Why Do We support Iran?

[Bostana]

Why Do we Support Iran?

[daft punk]

why does who support Iran, and in what way?

[pax et aequalitas]

We do? I can't remember supporting Iran personally. I do remember being against the USA, but the enemy of my enemy is NOT always my friend.

[Q]

I don't. But there are those on the left that do. The majority in the Stop the War Coalition for example, despite claiming "neutrality" on the Iranian regime, does seem to be very pro-regime. Here is a report on their recent conference (http://cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004744). I'm sure there are other nutcases around.

[revhiphop]

I'm against US imperialism. That doesn't make me for Iranian theocracy.

[Hexen]

A better option would be that the Iranian people would rise up and overthrow the theocracy. An imperialist war would makes things even worse.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Many people here defend Iran from U.S imperialism but do not support them in any other way. Iran is a theocracy so few "leftist" would defend their institutions. Protecting a country from intervention is not the same as giving it "support" as support insinuates advancement of its agenda (something no leftists would actually condone).

[daft punk]

I used to know a couple of Iranians. They were very funny. They used to warn about how the west was gonna get overpowered by Muslims, they sounded like the BNP or EDL! They had all these figures off some website or other about the demographics. It was quite weird as if they hated their own people. They told me that most people in Iran oppose the regime.

Anyway, no, nobody in their right mind supports the Iranian regime, it needs to be overthrown by the Iranian masses asap. Anyone on the left who is soft on the regime is a fool.

STW, yeah, well, loads of SWP in there innit, nuff said. They refused to condemn terrorism. Pathetic.

[Deicide]

I work with a guy from Iran, he hates the religious nutjobbery in his country.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I work with a guy from Iran, he hates the religious nutjobbery in his country.

so doesn't a gay Iranian I know... I believe most Iranians hate the regime;I wonder when rage will explode again.

[Per Levy]

Why Do we Support Iran?

who is this "we" you speak of? i dont support iran, no leftist should.

a much more interesting question would be why does bostana support iran?

[Krano]

Why would any leftist suppot a Neo-Fascist country? :confused:

[Yefim Zverev]

There is a difference between Iran and Iranian government. We don't support Iranian government but we support Iran because it is the next target of imperialist war and people of Iran are completely alone.

Not supporting Iran or being silent means supporting imperialist aggressors since they like us to be silent in such events as one by one they plague us with neo-liberalism. We do what they like means we support them. End of story.

Those who are silent on Iran issue are no leftists.

[Q]

There is a difference between Iran and Iranian government. We don't support Iranian government but we support Iran because it is the next target of imperialist war and people of Iran are completely alone.

Not supporting Iran or being silent means supporting imperialist aggressors since they like us to be silent in such events as one by one they plague us with neo-liberalism. We do what they like means we support them. End of story.

Those who are silent on Iran issue are no leftists.

I would word it a little different. "Iran" is rather vague. I'd argue that we must express and organise with the Iranian working class, as opposed to its regime. In fact, organise international working class solidarity with the Iranians. I think the point could be encapsulated with the slogan: No to imperialist intervention, no to the theocracy, for international working class solidarity opposing both.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Why would any leftist suppot a Neo-Fascist country? :confused:

What is Neo-Fascism?

[Brosip Tito]

"We" don't support any bourgeois state. There are the few cases of eejits on here that do support these reactionary states against imperialism, but we know they are incorrect in doing so. They support the likes of North Korea, Iran, the Taliban, Gaddafi, etc. only for the sake of "opposing imperialism".

As internationalist socialists, we oppose both the aggressor bourgeois state (the imperialists) and the "victim" state (usually reactionary). We support, however, the working class of every nation. We oppose the war, but we also oppose the states involved.

[Blake's Baby]

I would word it a little different. "Iran" is rather vague. I'd argue that we must express and organise with the Iranian working class, as opposed to its regime. In fact, organise international working class solidarity with the Iranians. I think the point could be encapsulated with the slogan: No to imperialist intervention, no to the theocracy, for international working class solidarity opposing both.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

[Grenzer]

Many people here defend Iran from U.S imperialism but do not support them in any other way.

I think a lot of people's version of "defense" against imperialism becomes somewhat problematic when it necessarily entails supporting Russian and Chinese imperialism in Iran, which the Iranian regime is propped up by in the interests of. I'm not accusing you specifically of this, but it unfortunately seems to be how a lot of people conceive of defending against imperialism.

I do not support the Iranian regime in any way, but support the workers of Iran in their struggle against the Iranian regime, Western imperialism, and Asian imperialism while condemning all three of these latter entities. To say that the Iranian regime, as opposed to the Iranian workers has the "right" to defend against Western intervention is the same thing as supporting Eastern imperialism in practice. Nations are a bourgeois construct: they don't have rights, and should not be supported in any way. The most pragmatic thing to do is advance class struggle, not advance Eastern imperialism over Western imperialism, which is at best a zero sum game.

[Homo Songun]

I would word it a little different. "Iran" is rather vague.

Yes


I'd argue that we must express and organise with the Iranian working class, as opposed to its regime. In fact, organise international working class solidarity with the Iranians. I think the point could be encapsulated with the slogan: No to imperialist intervention, no to the theocracy, for international working class solidarity opposing both.I would say, organize the broadest possible front against war and intervention in my own country, In solidarity with the Iranian people as opposed to the government as such. Organize a working class-led solidarity movement with the Iranian people for self-determination and against the NATO and US war drive. My slogans would be, No war on Iran! and Money for jobs and education, not for war and occupation!

In other words, just leave easily-manipulated and misunderstood words like "regime", "theocracy", "fascism" etc., out of the equation.

The reason why I say "people" instead of "workers" is because imperialist sanctions and bombing are bad and wrong generally speaking, not just for workers. Farmers and doctors have kids too.

[Ostrinski]

We don't.

[Krano]

What is Neo-Fascism?
Post ww2 fascist states could be called that.

[The Cheshire Cat]

I always support the people of a country and I always support what is currently best for the people. That would always be communism. But as far as I know, the Iranian people are not very class conscious. Communism is also forbidden and thus there are very few communists. So communism in Iran in the near future is very unlikely.

So in the current situation, calling for communism in Iran is not the most useful thing.
Ofcourse we should always try to make Iranian communism stronger, but in the coming conflict that is not were our attention should be.

Our support should be with what is the best for the Iranian people. I believe that at the moment that is the current government, as the alternative is supporting a NATO war (but I am pretty sure no one here would support that).

The current government, no matter how cruel and theocratic and anti-communist they are, are able to offer security to some level to the Iranian people. A war will destroy that and the government that will come into power after the (probably) oncoming war won't be able to give safety to the Iranian people. If it comes to a war, I think it will be a long one, and even when the NATO pulls out, surrounding countries might fight with each other for domination over the Iranian oil. This will be a disaster for the Iranian people.

So I'd rather support the current Iranian government in a conflict in the near future vocally and to some level and be able to provide most Iranians some sort of security and strive for communism on the long term, than be fully again against the government and destroy the lives of many Iranians.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Post ww2 fascist states could be called that.

Name one.

And no, none of they adhered to the specific ideology of fascism, despite their reactionary nature, and despite some of them being to some extent influenced by it (Franco, Salazar, what-have-you).

Neo-fascism, then, are those fascist groups that seek to revive fascism once more, of which there are some in Italy and elsewhere as I understand, similar to Neo-nazism, though perhaps less prevalent and not as easy to spot...

[Yefim Zverev]

I am an Iranian communist. What should I do when US/Israel/NATO are raining down bombs on me and my family ? Should I say hmm I don't like Iran because it is not communist, Iran and USA are same shit fuck the war I die here ? Or go to nearest AA battery to help reloading ? Or any other thing ?

[Bostana]

So wait,

We support Iran's fight against Western Imperialism, but not it's Government?
Am I correct or still need correcting?

[CommunityBeliever]

We support the good parts of Iran (like the fight against Western imperialism) and we oppose the bad (like the theocracy). I don't see why it has to get more complicated then that.

[Ostrinski]

I am an Iranian communist. What should I do when US/Israel/NATO are raining down bombs on me and my family ? Should I say hmm I don't like Iran because it is not communist, Iran and USA are same shit fuck the war I die here ? Or go to nearest AA battery to help reloading ? Or any other thing ?You should probably get the hell out of Iran.

[Le Socialiste]

I certainly don't support Iran's theocratic government, so I don't know who this "we" you're referring to is.

[Bostana]

So would it be okay to hun an Iranian Flag on my Porch?
:D

[Prinskaj]

So wait,

We support Iran's fight against Western Imperialism, but not it's Government?
Am I correct or still need correcting?
Who the fuck are "we"?
Make up your own mind about this issue, look at the subject find your own opinion!

[Althusser]

We don't support Iran, but I for one, oppose Israeli aggression vehemently. The U.S. has like 40 military bases surrounding Iran. No matter how wacked out (Islamic) Iran is, they would be pretty stupid to strike Israel facing complete and utter decimation. Iran is an Islamic theocracy and you'd have to be an idiot to support it, but Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, is a zionist madman who wouldn't think twice about wiping out the Iranian people or even muslims all together. I would feel threatened as fuck right now if I was in Iran.

[Le Socialiste]

So would it be okay to hun an Iranian Flag on my Porch?
:D

Why would you do that?

[eyeheartlenin]

Defense, not support: The Comintern, in its earliest years, adopted a document that said it was the duty of workers in an imperialist country to oppose any attack on a colonial country by the government of their own (imperialist) country (I am paraphrasing from memory, but I believe I got the gist of it right).

As someone born in the US and a (former) taxpayer, I feel it is my duty to oppose any US attack on any other country, regardless of its social system. So I will certainly go out to the street to protest any US attack on Iran, even though it is a theocracy. I think any leftist would do that. Failing to do that would be an error, IMO. Obviously, it would be more effective to oppose any imperialist attack by labor strikes, but, just as obviously, we are not there yet.

[Yefim Zverev]

Defense, not support: The Comintern, in its earliest years, adopted a document that said it was the duty of workers in an imperialist country to oppose any attack on a colonial country by the government of their own (imperialist) country (I am paraphrasing from memory, but I believe I got the gist of it right).

As someone born in the US and a (former) taxpayer, I feel it is my duty to oppose any US attack on any other country, regardless of its social system. So I will certainly go out to the street to protest any US attack on Iran, even though it is a theocracy. I think any leftist would do that. Failing to do that would be an error, IMO. Obviously, it would be more effective to oppose any imperialist attack by labor strikes, but, just as obviously, we are not there yet.

Wisest comment done so far

Where most of other leftists here seem that they are going to eat their chips and drink their beer and enjoy the far away going massacre in front of their TV s. US army did that US army did this... Showing exciting night bombardments during AA fire like lightworks.

[Bostana]

Why would you do that?

It's a joke

[l'Enfermé]

I don't support Iran at all. I think that Wilayat Al Faqih (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardianship_of_the_Islamic_Jurists) is a pretty terrible thing. I think Iran with nukes is a pretty terrible thing too. Not because they'll be pointing them at Israel and the US, Israel and the US have nukes of their own to deter Iran...it's because they'll be pointing them at countries around them with Shia populations. The Iranian theocracy has been calling on Shias in other Muslim countries to overthrow their governments so their countries can be annexed into Iran since the Islamic Revolution(I really hate the term because the Revolution against the Shah wasn't Islamic, every facet of Iranian society participated, the Islamists only hijacked it later on)happened. Anyone remember the Iran-Iraq war? Contrary to popular belief, Iraq didn't start it, Iran did. Prior to Saddam's invasion in September, the Iranians, through Shia rebels, having been waging a pretty intense assassination campaign in Iraq, trying to overthrow the Baath and annex the Shia areas.

Iran is no better than Israel. The Israeli state oppresses a few million Palestinians, the Iranian State oppresses almost 80 million. Israel bombs Gazans, that's pretty bad, right? Iran kills a few dozen Arab protestors in Khuzestan where they're(Arabs) pretty badly persecuted and some leftists don't care?

An outright invasion of Iran by the US and Israel is just impossible. The US barely handled Iraq and Iraq had less than half of Iran's population, it was smaller geographically, Iraq's economy was non-existent(wasn't their GDP PPP less than 40 Billion? Iran's is 800 billion today) and Iraq's military was a joke compared to Iran's today.

An invasion won't happen no matter what. What's more likely is an Israeli-American aerial/naval attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. That won't do much. Iran's nuclear program would be back where it was before the attack in a year or two. And it's not like Iran won't retaliate. They don't even have to retaliate against Israel(obviously they can't reach the US), though they can inflict huge civilian casualties on Israel if they want. There's plenty of US satellites around for Iran to attack. And again, it's not like Iran doesn't have balls, do you know how Iranians cleared Iraqi minefields during the Iran-Iraq War? They got thousands of Iranians to walk into them, willingly. The theocracy is completely willing to go on a suicide mission if you bomb them.

Anyways, this whole war scare is just a fraud. Israel and the US are not that damn stupid to bomb Iran.

[l'Enfermé]

I don't support Iran at all. I think that Wilayat Al Faqih (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardianship_of_the_Islamic_Jurists) is a pretty terrible thing. I think Iran with nukes is a pretty terrible thing too. Not because they'll be pointing them at Israel and the US, Israel and the US have nukes of their own to deter Iran...it's because they'll be pointing them at countries around them with Shia populations. The Iranian theocracy has been calling on Shias in other Muslim countries to overthrow their governments so their countries can be annexed into Iran since the Islamic Revolution(I really hate the term because the Revolution against the Shah wasn't Islamic, every facet of Iranian society participated, the Islamists only hijacked it later on)happened. Anyone remember the Iran-Iraq war? Contrary to popular belief, Iraq didn't start it, Iran did. Prior to Saddam's invasion in September, the Iranians, through Shia rebels, having been waging a pretty intense assassination campaign in Iraq, trying to overthrow the Baath and annex the Shia areas.

Iran is no better than Israel. The Israeli state oppresses a few million Palestinians, the Iranian State oppresses almost 80 million. Israel bombs Gazans, that's pretty bad, right? Iran kills a few dozen Arab protestors in Khuzestan where they're(Arabs) pretty badly persecuted and some leftists don't care?

An outright invasion of Iran by the US and Israel is just impossible. The US barely handled Iraq and Iraq had less than half of Iran's population, it was smaller geographically, Iraq's economy was non-existent(wasn't their GDP PPP less than 40 Billion? Iran's is 800 billion today) and Iraq's military was a joke compared to Iran's today.

An invasion won't happen no matter what. What's more likely is an Israeli-American aerial/naval attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. That won't do much. Iran's nuclear program would be back where it was before the attack in a year or two. And it's not like Iran won't retaliate. They don't even have to retaliate against Israel(obviously they can't reach the US), though they can inflict huge civilian casualties on Israel if they want. There's plenty of US satellites around for Iran to attack. And again, it's not like Iran doesn't have balls, do you know how Iranians cleared Iraqi minefields during the Iran-Iraq War? They got thousands of Iranians to walk into them, willingly. The theocracy is completely willing to go on a suicide mission if you bomb them.

Anyways, this whole war scare is just a fraud. Israel and the US are not that damn stupid to bomb Iran.

[derg]

I don't support Iran at all. I think that Wilayat Al Faqih is a pretty terrible thing. I think Iran with nukes is a pretty terrible thing too. Not because they'll be pointing them at Israel and the US, Israel and the US have nukes of their own to deter Iran...it's because they'll be pointing them at countries around them with Shia populations. The Iranian theocracy has been calling on Shias in other Muslim countries to overthrow their governments so their countries can be annexed into Iran since the Islamic Revolution(I really hate the term because the Revolution against the Shah wasn't Islamic, every facet of Iranian society participated, the Islamists only hijacked it later on)happened. Anyone remember the Iran-Iraq war? Contrary to popular belief, Iraq didn't start it, Iran did. Prior to Saddam's invasion in September, the Iranians, through Shia rebels, having been waging a pretty intense assassination campaign in Iraq, trying to overthrow the Baath and annex the Shia areas.

Iran is no better than Israel. The Israeli state oppresses a few million Palestinians, the Iranian State oppresses almost 80 million. Israel bombs Gazans, that's pretty bad, right? Iran kills a few dozen Arab protestors in Khuzestan where they're(Arabs) pretty badly persecuted and some leftists don't care?

An outright invasion of Iran by the US and Israel is just impossible. The US barely handled Iraq and Iraq had less than half of Iran's population, it was smaller geographically, Iraq's economy was non-existent(wasn't their GDP PPP less than 40 Billion? Iran's is 800 billion today) and Iraq's military was a joke compared to Iran's today.

An invasion won't happen no matter what. What's more likely is an Israeli-American aerial/naval attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. That won't do much. Iran's nuclear program would be back where it was before the attack in a year or two. And it's not like Iran won't retaliate. They don't even have to retaliate against Israel(obviously they can't reach the US), though they can inflict huge civilian casualties on Israel if they want. There's plenty of US satellites around for Iran to attack. And again, it's not like Iran doesn't have balls, do you know how Iranians cleared Iraqi minefields during the Iran-Iraq War? They got thousands of Iranians to walk into them, willingly. The theocracy is completely willing to go on a suicide mission if you bomb them.

Anyways, this whole war scare is just a fraud. Israel and the US are not that damn stupid to bomb Iran.
wow what a load. iran is no better than israel. nice...nice

[GoddessCleoLover]

Of course we ought to oppose an attack upon Iran, and Yefim Zverev is the best witness. Even for those of us who hold the Islamic republic in low esteem, an attack from Israel of the US would rally support for the mullahs as Iranians seek to defend themselves and their community from attack.

[Yefim Zverev]

Anyways, this whole war scare is just a fraud. Israel and the US are not that damn stupid to bomb Iran.

Seems like a bluff to me too. Bombing Iran would trigger more chaos than you could imagine. A global chaos in this matter. Whole Middle east would be doomed anyway.

USA threw out such rumors 6 years ago too but then nothing happened.

[Homo Songun]

Seems like a bluff to me too. Bombing Iran would trigger more chaos than you could imagine. A global chaos in this matter. Whole Middle east would be doomed anyway.

USA threw out such rumors 6 years ago too but then nothing happened.
Next you guys will be talking like capitalism isn't a homicidally (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Congo) insane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I) system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster) barreling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide) headlong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_crash_of_1929) into (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aids_in_Africa) oblivion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falling_rate_of_profit) :rolleyes:

[revhiphop]

I'm a half Iranian Shia. I hate all this theocratic bullshit.

[Blake's Baby]

... But as far as I know, the Iranian people are not very class conscious...

The Iranian working class in the last 35 years or so has shown much more class-consciousness than almost any other working class in the region. Strikes by oil workers for instance; in 1979 the Iranian revolution was taking a particularly working class path until the theocrats took over and reversed the gains of the revolution. There are several 'communist' groups in Iran with various versions of Marxist ideology. Iran is in that sense the most Marxist-influenced country in the region.


...The current government, no matter how cruel and theocratic and anti-communist they are, are able to offer security to some level to the Iranian people. A war will destroy that and the government that will come into power after the (probably) oncoming war won't be able to give safety to the Iranian people...

Better a government that persecutes communists than one that doesn't, you mean?


...If it comes to a war, I think it will be a long one, and even when the NATO pulls out, surrounding countries might fight with each other for domination over the Iranian oil. This will be a disaster for the Iranian people...

The 'surrounding countries' like Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan (which all currently have their own internal or external conflicts), or the sourrounding countries like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain etc where there have been protest movements against the government? I donb't think any of Iran's neighbours are really in position to make military play for the oil. Of course, the USA is also in many of those countries, for sure.


...So I'd rather support the current Iranian government in a conflict in the near future vocally and to some level and be able to provide most Iranians some sort of security and strive for communism on the long term, than be fully again against the government and destroy the lives of many Iranians.

I think it's possible to oppose US or European (or whoever) involvement without supporting the theocracy. The theocracy murders Iranian workers. They are our enemies. They need to be destroyed. In the last 35 years, they've killed many more Iranian workers than the US government has.

Oppose the US war effort; but don't do it by cheerleading the murderers of the Iranian working class.

[Yefim Zverev]

I'm a half Iranian Shia. I hate all this theocratic bullshit.

Worthless crap words...

This is not what we are talking about here...

This makes no sense at all...

Your half is animal and not human for most of western individuals... So killing at least half of you is not a sin against Jesus Christ (Where myself is completely an animal)

USA does not fight against theocracy in Iran...

USA wished that theocracy exists instead of socialism in Iran... And still its in USA's favor that Iranian regime stays Islamic (only more liberal Islamic like in Turkey where happened a silent transition to neo-liberalism through a so called islamic-conservative in the practice neo-liberal party. Perfect solution.)

[The Cheshire Cat]

The Iranian working class in the last 35 years or so has shown much more class-consciousness than almost any other working class in the region. Strikes by oil workers for instance; in 1979 the Iranian revolution was taking a particularly working class path until the theocrats took over and reversed the gains of the revolution. There are several 'communist' groups in Iran with various versions of Marxist ideology. Iran is in that sense the most Marxist-influenced country in the region.

Okay, thanks, I didn't know that there were communist groups in Iran. I thought they all live in exile.


Better a government that persecutes communists than one that doesn't, you mean?

Yes, bravo, that is exactly what I mean.



The 'surrounding countries' like Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan (which all currently have their own internal or external conflicts), or the sourrounding countries like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain etc where there have been protest movements against the government? I donb't think any of Iran's neighbours are really in position to make military play for the oil. Of course, the USA is also in many of those countries, for sure.


As far as I know, there are currently not many groups resisting to the Saudi Arabian governments. Those governments have hired during the Arab 'Spring' the man who founded Blackwater to make plans of gathering a mercenary army for them. Besides, they have plenty of money. Why would they not be in the position to fight about the oil? And I don't particulary mean war with fighting, it could also be a political fight.



I think it's possible to oppose US or European (or whoever) involvement without supporting the theocracy. The theocracy murders Iranian workers. They are our enemies. They need to be destroyed. In the last 35 years, they've killed many more Iranian workers than the US government has.


I do not support theocracy. I support the Iranian government to some level, by which I mean, the 'level' where they can provide relative safety for their people and where they oppose US/NATO/etc. . In many surrounding countries there is no such safety.


Oppose the US war effort; but don't do it by cheerleading the murderers of the Iranian working class.

Why would I be cheerleading for murder of the Iranian working class?

[Blake's Baby]

I didn't say 'murder', I said 'murderers'.

If there was a war, then the 'Allied' (US + ???) forces would be murdering Iranian workers for sure. But if there is, or isn't, a war, the Iranian regime is already murdering Iranian workers - that is really happening right now and has been going on for 35 years. Why even support that 'to some level'? The regime doesn't provide safty for Iranian workers, it persecutes and murders Iranian workers. What level of persecution and murder justifies what level of your support?

I think probably most of the communist groups are based outside of Iran, but there are communists in Iran too (for any given definition of communist anyway - tendency wars don't particularly come into this discussion I don't think).

Even if there weren't there are still class-conscious workers in Iran who have been fighting for their class interests under the Ayatollahs as well as under the Shah. The Iranian working class is particularly organised, combative and class-conscious in relation to many other countries in the region.

Even if the working class in Iran was disorganised, passive and lacking in consciousness, they're still workers and therefore oppression of them by the regime should be resisted.

Even if they weren't workers they'rew still human beings so oppression of them by the regime should be resisted.

I think the impression that you're prepared to rethink your support for the regime on the basis of how many communists there might be in Iran is pretty strange.

[OnlyCommunistYouKnow]

I only support Iran when it comes to US invasion. I believe the regime does need to be put down, but not by American imperialists.