In 1979 Iranians introduced a new form of social revolution. In place of the guerrilla-style armed struggle that had characterized the twentieth-century revolutions in non-western countries, the Iranians modeled a spontaneous nonviolent mass movement. And much to the experts' surprise, in less than 2 years this movement overthrew a dictatorial monarchy that had the backing of both Western powers and the strongest army in the Middle East. The principles of freedom and independence that sustained this revolution were soon violated by Khomeini, who instituted an even more repressive and brutal regime than that which had been dismantled. But the methods of the early victory set a new precedent, shaping the imagination of what was possible in the Eastern European revolutions of the 1980s.
Now, after thirty years, this revolution has boomeranged back to the streets and rooftops of Iran. A new generation is determined to finish the job that their parents began but could not bring to fruition: the establishment of freedom and democracy in an independent Iran.
The violent confrontations at yesterday's Ashura demonstrations, which resulted from widespread resistance to the brutality of the regime's various security forces, have shifted the balance of the struggle towards the people. The question is no longer whether this corrupt regime will be overthrown, but rather when it will go, and how. It is clear that this struggle, which began as a simple protest against the rigged presidential election, can no longer be defined as a movement for either state reform or civil rights. Yesterday's demonstrations, occurring throughout the country and from Tehran to the smallest towns, cannot be defined by any term other than revolution.
Dictatorships always maintain a fragile balance between fear and anger, which they either inflict on or produce for the people they rule. As long as the fear of the regime's power outweighs anger at its effects, its position is relatively secure. But if this balance tips with changes in conditions either at home or abroad, and if feelings of anger begin to supersede those of fear, then given opportunity and circumstances it is safe to assume that a regime's days are numbered. Yesterday, in defiant resistance against thousands of security forces and carrying with them in demonstrations the experiences of more than a century of struggle for democracy, Iranians demonstrated to themselves and to the world that this is truer than ever of the Iranian regime. The balance has tipped from fear to anger, and there is a new determination to make Iran free and independent.
The consequences of this revolution cannot be underestimated. Many argue that it was 1979 Iranian revolution which transformed Islamic fundamentalism into a global phenomenon. If this is correct, then it is possible that the present revolution might to do the 'unthinkable' and overthrow a corrupt, fundamentalist regime. Such a non-violent revolution could secularise the state, separating it from religion, and revolutionise religion itself by redefining Islam as a discourse of freedom and a method not for obtaining and managing power, but for expanding freedom. The principles of such an Islam are already being produced, not least of all in the latest works of Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, who during the course of his life became an advocate of human rights. His unprecedented burial gathering, despite being disrupted by the regime's great attempts to minimise it, suggest that the Iranian public recognises and perhaps even favours this discourse. An authentic Islamic renaissance is already sweeping through many Iranian cities, and its effect on other Islamic countries will be felt in the coming years and months.
Not to mention the government paid people to go, and anyone working for a government agency was "strongly recommended" to use the day off (the government gave them) and go rally for the government they work for. To be fair, thats not to say that there are not government supporters in Iran. Its just important to know where most of them are coming from.
The ongoing uprising in Moldova and the previous ‘colour’ revolutions in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, etc. are all characterized in some way by the classic definition of social revolutions, which is the overthrow of a state by its contender through mass mobilization. This is why I use the term ‘authentic’ revolution to characterize what is happening in Iran today, and extend this to discussions of an ‘authentic Islamic renaissance’. I differentiate the ongoing Iranian revolution from previous 21st century revolutions not only because it is a continuation of the 1979 revolution (or as a friend of mine put it, ‘revolution part-II’) but because it is happening within the cultural as well as political sphere. Most importantly, we see the reinterpretation of Islam, away from all sorts of discourses of power into new discourses of freedom. This is a total paradigm shift which assumes that religion, and indeed any belief system, is at the service of human beings and not vice versa. This renaissance started long ago, but has moved out of the small circles of Muslim intellectuals into the wider Iranian society. I’m hoping in subsequent articles to elaborate on this point.
I'm curious, is there any concensus among the Arab nations about what's going on in Iran? Any support one way or the other.... I would have a heard time imagining any arab government providing any kind of support to Khamanei/Ahmedinijad, but I would think countries like saudi arabia, qatar, etc would be equally troubled by the notion of a fully democratic, secular Iran.
Thoughts?
Dr Mahmood Delkhasteh can imagine a secular Iran if he likes but there is no evidence of it coming. The problem is Obama might be suckered by these guys, like GWB was conned by Chalabi.
Even if they do have a separation of "church" and State: you think it will be any different from here? Name me an agnostic American President? The last Catholic President was shot dead. So let's not get carried away with the idea that even if you write there is separation of religion and politics that it really exists. We like our presidents to be some kind of protestant. Iran like America will never have an Apostate leadership.
Let's hope Obama keeps out of this and waits to see what happens. The conflict between Christianity and Islam is the oldest War.
Add in that even amongst those hot to see a change in how the country is run, Ahmadinejad was getting a 30% approval rating last year, and the whole 'the election was rigged' storyline that is so popular in the West seems shaky even before you start to consider how hard it would have been to rig it (yeah, I know, people say it would be easy, but the voting and counting took place in full view of Mousavi monitors, and yet they didn't report seeing the massive fraud, or discrepencies between the counts they witnessed and the counts announced. And seeing as it appears that the riot...sorry, protesters, seem to have no problem getting their messages out of the country, unless you want to believe that Mousavi's people are totally incompetent, it seems that the rigged election wasn't rigged, and ranks right up there with the 'Iraq has WMD' and 'Kuwaiti Incubator' stories in terms of the 'herds of independant media' trotting blindly down the garden path)
Let's help these good folks any way we can, I say.
“Our epoch is a birth-time, and a period of transition. The spirit of man has broken with the old order of things hitherto prevailing, and with the old ways of thinking, and is in the mind to let them all sink into the depths of the past and to set about its own transformation”.
The Iranian people are at one with the age. They, just as we, are finished with political dictators and "higher" moral authorities. The Iranian people know this -- and history is on their side. Victory will not come soon, but it will come.
And not a moment too soon, only a little over 200 yrs since the US & France secularized their states, and created the Bill of Rights. It took the enlightenment and a bunch of secular freethinkers to get that done, and they have been dragging the religious along kicking and screaming ever since through every advancement of our rights.
Secular State is easy to say or write but increasingly we are losing that right.
Who knows what the leading dissident clerics and citizens actually believe or dont believe, give them freedom from religious oppression and you might find a huge number that don't really believe.
I am encouraged by their struggle, and hope they succeed. Even if they stay basically muslim for now, it will be progress. I actually think they will head toward something like Turkey, sooner or later.
An example of legitimate revolution would be throwing off Plutonomy in the U.S.
Sure, call for a revolution here when you can't even recognize that the Iranians are fighting their masters- you have to hallucinate that they're foreign agents. You have no credibility.
Do you have this stuff sitting in a "notepad" file ready to cut and paste because, I gotta tell ya, - this same line got boring yesterday.
How about some fresh thoughts, eh Chucky?
US funding destabilization programs in Iran:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/05/bush_authorizes.html
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh
First, the Obama administration is keeping a hands-off policy towards this movement. It wants to negotiate a grand bargain with Tehran, no matter who is in power, to get Tehran's cooperation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The movement has done nothing but embarrass the Obama administration.
Second, the movement has no leaders. Its two figureheads are not in control of much of anything any more.
Third, the regime they the people trying to overthrow is one which any freedom-loving and dignified people would want to overthrow.
Fourth, so what if the CIA actually did like this revolution? The CIA liked (and actively aided and abetted) Polish Solidarity. Should Poland have remained under a hellish Stalinist-military dictatorship just because the CIA did not like the opposition?
Oh, and Rand Victims, cross your "i" and dot your "t". Who is at the head of the Plutonomy in the US? Go ahead and say it. Don't be afraid. We all know what you mean by it in any case, you're deceiving no one.
You see, THIS is exactly why there can be no honest dialogue about foreign policy. THIS is why we can only lash out against *some* injustices and not others.
The system of intimidation and slander carried out against those with critical thought is keeping the world at war. You are just another typical player.
I hope you're proud,...because you certainly aren't *right*.
As long as Iranians are hailed by the so-called Democracies of this world for opposing their own government and Palestinians (at the same time are) ignored for opposing supression in their own land, there is a double standard! And as long as double standards exist on similar issues around the world, the next decade is set to be... can I say "interesting"?
BTW, just how much is being said (by the world's Democracies) agains the 700 apartments that Israel is building in Arabic East Jerusalem?
Now we have to Suffer through another weekend of "Schindlers List" on cable to reprogram.
Thanks a lot!
Rand Victims, why is a film about a Gentile saving thousands of Jewish lives from the Nazis such a thorn in your eye? Go ahead and say it. Don't be afraid.
The Iranian people have come a long way since 79. Back then, the mullahs were the only viable option to the Shah. They have learned a lot since then. Many now recognize that the people have more wisdom than the mullahs, and the uncertainties of freedom are preferable to the certainty of religious despotism.
The theocrats have built up a large class of loyal bullies who are willing to use violence against the people to maintain their privileges. It may be more difficult to dislodge these tyrants than the previous one.