If the world focus is on a particular regime, for whatever reason, and that regime stinks, why not affirm as much? Why not encourage what little opening there is visible? Failure to do just strengthens a stinky regime.
Carrol has odd ideas about when it is worth speaking and when not. It's always worth speaking. Why not, talk is cheap. There is no resource allocation issue because the left has no resources that are relevant to this struggle except moral support. You can talk about everything. History is not over. Stuff happens. There is not some uniform wall of blackness that evokes no commentary. Iranians are mobilized. I daresay mobilization of diaspora Iranians in the U.S. enriches the left here. Solidarity is good. The vigor of the opposition more than anything else IMO deters actual U.S. aggression. We're no longer attacking some foreign mystery place. There are all these folks who carry protest signs in English. They are our (broadly and loosely speaking) friends. How would Israel for instance look if they dropped bombs that killed Iranian civilians. Pretty bad, I would say. I'm sorry to see anybody leave the list over this. But MRzine's apologetics -- for that is what they are, nobody should kid themselves -- for this really awful regime are unfortunate. They need a Trotsky booster shot. On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Perelman, Michael<[email protected]> wrote: > > Carrol's note is one of the more thought provoking messages I have seen on > the list for a while. I suspect what he is describing reflects the CNN > effect, where we get plenty of information about the abuses in Iran, but much > less in Honduras, even though it is closer to home. > > I worry that ginning up too much anger against Iran may give an opening to > another theocracy to attack, which promises no good. > > > > >>It is sad that so many u.s. leftist are in such total despair of any > movement in the u.s. that all they can do is mount a verbal (for it is > only verbal and has no practical implications) crusade against the > Iranian regime. I don't defend that regime; I just notice that unlike > _eqyallly_ vicious regimes such as EKgypt, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, Peru > (all of which regimes are supported by u.s. power) Iran makes at least > gestures of setting itself against u.s. power. > > U.S. leftists might, were they organized, exert some real pressure on > those regimes to change. They have no power over the Iranian regime. > Everything they say, in fact, strengthens that regime by allowing it to > point out to the dreadful threat from the u.s.. Once that threat were > _definitely_ removed, doubtless the Iranian regime would be forced by > its own people to liberalize; but it would be fatal to Iranian > indpendence for it to liberalize under u.s. pressure. > > It is the caterwauling of moralists disguised as leftis in the u.s. that > in fact gies _real_ support ot he worst tendencies in Iran. Lay off. > Attend to your proper business at home. You are merely howling to the > moon. > > Carrol > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA > 95929 > > 530 898 5321 > fax 530 898 5901 > > http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
