For principled solidarity with Iran

by - Vady Ranlic - Fri Nov 02, 2007 16:35

'A critique, for me anyhow, is a reasoned political examination of /engagement with an idea, theory or campaign pointing in detail to its good features and its limitations.

It would be so good to see on this thread!

Or even better come along to the teach in "armed" with a reasonable set of arguments as to what a campaign opposed to American imperialism and theocratic regimes should proceed in your view'.

Sound points Krossie

by krossie - wsm personal capacity Fri Nov 02, 2007 15:47

Kal - el There is far too much assumption that the hand of the SWP is behind this or that the HOPI line is above any critique.

Websters definition of critique: A critical examination or estimate of a work of literature or art; a critical dissertation or essay; a careful and thorough analysis of any subject; a criticism; as, Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason."

I don't think anything should be ever above critique but there are ways to go about it.

Ranting under assumed names about which lefty grupiscule did what or split for who or towed what line isn't actually a critique!

A critique, for me anyhow, is a reasoned political examination of /engagement with an idea, theory or campaign pointing in detail to its good features and its limitations.

It would be so good to see on this thread!

Or even better come along to the teach in "armed" with a reasonable set of arguments as to what a campaign opposed to American imperialism and theocratic regimes should proceed in your view...

Krossie

by Kal-el Fri Nov 02, 2007 15:25

I have read nothing on this or any other thread that smears ordinary Iranian workers.

That is an emotive invective and an atempt to massage into common acceptance that by calling into question HOPI and/or its motives you are in fact smearing ordinary Iranian workers.

HOPI does not equal ordinary Iranian workers. In fact most ordinary Iranian workers would never have even heard of HOPI.

There are genuine concerns and those who tow the HOPI line do little to allay those concerns by using the very tools of propoganda that got us into this mess with Iraq and now very possibly Iran in the first place.

There is far too much assumption that the hand of the SWP is behind this or that the HOPI line is above any critique.

by pat c Fri Nov 02, 2007 15:06

tomeile for some reason is determined to smear Iranian Trade Unionists. He trips himself up though as the ITF* is affiliated to the ITUC. Does he believe that Iranian workers should not have the right to form unions or go on strike? This is a serious question. It makes me wonder what motivates those who smear ordinary Iranian workers.

The link he has posted is from 1998 and it deals with suggestions that there was CIA involvement in the ITF in the 1960s and 1970s.

This is 2007 and whats at issue here is whether ot not you support workers rights in Iran. Because this article is about Iran, not anyother country.

* Affiliates to the ITF include such well known CIA fronts as :

Services, Industrial, Professional and Technical Union

Irish Municipal, Public and Civil Trade Union (IMPACT)

Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers & Firemen

National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers

Transport & General Workers' Union (ATGWU)

Palestine Bus Drivers General Union

Palestine General Union for Transport Workers

Full list of affiliates at: http://www.itfglobal.org/about-us/affiliatelist.cfm

The International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) is an international trade union federation of transport workers' unions. Any independent trade union with members in the transport industry is eligible for membership of the ITF.

681 unions representing 4,500,000 transport workers in 148 countries are members of the ITF. It is one of several Global Federation Unions allied with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).

Full text at: http://www.itfglobal.org/about-us/moreabout.cfm

What really irks me about trolls like watcher and galileo is that they dont post any stories about Iran, Iraq or Palestine. Nor do they troll stories about Burma or Darfur demanding to know why those stories dont cover every horror in the world. The reason why is obvious: they are hostile to anyone who opposes the Iranian Regime. Thus they will smear striking workers and Iranian socialists.

They have no track record of posting stories on Iran, Iraq or Palestine but I do. I've posted stories on Iran where there is no mention of HOPI and all that Watcher has done is troll them. Hes even trolled a story about Iraq which covered a US military attack on the Iraq Freedom Congress Offices. They are only interested in trolling.

Here are some stories I posted:

Iran

More Warnings Of A US War On Iran
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/84850

Pentagon ‘three-day blitz’ plan for Iran
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/84072

Anti-imperialism and Tehran
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83568

U.S. Imperialism, Islamic Fundamentalism … and the Need for Another Way
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83856

Against imperialist war, for Iran workers
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/81286

Heres some on Iraq:

No To the Federalism of Occupation
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/84771

Now the U.S. military is assassinating Iraqi peace workers
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83897

US & Iraqi Troops Occupy Iraq National Library & Archives
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83829

IFC Statement on storming the headquarters of IFC in Baghdad by the US forces
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83180

Palestine:

Palestinian cameraman shot by the Israelis: "It never happened..."
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83636

Israel Kidnaps Two Brothers
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/76854

by krossie - wsm personal capacity Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:57

Sheep in wolves clothing
Kal-el

I have no knowledge of the complex sectarian back and forths you claim led to the formation of HOPI in the UK (may even be true for all I know!)- but I have found that HOPI (Eirie) is a small, open and democratic group with socialists , anarchists and various unaligned individuals - if you want to get involved you should come along to the teach in.

I think the main issue is whether it is possible to impose US imperialism but also maintain a principled stance against theocratic regimes.

To me this is ABC socialism regardless of who puts it forward or the muddied questions of the geanology of far left campaigns.

My enemies enemy is not always my friend and some times tactical unity is possible despite different political programmes.

krossie

by Kal-el Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:47

Yassamine Mather lives in Glasgow and is essentially a middle class chatterer posing as a victimised Iranian Socialist. She has called for revolution including the use of arms and supports the transitional use of brutal force and communist dictatorship until the population at large can be re-educated in the error of their ways. It is common to the Communist manifesto to envisage such tactics in light of the little support communism enjoys amongst the population, and not just in Iran. Marx made this central to his thesis, he understood the difficulties of revolution and the deleterious effect democracy could have on it in its infancy.

HOPI is a CPGB front and was borne out of sectarian division and an incompatibility with the StWC, RESPECT and the anti war agenda. This was primarily to do with the focus placed on regime change by HOPI.

HOPI are now whinging that the StWC has rejected their affiliation, this despite underhanded attacks from the Weekly Worker (which affectively controls HOPI) throughout the history of the campaign.

HOPI has attacked the StWC as being supporters of the Mullahs (sound familiar) and has also attacked the CASMII action group along similar lines.

HOPI advocates regime change in Iran and places it on an equal footing with is veenerism toward stopping military aggression. The sheer ferocity and hysterics lorry loaded toward those who question HOPI or any of its founder’s motives are pretty evident and somewhat distasteful given its claims of who and what it represents.

I trust none of this will be mentioned at its ‘Teach –in’

by tomeile Wed Oct 31, 2007 19:26

Here's a link to a long piece about the CIA's use of so-called free trade unions as front organizations to help overthrow the Allende government in Chile.The International Transport Federation ITF Patc refers to in such glowing terms gets a special mention.
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/42a/126.html

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 18:45

Heres a few stories from the ITUC on Iran:

Iran: Anti union repression continues
http://www.ituc-csi.org/spip.php?article1283

Iran: Arrest and Intimidation of wife and sister of detained union leader
http://www.ituc-csi.org/spip.php?article1395

Iran: Union Leader Osanloo Beaten and Abducted
http://www.ituc-csi.org/spip.php?article1310

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 14:17

Rubbish Pat.

I stated that Iranians support their government. I never said I do.

You used the fact that Iran has a dictatorship as your reason to refute the possibility that the Iranian People could (and do) support their Government.

Cuba was advanced as a country where a dictatorship existed yet enjoyed the support of the majority if its citizens. A comparison that contradicts your claim as you agree with that assessment.

Now enough of the apple and oranges horseshite.

Do you accept that a countrys populace can support its government, even if that government is a dictatorship?

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:57

Galileo you are not even bothering to read my comments.

I accept that Cuba has shortcomings. There is repression of the opposition. But the opposition are not tortured or murdrered as happens in Iran

I dont think Cuba is some sort of Utopia.

But Cuba cannot rationally be compared to Iran.

There is my answer. Its what I say, not what you want me to say. If you are not happy with it, then tough.

You given your uncritical support for the Iranian Dictatorship are in no position to lecture anyone about Cuba.

Now quit trolling.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:52

Withdraw your claim that it is impossible for a people to support its government if that government is a dictatorship.

Stop avoiding the Issue.

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:50

You seem to have a problem with the truth when it comes to Iran. It makes you so hysterical that you didnt notice that I was posting about Cuba rather than Iran. I was showing how Cuba was different from Iran

Never the less my points stand.

Women are stoned to death for adultery in Iran. That is a fact.

Women are forced to wear hijabs and chadors in Iran.

Gaymen and Lesbians are executed in Iran.

Government Death Squads shoot down Trade Union Activists in Iran.

by Watcher Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:22

And here it is again just in case Pat would like to engage in rational, honest discussion on the issue.

Whenever Pat is confronted with facts the result is usually the above hysterical onslaught. No attempt to engage with the very important point being made, that education will ,in time, deliver the people of Iran into a place where they want to be. Education is vital to assist people to participate and determine where their future and their children’s future is best served. Shouting and screaming or calling for unrealistic immediate change will only achieve nothing. Which begs the question-Does Pat C really want change to evolve at all?

The fact is that the revolution delivered a staggering increase in the literacy rate. Literacy allows people to read the views from far and near and reduces the capacity of government to mislead. The dramatic increase in literacy did not happen by accident. Almost the first act after the revolution was the issuing of a decree establishing the Literacy Movement Organisation. The illiteracy rate stood at 52% immediately after the revolution and this has been reduced to 24% at the last verified audit taken in 2002.The LMO established over 2,000 community learning centres across the country, employed 55,000 instructors, distributed hundreds of books and manuals, and provided literacy classes to a million people, women as well as men.

In the area of health, the progress has been equally spectacular. Infant mortality rates have been slashed and to assist women Iran now has a very effective family planning programme. This is contributing to allowing women to participate to an ever increasing extent in the day to day affairs of the country. And another wee fact that will further upset Pat, since the revolution, Iran has made significant moves up the Human Development Index from 0.569 in the early 80's to 0.732 in 2002 and it is expected that Iran will have made further large gains since 2002.

On the issue of Pat's repeated claims that Iran is "Dictatorship", the facts refute this. Nobody is claiming the the structures are pristine models of democracy however, Iran has elected governmental bodies at the national, provincial and local levels for which all males and females from the age of 15 yrs of age up may vote. While it is acknowledged that these bodies are subordinate, in the overall scheme of things they have more power than equivalent organs under the Shah's regime. Regarding representation of minorities, seats are allocated for the Christian , Jewish and Zoroastrian communities in rough proportion with their population.

Another fact that is rarely if ever mentioned is the fact that after the revolution, the new Iranian government had formal meetings with representatives of the indigenous Jewish community after which a decree was issued that all Jews were under the protection of the administration. A similar decree was issued for the protection of Iran's Christian community.

Progress is progress and we should be supporting that which is responsible for the dramatic changes and particularly those in the area of education. Education has the capacity to change things very substantially and stability allied to the political will to deliver facilities is vital for educational standards to improve. What is happening on the ground is indisputable progress far beyond the expectations of those who were originally critical of the revolution and that must be acknowledged rather than cheerleading US aggression which has the capacity to destroy that progress and movement and all to get control of the oil in the area. Who in their right mind would advocate aggression against Iran having witnessed the outcome of that same aggression on Iraq. People genuinely concerned for the region should stop attacking Iran and concentrate on focusing on US policy and it's disastrous consequences.

by Watcher Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:15

"There are not Public Executions in Cuba.
Women are not stoned to death for adultery in Cuba.
Women are nor forced to wear hijabs and chadors in Cuba.
Gays are not executed in Cuba. Indeed the position of LGBTs is better in Cuba than in most States in the US.
Death squads do not go around shooting down dissidents in Cuba."

This is the exact same hysterical crap that appeared elsewhere and was dealt with. How many times it is necessary to expose this anti-Iran propaganda?

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:11

Drew I didnt ask you what you thought of the Chinese Governement, i asked you what you thought the Chinese think of their Government and from your experience there do you think they support their government.

The claim has been made here that it is impossible to say that Iranians can support their Government because it is a dictatorship.

I have given examples of where that is not the case but still Iran is somehow uniquely different.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 13:01

Well then retract the claim that Irans cannot support their Government because it is a Dictatorship.

Stop fuckin playing games pat, theres far too much at stake.

by Drew - WPRM Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:54 wprm_ireland at yahoo dot com

This line of comparing dictatorships is going nowhere. All governments, whether they let you put a cross on a ballot paper or not, are dictatorships of one or other class.

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:53

and Cuba is not the same as Iran.

You are the one who is spinning on this. no rationsal honest person would suggest that the two societies are similar.

In site of Cubas freer society I admit that there are democratic deficiencies.

You wont admit the same about Iran.

But i think you'll find that some of those who disagree with me on Iran wont back you on cuba.

by Drew - WPRM Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:51 wprm_ireland at yahoo dot com

Again, picking through statements looking for sentences that you can pull out and attach significance to. I believe that China is a reactionary regime and should be overthrown. Once again you made a wild assumption.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:48

The point is pat you claimed it was impossible for a people to support its Government if that government is a Dictatorship. Cuba is a dictatorship yet you accept its people support its government.

Therein lies the bias thus the dishonesty you peddle when dealing with Iran.

Like with like and on the issue of Democracy Iran and Cuba are similar and there comparison justified.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:44

Of course not Drew, especially when those experiences contradict a certain agenda you are trying to push.

China is also ruled by a dictatorship, its people denied a range of Human Rights, opposition parties are banned, its capital punishment amonst the highest in the world, its imprisonment, torture and summary execution of political dissenters well documented etc etc etc, despite there having been no free elections do you think that the Chinese do not support their Government?

This seems to be the basis of your thinking toward Iran.

by pàt c Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:43

Cuba is not Iran.

There are not Public Executions in Cuba.

Women are not stoned to death for adultery in Cuba.

Women are nor forced to wear hijabs and chadors in Cuba.

Gays are not executed in Cuba. Indeed the position of LGBTs is better in Cuba than in most States in the US.

Death squads do not go around shooting down dissidents in Cuba.

I admit that Cuba is not paragon of democracy. Whilst a supporter of Cuba I have always been prepared to make criticisms of cuba, its here on the record on Indymedia going back over the years.

But only charlatans or the intellectually challenged would suggest there is any comparision between Cuba and Iran

by Drew - WPRM Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:36 wprm_ireland at yahoo dot com

One thing that has always irritated me whenever I have travelled are the loudmouthed middle class 'traveller' set that will insist on boring anyone who will listen of their 'findings'. These diatribes often begin with the words, "well I've talked to the people and they say...". The fact is, these are just the opinions of those that you met and shouldn't be over-emphasised.

When I was in China, all the people that I spoke to said that Chairman Mao was a great leader and although I fully agreed with them I didn't allow these conversations to overly influence my viewpoint. The people that I met and talked to were just a few people among millions and their opinions have to be seen in that light.

Also, Gallilio makes a lot of assumptions about those of us who disagree with him, churning out the cold war cliches. Once again, he is attaching significance to thin air.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:34

PAt c maintains it is impossible for a people to support its government if it is a dictatorship.

Would he apply that same logic to Cuba?

Cubans support their government in numbers larger than those who dont. There is opposition to Castros regime within Cuba yet only the VIs claim that is enough to warrant a regime change at the behest of the people. Cubans are suppressed and harranged and castigated, imprisoned tortured and murdered. Denied free travel, denied certain Human Rights,some live in destitution etc etc -yet still Castro is hugely popular and remaisn the peoples choice. Despite there having been no elections to pass Pat cs litmus test I'm sure he accepts this. Other wise there would be a HOPOC would there not.

The probem Pat has is that though he spouts democracy, he just doesn't like the fact that the majority of Iranians do not sunscribe to this world view and want islam to be instrumental in the mechanisms of their Governemnt. An unpalatable truth but a truth none the less.

If thats what they want, who are we to deny it or call for change.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:19

Iran is a stable country. Yes I have been there and quite frankly I couldnt give a shit what you beleive. My experience informs me on what I consider the Iranians support or dont support.

As I said no-one other than yourselves are saying that the majority of Iranian people dont support their Government. Whether it is a Dictatorship or not is irrelevant. They put it there. There have been attempts by communists to overthrow it and they have failed as they had no support among the people. This is the reality of Iran. A reality that those who wish to overthrow the regime in the US fully accept. No body in Washington is plugging the line that the Iranians will welcome the US army as liberators as they did with Iraq. They now Iranians support their government.

You live in cloud cuckoo land if you think Communists in Iran enjoy wides spread or popular support. They do not. To overcome a problem you must first understand the problem and except the scope of that proplem. I understand rigid Marxists dogma informs your thinking but you cannot surplant class struggle on Iran and assume the model fits.

The discussion within the left on iran is fracturing along those very lines and oversight is being lost as sectarianism usurps the agenda.

Hands off Iran.
No to US Imperialism
No to interefering with Iranians right to self determination.

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:16

I dont think the US have forces for a full scale ground war in Iran. They do however have the capability to launch a heavy air attack using Cruise missiles and aircraft. Given their expertise in surgical strikes they will probably bomb a childrens hospital and claim it was a REvolutionary Guards Depot.

by Seán Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:09

The US aren't going to invade Iran because they don't have the capabilities to engage in a war because of what's gone on in Iraq.

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:58

Neither Drew nor I are fringe revolutionaries we have a track record of involvement in real campaigns. Whereas you sre just an anonymous troll.

HOPI have consistently opposed all US aggression against Iran. Watcher is a liar to suggest otherwise. Watcher actually says that I should learn from the above article when in fact I was the one who posted it on Indymedia.

I dont know whether you ever visited Iran, I have no way of finding out seeing as you choose to remain anonymous. You could claim anything about yourself. However, given the convoluted nature of your postings and your bizaree assertions that the Iranian people support a dictatorship; I reckon you are a fantasist who was never beyond Bray and you get your information from Iranian Regime websites.

by Galileo Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:44

That is exactly the charge that was levelled at Pat yesterday.

Can any of you fringe revolutionary wannabies deal in facts?

by Drew - WPRM Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:33 wprm_ireland at yahoo dot com

This is a sad situation Pat. Rather than argue with what you are saying, they argue with what they want you to say.

by pat c Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:21

I have always argued against US intervention in Iran. Only a liar would suggest otherwise. I actually posted this article.

But that doesnt matter to Watcher. Hes just here to troll.

by Watcher Tue Oct 30, 2007 19:50

"But now the US administration is so desperate to divert attention from the disaster in Iraq that an air assault on Iran by the US or Israel is a real possibility."

People here have been trying to get that message across and have being trying to get HOPI to stop cheerleading US policy by repeating verbatum all the negative demonising propaganda that is spewing out of the US about Iran.Maybe now, Pat C will listen.

by tomeile Tue Oct 30, 2007 19:40

I wonder whether Yasmine could guess which group's website the quotes below come from. A clue : the author is Hopi's Peter Tatchell

"The Iranian regime is a neo-fascist state.'

"A democratic, progressive Iran would pose no threat to anyone. President Bush would therefore find it much harder to persuade the American public and military to go to war. "

"Iran is a dangerous, terroristic, fundamentalist, anti-Semitic dictatorship, which is striving to develop nuclear weapons and which poses a serious threat to international peace and security."

"If Iran was no longer a fanatical religious tyranny, the case for war would evaporate. Bush would lose the battle for hearts and minds. "

by tomeile Tue Oct 30, 2007 19:06

Yasmine writes :
"I suggest they read the text of a speech by Tony Blair comparing “Iran’s extremism” to “rising fascism in the 1920s and 1930s” (Times Oct 19). Quiet clearly Blair has spent so much time in Israel that he repeats like a parrot the most stupid utterances of Israeli politicians - all this in line with the US administration’s plans for possible military attack against Iran and paving the way for more extensive sanctions"

I suggest that Yasmine reads the text of an article by Borhan Azemi and Reza J. which was linked to on indymedia Ireland on Saturday August 25, 2007 18:49
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83939http://www.indymed...83939
Here's how the two so-called Iranian socialists describe the Iranian regime :
“It was like the Hitler regime who started with the communists and social democrats and eventually came for everybody else-including its own elected president Bani Sadr. A theocratic fascist regime was consolidated in Iran. At the heart of this fascist theocracy lies the slavery of women. “
http://im4df.com/english3.htm