iranian troubles

[Intifada]

Iranian authorities have banned student protests over the barring of reformist candidates from February elections and warned eight pro-reform newspapers about their reporting of the political crisis.

"Puppet parliament"

Muhsin Armin, one of the 87 barred MPs, called on students to block the election of a "puppet parliament" under which "we will no longer have a free press, nor freedom to defend the rights of jailed students".

Last summer, students sparked a nationwide security crackdown when they led anti-regime protests. Since deadly street riots in 1999, authorities have tried to confine student protestors to their campuses.

Tuesday's ominous warning to reformist papers came from prosecutor Said Mortazavi, who shut down dozens of papers when he was at Iran's press tribunal.

IRNA quoted the culture ministry, which oversees the press, as saying Mortazavi had written to the ministry asking it to warn the newspapers Shargh, Yas-e No, Nassim-e Sabah, Tossee, Aftab-e Yazd, Etemad, Hambasteghi and Mardom Salari.

Journalist summoned

An Iranian journalist noted for his support for press rights has also been summoned before a judge over his harshly critical coverage of the crisis.

Friends said Mash Allah Shamsolvaezin has been accused of "spreading confusion among the public".

Shamsolvaezin has been jailed in the past and had three of his papers closed by the courts. Several reformist papers have run his comments on the elimination of the reformist candidates by the Guardians Council.


Posters of late Cuban revolutionary
Che Guevara were seen at a rally

more (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/AD2DCEC8-18DC-4A73-BEFC-97910BC135D5.htm)

[Intifada]

forgot to add the pic

[Kez]

i think events in iran are very very interesting, question is what can we do to help prevent a liberal bourgeoise revolution and push forward a socialist one?

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 12:04 AM
i think events in iran are very very interesting, question is what can we do to help prevent a liberal bourgeoise revolution and push forward a socialist one?
Stay the hell out and let the Iranians take their destiny into their own hands. That is the answer.

[Kez]

we should stay out as communists? surely we should be aiding the workers there to revolt?

[Intifada]

america would never let iran become communist.

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 08:57 AM
we should stay out as communists? surely we should be aiding the workers there to revolt?
Then you're no different than Donald Rumsfeld -- you oppose the right of the Iranian people to choose how they want to live. How do you expect people to work together when you force them under an ideology? If you ever go to Iran with such intervening plans, I hope someone will have the decency to suicide bomb you. Have a nice day.

[Kez]

who the fuck is this shite.

I as a communist dont see borders, the workers dont see borders, and im not helping iranians coz theyre fuckin iranians, im there to explain because im with them as workers. As for forcing them, im not going to fuckin whip them to shoot the mullahs am i?

I explain the need to go smash the mullahs and the capitalist state, but sorry, maybe we should wait till the communists who are persecuted in iran can magically spring up using the non existant trade unions, and thru the non existant labour party drive home a revolution

yes, well done

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 10:49 PM
who the fuck is this shite.

I as a communist dont see borders, the workers dont see borders, and im not helping iranians coz theyre fuckin iranians, im there to explain because im with them as workers. As for forcing them, im not going to fuckin whip them to shoot the mullahs am i?

I explain the need to go smash the mullahs and the capitalist state, but sorry, maybe we should wait till the communists who are persecuted in iran can magically spring up using the non existant trade unions, and thru the non existant labour party drive home a revolution

yes, well done
Here are your words: "what can we do to help prevent a liberal bourgeoise revolution and push forward a socialist one?" If the Iranians want a liberal bourgeoise revolution, that's what they should have. There is nothing about the Mullahs in that comment.

[Kez]

and if they want fascism we should allow that?

no.

We oppose capitalism in all its forms, therefore we must smash it, according to your theory we shouldnt fight for revolution in our own countries coz the people here want it...

[LuZhiming]

and if they want fascism we should allow that?

no.

What does that have to do with anything? You don't even know what Iranians want, yet you are imagining intervening to ensure Socialism. Iranians wouldn't just want something like fascism if not for some extra and foreign circumstances. Germany became fascist largely because of the idiotic foreign interventionists.


We oppose capitalism in all its forms, therefore we must smash it, according to your theory we shouldnt fight for revolution in our own countries coz the people here want it...

Those that start revolutions without the people's support are very foolish indeed.

[Kez]

As i have family in iran i think its safe to say i know what Iranians want, having bin there fair few times now.

You didnt answer my point

"according to your theory we shouldnt fight for revolution in our own countries coz the people here want capitalism..."

And when did i say we werent going to gain peoples support, u think i wud take on iranian system myself?

[LuZhiming]

As i have family in iran i think its safe to say i know what Iranians want, having bin there fair few times now.

That doesn't mean very much. Just because your family wants something or you've been there a few times, hardly means you know what Iranians want. I'm sure a ton of people must know what Iranians want, including extremely far right Capitalists. :rolleyes:


You didnt answer my point

"according to your theory we shouldnt fight for revolution in our own countries coz the people here want capitalism..."

And when did i say we werent going to gain peoples support, u think i wud take on iranian system myself?

I did answer your question. You are blatantly saying that you are willing to impose the system you want on Iranians. That is of course implying that you would be completely willing to 'give' Iranians what they don't want. One doesn't fight for something in the literal sense without the people's support. If the people want Capitalism, that's how it's going to be. Changing the system overnight from an unsupportive population will have catastrophic results.

[Kez]

So your saying we shouldnt fine for socialism because people dont want it

also i never sed socialism would be imposed, end of story

[LuZhiming]

So your saying we shouldnt fine for socialism because people dont want it

Unless you are Augusto Pinochet, it is pointless to fight for something the people don't support. One should earn support through civilized manners, and then consider fighting.


also i never sed socialism would be imposed, end of story

Yes you did. You openly stated that you wanted to ensure that a liberal bourgeoise revolution does not succeed. That means that whether Iranians support it or detest it, that's what you want to do. That is imposing.

[Guerilla22]

Originally posted by LuZhiming+Feb 4 2004, 01:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LuZhiming @ Feb 4 2004, 01:43 AM)
[email protected] 4 2004, 12:04 AM
i think events in iran are very very interesting, question is what can we do to help prevent a liberal bourgeoise revolution and push forward a socialist one?
Stay the hell out and let the Iranians take their destiny into their own hands. That is the answer. [/b]
Exactly. The reason Iran is in the situation it is in today is because the west got involved for purposes of securing oil and ended up dictating Iranain politics. In the end even a liberal party taking control is a whole lot better than having the fundamentalist government in power. Besides, who would support a communist uprising? China?

[Reuben]

Originally posted by LuZhiming+Feb 4 2004, 08:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LuZhiming @ Feb 4 2004, 08:15 PM)
[email protected] 4 2004, 08:57 AM
we should stay out as communists? surely we should be aiding the workers there to revolt?
Then you&#39;re no different than Donald Rumsfeld -- you oppose the right of the Iranian people to choose how they want to live. How do you expect people to work together when you force them under an ideology? If you ever go to Iran with such intervening plans, I hope someone will have the decency to suicide bomb you. Have a nice day. [/b]
whatan idiotic comment.

Kez opposes not the rights of the Iranian people to determine their own destiny but the right of th Iranian bourgioesie to predominate over the destiny of iran.

If you think that fighting wars which aid the bourgoirsie ismorally or politically equivalent to supporting the proletariat of a particular country then id be interested to know why you are on this site.

Moreover in a totalitarian state suche as Iran i fail to see how simply &#39;staying the hell out&#39; enables iranians to take their destiny into their own hands.

As asocialists we have a responsibilyty to support one side over the other - and that ide in Ian currently disenfracnhised in the extreme.

Reuben

[Guest1]

Once again, Reuben is a voice of reason amongst the overpowering stupidity.

Welcome back comrade. Where have you been?

As for LuZhiming, no one said anything about forcing anything. Kez is simply expressing all our hopes that the current revolution that is brewing, which for your information is very distinctly left-wing and anti-american, does not get hijacked by the "other" rich fascists in Iran. The last thing Iran needs is to pendulum back to being an American satellite state.

How do we best ensure that this doesn&#39;t happen? We can&#39;t. The students in Iran will do it for themselves. They already took the first step. During the summer riots, when they had running battles with the army in the capital while chanting "down with the Islamic republic&#33;", George Bush came out and publicly pledged his support for "the democratic movement in Iran".

The very next day, the chant had changed to "down with the Islamic republic and down with American Imperialism&#33;". I&#39;d say they&#39;re gonna be just fine :)

[LuZhiming]

Kez opposes not the rights of the Iranian people to determine their own destiny but the right of th Iranian bourgioesie to predominate over the destiny of iran.

"what can we do to help prevent a liberal bourgeoise revolution and push forward a socialist one?"

:lol: What an interesting way to twist facts. If the Iranians support the bourgeois then that is their choice to take and learn from.


If you think that fighting wars which aid the bourgoirsie ismorally or politically equivalent to supporting the proletariat of a particular country then id be interested to know why you are on this site.

Don&#39;t be outlandish and put words in my mouth. Kez is honestly saying that if the Iranians choose to stage a liberal bourgeois revolution, he will attempt to supress it and forcefully replace it with a Socialist one.


Moreover in a totalitarian state suche as Iran i fail to see how simply &#39;staying the hell out&#39; enables iranians to take their destiny into their own hands.

Are you implying that Iranians can&#39;t stage a successful revolution by themselves because the country is totalitarian? History contradicts your claim.


As asocialists we have a responsibilyty to support one side over the other - and that ide in Ian currently disenfracnhised in the extreme.

No you don&#39;t. This is just a generalization. There is nothing about Socialism that makes it necessary for your intervention.


As for LuZhiming, no one said anything about forcing anything. Kez is simply expressing all our hopes that the current revolution that is brewing, which for your information is very distinctly left-wing and anti-american, does not get hijacked by the "other" rich fascists in Iran. The last thing Iran needs is to pendulum back to being an American satellite state.

Kez never said that and you are fully aware of it.

[Guest1]

This is like arguing with Enigma.

Just shutup man.

[Kez]

Luzhing,

The iranian people chose the bourgeoise over the shah, the tudeh party supported this.

result? Tudedh were murdereed, now Iran is a shithole, thats what u get for simply following the line of people who are being forced into bourgeoise movement. You idiot

Your argument suggests i shudnt bother trying to incite revolution in UK, as UK people dont want revolution, in which case Che was an idiot for inciting revolution in Cuba, what he shud have done is kept Batista, because people were revolting themselves....

[LuZhiming]

Luzhing,

The iranian people chose the bourgeoise over the shah, the tudeh party supported this.

result? Tudedh were murdereed, now Iran is a shithole, thats what u get for simply following the line of people who are being forced into bourgeoise movement. You idiot

And Sweden is also a shithole, right? Your arguement suggests that since a particular occurance happened under one scenario, it must happen under all others with small similarities. That sort of generalizing is just ridicolous. And you keep twisting your own words, why must you lie? You are openly advocating forcing people to follow in your line, and supress them if they go in another one, not the other way around.


Your argument suggests i shudnt bother trying to incite revolution in UK, as UK people dont want revolution,

Of course they don&#39;t want it. And you forcing them to do something isn&#39;t going to help much, unless of course you are Augusto Pinochet.


in which case Che was an idiot for inciting revolution in Cuba, what he shud have done is kept Batista, because people were revolting themselves....

And yet again you must resort to outright lies.

1. Cubans wanted a Revolution
2. Che wasn&#39;t fighting against other Revolutionary current that had the support of the people
3. Fidel is a Cuban

[Kez]

your final post is evidence of your stupidity and nationalist attitude, and i presume the avatar u have is of the nationalist Mosadeq?

For sweden, ask the unemployed in sweden if Sweden is great, then go ask the employed if they enjoy being exploited. Your not even a socialist, wtf are you doing on this site?
I dont force people to take my line, i patiently explain.

What is the relevance of Fidel being Cuban? ah yes, because of ur nationalist ideas we see you think only a cuban can incite revolution in Cuba....
Che could have easily have supported the Cuban bourgeoise who wanted to break from the US imperialists, but he didnt, because as a true communist revolutionary he fought for class independence, and i will not allow one comrade to spill their blood for ANY bourgeoise revolution.

The only class i defend is the working class, never will i or any communist on this board collaborate with the enemy.

[Edelweiss]

The opposition in Iran is consisting of liberal bourgois AND socialist/leftist forces. Iran most likely won&#39;t have a socialist revolution in it&#39;s purest form, I think it would be very naive to hope for that. Right now, if there really would be a successful uprising against the Mullahs, the new government probaply would be a coalition of various islamic reformist, bourgeois and leftist/socialist groups. Us socialists should of course support the proggresive/leftist forces in Iran, and hope that they won&#39;t allow the bourgeois forces to gain too much power.
But even a pure liberal bourgeois government still would be a progress to the insanity which is now in Iran...I know we had a similar argument before, Kez, and I already reminded you that Marx was a passionated supporter of the liberal bourgeois revolution in Germany in 1848. The situation in Iran is very similar, maybe even worser...

[Kez]

Marx supported the bourgeoise when capitalism had not developed, this is not the case in Iran.

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2004, 08:20 PM
Marx supported the bourgeoise when capitalism had not developed, this is not the case in Iran.
Wrong&#33; capitalism may wasn&#39;t as advanced as it is today, but still it was very much existing in 1848.

[Guest1]

We should support whatever revolution occurs, because even a liberal capitalist system will be better than the current one. However, we should not forget who these people are, and who we are. We should continue to push for the progressive forces in Iran.

Now, as we don&#39;t have a military, or secret police force to disappear people like the evil, evil Communists we are, I don&#39;t see how anyone could think that is what we mean to do.

"Support" does not mean "kill all opponents". It means coming to websites liek che-lives and arguing for it. It means talking to Iranian students about it. It means talking to the media about it.

So don&#39;t be accusing others of lying, you&#39;re much more skilled at it.

[18tir]

It doesn&#39;t matter if a socialist government doesn&#39;t immediately come to power. Right now in Iran, strikes and unions are outlawed. If you say out loud that you are a socialist, you will be imprisoned, tortured or even killed. The fundamentalist regime is treating the people like shit. Just recently, the mullahs&#39; police forces opened fire on striking workers killing at least 4 of them. The people are very angry and are ready to overthrow the government. The first step should be bringing a secular and democratic Republic to power. This will allow leftist groups to operate freely. They could partipate in the multi-party system and make meaningful changes. This is the first step towards a socialist system.

[Kez]

Jesus Christ,

You think communists in Russian werent being imprisoned, killed, tortured? you never saw them spilling blood for the bourgeoise. Why should the communist spill blood now just so the bourgeoise can turn back round and stab them later? The aims of the bourgeoise and communists completely contradict, how is it possible to help our enemy?&#33;

It is completely absurd to suggest a 2 stage revolution as Stalinists suggest, we saw it Fail in Spain, and then in france. Never again will we allow to be betrayed by our enemies&#33;

[Kez]

Heres An article on anniversary of revolution (http://www.marxist.com/MiddleEast/25anniversary_iranrev.html)

what are your views on the revolution in hindsight?
what lessons should be learnt?