Mousavi

[Hiero]

Who is Mousavi? What is his policies? Is he anti Mullah and Clerics?

[Yehuda Stern]

No. He's part of the reformist wing of the ruling class. That means that he believes that the regime in essence should stay the way it is, but give some reforms to the oppressed and the poor. He is no way against the control of the mullahs over the state, and is in no way any sort of socialist.

[RHIZOMES]

but give some reforms to the oppressed and the poor.

Is that why he's pro cutting welfare and pro privatisation?

[Yehuda Stern]

Hmm, false logic all around: because I said reformists are for some reforms, does that mean that they do not support any attacks on the working class too? Think about it: if I say that a word has in it some letters of the ABC, would anyone consider it smart if you pointed out in a cynical, self-satisfied matter that it does not have the letter W?

Probably just you and khad.

[Sean]

This was brought up (rightly) before, but I'll say it again, Mousavi used to be in charge as much as you can be in such a state, but if you look at wikipedia, his entire past is not mentioned and its locked. You need to dig deep to see Mousavi because the west has hijacked him not getting elected as a sign that the incumbent is evil. We need complete information on both before we can judge whether or not the crowds will bring about reform or just a slightly more western leaning government. I'm not being arrogant at all when I suggest that you google him and try to do some research that isnt western or wikipedia based.

[RaiseYourVoice]

From http://hopinewsfromiran.wordpress.com/facts-on-mir-hossein-moussavi/


Facts on Mir-Hossein Moussavi

At this stage, large swathes of the Iranian masses have illusions in the ‘reformist’ Mir-Hossein Moussavi. Unless the protest movement becomes stronger and clearer in its aims, there is a real danger that the trend around Ahmadinejad will use the pretext of the disruption to launch a wave of repression across society as a whole. There are already signs of this with a growing number of deaths and increased belligerence of the state-sponsored militias. The key to ensuring this upsurge makes real, solid gains for the working people of Iran is boost the fighting capacity of those masses, not to sow illusions in any establishment politician, particularly Moussavi. Here are some facts on him:
http://hopinewsfromiran.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/imagesmoussavi.jpg?w=100&h=118
Moussavi and the other reformist candidate in the recent elections, Mehdi Karroubi, are no radical opponents of the regime. For eight years, Moussavi served as prime minister of the Islamic republic – during some of the darkest days of this regime. He was deeply involved in the arms-for-hostages deals with the Reagan administration in the 1980s, the affair that came to be known as ‘Irangate’. He also played a prominent role in the brutal wave of repression in the 1980s that exterminated a generation of Iranian leftists. During this period, thousands of socialists and communists were jailed, with many of them arbitarily executed while in prison.
Moussavi has attempted to refashion himself as a ‘conservative reformer’ or a ‘reformist conservative’ by expressing his allegiance to the supreme leader and by claiming to have initiated Iran’s nuclear programme, which he has promised to continue. He also criticised the release of British navy personal in 2007 as “a humiliating surrender”. Defending his government’s anti-Western credentials, Ahmadinejad then counter-claimed that “prime minister Tony Blair had sent a letter to apologise to Iran”. Within a few hours, the foreign office in London issued a stern denial that such a letter was ever sent – an unprecented intervention which was a clear indicator who the west’s preferred candidate was. Moussavi tried to exploit this Ahmadinejad gaffe.
But he clearly failed. The supreme leader could not tolerate his former protégé Moussavi. Although his politics are almost indistinguishable from those of Ahmadinejad, he was just a bit too ‘progressive’ on two points:
He promised to be more liberal over women’s dress code and said he would expand women’s rights –within the parameters proscribed by the religious state, of course
He promised to use more diplomatic language and a more amenable attitude in dealings with the West, especially the USA. Despite this diplomatic ‘packaging’, however, he remains committed to defending Iran’s nuclear program (including the right to enrich uranium)
Mass protests
These elections themselves were a “charade” from the day they started. All four candidates were supporters of the existing system. All supported existing neo-liberal economic policies and privatisations that have pauperised wide swathes of Iran’s working people. All four are in favour of Iran’s nuclear programme.
But we should not underestimate the anger of the Iranian population against this blatant manipulation of the results. Iranians had to choose between the lesser of two evils – and when the worst was declared winner, they showed their contempt for the system by huge demonstrations culminating in the massive protests of June 13 2009.
Until early June, most Iranians had shown little interest in these elections, as they knew that no candidate would produce real change. But it was the live TV debates that swept away the apathy. The debates betweeen Ahmadinejad-Moussavi and Ahmadinejad-Karroubi were unique events in the history of the official media of the Islamic Republic. The debates confirmed what most Iranians know through their personal experiences – but which they had never before heard on the official media:
• Ahmadinejad stated that Iran had been ruled for 24 years (up to his presidency) by a clique akin to an economic and political mafia. ‘Elite’ clerics such as the reformers Rafsanjani and Khatami had “forgotten their constituents” and were corrupt
• Moussavi stated that the economy has been in a terrible state, particularly in the last four years
The situation in Iran is very fluid. Over 900 protesters and 100 ‘reformist’ leaders have been arrested, including the brother of former president Khatami. Moussavi and his wife have gone underground. There are signs of the beginning of an internal coup. Thirty years after the Iranian revolution, there is an irony in Iran’s supreme leader using suppression against an opposition to a rotting, totally discredited regime. The parallel is with the chain of events that led to the overthrow of the Shah’s regime in 1979. The foundations of the Islamic Republic regime are shaking.
The protests of June 13 were the largest demonstrations since 1979. After the euphoria of the last two weeks, when Iranians participated in their millions in demonstrations and political meetings, no state – however brutal – will be able to control the situation. The events of the last few weeks show that there is real hope that the Iranian people can get rid of this regime – be it in the guise of Ahmadinejad or the no less undemocratic and corrupt ‘reformists’.

[RHIZOMES]

Hmm, false logic all around: because I said reformists are for some reforms, does that mean that they do not support any attacks on the working class too? Think about it: if I say that a word has in it some letters of the ABC, would anyone consider it smart if you pointed out in a cynical, self-satisfied matter that it does not have the letter W?

Probably just you and khad.

I can see maybe reforms for some sections of the oppressed (Women, gays, Bahais, maybe), but I can't see any for the poor. I can see things getting worse for the poor under Mousavi.

[REDSOX]

He is a member of the clerical bourgeoisie and no friend of the poor. He is however a friend of the protesters who chant his name and hold his picture aloft when they march. In short a neo liberal fuck who is as bad as the reactionary ahmadinejad.

[Pogue]

Mousavi is irrelevant. These protests are now about alot more than him, and the unions recognise this.

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/06/20/18603064.php

[Yehuda Stern]

I can see maybe reforms for some sections of the oppressed (Women, gays, Bahais, maybe), but I can't see any for the poor. I can see things getting worse for the poor under Mousavi.

But where did I say that I support Mousavi or that he can improve the condition of the poor? Obviously the reformists offer some reforms that the oppressed and poor want. However, as I already said, they are in essence no different from the conservatives. That is irrelevant, however - the protests are much bigger than just Mousavi.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Mousavi is the least bad guy in the Iranian elections.

[Comrade B]

I support the protesters because they are standing up against their oppressive government, however I am not so much for Mousavi, if he takes leadership I don't really see much change in Iranian politics, it seems like the western media has just been trying to help set him up as representative of the resistance in hopes of him taking charge, rather than someone more radical. The US dislikes Ahmadinejad because he dislikes them, Mousavi gives them a new chance for getting a hold into Iran. The protesters however, are standing up for their voices, maybe the brutality they face during the riots will sway them further towards the left and make them realize that Mousavi is not the face of change for their country, just a tool to misdirect their anger.

[Sarah Palin]

As benign as this sounds, he is for the privatization of ownership of televisions.
But he is also for more relaxed laws towards women, so it's a step in the right direction.