Social revolution by anarchists or socialists has nothing whatsoever to do with regime change by the empire -- they are mutually exclusive.
What do you gain by confusing the two? Confusing them only helps both Western imperialists and the most reactionary forces outside the West, to say nothing of hopelessly dumbing down discussion. That's "Right in Form and Right in Essence," if you ask me.
And that's so even setting aside the fact that anarchism, socialism, etc. are irrelevant to much of the world, including Iran, due to lack of interest on the part of the populace today. It is not possible to make it relevant again unless anarchists, socialists, etc. first recognize this reality.
On 5/23/07, Mike Ballard <swillsqueal at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> I do not suffer the foolishness of nationalist
> cheerleading for any ruling class without comment; this includes the theocratic
> dictatorship in Iran.
You are not an Iranian, by citizenship or residence, so, by definition, you couldn't be an Iranian nationalist even if you tried to be. It's foolish to struggle not to become what you cannot become anyway. (It's the duty of _Iranians_ not to become Iran-Firsters.) Instead, struggle against becoming what you can, but should not, become. -- Yoshie