the myth of ‘western rationality’


the myth of ‘western rationality’
by Niloufar Parsi

it is clear that there is a major ideological barrier to real dialogue between iran and the west. mistranslations are common, misunderstanding is encouraged, and it is easy to get the feeling that there is a strategy in place to ensure confusion and animosity instead of goodwill. i tend to see more of this mischief emanating from the west, but that is probably related to the fact that i live here, and it is easier to catch the lies on this side. iran is probably just as guilty.

but there is this one specific western myth that is definitely a big part of the problem: the myth of western ‘rationality’ that presupposes many positive qualities associated with the west and negative ones associated with the east, including iran.

in a different context and time, it would be called racism, but i expect that definition will come later. a bit like how the slave trade was first totally ‘justified’ by religious, racial and other myths, and then later described as ‘racist’. at some point, many westerners believed that their genes or skin colour gave them some sort of spiritual and/or intellectual superiority to other ‘races’, and enslaving people or taking over their countries was more like a favour, a civilizing effect. they sugar-coated this kind of racist self-deception with terminology such as ‘the white man’s burden’, and a host of other ideological justifications. the act of plunder was described as some kind of civilizing mission.

remnants of this kind of mind game remain today in the western discourse on iran. the ordinary american is more likely to see iran and iranians as ‘irrational’ beings who cannot be trusted with a nuclear bomb. but they are a little more subtle than that. knowing full well the racist connotations in openly labeling other countries and cultures as ‘irrational’, they apply further sugar coating by going one step removed and using a term like ‘dangerous’ instead.

if we look out for the terms ‘danger’, ‘threat’ and ‘risk’ in any report or speech on iran by israeli and western media and politicians, it becomes quite clear that the agenda is for the conflict situation to persist – particularly, in the minds of their own citizens. the politicians themselves are fully aware of realities on the ground.

what is this reality? well, we all have our own perceptions, but mine is this:

iran is and has been acting far more rationally than her enemies would like to admit. her priorities have included
-          protecting iran and the regime
-          challenging the power of israel – a proven regional warmonger - and building alliances in the region to contain israel and her allies and arming them in order to create a buffer zone for iran
-          working against american interventionism and warmongering in the region. building a global alliance against american imperialism
-          growing her influence in iraq once saddam’s regime was removed, and preparing the ground to take over as the biggest foreign sponsor once the americans leave iraq,
-          same as above for afghanistan only with less success
-          building up her own armaments industry,
-          finding ways to defeat or weaken sanctions,
-          building up political capital among muslim nations,

-          developing nuclear capability mainly within internationally allowed rules, but remaining vigilant of the iaea and other un agencies as they often behave like tools of american imperialism, and
-          adopting, and speaking from a position of strength rather than servitude

nothing about iran’s regional policy is particularly ‘irrational’. iran could have been more strategic and effective, and could have taken a more conciliatory path. all that may have been possible if one allows for the remote possibility that her foes would have reacted differently. but khatami perhaps proved the opposite.

in any case, while the iranian approach might have been better, it has not been irrational. on the contrary, iran’s military expenditure as a percentage of gdp and her overall tendency to war is far more humane and rational than that of the us or israel. iran’s military architecture is designed and built for defensive purposes. the us military is designed for offence, so much so that they could not respond effectively to a natural disaster such as hurricane katrina at home.

in other words, the us military structure is designed for plunder and loot in the name of ‘rationality’, ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. take your pick.

truth is, we are all equally irrational!


Recently by Niloufar ParsiCommentsDate
US media double standard
Jul 21, 2010
patriot dog
Jul 13, 2010
the trouble with capitalism
May 24, 2010
more from Niloufar Parsi
No Fear

Oh man... you are too easy.

by No Fear on

Thank you for honoring me with your " categorization" and the privileged to be an Iranian supporting his government. This coming from someone who does not fit in any category is a blessing. Anyway, all niceties aside;

I went through specifics about our oil industry with you and you come back with this;

"It's rather survival business. Much like in a pyramide scheme. Of course as long as there are new suckers, the pyramide scheme works, but it can't go on forever. "

How do you expect me to take you seriously and spare you the insults when you write meaningless garbage like the above? What the hell is that anyway? Try to make an educated and informed statement next time rather than an opinion which is merely better than a farce.

Once again, try this for your new mental challenge, building ( Purchasing ) expensive oil refineries when our country has the largest natural gas field in the world, does not seems like a sound economic decision to me. 

Besides, considering that the cost of gasoline in Iran is hugely subsidized, building a refinery which has to sell its product at discounted price is creating a bigger problem than before. Because now you have an Industry which is operating at a complete LOSS. The only solution is to eliminate all subsidies before you can invest in core industries.

Which part of the above statement is hard for you to comprehend?

You concluded ;

"And to me you suffer from severe exposure to the mollah culture of haghir parvari and gedaa parvari and satisfaction for the least you can be. That is why you are so "proud" of the very least that Iran can be."

I am sorry if my way is different than yours who advocates licking the boots of Americans and becoming an extension of their foreign policies to become developed like south korea. You think like a trailer trash hoe who believes her pimp will marry her after she works the streets for awhile. South Korea from its existance has lived under serious nuclear attack by the commies since it has allowed US military bases on its soil. The destiny of that nation was closely tied to what happened in Moscow and washington. Thats a pretty hefty price to pay for being someones bitch, don't you think so?  Its all or nothing..... 

Your doughnut is out of jam....


No Fear

by jamshid on

First, I want to say that I put you in a different category of regime supporters. I am still against your views, but at least I know I am not talking to a closet personality who pretends to be something he/she is not.

To answer to your comment. Yes, all countries export resources only to import them in another form. Business do this to, not just countries. But like all business, countries too are in this game for profit and their interest.

Exporting oil to India, only to import it at five times the price is not good profit business. It's rather survival business. Much like in a pyramide scheme. Of course as long as there are new suckers, the pyramide scheme works, but it can't go on forever. In case of Iran, as long as there is oil, the IRI can keep going no matter how incompetent they are.

You wrote:

"You suffer from severe lack of information when you analize world's events emotionally. To me, you are just misinformed."

And to me you suffer from severe exposure to the mollah culture of haghir parvari and gedaa parvari and satisfaction for the least you can be. That is why you are so "proud" of the very least that Iran can be. Your mind cannot even phatom the places that this country could have been today, it is too out of reach for a mind that has been designed to be gedaa and small.

(since you don't speak farsi, translation for haghir and gedaa parvar: smallness and begar rearing.)

Mola Nasredeen


by Mola Nasredeen on

My answer to your question from my blog:

"8. They never take their enemies for granted and would face them with force.

9. They use force to suppress the opposition."


No Fear

Jamshid, try to expand your simplistic views

by No Fear on

You said;

"I mean think about it for a second. Iran is sitting on the 2nd largest oil reserves of the world, but it imports more than half of its gasoline!"

Is this supposedly cutting edge logic? Is this a reason to feel sorry about Iran? Canada exports timber and wood to china but imports paper products from them. Should canadians start jumping off the bridge now? There are many examples like this in the new global economy. Do your research before making a fool out of yourself.

Iran's recent policies in our oil sector has been to put more focus on natural gas developement since in terms of natural gas resources, Iran is the Saudi Arabia of this market. After the war, emphasis was given to develope pipe networks for internal consumption ( Which will reduce the use of fossil fuel in the power plants ) and to expand these networks in all directions out of our borders with Europe and india in our immidiate sight.

Considering that we were recieving favourable rates for our gasoline purchases from the same companies who were buying our oil, building expensive refinaries were not a priority during Rafsanjani or Khatamis administrations. Such refinary would have been a contradiction by itself since economically , it would operate at a complete loss since gasoline was hugely subsidized in Iran.

"If you ask a regime supporter why, he'll tell you: It's the US and West's fault! To which I say: Exactly! Bingo! You got it right! It is the US that is forcing Iran to import more than half of its gasoline."

I am a regime supporter and i have given you a logical response. Now all i have to do is wait for your illogical response. Once again, By eliminating the energy subsidies like those on gasoline, it will make economical sense to build an oil refinary in Iran again. And this is exactly what Ahmadinejad is doing.

The rest of your sher o ver about who is whose NOKAR, is just pure rubbish. Economics defines the politics in middle east. There is always a logical reason to many events that a shrewd observer can detect and plan their next course of action based upon it.

You suffer from severe lack of information when you analize world's events emotionally. To me, you are just misinformed.




by jamshid on

I agree. The US has hurt Iran under the IRI more than can be imagined. The IRI fullfills foreign interests in the region. Even Saudia Arabia, which is basically a puppet regime of the USA, is not serving the US as well and as much as the IRI is.

I mean think about it for a second. Iran is sitting on the 2nd largest oil reserves of the world, but it imports more than half of its gasoline!

If you ask a regime supporter why, he'll tell you: It's the US and West's fault! To which I say: Exactly! Bingo! You got it right! It is the US that is forcing Iran to import more than half of its gasoline.

But how does the US pull this "miracle"? For example, why can't it do the same to India that today, thanks to Iran's fall in the oil sector, has some of the largets refineries in the world? Why can't the West do the same to the previous regime of Iran in the past?

They will reply: Because they are/were "nokar" of West! But that's just BS. You can't claim that all of the countries of the world are nokar of the West, now can you?

The real answer is that the US can pull this miracle with inside help. The inside help is in the form of incompetent, backwarded, clueless, irresponsible and corrupt people in charge of the IRI.

The IRI is one of the best willing "nokars" the West has found in a long time. Even the Saudis are relatively independent and protective of their interests in comparison with the IRI.


Khomeini in the early days of the revolution said:

by lombriga on

“All the magazines have written that when their reporters went to investigate the situation inside Iran, they witnessed that Iran was a country whose population, in a peacefull manner, numbering in many millions of people throughout the whole country began to peacefully march, men, women and children, old and young marched in the strees  and they all were demanding that they didn’t want this Shah. We will assume that the Shah is a very wholesome person, very correct person and very willing to serve the people. Well, when the people do not want such a servent to serve them he shoul step aside. We will assume that the Shah has done everything for the benefit of the country, he wants to grant people freedom, he wants to make the country independent from others, the wants to progress the country to an advanced civilization, all of these we assume to be genuine, and then the population of this country says that they don’t want him to be their ruler. The destiny of the people of a country is in their own hands, they say ‘We don’t want a servant like this. He should step aside. We ourselves will select someone else’. We assume that even if the ruler was like any other human being and for example, like any other being had a little of humanity, still the people of a country would have the right to say that ‘We do not want this public servant, this very honest and decent man who wants to turn our country into the highest Heaven, we don’t want him to turn our country into the highest Heaven’. Don’t they have the right to say that ? Isn’t it a Human Rights Charter that every human being has the right to determine his/her own destiny ? Well these people want to determine their own destiny and they don’t want this Mr. public servant!”




by jamshid on

"Imagine if one of these losers would ever find himself/herself in a position of power one day."

Ok, fine, we are brute losers. Now, would you mind telling us what do you call those that actually are in power in Iran right at this moment?

Mola Nasredeen

نیلوفر خدا خرو شناخت که بهش شاخ نداد!

Mola Nasredeen

Their childish attacks continues like a bunch of hysterical bullies who know they have nothing to offer but blurbing nonstop nonsense. Imagine if one of these losers would ever find himself/herself in a position of power one day.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Well said. The IRI types sacrificed all Iran had for the right of arbade keshi. They sacrificed our international respect; hundred of thousands of lives; billions of dollars and freedom so they could take a bunch of hostages. 

Great they got the hostages (useless) and Iranian people got the shaft. They still don't see it because they think gave the us the finger! In reality the US politicians are laughing all the way. They keep Iran weak and suck our blood. Meanwhile some morons gets t scream "Death to America" and make asses out of themselves. It makes me shocked to see people actually think this is a good deal!


Niloufar Parsi

by jamshid on

"but to go that giant step further and blame 'foreigners' for the iri itself is to me the height of denying the realities of iran."

It seems that your views are limited to a small circle of people. I don't just blame foreiegers for the IRI, they are doing what any other country does, namely to benefit their own countries. However, I do blame, the IRI for willingly bending over and getting shafted, left and right.

The IRI has put Iran in such unfavorable postion, that they find themselves forced to buy 50s technology at the price of 21st century technology.

Thanks to the IRI, the US is shafting Iran in much worst ways than even under the Shah. They are having the last laugh while the likes of you are so blind as not to see how they have managed to screw Iran by using the IRI.

Because of folks like you, the US , China, Russia, the list is long, are getting fatter, while Iranians are getting thiner by the days.

Oh, but since you are doing some chest beatings and arbadeh keshi, that makes it all ok. I rather the IRI pull the multitude of foreign shafts out of itself, even if it means no more chest beating and arbadeh keshi.


The Truth About IRI

by Parsagarda on

Niloufareh Nazaneen,

I already told you I love you and I even nominated you for the President of United States and Iran. I have been reading your posts with much interest. But I still don't see clearly your view of IRI.

You wrote beautifully about the myth of western rationality, but what about the IRI hypocracy, brutality and idiocy? I believe in the notion of Iran and Iranian separate from the mullahs just as I beleive in an America separate and distinct from Geoprge Bush and Rush Limbaugh.

Since IRI has come to power, Iranian culture is under attack. An Arab identity, language and worldview is being enforced by the Arab Mullahs.

Don't you agree? Say more about your views of this notion. I like to hear your insightful thoughts whether we agree or not.

Yours Truly,


Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

why would i do that? voices bothering you in your head?


onlyIran: She is

by vildemose on

onlyIran: She is Khanoomzadeh, don't disrespect her. Don't you know her family members are Sepahi???


NP: bla...bla...bla.. How

by vildemose on

NP: bla...bla...bla.. How very Sepahi of yours. I wouldn't expect anything less from an IRI supporter. Enjoy your ride while you can and spend the stolen money, khanoomzadeh.

I will be around to expose you for the deeply hypocritical fraud that your are.

Now go rape and torture more prisoners...



by Onlyiran on

I heard that the white sand in St. Lucia was imported from Gaza....

What a shame... I think you better hurry up over there and hold up a sign.  

Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

st lucia was one of my favourites too. beautiful volcanic island. real friendly people too. did you visit the hilton there? it is just something else. with imported white sands too!

listen kid: whatever your political opinion may be you are entitled to it by virtue of being a human being with basic rights. what your under worked brain does not get is the fact that i am one too. the reason why you sound so idiotically hysterical all the time is nothing to do with my opinions. it is to do with your myopic view of the world and your intolerance for the views of others. 'islamist' is a more fitting description for you kid because the nastiness that it is meant to convey (it conveys little at all with any meaning) is your forte. all i see you do around this place is act like a heavyweight mobster. problem is you are actually a lightweight nitwit with real bad 'islamist' attitude and that is why i ignore you most of the time. this is the last time i address you.


Rapist loving Sepahi NP: I did not want to

by vildemose on

NP: I did not want to punish Islamists such as yourself  by sending you to Caribbean, I wanted you to enjoy your stolen money so much and be extremely happy there so you won't ever think of ever coming back. I would also like to send all the mullah to Las Vegas to get over their sexual hang ups and enjoy their lives and leave Iran alone.

I have been to Caribbean many times. St. Lucia is my favorite place.

Now, go torture and rape some more prisoners....

Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

i basically agree. the only point was that the regime cannot be described as 'arab' or 'anti-iranian' or some such foreign description. such descriptions of iri as 'alien' are misleading and simply incorrect.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


well then by your argument the Pahlavi's come from Iranians right? How about the Bush dynasty coming from Americans. Stalin from Russia? Why did they all get replaced.

Power is often grabbed in a political game.  Many times there are lots of forces at work and one wins. The others sit there brooding waiting for their time. In 1979 we got very close to having the Marxists take power. 

Lets just assume that the clerics came from people in 1979. That was over 30 years ago. Things have changed but the clerics have not. That generation is a minority now. There is no reason to think today's generation wants them. That is why free elections are important. That allows non violent change of power. IRI by not allowing them is leaving no choice but a violent change. It is like a boiling kettle. The top will blow. The longer they wait the harder it will go when it does.

Now time will tell.

Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

i know where you are coming from. and it is a real dilemma we face. war crimes, mass murder, sanctions, loot, plunder have all become the hallmark of those countries claiming to be the vanguards of 'democracy', 'freedom', 'human rights', 'secularism', you name it. 

but you should be clear about one thing in this place: the violent right-wing views that you see expressed here (even on a personal level they sound violent. imagine them in government...!) have very little to do with majority iranians. we have a group of extremists totally in bed with israeli and american agendas, and half of them don't even know it. a little like the last passengers on the titanic: the poor things were thinking that they got it made and that their ship was unsinkable because it was so big.

but pls don't make the mistake of thinking that they speak for the majority of iranians outside or inside iran. they don't. their only plan seems to be to remain on the sidelines, and some of them tend to latch onto the bloodied skirt of uncle sam in the hope of catching some crumbs when the time comes. what they don't realise is that a traitor remain a traitor even in the eyes of his foreign master.


Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

i worked in the caribbean for 2 years. great place. sounds like you have never been, as it is no punishment at all. beautiful scenery, calypso, reggae,  carnivals, fresh fish, gorgeous beaches, scuba diving, beautiful starry nights. i could tell you so much about it... except that you are such a hateful and childish character. terrible combination.

Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

any regime comes from the people. where else could it come from? getting shafted does not show that they are completely different things. it just shows that one is stronger at shafting and the other is not. the same happens at the work place every day. there is management and there is everyone else. one group gets shafted. but they are part of the same entity, and the shafted tend to want to become the shafters. whatever the ideology of the firm, there will be the reality that some will be in charge and earn more, and others will not. the day we learn to run companies that operate differently, we will have different governments too.

saddam was irqi and kim is korean, and khamenei is iranian. none of these could have ruled any other country in my opinion. 


Niloufar Parsi

jamshid khan

by Niloufar Parsi on

you wrote:

"It looks like IRI's foreign masters and half masters have succeeded in
separating the government from the people in Iran, and installing one
that is serving foreign interests, instead of the people's will. "

this is really interesting. one of your main criticisms of me has been that i allegedly blame everything on foreigners and divert attention from the struggle inside iran. but here, you actually claim that the iri has 'foreign masters'. i think this statement of yours is much more 'daei jan napelon' than anything i have ever written. i see american plunder of our neighbours and americans and israelis threatening to attack iran, and i take it seriously. one of the most enduring images in my head about the american military is the videos i saw of soldiers blasting all living things to smithereens while listening to the deafening sound of 'burn mother burn' in iraq. i don't want that mother to be iranian. 

but to go that giant step further and blame 'foreigners' for the iri itself is to me the height of denying the realities of iran. i am afraid it is you who shows paranoia about foreigners. i am concerned with the deadly reality of actual warmongers threatening iran. 


Niloufar Parsi

hi mehrban

by Niloufar Parsi on

sorry for late response.

the point about marx not being working class was that the leaders of such movements are often not working class. also, i did not say that the iranian revolution was marxist. i said it was done in the name of the poor. you had mentioned that some rich people are/were also supporters of the revolution/regime, and my point was that this does not prove or disprove whether the revolution was done in the name of the poor.

class struggle it was for sure, and it remains so today. any struggle requires some kind of ideological underpinning. often, the ideology can mask the class struggle. the tea baggers in the us are an interesting case. if i can hazard a guess, it looks to me like the republicans are trying to drive a wedge between the democrats and the poorer classes by funding and pushing a 'grass roots' movement against obama, and trying make him look like, well, a kind of elitist fascist with a hitler moustache and other rather elementary tactics that appeal to a palin-like intellect. it is bound to blow up in their faces one day. the islamic part of the iranian revolution has also threatened to backfire on several occasions, and the iranian regime has had to face such consequences over the years. a kind of catch-22.

regarding 'welfare class', you could say the same about any country with a welfare system, namely almost all western countries. some would argue that one of the main purposes of the welfare system is to co-opt the poor to the cause of the rich. but your point about protection for the ruling class, again, it is similar to the tea baggers. (i really like how maher describes them!) and it is similar to how most revolutionary leaders have acted. they cannot otherwise hope to succeed.

your point about the ownership of the mean of production, i think this is where marx got it wrong. he romanticised about the working class like they were the agents for bringing about some ideal form of government. this is very unlikely to happen, and we have seen no evidence for it. where the poor do take over the reigns of power - in whatever size or form - they are just as likely to be regressive as they are progressive. this is Not meant as an argument for 'elitist' politics. i only mean that there is a need for more than a single class to be involved, and in any case, technology will lead to fewer and fewer of the typical working class type in the future.

as for the data, i am afraid i don't have the time right now, but may try some time later. you may want to have a look at this though: know thy economy!


Was Rosie

Ah, well, Ben, you know me....

by Was Rosie on

I like preaching. I'm sure I'll love the sermons. lol

ps It's called 'take a look at my blogs", Ben.. Your profile is your biographical information in the account only.

lol again



by benross on

What do you mean by 'on your own page'?

I don't know what it's called. If you click on my name you go to my profile or whatever, with a list of so called 'blogs' of mine. They are not really blogs. Some material I transported there from previous discussions to be found easier later on (by myself mostly). But nothing important. I prefer to impact the dynamics of discussions otherwise by writing blogs I feel like I'm preaching. (It would be that way!)


Thanks dear VPK

by Souri on

If I'm still around it's because I enjoy reading those precious comments from you, Jamshid,Vildmose, Mehrabn and some other great contributors. It is very comforting to see how you all,  debate with this bankrupt group and fight against their curruptive ideology.


who put those "freaks in

by truthseeker on

who put those "freaks in power" who put in the shah so the islamic rev would happen who never planned on making iraq work who let iran have nuc reactors in the first place. who is now putting the economic squeeze on them. once more the west and their end-timer rulers get what they want as always devide and rule devide and destroy. they rape women children and even babies in iraq they have death camps and torture chambers but that is okay. hollywood covers for them while still having the cheek to bitch holocaust. they are  above us all. (as tony blair said here you are either with us or against us. i am non-violentily against you times a billion and more. tony.)

but u r right they are no muslim countries yet to many false muslim they are cowards and crooks they have no spine. they won't protect women like they are there sister, they won't protect children like they're there own. they won't fight back in the west the right way, not with bullets or bombs but with the truth! as that is the most dangerous weapon going! u can always win as along as you have that!

plus they did not learn these crimes from the prophet (pbuh) he would have been the first to stand up and put a stop to all of this once and for all! like jesus he was a great man. he was a jesus would not turn the other cheek. he had a spine he was spartacus with a prayer rug!  


NP: I would like to see the

by vildemose on

NP: I would like to see the likes of you and those who share your twisted ideology rounded up and sent into exile somwhere in the Caribbean. You don't get to decry free speech while your criminal and crooked family members deny it to Iranians.

 I will expose you for your devious, twisted and diabolical logic and pure treachery.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


does things like execute young girls because it is run by freaks. A bunch of Islamic fanatics with a never ending thirst for Iranian blood. This was the gift of Shariati and his idiot followers to our people. The morons who went and followed Khomeini and the Mullahs. That is why. This has nothing to do with the West and its black ops. It has to do with a bankrupt religion and its desperate priests.

No one is going to be able to give you an excuse for why they do this stuff. It is evil and inexcusable. One day every one of these freaks is going to get dragged in front of a court to explain why they murder young Iranians. Why do they have such a need for blood.

To those who will now jump on the Israel thing: don't bother. The Mullahs are far more interested in beating the weak and the helpless. They are not going to attack and armed to the teeth Israel. An Islamist will rather rap a helpless girl than to attack the Israeli army. They learned it from their prophet.

So much for the despicable IRI.