled or deluded it is difficult to think or write something sensible about the events. What I do know however, is that as a self-respecting woman and leftist living the majority world, I would have refused to be a good girl and toed the dominant line. Yes, maybe I’ld have gone out and marched just because dissent, in Dhaka, Jakarta or Islamabad seems to unfortunately be the prerogative of the courageous.

    [Reply]
44. naeem says:

    June 27, 2009 at 3:15 pm

    There is debate as to
    1. whether this is a “revolution” or “uprising” or “revote movement”
    2. whether Mousavi can represent the protesters desires.
    3. what tangible changes this movement will bring
    4. whether the state will succeed in crushing the movement

    However, my focus in the op-ed was about the volume of data that is coming out, and the nature of the new pipes that are carrying it. Whatever we may think of the pros/cons of this movement, that information dissemination is happening in a paradigm shifting way is clear.

    [Reply]
45. naeem says:

    July 2, 2009 at 8:01 pm

    Vijay Prashad wrote in this op-ed “Made for Revolution: Iran and Us”
    http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad07012009.html

    “Our Facebook updates and Twitter squeals do not contribute to their debate.”

    My response:

    I disagree that Iranian twitterers, inside Iran and in the diaspora, don’t have an impact on the crisis. To suggest otherwise would be to denigrate the achievement of twitterers like PersianKiwi, who sent updates for two weeks, until being allegedly arrested by security forces.

    Yes, there’s tremendous amount of chaff on Twitter, but there’s also precious data.

    I stand by my original op-ed from June 17

    “The Revolution Will Bypass Your Filters”
    http://unheardvoice.net/blog/2009/06/17/iran-filters/

    This crisis has been different precisely because of the critical mass interlinking of social media. News, photos and video has leaked out in such large volume precisely because of the existence of Twitter, Twitpic, Youtube, Twazzup, Facebook, etc.

    [Reply]
46. Kgazi says:

    July 2, 2009 at 9:05 pm

    The 1979 Iran revolution was knownn as the “Audio Cassette revolution”, and this one is known as the “twitter revolution”.

    [Reply]
47. naeem says:

    July 2, 2009 at 10:14 pm

    @Kgazi, I think you can’t go to the wall with the analogy, because:
    1. In 1979, it was near impossible to shut down the underground hand-to-hand passing of secret tapes. But over the last two weeks the Iranian state has had some success in shutting down access to Facebook/Twitter/SMS inside the country. They are not 100% succesful, but they are not at 0% either. The rumored arrest of twitterer PersianKiwi, if true, shows how deep their hands have gone.

    2. Although I did write optimistically about “Bypassing Filters”, and I will always take that position as an evangelist for technology for activism, the Iranian state has also shown some strength in the area of interception, aided by equipment sold by Nokia and others. The State is not all-powerful in the face of technology, but it is not helpless either. I think what is also different from the early days of the net is that the strong libertarian, anti-authoritarian streak of some net community players (obviously not Arpanet, but more Well-era players) has been replaced by politics-neutral, even amoral, position of players who are willing to sell technology for use by repressive actors.

    3. The flow of information OUT of the country is significant. Information, photo, video is leaking out of Iran to the outside world. But iin terms of intra-country flows, it is not clear whether some of that information flow is getting shut down. You will also note a noticable drop in leaked video in the last three days. Does that mean state censors are getting better?

    The use of technology in this crisis is a moving target, the trends are shifting each day. However, on balance, it’s a positive– both for activists inside Iran, and to global activists for showing possible techniques and tools.

    [Reply]
48. naeem says:

    July 2, 2009 at 10:29 pm

    From Businessweek:

    1. Iran experts and social networking activists say that while Iranian election protesters have certainly used social media tools, no particular technology has been instrumental to organizers’ ability to get people on the street. Indeed, most of the organizing has occurred through far more mundane means: SMS text messages and word of mouth.

    2. With the government blocking the Twitter site, that small group becomes even smaller. Tech-savvy netizens can use proxy addresses such as Tor or Proxy.org to bypass the government block of certain IP addresses. But for many users, circumnavigating the government’s blockage is too big a hurdle, and organizing in more conventional ways, such as over the phone or by knocking on doors, can be both quicker and easier.

    3. Mishra, who has organized social media activism campaigns for elections in India, says the main reason to use the tools is the attention it generates in the international media. Indeed, one of Twitter’s primary contributions in the Iranian elections has been to raise awareness of the issue among tech-savvy users outside the country.

    http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2009/tc20090617_803990.htm

    [Reply]
49. fugstar says:

    July 3, 2009 at 6:29 am

    kgazi,
    but there you go, believing the hype. its not a revolution, its a rumble, dark divisions ahead for our sisters and brothers in iran. poor mousavi, establishment must be laughing in the knowledge that he’s got himself in a corner.

    lets have a dose of measured reality, the biggest threat to iran at the moment is the regime in the nearby zionist entity.

    The revolution will not be twitterized.
    The revolution will not be brought to you by fox
    In 4 parts without commercial interruptions.
    The revolution will not show you pictures of Obama
    strumming on a kamanche and leading a charge by Bibi
    Brown, General Motors and AIPAC to eat
    pistachio nuts confiscated from iranian container ship.
    The revolution will not be twitterised.

    [Reply]
50. fugstar says:

    July 3, 2009 at 6:58 pm

    America’s Iranian Twitter Revolution

    http://openanthropology.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/americas-iranian-twitter-revolution/

    [Reply]