Iranian election

[Alex]

But in this case it is more a choice of "lesser of two evil figureheads." It is only a slight exaggeration to say (from the American point of view) that caring who's president of Iran is about as useful as caring who's queen (or king) of England.

Unless the theocracy is booted by all of this, regardless of who ends up in the presidency things will change as much as Ayatollah Khamenei wants.

Mousavi's hotter. Looks more professorial.

[innerSpaceman]

It's all a matter of degree. Certainly the president is all but (yet not quite fully) a figurehead in Iran.

But the president of the U.S. is so beholden to corporate interests, I've never considered that position much less of a figurehead. If you're not acceptable to the corporate power structure in America, there's no chance of becoming a major presidential candidate in this country ... and Obama is no exception.



(Except that Obama's way hotter than McCain.)

[JWBear]

Satire is the most painful when it hits closest to the truth

[wendybeth]

Well, Mousavi is way hotter than Jon. He certainly has more hair.


I think what is happening in Iran is interesting, but I'm not that excited about it. Mousavi is not a lot better than the lunatic running the asylum now, and the clerics are the real power in Iran. I am happy to see people there refusing to give in to corruption- it seems like the stranglehold of apathy has been broken in yet another nation- but I don't think it's going to bring about any real change.

[Alex]

Plus, we've seen a lot of massive popular protests in recent years that have come to nothing much even when they changed those in charge (the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon, Tibet, Georgia, and Kyrgystan have all had relatively non-violent revolutions in recent years without significant short term change).

So while I'm rooting for the protesters in Iran to accomplish something of significance I don't yet have any strong feeling that they will.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Hey, if it distracts them for a moment from their hatred for the US and Israel, then that's better than nothing, right?

[€uroMeinke]

I'm fascinated with the story as well. The demographics of the country are so young, so it is interesting to see what this generation wants and is willing to do. The Internet/Social Networking aspects are also interesting to me, thinking how totalitarian regimes maintained their control over the monolithic broadcast mediums, on wonders how anyone can cut or block these communication ties without damaging themselves.

Of course the fear is another Tienanmen Square - China is the one totalitarian regime that seems to have mastered these things at the moment, though one wonders about her growing youth culture that has come of age in a much more materialistic society than their parents. The world is changing, and I hope it works out okay.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Alex

I think Colbert did a good job demonstrating why, while it is good for the people of Iran to insist they get to pick their leadership, there isn't much to be happy about in the person they're currently insisting on.

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Here's the clip Alex is referring to

I still think it's important. Snips from Wikipedia:

He has stated that his main goals are: to institutionalize social justice, equality and fairness, freedom of expression, to root out corruption and to speed up Iran's stagnant process of privatization and thus move Iran away from what he calls "an alms-based economy".

Mousavi has on numerous occasions indicated his wish to change the constitution in order to remove the existing ban on the private ownership of television stations (currently all Iranian television stations are state-owned), as well as transfer the control of the law-enforcement forces to the President (so that they represent the people, since the people directly elect the President through popular vote) from the Supreme Leader. He has said that "the issue of non-compliance with the Iranian rules and regulations is the biggest problem that the country is currently faced with" and that he wishes to put in place ways to enforce the laws further, and that it is also important to bring an end to keeping people in the dark about government matters.

He has also vowed to review laws that discriminate against women in Iran if he wins the upcoming election. He has stated that he would seek to disband the so called morality police force of Iran and make sure that women in Iran are treated equally, have the ability to attain financial empowerment and highest levels of decision making bodies.

His other notable assertion was calling Ahmadinejad's attitude of the Holocaust ("a myth") wrong. Mousavi condemned the killing of Jews in the Holocaust, a much different stance than Ahmadinejad.

I don't think you can change Iran overnight. If you get things like freedom of information, freedom of expression and even slight governmental transparency truly going, it can cause all kinds of other things to fall.

Oh, and recognizing the Holocaust? That's pretty f'n amazing right there.

[Alex]

I don't think the president of Iran can change Iran at all, let alone overnight.

He may wish to see the constitution changed but he has no power to get it done. If there is some indication that the ayatollah supports such changes then they're lost in the fact that he likely supported election fraud to ensure Mousavi's defeat.

As soon at the unrest looks like the theocracy is at risk I'll start to get excited.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I understand that the president does not have these powers. What matters is that the people support these ideas, and if they can elect someone who actually says these things, the country can move in that direction.

Yes, Tianamen and other events have not lead to more freedom, but what other hope is there for oppressed people? They have to start somewhere and hopefully the momentum will gain traction.