I'm over with this note, but I have to recommend this essay because I found it so interesting. Obviously it's not pro-Khomeini, but I think it's very useful. I think this "clientelism" is a great way for us political-theory types to find less loaded language to analyze what I tend to call "warlordism" or "neo-feudalism" which seems to develop when capitalism abandons a society and class structures based on ownership are replaced by "vertical" structures which are internally hierarchical but cut across class divisions. The .pdf is here: <a href="http://www.iranian.com/Alamdari/2006/March/Iran/Images/MilitalizationIRI.pdf">http://www.iranian.com/Alamdari/2006/March/Iran/Images/MilitalizationIRI.pdf</a> Here is the abstract reprinted: "The Power Structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran: transition from populism to clientelism, and militarization of the government KAZEM ALAMDARI ABSTRACT: Since the1979 revolution, Iran has experienced two non-class power structures—populism and clientelism. Populism, a product of the revolution, helped Ayatollah Khomeini to rule Iran for a decade with absolute power. Clientelism in Iran is linked to Shiism, as well as to a rentier state, and to the revolution, which resulted in many autonomous groups formed in patron – client bonds. Neither clientelism nor Shiism can be analysed using classical class system theory. Instead of horizontal layers of classes, the power structures in both Shi'ism and clientelism are based on vertical columns of rival and autonomous groups. The traditional Shi'a institution of Marja'iyat (source of emulation), has come into conflict with an elected government. The reformist government elected in 1997 failed to deliver on its democratic promises and to end the destructive role of autonomous groups. Therefore, disenchanted with state-sponsored reforms, Iranian society seems to be moving towards pragmatism and utilitarianism, while the political power structure leans towards militarism." On 11/29/06, Doug Henwood <<a href="mailto:dhenwood@panix.com">dhenwood@panix.com</a>> wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2006, at 3:21 PM, boddi satva wrote: > > > 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. > > Fortunately, Yoshie is pretty much alone in this position, though she > has been dragging the good name of MR through the mud in promoting it. > > Doug > ___________________________________ > <a href="http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk">http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</a> >