"The Whole World is Watching" - But This Isn't the Sixties

Whatever is happening in Iran is messy. Tehran hospitals say 19 people were killed today. My guess is that the real body count is closer to the 150 mentioned in "unconfirmed reports." (CNN) I think this may be a Middle Eastern conflict where the lions of Islam want to claim as few kills as possible.

And a suicide bomb went off today. At a shrine of Iran's revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Killing three people. (Reuters)

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but considering that this is likely to fire up people who revere Ayatollah Khomeini, and it got reported on Iran's state television, my guess is that whoever wound up the bomber and pointed him at the shrine was working for the current Supreme Leader.

"The Whole World is Watching"

On this side of the Atlantic, President Obama told Iran, "The whole world is watching." If you think you've heard that slogan before, you're probably remembering the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago. "The whole world is watching" was chanted by demonstrators before the violence that you probably heard described as a "police riot." (jo freeman.com: see Background, below)

It's true enough: quite a few people around the world are watching. And showing support for those in Iran who aren't entirely satisfied with the Islamic Republic's leadership.

Although that quote from the sixties is appropriate in this context, I don't think that a 'sixties' approach to the violence in Iran makes all that much sense.

Welcome to the 21st Century

Quoting from this blog's description:

"...The Cold War, WWII, and WWI are over. The 19th and 20th centuries' class conflicts and colonial issues are behind us. 'Oppressed proletariat' and 'European expansionism' are no longer relevant. Religious fanatics want their beliefs to rule the world. Free people want to stay that way...."

I'm aware that decisions and actions have consequences.

We will be living with the results of the treaty of Versailles' arbitrary drawing of national boundaries in places like Africa for the foreseeable future. Today's conflict between the children of Abraham in the Middle East can reasonably be traced back thousands of years.

But we're living in the early decades of the Information Age. Attitudes, slogans, and ways of perceiving the world that might have made sense fifty years ago don't necessarily fit today's reality.

Two years ago, I watched journalists and others struggle with the idea that terrorists might not be poor and uneducated people, ground under the heel of oppressor plutocrats.¹

We seem to have gotten through that learning experience rather well. I think most people who have been paying attention realize that we're living with "a better class of terrorist" today. (July 8, 2007)

Should America Get Involved?

My sympathies are with the people whose friends and relatives are being killed by the Islamic Republic's enforcers. I hope that the conflict will be resolved soon.

But I do not think that America, or Britain (" 'the most evil' of Iran’s enemies" according to the Supreme Leader (NYT)), or any other country should get involved.

The way I see it, at this point the Ayatollahs are doing a fine job of tearing apart their own government. My guess is that their brutal attempts to suppress criticism of their dubiously-legitimate election are alienating many Iranians. It's not a good sign when a young, energetic, courageous Iranian says "...'To hell with Iran,' ... 'This is not my government. This is not my country.'..." (June 15, 2009)

Not good if you're an Iranian Ayatollah, that is.

Related posts:

• "Iran, YouTube, Twitter, Technology and the Human Spirit"
  (June 19, 2009)
• "Iran: Election Fraud, 'Death to America' and the Information Age"
  (June 19, 2009)
• "North Korea, American Journalists, the Internet, and Power to the People"
  (June 16, 2009)
• "Iran: Win the Election, Lose the Country?"
  (June 15, 2009)
• "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Re-Elected: No Surprise"
  (June 13, 2009)
• "Iran, Islam, "Arrogant Powers" and "Certain Expansionist Superpowers," and Common Sense"
  (May 30, 2009)
• " 'Islamic Mercy:' Roxana Saberi Free, Returning to Fargo, North Dakota"
  (May 11, 2009)
• "Iran Has Heavy Metal for Bomb, No Bomb: Yet"
  (March 1, 2009)
• "Castro, Cuba, Guevara, Traditional Gatekeepers, and the Information Age"
  (January 30, 2009)
• "Ahmadinejad Wants America to Apologize: This is News?"
  (January 28, 2009)
• "Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel, Iraq, America, Bush and Obama: Simple? Not!"
  (January 11, 2009)
• "Terrorists as an Oppressed Class: That was Then, This is Now"
  (February 23, 2008)
• "The War on Terror: It's Not All Uneducated Muslims and Attacks on America"
  (February 23, 2008)
• "Starvation, Poverty, and Perceptions"
  (July 18, 2007)
• "A Better Class of Terrorist"
  (July 8, 2007)
• "Doctors, Terrorists, and the Proletariat: What's a Person to Think?"
  (July 3, 2007)

News and views:

• "Iran police clash with defiant protestors"
  AFP (June 20, 2009)
• "Saturday: Updates on Iran’s Disputed Election"
  The Lede, The New York Times News Blog (June 20, 2009)
• "Chaos prevails as protesters, police clash in Iranian capital"
  CNN (June 20, 2009)
• "Rallies in France, Germany, U.S. support Iranian demonstrators"
  CNN (July 20, 2009)
• "Bomb kills two at Khomeini shrine: Iran TV"
  Reuters (June 20, 2009)
• "Iranian-Americans suffer a jumble of emotions"
  CNN (July 20, 2009)
• "Suspicions behind Iran poll doubts"
  BBC (June 20, 2009)
• "Khamenei: rallies must stop"
  Financial Times (June 20, 2009)
• "Obama to Iran: 'The whole world is watching' "
  CNN (June 20, 2009)
• "Iran opposition leader calls for purge of 'lies' "
  Reuters (June 20, 2009)
  • The headlined leader is Mousavi
  • "EDITORS' NOTE: Reuters and other foreign media are subject to Iranian restrictions on their ability to report, film or take pictures in Tehran."
• "19 protesters reported dead in Tehran"
  UPI (June 20, 2009)
• "Ayatollah Taps Into Distrust Rooted in History"
  The New York Times (June 19, 2009)
• "Iran's supreme leader warns protesters"
  CNN (June 19, 2009)

Background

• "Confrontation at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago"
  Jo Freeman.com, CWLW herstory/Chicago Women's Liberation Union, University of Illinois at Chicago
  • (Whoever said American academia didn't encourage diverse opinions? Provided they're the correct opinions, of course.)

---

¹ Not all 'intelligent' people had quite that thoroughly Marxian a world view: but I think elements of the 'class struggle' view of human affairs were strongly represented.