A Call for Revolution in Iran

[Kaine for Senate '18]

America was the first nation to be institute a government amongst men to secure certain inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  Since then, a myriad of other nations have taken up America’s example, and declared themselves free, independent, and devoted to these same ideals; often with American help.  Our noble experiment has spread across the Globe, and there are now very few roadblocks to the complete spread of Democracy.

Now, in Iran, the people yearn for freedom.  They desire to throw off the yoke of oppression, and enter into a world where the American principles are as sacred in Tehran as they are in Washington, DC.  No desire can spread more quickly than the desire to be free, and the Iranian people have caught that desire.

In our own Declaration of Independence we listed twenty-seven charges against the King; twenty-seven reasons why we needed to sever ties with Great Britain, and set out to form our country.  The Iranian people could have a list ten times that length, a mile long list of calumnies perpetrated against the people of Iran, including amongst them:
   
1.   Suppression of the freedom of assembly, the press, and other institutions
2.   Suppression of the rights of women
3.   Suppression of the rights of children
4.   Suppression of the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals
5.   Suppression of the rights of ethnic minorities
6.   Discrimination based on religious faith, and denial of religious freedom
7.   The torture and general mistreatment of prisoners
8.   Sanctioning of extra-judicial executions
9.   Executing of prisoners in custody, prior to a trial by jury
10.   Execution of political prisoners

These are just ten of the possible indictments against the Iranian Regime.  These reasons, and many more, justify a Revolution, and the dissolution of the Ayatollah’s Government.  The incumbent regime, with its persistent violations of the most basic rights of human beings, has forfeited their claim to power.

When a government behaves the way the Government in Tehran has, it is not only the People’s right, it is their duty, to overthrow that Government.  When dealing with a government that is not performing its duty, the first option must always be the ballot box.  The ballot box has failed in Iran; another example of the malfeasances of this Government.

Revolution must come to Tehran, and it must come soon.  The Iranian people cannot do it alone.  The United States, the United Kingdom, every nation that loathes totalitarianism and loves democracy must come together, right now, and help the people of Iran enter into the world of democracy.  We must do this of our own volition, with no expectation of reward, other than to see our ideals vindicated throughout the world.  We must be the selfless champions of freedom, not because we seek a reward, but because we know that we are right, and that it is for the good of mankind to see our ideas spread throughout the Globe.  That is our great challenge, and we must start it in Tehran.

[Franzl]

you're not by any chance drunk, are you?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

4.  Suppression of the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals

you mean, Iran forbids discounts on the sale of Vaseline?

[Middle-aged Europe]

First of all, there should be revolutions in Burma, North Korea, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.... among other places. They're in far greater need for freedom.

Revolution may have a greater chance to succeed in Iran at the moment (although not a very high one)... and it is currently on TV, so we notice it for a change. North Korea doesn't even have the Internet access.

[Lief 🗽]

Not everything's about the United States, you know. Sometimes people just want to be free, you dig? Doesn't mean they're embracing some American thing.

[Meeker]

k.

[Democratic Hawk]

You underestimate the popularity of the Islamic Republic, Ben. Removing the Ayatollah, by military force, and its aftermath would make Iraq, after the fall of Saddam, look like a game of conkers

I don't think Khamenei is reviled, from within (that is by his people), to the extent Saddam was

[Hash]

Revolution in favour of civil liberties does not mean a pro-American/pro-American protectorate revolution, Ben. Please learn this simple fact.

[Earth]

4.  Suppression of the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals

you mean, Iran forbids discounts on the sale of Vaseline?

You're a shitheel.

[Beet]

Not everything's about the United States, you know. Sometimes people just want to be free, you dig? Doesn't mean they're embracing some American thing.

Lol. My new sig.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Leave it to ben to turn this into jingoinistic nonsense. I wonder if he would try to spin the Greek revolution in 1974 as them embracing America's ideals of freedom and all that nonsense. That would be so humorous.

[JSojourner]

Leave it to ben to turn this into jingoinistic nonsense. I wonder if he would try to spin the Greek revolution in 1974 as them embracing America's ideals of freedom and all that nonsense. That would be so humorous.

Of course, I agree this is jingoistic nonsense...but Ben is hardly alone in this view.  At the end of the day, this comes down to the dispute between the neocon interventionist and world policeman view and the Reagan-Lugar-Kissinger-Biden view.  We contain, we engage diplomatically, we issued measured condemnation of human rights abuses but we do not intervene unless the United States or an ally is attacked or in danger of certain and imminent attack.

I won't deny that interventionism has worked at times.  The Balkans are a good example.  I opposed American involvement in all of those operations, preferring to let Europe police itself.  But most of the time, when the United States gets involved in overthrowing governments, we have a habit of replacing bad with worse.  Iraq is still a massive question mark. Vietnam is a classic example of what I am talking about.  And even when we intervene "behind the scenes" we do nothing to improve the lot of people in other countries.  (Iran itself is proof of that.) We replace one murderous thug with another...in Panama...in Iran...in Chile...in Haiti...

But there are times when people within a country revolt.  And when they build their own government, it's usually at least a shade better (sometimes substantially better) than the previous one.  In some cases, the revolt is relatively peaceful and bloodless.  In others, Romania for example, it can be a bloody affair.  But the notion that the United State can -- or should -- come to the rescue of people in revolt is an idea fraught with both danger and error. 

Had Eisenhower intervened in Hungary in 1956, a nuclear war would almost certainly have broken out.  1968 Czechoslovakia?  Ditto.  Had George H.W. Bush gone on to Bagdhad in 1991, he'd have been in the same mess his son later found himself in.

And as I have pointed out elsewhere, why just Iran?  Because it's what's on TV right now?  Are the Burmese people better off?  How are the people of North Korea faring these days?  Shall we also overthrow the brutal Saudi, Kuwaiti and Yemeni regimes?  (Read up on how they treat Christians, Atheists and foreign workers.)  Perhaps another invasion of Somalia is called for.  Or Sudan or Congo.

Extremism in defense of liberty may not be a "vice".  It is stupid, however.

[opebo]

Also, it isn't precisely 'liberty' anyway.

I wonder if they allow vaseline in prison.

[GMantis]

US intervention in Iran would be the best way for the US to lose a potential friend in the Middle East. The Iranians are not as anti-American as their regime, but I don't think they have forgotten their history.

[Dan the Roman]

Interestingly the last independent pollster in Iran was shut down in 2003 after the government commissioned a poll asking whether Iranians would resist a US invasion on the model of Iraq. Since they shut down the pollster and suppressed the result, it probably wasn't pleasing to them.

Iran is not an Arab state, and Iranians are not Arabs. I think people here underestimate how sophisticated politically Iranians, even rural villagers. Anti-American and Anti-Imperialist sloganeering has no appeal outside of a core 10-15% who are hardcore supporters of the regime, and outside of that the system is massively unpopular. If anything, these protests show that the regime is much less popular than Ahmadinejad himself, as we see people who voted for the incumbent joining them now that they are anti-Khamenei.

For most Iranians the regime is not an ideological entity, but a criminal enterprise run by a bunch of people who have stolen billions. While the US would have to get out quickly, I would venture there are a large number of Iranians who would not be opposed to a stronger US stand.

[Frodo]

Interestingly enough, the very severity and harshness of the crackdown by this government against the reformists may well be the key factor in radicalizing the reformists by turning them into democratic revolutionaries.  Already the actions by the regime has helped push people to join the movement who before had nothing to do with them.  By systematically closing off all avenues for reforming the Islamic Republic from within, this regime is about to seal its fate not unlike how the Shah sealed his when he reacted to pleas from his subjects for reform with repression. 

[Eraserhead]

4.  Suppression of the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals

you mean, Iran forbids discounts on the sale of Vaseline?

It'd be one thing if I knew you were kidding, but since we all know this is how your brain really works, I think it is only fair to write you off as the worst kind of swine.