The president of Iran, according
to a recent report, wants to meet with the proponents of Occupy Wall Street. This meeting will occur as President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad goes on a media tour during his visit in New York for the
United Nations General Assembly.
In a sense this is an understandable
political move because such a meeting with American activists will
give him an opportunity to highlight discontent within the United
States. On the other hand... it seems as if Ahmadinejad may not
understand the Occupy movement any better than American politicians.
Who exactly would he plan on meeting with? Occupy Wall Street has
never had any centralized leadership and having a hundred members of
that movement asking him questions or having a dialogue with him
would really not be representative of that movement as a whole. This
is even assuming the particular occupiers he meets with are not
somehow screened in advance for the purpose of political theater.
Occupy Wall Street was largely
initiated by anarchists and with anarchistic principles. To a large
extent the movement remains anarchistic despite being watered down
with milquetoast liberals and Ron Paul fanboys. So what in the world
could the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran expect to find in
common with such a movement? The corruption of Wall Street and the
U.S. government does not at all suggest that the movement is on the
same side as, or in favor of, a repressive theocratic government.
And let's face reality... if this sort of movement had manifested in
Iran it
would have been attacked by the government of that land, and it's
media, just as the movement was attacked by the U.S. government and
it's media. Quite arguably the attacks on such a movement would have
been worse in Iran. Also, certainly, the
participation of women would have served as extra motivation to
crack down on this movement if it had manifested in Iran.
Don't get me wrong... I'm sure there
are plenty of freedom-loving people in Iran. I suspect that many
Iranians haven't even had their ethics or morality corrupted by
theocratic interpretations of religion. Iranians deserve peace and
prosperity just like all other populations. But the national
leadership of Iran, the theocratic rule of the so-called “Leader of
the Revolution,” is undoubtedly just as corrupt as the leadership
offered by the politicians in the United States. Overt criticism of
Ali Khamenei, within the borders of Iran, is likely to be even more
risky than overt criticism of politicians within America. Insomuch
as the Iranian government works to stay in power by keeping the
Iranian population repressed... the Iranians have much in common with
those living within the borders of the United States – who are also
repressed by politicians doing whatever they can to stay in power.
So while I find the government of Iran to be corrupt and abusive of
Iranians, I am in solidarity with the common population of Iran in
the same way that I am in solidarity with the common populations of
all lands.
The issue at hand isn't whether or not
I believe that Iran
is threatened by the military forces of the West, it is. And the
issue isn't whether or not Iranians should have self-determination in
the lands where they dwell. My point of contention is with the
Iranian government – the destructive projects it undertakes and the
oppressive tactics it uses to suppress the Iranian people. This is,
as an anarchist, the same issue I have with the U.S. government. And
so, when the President of Iran wants to meet with a group of
representatives from a movement that I've generally supported... I
am very skeptical of the motivations for any such meeting.
It seems to me that such a meeting is
not at all intended to really help either the people of Iran or the
people within the borders of the United States. On the contrary, I
see such a meeting as detrimental to both populations. As I
mentioned in the opening paragraph, this meeting will give the
opportunity to present the United States as a corrupt entity to the
people back in Iran. The state media in Iran can point out all the
corruption that people in the United States must deal with and the
generally flawed system under which they live. No mention of the
similar corruption in Iran will be mentioned in such a propaganda
piece and, therefore, the United States will be presented as a lesser
nation than Iran. The idea will be that “things are rough all over
and even if you are a bit discontent with this government... the
government elsewhere is just as bad or worse.”
In the United States... the Occupy
movement, just because a few supposed representatives of that group
intend to meet with the representative of such a corrupt and abusive
Iranian system, will be painted as naïve (and possibly as being
proponents of such a system themselves). And, truth be told, it
probably is pretty naïve for members of a liberation movement to
meet with a corrupt leader of a foreign government. Sure, he'll
agree with them about every criticism of the United States that is
put forward, and yes, the United States often takes an unnecessarily
hostile position towards Iran, but the President of Iran is not an
ally of humanity. It's as simple as that. The enemy of your enemy
is often not your ally.
In fact, the government of the United
States and the Iranian government have much more in common with each
other, and work much more closely together, than is often considered.
Even the incessant sabre-rattling and talk of war between these two
nations may be little more than a tool used to control the
populations in these countries. Such posturing would certainly serve
to pump up arms sales. And the relationship between the governments
of Iran and the United States, as hostile as it may often seem,
actually serve to stabilize and control the price of oil. The fact
of the matter is that the governments within both nations actually
profit (both politically and financially) because of the positions
they maintain relative to each other. They shine a bad light on each
other to make themselves look more moderate by comparison and, in so
doing, they reinforce their own power and control.
If I didn't know better... it might
even be possible to suspect that the American banking industry was
financing Ahmadinejad's meeting with the Occupy Wall Street
protesters. Hell, they could even hire their own stand-ins for the
movement to ask all the same old questions and present all the same
old legitimate critiques. And, again as stated above, this would
play out on Iranian television to serve the Supreme Leader's
propaganda interests and in the United States it would be presented
as the Occupy movement cozying up with the authoritarian leadership
of oppressive governments. However... this meeting does offer some
better possibilities.
A real line of questioning from the
Occupy movement in the U.S. would go something like this... “How
has the Occupy movement manifested itself in Iran and how has the
Iranian government dealt with it?” If Ahmadinejad denied it's
existence there, a follow up could be about more general protests
there and how the Iranian Assembly of Experts deals with such
protests. And, at this point, any proponents of the Occupy Wall
Street movement should repeatedly ask about things like “The
Chain Murders” and the
execution of political prisoners in 1988.
The effect of such a line of
questioning, while perhaps seen as impolitic by some, would be to
actually show solidarity with the people of Iran. We could show that
we know about their struggles and in many ways, they are the same as
our struggles. This would solidify the Occupy Wall Street movement
as an international movement and not something merely looking for a
few reforms in the United States. We can show that we recognize the
harm that Wall Street is doing around the world and how it acts in
coordination with oppressive governments around the world.
Because of modern social media
technologies, it's likely that these questions and this information
would still reach the general population of Iran. Such a line of
questioning would serve to undermine the propaganda model that is
currently in place which works to keep people under all governments
ignorant about ideas of freedom, peace, and revolution. This is a
general project which needs to be undertaken while the opportunity is
at hand – because we don't know when new forms of media will come
under tighter control by the controlling powers.
And, finally, I should point out that
this proposed meeting between Ahmadinejad and the proponents of
Occupy Wall Street first came to my attention on the Drudge
Report – which continues to be a very popular source of news
and which is generally considered to be right wing website. So the
negative association between the Occupy movement and the Iranian
government is undoubtedly already being put forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment