Antiwar activists and progressive intellectuals in the west should know, and be prepared to say extemporaneously in public debate, what the likes of Shirin Ebadi , Akbar Ganji , Emadeddin Baghi ,Abdollah Momeni , and Ramin Jahanbegloo think — most pressingly, what they think of a US military attack on Iran, but also what they think about the human rights situation in Iran, the nature of the Islamic Republic, and what members of global civil society can do to support them. Indeed we should be in conversation with them, and with many other Iranian progressives — writing articles about them, inviting them to speak at our universities, learning as much as we can about them.
[...]
It's almost impossible to argue with this. In fact, it should always be the case: if you're talking about conditions within a country, intelligent, well informed thinkers, activists, etc from that country should be given first speaking rights whenever and wherever possible.
Beyond that general idea however, events have swiftly moved past the McLemee/Postel argument about stealing the neocon's rhetorical thunder.
That is, war agitators scarcely talk about bringing democracy to Iran anymore and have begun to allege (no, not allege, boldly assert) that Tehran is funding, arming and otherwise supporting Iraqi guerrilla warfare and, therefore, American deaths. Note the recent chatter about Explosively Formed Projectiles or EFPs - from the media noise, you'd think they were an Iranian invention and not a long used weapon, surely something Iraqi combat vets would well understand and be able to make from domestically available munitions. Despite this, they're discussed like an exotic new technology only the sinister explosives experts of Iran could engineer.
Washington - or at least the pro War Plan Iran cadre - are asserting that acts of war have been committed. The fact that most attacks (to date, though things are changing) come from Sunni groups and that no love is lost between these groups and Iran is a minor factual detail, easily overlooked by the busy American journalist corps.
McLemee/Postel are demanding the American left counter the neocon false 'democracy plan' with the real ideas and plans of Iranians who look forward to a post theocracy future. This makes urgent good sense and I wholly support their POV as far as that goes. Thing is, this isn't the field upon which the perceptual battle is presently being waged.
That's the thing about neocons and fellow travelers: as conditions change, they quickly change the rhetorical game board, pieces and rules. Surely they realize that the 'let's bring democracy to the natives' bit isn't going to fly in a 'We Fucked Up Iraq' world. Stronger dosages of illusion are needed so a teetering back to the clear and present danger side of the story scale was needed.
.d.
My needs are simple: solid gold house, rocket car and crazy stripper wife.
Is this too much to ask?
Chester ...................... http://monroelab.net/blog/