FREEDOM

What is the alternative to

What is the alternative to not voting? By voting we won't get what we want, but we'll get less of what we don't want.

Darius, I sure hope your prince comes one day and brings you...

your "velvet revolution". Is Blue OK?

Let me ask you since you brought it up. Do you really believe anyone with an "anti-Zionist stance" is anti-Jewish? Would you call those with anti-Nazi "stance" anti-German?! Your remark just reminds me of the Jehdis who call their critics anti-Moslem for pointing out their extremist/terrorist agenda.

همساده

البته منظور بیشتر اینه که اسم بامزه است! با حرف‌هایت هم کاملا موافقم. عجب دامبال و دیمبلی برای هیچ. :)

پرهام

اولاً کجای اسمم عجیبه!؟ بیشتر موافقم با حرفت دربارهٔ مشروعیت این دولت در خارج از کشور بوسیله "تبعیدیان" با اینکه جلب کردن سرمایه‌گذاری هم طبیعی هست. برای بازاری فرق نمیکند سرمایه از ایرانی‌ باشد یا خارجی‌؛ شرط لازم برای سرمایه‌گذاری اعتماد به دولت است که باز به مشروعیت برمیگردیم.

خنده‌دار این است که این آخوندزاده‌ها دست به چه دلیل برهان‌هایی‌ میزنند که ما "تبعیدیان" یا مهاجران رای بدیم. از مؤمن میپرسند "چرا به خدا اعتقاد داری؟"، میگوید "چونکه در قرآن گفته شده"، میپرسند "چرا به قرآن اعتقاد داری؟"، میگوید "چونکه حرف خداست!" این منطق دایره‌ای، منطق ابرمرد را نشان میدهد؛ میگوید: "همانطور که بدون آزادی، انتخابات آزاد نیست، بدون انتخابات اصلا آزادی نیست." شاید هم بین "آزادی نبودن" و "اصلا آزادی نبودن" فرقی‌ باشد که من ندانم. حالا بگذریم از این منطق‌ها که اگر ما مهاجران رای ندهیم دلیل میشود اسرائیل به ایران حمله می‌کند، احمدی‌نژاد انتخاب میشود و ...

استاد، من هیچوقت در زبانم به فحاشی دست نمی‌زنم. نمیدانم درباره چی‌ صحبت میکنی‌. ولی‌ میبینم با اینکه من فحاشی نکردم، تو از آن کار دریغ نکرده‌ای

Ostaad Democracy ,Utopia ,Solidarnosc's Religious aspect

Democracy has ALWAYS been a UTOPIA And it continues to be even in fully democratic societies where people continue to strive for more individual rights be it women for equality, abortion or contraception ( which are not fully accepted depending on the type of moral and religious standards in different countries), Homosexuals or ethnic minorities etc ...

So democracy is Never Perfect and evolves from generation to generation with the demands and maturity of the society. 

Now regarding Solidarnosc being a Religious mouvement.

That was Not at all the case.

True, Lech Walesa was a Catholic and he insisted on the spiritual aspect of his struggle but it was not about establishing a catholic state or Theocratic Democracy. He also relied on the Polish Pope as an Opportunity for his movement to gain the moral and international recognition it needed. 

However Solidarnosc had members from ALL WALKS of Life and even religion, since one of the founding founders and political thinkers of Solidarnosc was not even catholic but Jewish ( sorry to dissapoint you again knowing your Anti Zionist Stance ...), his name was Bronislove Geremek ( he tragically died in a stupid car accident last year).

The Support of the Church in this struggle was more symbolic than truly ideological in the democratic aspirations of the movement. 

The assassination of a clergyman by the Polish Secret Police also enforced the spiritual need and symbolism within the movement but it nevertheless did not lose focus on the key demand and that was a plurilistic and secular Democracy to replace to obsolete communist state.

The Church served also for meetings and gatherings to allow debates and reunions between the members of the mouvement.

In addition Solidarnosc placed Religion in the center of its political construction again for the spiritual and moral support it brought to a highly catholic nation in the heart of Soviet Communist Europe. They placed religious freedom amongst other demands within a secular democratic framework.

But at No time did Solidarnosc call for a Religious State but a Secular Democratic state and even after the fall of communism it allowed communist parties to run for elections.

An Iranian Solidarnosc would not be an exact replica of the original Polish movement but it can be inspired by the methods and organizational aspects. It actually did serve in other countries like former Tchekoslovakia with Vaclav Havel or other Velvet Revolutions in Eastern Europe.

This can also be achieved in Iran. How and when will depend on all political parties in finding common ground and defining common priorities.

Are Iranians capable of achieving this ? I don't know, but what I do know is that we have No other choice if we want to achieve democracy with the least bloodshed possible. The Poles understood this much better than the unfortunate Chinese in Tienanmen mainly because in the latter case they only relied on immature students with no political agenda but to demand freedom at all costs in a sporadic and unique gesture. In the case of Iran, the dissatisfaction has been around for far longer and in a far more wider level than the marginal movement of the Chinese Students in the Capital who had no particular connection with the rest of the country.

So Iran is much more ripe for such a Solidarnosc movement than any other country in the same situation.

Also you mention why doesn't this appear in Jordan, UAE etc and that is because they are not faced with the type of moral and political crisis Iran is going through. They are not immune to also follow the same path if this is achieved successfully in Iran but at this stage none of these countries or their people are at crossroads in their history as we are.

So I think that the Path for a Solidarnosc type unity IS Possible if the goals and direction is explained and outlined by chosen leaders within Iran's civil society and the Iranian Diaspora can play a constructive role in enforcing it.

Comparing apples and Kombozehs

“All I am saying is, based on the experience that I have gained by living in a democratic society like the US, low voter turnouts almost always result in the incumbent, in the (this) case Ahamadinejad, to win.”

If the Islamist republic, as opposed to the Iranian nation, were a democracy the above observation would be true, and since it is demonstrably not, the observation is false.

Hamsade...

Who is encouraging the "exiles" to vote, and what makes me a "regime's agent" when I say not voting leaves the arena for Ahamdinejad's core supporters, who WILL vote, to win the (s)election for him?!

All I am saying is, based on the experience that I have gained by living in a democratic society like the US, low voter turnouts almost always result in the incumbent, in the case Ahamadinejad, to win. Your lack of understanding of this simple concept should not be the reason for you be called stupid names. 

Since you correctly point out ex-pats' votes have "negligible" effect on the election results, calling those who have a different view utterly stupid names only reveals your own deep seated ignorance and "bikheradi" about how these social phenomena work. 

همساده قدیمی (عجب اسمی!)٫

فکر میکنم اصرار حکومت در «دزدیدن قاپ» افراد خارج از کشور، بجز جذب سرمایه های اندوخته شده و در عین حال «نرم» کردن اپوزیسیون، در این باشد که بدنیا بقبولاند که مشروعیت کاملاً مردمی حتی در جمع «تبعیدیان» دارد. بنظر من این خود نقطه ضعف بزرگیست که اگر ما هایی که خواهان دمکراسی هستیم بخواهیم، میتوانیم استفاده خوبی از آن بکنیم٫

Stockholm syndrome

Ms. Bayzaie, thank you for a very clear analysis of the current situation. This "election" is only meaningful for the people who see one of these four, as a representative of their social and political views.

The feverish engagement of the rest of Iranian population in Iran reminds me of Stockholm Syndrome //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome where captives start relating to their captors.

Khatami extended the life of this theocracy by eight years with neither advancing democratic rights for non-governmental political parties, nor furthering the quest for individual rights and freedoms in Iran. The same is going to happen under Mousavi.

The only way to make a meaningful change in Iranian political scene is through opposition to concepts of an Islamic theocracy and promoting separation of religion and state, removal of non-elected Jurisprudence (Vali Faghih) and Guardian Council, and demanding freedom of speech and association.

خانم بیضایی

از خواندن مقاله‌تان لذت بردم بخصوص زیر سوال بردن تشویق کردن رای دادن "تبعیدیان" به وسیله‌ی ماموران رژیم. اگر درصد جمعیت ایرانیان را در خارج نسبت به ایرانیان مقیم کشور در نظر بگیریم، شرکت تبعیدیان در رایگیری اثر ناچیزی بر حاصل انتخابات خواهد داشت. با اینکه شما در این مقاله اعتراف می‌کنید که "اگر مردم در داخل ایران به پای صندوق رای بروند قابل درک تر است..."، باز هم میبینیم که این ملازاده‌ها جریان تحریم را برای ایرانیان درون و خارج کشور جمعبندی میکنند. پس باید سوال کنیم که دلیل این تلاش بازاریابی پرسماجت برای رای گیری از ایرانیان خارج کشور چیست. حالا بگذریم که موسوی به گفته خودش به قانون اساسی‌ اعتقاد دارد و به آن وفادار خواهد بود، و در عین حال میگوید در زمان نخست وزیری ایشان بنا بر قانون اساسی‌ سرکوب کردن اپوزیسیون به او ربطی‌ نداشته. پس با اینکه به اصلاح قانون اساسی‌ اعتقاد ندارد خود را به عنوان یک اصلاحطلب قلم میزند. بیشتر و بیشتر به نظر میاید که رقابت انتخابات برای کسب کردن نمایندگی دفتر رهبر است نه برای رئیس جمهوری و تمام شور و هیجان مردم سر همین است و بس

Darius, if memory servers me the entire "solidarity" movement...

was based on the "church". The "solidarity" movement would not exist had it not been for the Polish pope and the generous financial support of the Vatican banks, the "church" and the CIA. Don't get me wrong, I am glad Poland could get rid of Soviet-installed communist rulers, but secularism was not what Lech and others were PREACHING to the Poles. Google it and learn, buddy you may learn something you didn't know.

As to your comments, "we need to create a political society outside the existing and official
political establishments... One which is the corrupt government and the other
being the nation at large...", I have to say my impression from your posts is that you've not been involved in ANY political organizing otherwise you'd not come up with naive remarks like that and this one, "That way the Western Democracies including
their leaders will see that they will have to take into account the
People and NOT the Regime as their true partners."! Do you really believe "Western Democracies" need your imaginary "outside political society" to know what is really going on in Iran or any other country with despotic and undemocratic regimes?!!! Have any of those factors influenced the "Western Democracies" business dealing with S. Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, etc?

Darius, I have heard some Polish people still have a club in London, whose mission statement reads the Earth is Flat. Do you by any chance belong to that club too? If not, you should be because you seem to be a perfect fit.

Having said that, I am for ANY form of civil disobedience that results in the abolishment of the Velayt-e Fagheeh in order to replace it with true representative democracy. I'm afraid your game theory gets us nowhere. You seem to believe in palying gorgam-beh-havaa with the regime just to convince yourself you're doing something.

Parham

In my comment, I said that I understand your point and then I'd asked you a questin. Later, that question was answered by Darius. Thanks for the reply.

Respects,

Souri

What is your point in response to my "not bowing" comment? I didn't get it.

نابرده رنج كنج ميسرنمی شود

Darius jan, not bad :)

Very good argumentation. But isn't it a bit too utopic now? In a country where the majority is still undeniably very religous and very much obeidient to the rules of Islam, do you think this is even possible, now? Today?

The Alternative is an IRANIAN SOLIDARNOSC

Civil Dissobedience until the regime give in more and more to the Peoples demand for genuine change and that is SECULARISM ! Just Like in Poland where people demanded the separation of the communist ideology which entrenched the constitution and dominated political life to the degree of suffication:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=asAW30hDEfY

We need to confront the so called Islamic Republic to its own Contradictions by claiming that a Theocratic Republic is anything but a Republic and therefore at odds with the very principles of Democracy and democratic life. "THE EYE OF THE OCTOPUS" to Paraphrase another Opposition leader is: KHAMENEI but Also RELIGIOUS DOMINATION over politics! 

If he is out of the scene then progress can be made, otherwise its a confrontation that becomes inevitable with the entire system.

This civil dissobedience can lead to forcing the regime into accepting in Parliament genuine representatives from Iran's civil society in the making rather than the current parlimentarians and government officials of the regime. Thus these new representatives would be naturally selected within the ranks of such a Solidarnosc mouvement. A Mouvement like solidarnosc was not initially a party but a syndicate that was gradually extended to the various sections of society and particularly the intelligenstia who could translate the demands of the people in practical terms and in opposition to the ruling establishment so as to avoid a direct  and violent confrontation with a regime that claimed to be of the people.

These legitimate representatives will have the moral support of the masses but also the advantage of thriving outside the current and corrupt ruling establishment.

In otherwords we need to create a political society outside the existing and official political establishments in order to show that there are actually two different entities. One which is the corrupt government and the other being the nation at large. That way the Western Democracies including their leaders will see that they will have to take into account the People and NOT the Regime as their true partners. 

Great Article THANK YOU !

DOWN WITH THE IRI !

Alternative = not bowing

Okay, granted. But what is the result?

Election, even in most democratic countries are only different in form(shekl), but not really in the content(maahiat). Only, people are freer to believe the lies!

What is called "velayat faghih" in Iran is the same as "Oil Trusts and Cartels" in USA. Believe it or not they have just a few differences in form, but not in the real power exerting on the rules of governing.

Two years ago, nobody has even heard the name of Obama in US. He just jumped out of the chaos, like this, and has been elected by the majority (??) 

Let not fool ourselves.

Excellent Article

Dear Ms. Beyzaie,

Excellent article. Thank you.

Best,

Masoud

The alternative...

... is not bowing.

رای ندیم که چی بشه؟ بعدش چیکار کنیم؟

چرا فکر می‌کنید اونایی که می‌گن باید رای بدیم هیچ نمی‌فهمن و نمی‌دونن چی به چیه. اتفاقا همه این حرفا رو می‌دونن. شما بگید با رای ندادن چه اتفاق خوبی میوفته تا ما رای ندیم. اگه آلترنتیوی دارید و فکر می کنید عملی تره و نتیجه ای می ده بگید. وگرنه هرچقدر از این حرفها بزنید تاثیری نداره. سیاست غر زدن و گلایه کردن و احساسی برخورد کردن نیست. یه جور شطرنجه. مردم ایران هم فهمیدن که اگه بخواد دوباره انقلابی بشه و اینا برن مطمینا یکی بدتر از اینا سر کار میاد.

عالی

نیلوفر عزیز  .دقیق و روشن بود ممنون از نوشته ات

I hate to burst your ballon...

آنچه مسکوت می گذارید این واقعیت مهم است که تصمیمات اصلی در مورد سیاست خارجی ایران نه در دفتر ریاست جمهوری که در بیت رهبری گرفته می شو

Do you want to tell me Mr Obama makes his decision all by himself and his own advisors? If so don't you see how he changes his policies? Can Obama, for instance, tomorow decided that there would be single payer health insurance plan for all US citizens (that is what he talked about when he was making his own decisions)

FYI, Every society has one or more power centers that are key to any decision that is made. The President is one voice in that process and the one that communicates the decision to people.

In American terminology it is not "Maghame Moazam Rahbari", it is a bit more abstract, intellectual sounding, it is called the stake holders. In Middle East policy, AIPAC is the key stakeholder, in things related to health insurance, the drug companies and the insurance companies are the stakeholders. In financial stuff there are the banks.....

It is not unlike car dealership. You are dealing with the salesman, but his supervisor has to sign the deal. Think of presidents as the salesman that you are working with, he is working for the dealer, but you want one that at least is honest to you about the best deal the dealership can offer. The dealership usually has a bunch of sales people, I choose the one I like the best. I choose Obama over McCain. I felt he can better explain my position to his general manager and the stakeholders to me. I don't want the car for free, just want to get the bet deal possible. No president delivers a utopia, all I want is the slight improvement.

Unlike you, I am under no illusion to think that somehow with my vote I got to determine the policy to the US, not even 1/300,000,000 of it.

Basic Mistake

Like all the other arguments of the non-voters, I mis the alternative, a vision for the solution. And it's not quite intelligent sitting there and hoping for God bringing up the change.

At least wrote and posted in good faith ...

legitimacy megitimacy

شما امروز با پشتیبانی از آنها نه تنها بدانها اعتبار می بخشید

You are so worried about Legitimacy to whom?
Other countries? World deals and wheels with so many illegitimate regimes and the ones who decide future of Iran are Iranians not them.

Iranians? Iranians after 30 years are in two camps already and no matter who is the future president they will not change their mind about legitimacy of regime

Therefore the foundation of your no-vote because it legitimates the regime is wrong.

Vasalam Nameh tamam !

Speechless !!

Dear Niloofar,

I have always been a real fan of your articles (even though they are very few in this site, but I know you from afar). As I had said before: like father like daughter!

Your father's name is among the veritable pride of our cultural heritage and you are a true Iranian, whose love for the country should be an example for all and any Iranian inside and outside of the country.

I read your speech very carefully and each line of it is highlighted in my mind and I admire your great capacity of analyzing and describing the actual face of our disaster.

I understand and agree with every word of it, but still have a question now and I hope you will read this comment and answer this question. 

It is well understood that under such system, the democratic aspect of the election is null, and voting has no meaning. But what is the other alternative?

If people inside of Iran, do not vote for one of the 4 imposed candidates, then it will be the velayat faghih who will chose this president for them. I mean, even if by voting, people will still get the same result, but isn't it better that they show at least their willingness to take their destiny in hands, by voting?

As Dr Natel Khanlari said :

Zaan pish ke dast o pa frou bandad marg

aakhar kam az aankeh dast o paaee bezanim?

So, what is the other alternative for the Iranian people? And by Iranian people I mean only the Iranian who live inside of Iran.

Sincerely yours,

Souri

عالی

ممنون