But reviling the Bush government for its evil "wag-the-dog" intent to attack Iran and *supporting* Iran are two different things.
Those who are putting forth the idea that somehow leftists should *support* Iran had better come clean, because frankly some right-wing website is going to find writings here about this tendency and beat the Left to death with it. Seriously, this kind of talk about Iran is EXACTLY what the Anne Coulters of the world are dying to read in support of their insane contention that Islamists and Leftists are somehow linked.
So those tending to support the idea that Iran is a positive force in the world should make your case because I'm sorry but leftists really have to choose one side or the other: Does Iran and the Shiite Islamist movements it supports represent a "liberation theology" or not? If so, how?
Here is a portion of Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto:
"We are the sons of the ummah (Muslim community) - the party of God (Hizb Allah) the vanguard of which was made victorious by God in Iran. There the vanguard succeeded to lay down the bases of a Muslim state which plays a central role in the world. We obey the orders of one leader, wise and just, that of our tutor and faqih (jurist) who fulfills all the necessary conditions: Ruhollah Musawi Khomeini....We are an umma linked to the Muslims of the whole world by the solid doctrinal and religious connection of Islam, whose message God wanted to be fulfilled by the Seal of the Prophets, i.e., Muhammad. Our behavior is dictated to us by legal principles laid down by the light of an overall political conception defined by the leading jurist....As for our culture, it is based on the Holy Koran, the Sunna and the legal rulings of the faqih who is our source of imitation."
I found this on the Wikipedia site. The web page quoted is
http://www.ict.org.il/Articles/Hiz_letter.htm
I'm sure other sites will be quoted, but there are consistent ideas, it seems to me, throughout the Iranian-based political writings.
1.) Their movement is based on a defense of Muslims only.
2.) They seek to create governments based on Sharia law.
3.) These governments should have, as their supreme juridical authority, Shiite clerics.
4.) All people under the domain of these governments will be subject to Sharia law AND be constantly exhorted (at least) to become Muslims.
5.) In terms of economics, Islam, like other God/Authority religions, counsels for charity and against vice, but it is not really based on humanistic or democratic judgment. From the "Islamic Economics Homepage" at the website
http://www.islamic-world.net/economics/index.htm :
"It has to be fully kept in mind that all the injunctions of the Sharia seek to benefit human beings and eliminate harm. But those benefits and harms are not entirely left to the judgment of man. In a large number of cases those benefits and harms have been specified in the Qur'an and Hadith and should be made the criteria of judgment."
So the purpose is to impose Sharia first, and create economic justice second, if at all.
It seems to me that, where Catholic liberation theology in South and Central America pushed the Vatican left, it seems that the Iranian theology actually pushes the Muslim world right, towards a stricter, more fundamentalist, Sharia-based political economy. This political economy enshrines male, religious authoritarianism and is completely inconsistent with the aspirations of the Left. The success of Islamism, it seems to me, CANNOT be a success for the Left. There are many ways to sow discord against the hegemon. Not all of them are good.
If Iran succeeds, what do we win?
boddi