http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/07/31/mrzine-sinks-to-new-lows/
Pouya really pours it on with the decadent Western imperialist imagery. 
The anti-Ahmadinejad leftists“have either been greatly influenced by the 
West or have been educated in Europe or the United States and tend to be 
devoutly secular.” They become enraged when “rootless villagers” tell 
them “how to dress and behave in public”. Oddly enough, this kind of 
rhetoric evokes the culture wars attack on Barack Obama from the Sarah 
Palins of the world. No wonder Tariq Ali found it so easy to compare 
Islamic fundamentalists to the Christian right in the U.S.A. in “The 
Clash of Fundamentalisms”. People like Bizhan Pouya made it easy for him.

---

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/08/03/palin_ahmadinejad/print.html
Sarah Palin, meet Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
You two right-wing populists have a surprising amount in common

By Juan Cole
Aug. 03, 2009

Is Sarah Palin America's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? The two differ in many key 
respects, of course, but it is remarkable how similar they are. There 
are uncanny parallels in their biographies, their domestic politics and 
the way they present themselves -- even in their rocky relationships 
with party elders.

Both are former governors of a northwest frontier state with great 
natural beauty (in Ahmadinejad's case, Ardabil). Both are known for 
saying things that produce a classic Scooby-Doo double take in their 
audiences. Both appeal to a sort of wounded nationalism, speaking of the 
sacrifice of dedicated troops for an often feckless public, and 
identifying themselves with the common soldier. They are vigilant 
against foreign designs on their countries and insist on energy and 
other independence.

But above all, both are populists who claim to represent the little 
people against wily and unscrupulous elites, and against pampered 
upper-middle-class yuppies pretending to be the voice of democracy. 
Together, they tell us something about dangerous competing populisms in 
an age of globalization.

Both politicians glory in being mavericks, as a way of underlining their 
credentials as representatives of the ordinary person. Former beauty 
queen Palin calls herself a hockey mom and plays up her avocation of 
wolf and moose hunting, to rally her rural supporters and, perhaps, to 
disconcert squeamish urbanites. Ahmadinejad, who earned a Ph.D. in civil 
engineering with top grades, is said to have once dressed up as a 
janitor and swept the streets when campaigning for mayor of Tehran. Most 
recently, his supporters have dismissed the Iranian protesters as 
pampered young people from the wealthy neighborhoods of North Tehran. In 
fact, both figures are themselves quite comfortable.

Palin portrays herself as the small-town outsider. "I'm not a member of 
the permanent political establishment,"  she proclaimed last fall. She 
blamed her bad press on not being in the "Washington elite," when, in 
fact, self-inflicted debacles such as her deer-in-the-headlights 
interview with Katie Couric, in which she demonstrated a shaky grasp of 
world politics, are a better explanation for media questions about her 
qualifications. In his debates with rivals for the presidency this 
spring, Ahmadinejad apparently damaged his standing with voters by 
attacking the wife of his electoral rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, and 
tarring previous presidents of the Islamic Republic from the centrist 
and reform factions as having been corrupt. On June 5, he said on 
Iranian radio that since he was not a part of that closed "power 
circle," he had been targeted for both a domestic and an international 
media "smear campaign." Actually, Ahmadinejad was raked over the coals 
during the campaign by Mousavi for his ignorant and bigoted statements 
about Israel, which, Mousavi pointed out, had damaged Iran's standing in 
the international community.

Both so-called mavericks have had tense relations with their party 
elders at times. Many Republicans have made withering statements about 
Palin and consider her a "train wreck," and her conflicts with the camp 
of her former running mate, Sen. John McCain, are legend. Ahmadinejad 
got into hot water last week with his patron, Supreme Leader Ali 
Khamenei, for appointing an overly liberal relative as his first 
vice-president. Ahmadinejad dragged his feet on firing the man, but in 
the end bowed to pressure from his fellow hard-liners. On Friday, the 
president was forced to deny that there was any rift between him and 
Khamenei. For a maverick populist, such conflicts with the party elders 
are useful in emphasizing their independence from the establishment even 
as they remain largely within it.

Both leaders see press criticisms as coordinated attempts to discredit 
them not from the media's duty to examine a political figure's policies 
or public statements, but from an elite conspiracy. In her farewell 
address about a week ago, Palin fell into a Shakespearean soliloquy 
directed at the media, saying, "Democracy depends on you, and that is 
why, that's why our troops are willing to die for you. So, how 'bout in 
honor of the American soldier, ya quit makin' things up." Palin did not 
say what exactly she thought the media was making up about the American 
soldier. On June 16, in his first news conference after his officially 
announced victory in Iran's June 12 presidential election, Ahmadinejad 
complained, "During these elections, our nation was faced with a 
widespread psychological war and propaganda by some of mass media which 
have not learned from the past." The people, he boasted, followed not 
the media but the path of "the martyrs [in war] ..."

An armed citizenry is important to Palin's conception of the republic, 
and she warned in her farewell address, "You're going to see 
anti-hunting, anti-Second Amendment circuses from Hollywood ..." She 
continued, "Stand strong, and remind them patriots will protect our 
guaranteed, individual right to bear arms ..." By talking about 
"patriots" "protecting" the individual right to bear arms, Palin skated 
awfully close to the militia or "patriot" movement on the right-wing 
American fringe (and not for the first time). Ahmadinejad is not 
similarly in favor of all citizens having guns, but he comes out of a 
popular militia, the Basij, which consists of hundreds of thousands of 
ordinary citizen patriots, armed and pledged to defend the constitution 
of the Islamic Republic.

Right-wing populism, rooted in the religion, culture and aspirations of 
the lower middle class, is often caricatured as insane by its critics. 
That judgment is unfair. But it is true that such movements often 
encourage a political style of exhibitionism, disregard for the facts as 
understood by the mainstream media, and exaltation of the values of 
people who feel themselves marginalized by the political system. Not all 
forms of protest, however, are healthy, even if the protesters have 
legitimate grievances. Right-wing populism is centered on a theory of 
media conspiracy, a "my country right or wrong" chauvinism, a 
fascination with an armed citizenry, an intolerance of dissent and a 
willingness to declare political opponents mere terrorists. It is 
cavalier in its disregard of elementary facts and arrogant about the 
self-evident rightness of its religious and political doctrines. It 
therefore holds dangers both for the country in which it grows up and 
for the international community. Palin is polling well at the moment 
against other Republican front-runners such as Mitt Romney, and so, 
astonishingly, is a plausible future president. At least Iranians only 
got Ahmadinejad because of rigged elections, and they had the decency to 
mount massive protests against the result.


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: [email protected]
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to