Who supports Mousavi?

[Crux]

Since there have been several claims from regime apologists that the left are "supporting" Mousavi, an obvious strawman, I think the question needs assigning. But aside from the provocateurs there seem to be some people who genuinly do not know. This thread is not supposed to be a list of organisations that support Mousavi, like for example the Stalinist of the Tudeh Party, who incidentally also supported the islamists in 79, but rather a clarification for our for the comrades that are obvuiously confused about what the perspective are of most left organisations concerning the protests in Iran.
I will eloborate on the CWI position later.

[h0m0revolutionary]

I should hope nobody here supports Mousavi, but the runt-of-the-left-litter small and insignificant orginisations that pop up on here occasionally never cease to amaze me with their confusion and idiocy.

Mousavi as Prime Minister killed more leftists than any other pillar of the Islamic Republic and he offers nothing different to Ahmadinejad.

[What Would Durruti Do?]

I should hope nobody here supports Mousavi, but the runt-of-the-left-litter small and insignificant orginisations that pop up on here occasionally never cease to amaze me with their confusion and idiocy.

Mousavi as Prime Minister killed more leftists than any other pillar of the Islamic Republic and he offers nothing different to Ahmadinejad.

Exactly, and by supporting Mousavi's supporters and the reformist greens, you are essentially supporting Mousavi and the regime he is a part of. Just like supporting Obama and the Democrats (while they are the more leftist and working class-aware wing of the American regime) is still supporting the American regime.

And yet I'm the one that gets labeled a regime apologist. :rolleyes:

Go back to chanting "allahu ackbar!" in the streets with your theocratic imperialist bourgeoisie friends, Mayakovsky.

[bricolage]

Exactly, and by supporting Mousavi's supporters and the reformist greens, you are essentially supporting Mousavi and the regime he is a part of. Just like supporting Obama and the Democrats (while they are the more leftist and working class-aware wing of the American regime) is still supporting the American regime.

And yet I'm the one that gets labeled a regime apologist. :rolleyes:

Go back to chanting "allahu ackbar!" in the streets with your theocratic imperialist bourgeoisie friends, Mayakovsky.

Yes but supporting the protest movement is not the same as supporting Mousavi, in fact Mousavi lost whatever minimal control he had over it early on. So supporting the movement does not equate to supporting Mousavi but opposing it does equate to supporting the theocratic regime.

We most oppose Mousavi, Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic and imperialist intervention all at the same time.

[Crux]

Exactly, and by supporting Mousavi's supporters and the reformist greens, you are essentially supporting Mousavi and the regime he is a part of. Just like supporting Obama and the Democrats (while they are the more leftist and working class-aware wing of the American regime) is still supporting the American regime.

And yet I'm the one that gets labeled a regime apologist. :rolleyes:

Go back to chanting "allahu ackbar!" in the streets with your theocratic imperialist bourgeoisie friends, Mayakovsky.
Have I, or the CWI, ever defended Mousavi? Hardly. If you can not argue without strawmanning perhaps you ought to stop posting all together.

Also LOL at the democrats being "more workingclass".

[Pogue]

no one on here supported him

[The Situationist]

I think some leftists got caught up in the fact that Mousavi used to be an admirer of Che Guevara, and forgot that now he was an economic reactionary.

[Led Zeppelin]

I think some leftists got caught up in the fact that Mousavi used to be an admirer of Che Guevara, and forgot that now he was an economic reactionary.

Name one who was caught up with that, something which you have made up by the way since he never identified himself with Che Guevara, or shut up.

EDIT: Just did an IP check and saw that the above user is a sock-puppet.

Typical.

[Serge's Fist]

Mousavi does have the support of some "left" wing organisations. Yassamine Mather looked at this in articles in the Weekly Worker and so has James Turley. Obviously a section of the Tudeh do support Mousavi and by default then do the CPB who published without question a section of a statement the Tudeh put out recently essentially backing the Mousavi and the reformists. It was in the Morning Star a couple of weeks ago now.

There is a whole section on why we should not support Mousavi on the dedicated Iran election crisis blog here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NiRt3koN78&feature=player_embedded).

[Led Zeppelin]

Mousavi does have the support of some "left" wing organisations.

Great, that has got nothing to do with the idiotic made-up Che Guevara claim.

But yes, some "left" wing organisations do indeed support the various factions of the ruling classes. For example, Galloway and his group of morons support the Ahmadinejad faction, while the main social-democratic parties support Mousavi and his faction.


Obviously a section of the Tudeh do support Mousavi and by default then do the CPB who published without question a section of a statement the Tudeh put out recently essentially backing the Mousavi and the reformists. It was in the Morning Star a couple of weeks ago now.

I don't know what you are talking about regarding the Tudeh statement. It didn't mention Mousavi's name once. It referred to supporting the popular movement itself, which is of course the basic stance of any principled revolutionary leftist (see the list of orgs that have proclaimed this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/parties-and-organizations-t111281/index.html)).

If you have any quotes from some other statements expressing explicit support for Mousavi himself then that is another matter, but I don't think that is the case. If it is, they are just as idiotic as their opposites and there's no reason not to denounce them as such.

[Serge's Fist]

http://www.tudehpartyiran.org/TPI-CC-statement-election-No4-17June09.pdf

"The recent call by Mir Hossein Mousavi to
continue protests and his communiqué to rally on June 18th is a principled stance
and along the demands and will of our people. In this regard, Tudeh Party of Iran,
supporting the initiatives of Mir Hossein Mousavi and other reformers in continuation
of the protests along with other progressive and Nationalist parties and organizations"

[Crux]

Mousavi does have the support of some "left" wing organisations. Yassamine Mather looked at this in articles in the Weekly Worker and so has James Turley. Obviously a section of the Tudeh do support Mousavi and by default then do the CPB who published without question a section of a statement the Tudeh put out recently essentially backing the Mousavi and the reformists. It was in the Morning Star a couple of weeks ago now.

There is a whole section on why we should not support Mousavi on the dedicated Iran election crisis blog here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NiRt3koN78&feature=player_embedded).
Well no surprise there. Tudeh has been pretty dead since they sold out to the islamists and then got physically anihilated by said islamists. Made their position kind of tricky. Quite typical for parties of their character actually. So, it's no suprise they support Mousavi now. Just as they supported Khomenei with "anyone but the Shah" rhetoric they will do the same mistake. Sad, but not unexpected.

[ckaihatsu]

Yes but supporting the protest movement is not the same as supporting Mousavi, in fact Mousavi lost whatever minimal control he had over it early on. So supporting the movement does not equate to supporting Mousavi but opposing it does equate to supporting the theocratic regime.

We most oppose Mousavi, Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic and imperialist intervention all at the same time.


People who are newer to revolutionary leftist politics may find this kind of situation -- the one in Iran -- somewhat confusing, because there are actually *three* contexts going on with it, [1] the popular uprising against the entrenched, culturally conservative clerical rule as a whole, [2] the schism *within the ruling elite* between Khamenei / Ahmadinejad, and Rafsanjani / Khatami / Mousavi, and [3] the U.S. empire's efforts to destabilize Iran by trumpeting claims of election fraud against the populist- and autarkic-leaning Ahmadinejad, and the U.S.' spotlighting of any manifestations in the streets in attempts to paint them as being entirely anti-Ahmadinejad.

We can conceptualize these three contexts as taking place on three different "planes" of magnitude, in the historical-materialist sense. [1] The anti-clerical uprisings, while very much grassroots and "from-below", have a much greater *potential* impact -- especially through nationwide labor actions / strikes -- because they are against *all* representatives of Iranian nationalist rule, across the board. So we can conceptualize these class-conscious movements as being on a "higher" "plane" than anything pertaining to the politics of Iran alone. [2] The national political schism is about the nation of Iran itself, and about the Middle East more generally. [3] The U.S., being an empire, is a much larger political entity than Iran.

I have made a diagram that provides a *universal* framework for assistance in examining *any* number of historical factors, according to their relative magnitudes.


History, Macro-Micro -- Precision

tinyurl.com/nf8gyr


Chris



--




--
___

RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com

MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u


-- Of all the Marxists in a roomful of people, I'm the Wilde-ist. --

[Led Zeppelin]

http://www.tudehpartyiran.org/TPI-CC-statement-election-No4-17June09.pdf

"The recent call by Mir Hossein Mousavi to
continue protests and his communiqué to rally on June 18th is a principled stance
and along the demands and will of our people. In this regard, Tudeh Party of Iran,
supporting the initiatives of Mir Hossein Mousavi and other reformers in continuation
of the protests along with other progressive and Nationalist parties and organizations"

Eh, that's them saying that they supported Mousavi and other reformers' call to continue the protests and his communiqué to rally.

So does pretty much everyone else, including the organization you work with.

Now do you have a statement where they say they actually support Mousavi's political programme or his politics?

Even though I would not be surprised in the least if they do actually support Mousavi given their history, I haven't read any such statements, and until I do I'm not going to believe what you say over what some of their members have said to me personally and the statements that I have read saying otherwise.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The "socialist" Mousavi will, if put back into power, be just like that neoliberal turncoat ruler of Nicaragua.

[Serge's Fist]

Eh, that's them saying that they supported Mousavi and other reformers' call to continue the protests and his communiqué to rally.

So does pretty much everyone else, including the organization you work with.

Now do you have a statement where they say they actually support Mousavi's political programme or his politics?

Even though I would not be surprised in the least if they do actually support Mousavi given their history, I haven't read any such statements, and until I do I'm not going to believe what you say over what some of their members have said to me personally and the statements that I have read saying otherwise.

The statement is pretty clear where they are at politically and who they are backing. You know the history of the these people, it is safe to say that they will fall in behind Mousavi and the reformists.

[Crux]

The statement is pretty clear where they are at politically and who they are backing. You know the history of the these people, it is safe to say that they will fall in behind Mousavi and the reformists.Well,as I said, unfortunatly probably so. This is the consequence of "Popular Front" reasoning and separating the struggle for democracy from the struggle for socialism. but the fossil that is Tudeh hardly represents the Iranian left or even less the elft in general.

[Led Zeppelin]

The statement is pretty clear where they are at politically and who they are backing.

Yes, they're backing the protests and rallies called for by Mousavi and co. in that statement, not his political programme.

I'm not going to say that Tudeh supports Mousavi political programme based on such a statement, and neither should you.


You know the history of the these people, it is safe to say that they will fall in behind Mousavi and the reformists.

Sure, they most likely will fall behind a bourgeois-democratic candidate, but will that be Mousavi who hasn't even come to that level yet? I don't know. I think it's doubtful given the history they've had with the Islamic Republic (being virtually decimated by them, specifically by Mousavi personally).

There's an old joke going around amongst the Iranian left that Tudeh members are all old people in retirement homes, irrelevant to the struggle. There is some truth to that, in that they have lived through the rule of Mousavi, which is why support for him is unlikely.

Again, I've had Tudeh members saying this to me personally (and I can corroborate that they are all old) and I have read their statements on this in full. If you or anyone else can present me with one saying the opposite, I'll more than happily believe it.

[Sarah Palin]

I supported what could have been a revolution against a theocracy (now crushed though). Not Mousavi.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

We most oppose Mousavi, Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic and imperialist intervention all at the same time.

Of course. But a question worth asking is whether supporting what could have been a potential "revolution" against a theocracy would have achieved any of that. Save for the opposition to Ahmedinejad.