Uprising in Iran

Channel 4 news is calling it another 'revolution' (although their reporter there said 'maybe it's too early to call it that'...). It's clear that they're trying to make a lot of this, and no doubt the US etc will try and make some gains through these events. It seems as though the US is currently holding off directly criticising events, just saying they're 'very concerned' about events, not that they condemn them or anything..

Is there a revolutionary way of intervening in this from abroad, though? Currently it seems that there is naught to do until things settle down and the media blackout is dropped.

Well there are a lot of people outside of Iran (more tech savvy than I am), apparently working to provide internet proxies to people inside Iran, so that they can share information and operate outside of the government's reach.

I don't think the media blackout is as complete as the Iranian government would like people to think.

Oh and apparently Mousavi is calling for a general strike tomorrow.

While the development in Iran today is a welcome development for revolutionaries around the world, we sholud be cautious of the danger that the working class will succumb to the factional infightings between the two major factions of the ruling class in Iran and in the mystifications of democracy and "clean" elections. As of now, the main character of the protest movements in Iran is inter-classist and very much influence with democratic mystifications.

However, the report from the ICC's section in Turkey is very informative.

Our intervention as internationationalists should focus on helping the Iranian proletariat to act and decide their struggles independent from the control or influence of any factions of the Iranian capitalist class -- administration or opposition. In other words, Iranian proletariat should launch independent movements there and as much as possible relate to the proletariat outside Iran especially in Western Europe where the proletarian struggles are relatively strong and widespread..

Devrim

http://riseoftheiranianpeople.wordpress.com/

Could become an interesting site.

Devrim

thx

According to eyewitnesses on the BBC this morning there was a demonstration by medical workers outside the hospital where the wounded (and dead?) were taken yesterday, against the security forces.
When asked on Newsnight last night whether just the "middle classes" were involved, the reporter managed to mention everyone else except the working class. Very little news, on the mainstream media, so far about the working class.
There were reports last night of unrest spreading to other major towns.

Iranian state press have announced seven deaths after an 'attack on a military facility' which was some kind of training camp connected to the revolutionary guard. Considering that their members have been attacked in the street and turned out of demos this is hardly surprising.

Huh? Who attacked the military facility? What members are you talking about? I dont get it...

The above article is now on our English language site.

http://en.internationalism.org/icconline/2009/6/iran

Comments welcome...

The Basij militia, loyal to the government, have been on the streets attacking demonstrators with wooden staves and iron bars.
I think what Jef is talking about is the peaceful demonstration in front of a compound linked to the Revolutionary Guard, when the latter opened fire, first in the air and then into the crowd when it threw stones back. The BBC reported the event in the correct sequence but Iranian TV showed the crowd throwing stones and the guard apparantly responding with gunfire. Ironic really, because the BBC developed the "reverse sequence" trick during the miners' strike.

Just an interesting aside: The Guardian reports today that two US thinktanks said that the result was consistent with their polling weeks before the election. In the Washington Post they wrote: "While western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about ... Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead".

There seems to be weighty criticism from the demonstrators towards Mousavi but democracy remains a danger opening up the way for widescale repression, which is already underway at this level.

Wasn't only stones; the building was set on fire, and a Molotov cocktail was thrown.

A piece by Azadi Omid. For the couple of readers here who can understand Polish :-))))
http://cia.bzzz.net/wybory_w_iranie

Anyone got any better sources than those associated with the ICC mentals?

Anyone got any better sources than those associated with the ICC mentals?

This kind of sectarianism seems especially unfortunate when we experiencing something of a real movement (not to minimize that this is certainly starting as a middle class movement),

I haven't read it, because it's by the ICC, and they are bonkers and pointless. God forbid anyone should be sectarian towards the ICC...

I've been getting dispatches from a comrade-of-a-comrade (meaning I don't exactly know their political perspective) in Tehran. They're having a hard time sending them with the government randomly shutting down various means of telecommunication.

The dispatch in the a.m. hours on Sunday, June 14th, said this:

"Today there is a call for a general strike."

I read elsewhere that a one-day work stoppage was called for today (Tuesday), but haven't heard anything subsequently. Has anyone heard any news?

For International Solidarity,

Hieronymous

PS I know this account is pretty dated, given the fluidity of the situation there. It seems like all means of communication have been blacked out for the last 1 1/2 days.

____________________________________________________________

Here's the report from Sunday evening:

First of all, thanks so much for your messages! We share them with friends here, and it gives us strength and morale to know we are not alone!

I know these dispatches are long, but please circulate wherever you think helpful, even if you don't have time to read. It was too dangerous to take photos or video today, but i'm sure there are plenty of images being spread over the net. I don't do Facebook, and it has been officially blocked here, but some are able to access it through proxies. It is a good minute to minute update, and somewhere we have been sending our images.

b
-------------------
TEHRAN, June 14, midnight---The streets of Tehran are under siege. After this coup d'etat, people are remaining in the streets, although today there was severe repression and riot police everywhere. The word revolution is in everyone's mouths, and people are refusing to stay indoors, as the regime and police are asking them to. The fascist apparatus is coming on full force. Riot police are accompanied by Bassiji militants, huge men with beards, dressed in emblematic khaki pants and white button up shirts, with one-meter long wooden batons in hand, and colt pistols. These men, usually hidden on a 'normal' day in the streets to monitor behavior and the dress code, are now working at full force with the police, especially at night.

Today we mostly stayed indoors, although there were some gatherings further into the city. Because Ahmadinejad was holding an official victory rally, where thousands had gathered (although as usual, many were probably brought in by bus from the outskirts of the city), people in opposition were encouraged to stay away. This is mostly because meeting face to face with these people would lead to violent clashes, and more deaths. Although there are no official figures, there have been some deaths. We have heard that 11 were killed yesterday, but there is no way to know.

This is not an explosion or a spontaneous riot. This is not a show of anger or rage. Something bigger is happening, and we can feel that people are preparing for it. Although there is severe repression and fear, people are maintaining their presence in the streets. This is not just an angry reaction to election fraud, but a real movement that is bubbling. The slogans on the street now are mainly 'Death to Dictatorship', and people are not afraid to cry this out.

Again, through some accessible weblogs (or others we get through to with filters), and phone calls to others around the city, we gather information. Internet has been virtually cut, although a slow dialup service allows us to send a few emails or read feeds every few hours.

A short list of today's news: Moussavi is still under house arrest; his wife gave a talk today at Tehran University announcing that tomorrow there will be a massive demonstration (for which they will have asked for a permit, which is not sure to be granted); a large number of reformist leaders were arrested, threatened not to make any radical moves or declarations, and then released; SMS services are still deactivated, as are any wave using internet services; Ayatollah Sanei (a reformist, elderly cleric) took to the streets of Qom in protest, wearing a shroud that Muslims are wrapped in when they die; weblogs called for people to stay in the streets and to walk calmly; Tehran and Isfahan Universities were attacked by Bassij militia who severely beat students.

As night fell on Tehran, we went up on the rooftop and along with hundreds of other people began yelling "Death to Dictatorship". You could hear the voices in the dark across the city. Friends who live in other parts of the city reported that in their parts the same was happening. People were also yelling, "Allah Akbar" (which I personally have an extremely hard time saying, but it is a tactical move for people: they need to keep the support of figures like Moussavi, Rafsanjani, Ayatollah Sanei, and others important within the political sphere if their movement is to build and go forward with force). During the 1979 revolution, the movements were leftist, but what is happening today is first and foremost a fight for social and political freedom.

Officially it is illegal to gather, meaning that groups of 3 or 4 people standing together in the street are threatened and hit with batons if they don't move. So the quiet walking continues tonight.

In our street, Bassiji militants have attacked people and beaten their wooden batons onto our doors, insulting us and telling us to get back in the house. They are trying to create fear and hysteria, but people continue to go outside, to walk in the streets, to drive their cars and honk. This will only grow.

But the situation is severe, and the police have been given orders to kill. That said, we are all seeing a clip today of a number of protesters protecting a policeman after he was beaten by a group of protesters, pleading with each other that we are all the same people, that we are all in this country together. Today, I witnessed a few occasions where people were discussing with young policemen in riot gear. At one point a few friends and I conversed with a policeman in his twenties. He was ashamed, and told us that they have been told to shoot to kill, but that they are
'trying hard to keep the situation calm'. He said that he considers us like his brothers and sisters; we told him to drop his weapons and join our ranks. This will hopefully happen soon.

The main problem for us is the plainclothes police, Bassijis, and secret service that are stationed all over the place; on each street corner, as well as around the major squares of the city.

Something is happening, slowly but surely, and the force of the people will only grow each day. Tehran, Isfahan, Mashad, Ahvaz, Shiraz, Zahedan are [sic], and probably more cities in the coming days and weeks.

What we want may take a long time, but it is happening. The walls are covered with "Death to Dictatorship", and it will come to an end.

Latest news:
• Helicopter police have opened fire on a crowd in Haft Tir Square (in central Tehran). We heard that this was with plastic coated bullets, but this is to be confirmed.

• Tehran University is under severe attack; this is the first time that the army has actually entered the university grounds in 44 years.

• The above mentioned, Ayatollah Sanei has come to Tehran from Qom and is maintaining a sit in in Khomeini's home, asking others of the Ulema to join him. This is extremely important; a remnant action from the Constitutional Revolution of 1906.

Well done Vanilla - very succinct summing up of many of the anti-ICC elements shown on here.

I think that the basij police are the loathed religious police distinct from the Revolutionary Guards and other repressive elements, as far as I can make out. The report directly above is interesting for its elements of fraternisation. Some elements of the army were on the streets last night, but appeared to be only cadets, according to the BBC.

BBC world news reports this morning that the "bazaarists", ie, the merchants have threatened a strike, and this would, it says, scare the regime because of their pivotal role in 1979. As far as I can tell there has been no mention of the working class on the mainstream media and the BBC, for all its resources and reporters, seems unable to utter the word or anything like it so far.

A first-hand update from earlier today, Wednesday, June 17th (Note: I don't agree with the reformist implications of this dispatch, but forward it for important on-the-ground information):

(plainclothes police, militia, or paid hitmen?)

TEHRAN, June 17, 02h00---Today brought thousands to the streets again, although protesters changed the initial location of the protest because Ahmadinejad supporters were supposed to gather at the same site. Official state television was calling all peoples of all opinions to gather there, which in Islamic Republic code means: go and fight it out; we will provide the armed militias, and you will provide the targets.

So the peaceful crowd changed their location, making their way from Vanak Square towards Tajrish, in the north of Tehran. Like each day, the protests are illegal, and people afraid of repercussions, but this has not kept them indoors. The government has announced that it will re-count votes, although what has happened to the votes is a mystery. Many have resigned from the Ministry of Interior and most likely the paper ballots we all hand-wrote have either been trashed or tampered with. In any case, it matters little. This is not about the elections, but about a people being mocked and disgraced over and over again by a fascist regime--YES...FASCIST... (with big capital letters, for all those who think otherwise!).

I took the day off from the rally to rest...and to move across the city to hide my video tapes, get internet access at a friend's house, and to converse and exchange ideas about what has happened and what will happen in the next days, weeks, months, and maybe years. We all think that this is a beginning of the formation of a movement towards major systemic change. The last decade, starting with the student movement of 1999, brought about a demand for a REFERENDUM. Yes or No to Velayat-e-Faqih, supreme and divine law as administered by the chosen Ayatollah. This will come with due time - people want a peaceful, yet determined transition, one that will mean change brought about through a long-term people's struggle. Our only hope is that this movement is not stolen or undermined as the 1906 Constitutional Revolution was, as the coup d'etat in 1953 brought an end to Mossadegh's fight, and as the 1979 Revolution turned from a people's (mainly leftist) revolution to an Islamic one.

We are hopeful; people know what they want and are no longer afraid of each other. They have proven that the regime has ultimately failed at crushing our deep-set solidarity. But there is work to be done; there are many cleavages and gaps (both economic and cultural) in Iranian society, and too much trauma to just step nonchalantly towards something new. There are echoes of the past at every corner, and the strength of this time, I believe, is that we all have some memory, a collective memory, of what Iranians have been through together. Even those university students that I met last week, so adamantly calling for equality between men and women, carry some imprint of the aftermath of the revolution or the Iran-Iraq war, even if they were not yet born. People are learning their own history and making use of it.

But there is a lot of work to do. Right now we continue to stay in the streets, in defiance, in opposition, in solidarity, and to show who has power. The immediate demands may be for a cancellation of this election and a revote, but what has surfaced starting during the election campaign is a need for major change, or outright revolt. What people want is not Moussavi, Karroubi, or whoever else. What people want is freedom of expression and speech; freedom to gather; an end to censorship of press, art, film, theatre, and basically everything else you can name; and the right to choose how to live in private and in public, together.

Despite yesterday's killings, and violence in other parts of the country today (and most definitely cases in Tehran that we have not yet heard of), I feel very optimistic and energized today. Even the Bassijis had to stand silently on the sidewalks, having shocked the world with their brutal killings yesterday.

That said the list of repressive actions and events continue. University students are still under attack: two students were thrown off the roof of a building today at Tehran University; the director of Shiraz University resigned; at least 50 reformist leaders have been arrested; police still have an order to kill; SMS messaging, and also cell phone communications are shut down; internet is sporadically closed or slowed with parasites; the spokesperson of the Ministry of the Interior was arrested, most likely because he would have let out some unpleasant information.

These events will accumulate, the country, as we know it, is falling apart, and things are happening.

Two bits of information, one funny and one with exciting prospects:

1) State television continued to publish its phone number at the bottom of the screen, and read SMS messages that they apparently received today; although ALL SMS has been shut down since Saturday!! An oversight or just plain stupidity. Doesn't matter, we had a laugh. This gives you a sense of how the country is run with lies.

2) Sixteen members of the Revolutionary Guard were arrested today for trying to give arms to people within the opposition. Three of these men were veterans of the Iran-Iraq war.

On a not so gay note, please look at this photo: plainclothes police, militia, or paid hitmen. This is what we are up against.

Tomorrow, a massive gathering is planned - to meet at 4 pm at Haft-e-Tir Square. Hopefully I'll have internet access in the late evening to report.

b

cheers Hieronymous for these very revealing reports.

Sixteen members of the Revolutionary Guard were arrested today for trying to give arms to people within the opposition.

that is interesting. Perhaps the first signs of a soon-to-follow coup? Let's hope it doesn't all end with a junto-run "emergency government" that will make Ahmedinejad look like Michael Foot.

I think that comrade sabri's article is misleading. The basic problem is that Iranian situation is not similar to that of Greece, Egypt, Bagladesh or Chinese situations in which workers are the main force. In Iranian case however supporting the movement might have very dangerous consequences. I think one should be able to show the expressions of autonomous actions of working class before arguing for a potential working class orientation in that kind of processes. Otherwise islamic dictatorship versus secular democraticsm or combinations of these can be found in every inter-burgeoisie political clashes in middle east in which only working class suffers.

I think that it quite clearly stresses that this is not a revolt of the working class, and that if the working class does not start to assert itself the revolt has no future without the working class intervening as an autonomus force in it's own intrests.

Yes devrim ok. But what you did say was to equate Greece ot Egypt to Iran in terms of "people's dissatisfaction". As I have tried to explain, both cases were proletarian struggles. And second was from the beggining a worker's action.

One more thing you seem to not understand about students is that unlike musavi in iran they are either part of proletariat (most of the students might be working) or they are going to be a part of it ("600 euro generation" is what Greek students are called since this is the general wage they earn after graduation). So I propose you to not reduce two different thing to one.

and;

This does not mean that there is a 'revolution' happening in Iran today or even that the working class will be able to intervene and play a decisive role in this struggle. Nor does it mean though that it is impossible, it unlikely for this to happen. I believe that the article reflects both these dangers and possibilities well.

Personally I do not believe that for Iran working class there is a possibility to break with burgeoisie alternatives in this situation. and the reasons should have been obvious;

1- Political violence caused by a fight between two burgeoisie fractions itself is never something beneficial for working class to advence its otonomous struggle. On the contrary in most cases oppression is legitimised in that way. History of middle eastern capitalist states is a clear indication of that.

2- In Iran political minorities of the class are either too weak and small -that we even are not sure they exist-. Moreover the groups such as Iranian Communist Worker's Party are sources of confusion.

In that sense the article fails to develop, "necessary analysis and explanation and putting forward a perspective". It is misleading because it is not clearly showing the dangers. I do not think that it is written on the basis of a patient observation. Rather than that the writer seems to be excited with the news coming from stalinist articles and mainstream media and tv's.

one last thing;

In greece and egypt working class interests were at least expressed clearly in the strugle. However "down to the dictatorshinp" and "Allahu ekber" slogans do not seem to show the working class alternative to me...

http://iran.whyweprotest.net/

website of the pirate bay / anonymous project to help the iran opposition to circumvent the draconian media control in iran. a really good initiative.

mikail firtinaci

But what you did say was to equate Greece ot Egypt to Iran in terms of "people's dissatisfaction". As I have tried to explain, both cases were proletarian struggles. And second was from the beggining a worker's action.

Egypt was a mix of both proletarian and liberal struggles. The current round of "people's dissatisfaction" expressed publicly started with solidarity for Palestine and Iraq, developed into the liberal middle-class Kefaye and it was not until they were insignificant that workers' struggles became the centre of opposition. The strike movement has in turn inspired lots of other liberal groups to start opposing the regime. The situation and history of the struggles in Egypt is a bit more complex than you give impression of.

And there have been lots of proletarian struggles in Iran since at least 2002 (several strikes, repression from the state etc.).

I agree with the statement, which of course carries an element of speculation about the role of the working class but there's nothing wrong with this. Khawaga above points to the struggles of the working class - and Iran has a relatively strong working class - since 2002 and these have continued until recently. The question for the latter is the development of the crisis, unemployment and the general decomposition and repression affecting this country and themselves. From news bulletins it seems clear that workers are taking part in the demonstrations but this is as individuals with the danger that they will be subsumed into the faction fight that appears to be going on. What's important is the class enters the struggle with its own demands and fights on its own grounds. No news of it so far though.

Obama has been praised for "playing it cool" over events in Iran. But there is an imperialist aspect to these events - even if in the background - and a certain amount of truth in the claim from the ruling faction of "western interference". It's clear that the USA and Britain have for years being trying to destabilise certain areas of Iran up to using Kurdish terrorist groupings to do so. This again shows the need for an independent working class movement without overestimating its present capability.

Thanks to Devrim for starting this thread Agree with Baboon that this has an international aspect. Just translated IBRP take on it

Iran at the Crossroads
Bourgeois rivalries and the recomposition of
imperialist alliances behind the Iranian crisis

As we write demonstrations are taking place in Tehran and other Iranian cities which are being brutally attacked by the police, flanked by paramilitaries (from the Basiji; A type of militia incorporated into the Pasdaran or Revolutionary Guards) so it is as yet difficult to see how events will unfold. What is certain is that beyond the slogans, and the subjective intentions of the mass of people who have taken to the streets, what is taking place is a bitter confrontation between opposing factions of the Iranian bourgeoisie, each lined up behind one of the presidential candidates, the two principal challengers for the presidency being Moussavi and Ahmedinejad, the latter already loudly proclaimed President. In fact the unusual ferment, especially amongst the young, and particularly in the capital, and with the massive turnout of voters, had given hope to the opposition, but in a vote between the “reformist” Moussavi and Ahmadinejad, the latter was officially confirmed as victor with 63% of the vote. But the unusual speed with which the results were released, and other irregularities, induced the losers to scream that the election was rigged. This was the starting point for the protests, the deaths on the streets of Tehran and Isfahan, the arrests and the restrictive measures against the ex-opposition candidates, who had apparently lost.

That rigging took place and on a huge scale is entirely probable but the victory, if we can speak of victory, of the President, cannot be attributed solely to the tricks and widespread intimidation, both during and after the election, by the Basiji. A powerful instrument of state consensus has been the use of oil revenues to provide social security; an increase in teacher numbers, as well as pensions and subsidies for the poorest socio-economic strata, in order to buy their loyalty to a regime which is both anti-worker and anti-proletarian, notwithstanding the social spending which is only intended to dampen down the misery and continuous economic decline of the proletariat. The Iranian economy is also not immune to the fallout from the structural crisis of capitalism which has, bit by bit, hit all four corners of the planet. The working class of that area are also subject to attacks on living conditions brought on by the entire world bourgeoisie. In Iran the iron fist systematically used against the demonstrations of workers’ struggles by the clerico-fascist regime has aroused the envy of other governments. Perhaps some will remember the tram workers strike in Tehran brutally suppressed as always by the authorities? In Iran too exploitation is increasing – with unemployment rising – wages go down, even if softened by government subsidies, but the dramatic fall in oil prices, if it has not undermined this, has severely weakened it. Moreover the economy is limping along largely because the enormous oil revenues have not been invested in the production of real surplus value, instead going the way (social spending apart) of speculation, the typical feature of contemporary capitalism. The world crisis has thus aggravated the socio-economic problems of the country and the frictions between opposing interests within the different bourgeois factions. Put crudely there are those sectors which more or less look to the family of the Ayatollah Rafsanjani (one of the richest and most powerful in the country), who are tired of the limitations on economic activity imposed by international sanctions and thus desirous of a greater opening towards outsiders. On the other hand, there are those sectors of the bourgeoisie whose power has been strengthened in the last few years. They are favourable to the aggressive policy of Ahmadinejad and their bastions are in the state bureaucracy, the Army and the Pasdaran. It’s worth repeating it – this conflict is just a game played out within the Iranian bourgeoisie even if the “refomers” (in reality they have always been big players inside the clerico-fascist regime) represent the hopes of millions wanting a relaxation of the most vulgar forms of social control that have been in operation for the last thirty years. The stakes are high because, as is well-known, Iran is the fourth highest oil producer in the world, and it sits in the hottest zone for imperialist tensions on the planet. Tehran, even if only as an observer, is part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which represents the countries of Central Asia plus China and Russia (Ahmadinejad in fact participated in the group’s meeting in Russia on June 16) and it is behind organisations like Hezbollah, supports Syria, wants to reduce the weight of the dollar in international transactions, and demands the right to use nuclear power. In practice, according to the USA, it is the “rogue state” par excellence. Its obvious then that all the imperialist powers, big and small are attentively, and even apprehensively, following what is happening because any eventual split in the Iranian ruling class could involve in one way or another the strategic plans of Washington, as well as Moscow or Beijing.

Currently it appears that a partial recount of the votes is being proposed but it is difficult to see that this could overturn the election result; its even less likely that the bourgeois gang now in power will quietly retreat without striking a blow should the count be declared invalid. Sure, the events could take another course if another actor enters the field, an actor never spoken of by the mass media, that is to say the working class struggling for its own interests with its own revolutionary organisations against all the bourgeois factions. But this is an issue not just for Iran...

I think this article is very good. It is showing and analysing the roots, dangers and problems involved in the situation for the working class in that specific situation.

yes, good work

from http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/06/432633.html ... Iran Khodro is the largest car producer in the whole Middle East:

Both Shifts at Iran Khodro on Strike Now!

Workers from Iran Khodro have come out on strike against repression.

First news of workers strikes in protest at the current situation, Iran Khodro car (car plant ) workers have issued a statement : they condemn the repression and say what we are witnessing is an insult to peoples intelligence . Both shifts are on strike. We should welcome this move by one of the most combative sections of the Iranian working class. Workers at Iran Khodro have been in many struggles against the management and the state, for this their leaders have been imprisoned, tortured, sacked and killed.

and here the statement of the Tehran bus drivers' union:

http://www.justiceforiranianworkers.org/?p=594

Do you know any revolutionary libertarian groopes in Iran?
People who support statless comminism and seforgernised proletrian strugle?
Melacholic Troglodytes?

There are some councilists but I do not know any anarchist groups

Grate!
We are friendly with counsilists. My friends are russian counsislists and we strugle together.
Where are iranian councilists ? Haw can i contact with them?

Agree with the IBRP statement above - internationalist, putting the crisis to the fore and pointing to the centrality of the working class, the expressions of which above are to be cautiously welcomed.

There does appear to be some sort of conflict going on within the state apparatus but the main faction holds all the important cards.

US and British imperialism has been "interfering" in Iran since the end of WWII, mounting a coup against the elected regime in the 50s. Both these imperialisms were mainly responsible for the Iran/Iraq war in the 80s, which cost the lives of millions and millions of young men. US policy particularly has been consistent, knocking back and subverting all Iranian attempts at "better relations". Obama made much of his open hand to the Iranian people and his promise to talk. It's quite likely that elements in the State Department have been talking to elements within the Iranian bourgeoisie,not necessarily those of the main faction.

There's a clear threat today to unleash the forces of repression and the only force that could possibly counter this threat is the working class.

Sure, the events could take another course if another actor enters the field, an actor never spoken of by the mass media, that is to say the working class struggling for its own interests with its own revolutionary organisations against all the bourgeois factions. But this is an issue not just for Iran...

Comment
This is troof but this is not enough. It is not deep.
Big croud of workers with ikons, portrait of king and "saint Georgy" leaded by creasy priest was shooted by soldiers... Remember?
That was a beginig of Russian Revolution 1905.

There is no doubt that there is a major inter-bourgeois faction fight going on and that the imperialist powers are inevitably drawn into this, although Obama's caution indicates that it is not a comparable situation to, say, the Ukrainian 'orange' revolution where there was direct backing of the contending factions by the US and Russia. There is also no doubt that the strength of the democratic illusion is a gigantic obstacle to the development of a class movement, and potent means for mobilising the population into a bloody inter-bourgeois conflict.

The question, however, is this: we are currently living in a global period of mounting class struggle and social revolt, and in this context, even if there was a conscious bourgeois manouevre around the elections, aimed at channelling the mounting discontent into support for the 'reformist' faction, there is no guarantee that the bourgeoisie will be able to control the social forces it has unleashed. The appearance of the working class on the scene, which is presaged by the car workers' strike and statement, contains the danger (for our side) that it will be drowned in the general inter-classism. paving the way to direct repression; but it also holds an enormous promise for the development of a movement that seriously questions the false alternatives being offered by the ruling class. I think we have to be open to this possibility and at the same time extremely sober about the perils of the situation.

Alf;

I would like to share your optimism. However working class combaitivity generally follows and do not lead in middle east. Here the level of decomposition is deeper then you might imagine. Nationalism, secterianism etc are too strong. It is not a coincidance that islamism is the product of this region. Social decomposition, Long decades of wars and civil war with no proletarian open rejection, worst forms of state capitalisms, genocides... This is the history of middle east -and indeed capitalism- but we should see the quantitative difference...

That is why I think that in the M.E. the acceleration of the working class movement might be expected to come later than any other parts of the world.

This is the general context I tend to think about any movement in M.E.

Certain groups always say (Such as ICWP) that the revolution is just going to come in Iran. They are saying that since 10 years.

And about the media thing; why any worker's action, such as bangladesh movement did not cause and the Iran issue was a big thing? I think there is much to do with the imperialist conflicts here right?

Finally; when the level of social decomposition, absence of any internationalist political minority and the level of imperialist tensions in the region, I do not think that an isolated action worker's in Iran can seperate itself from burgeoisie political tendency. I hope that it will be otherwise. But the place we should be looking for working class action and autonomity should not be burgeoisie politics...

For take of Avtonom on orange revolution in Ukraine:

http://www.ainfos.ca/04/dec/ainfos00336.html

Iran is in many senses very different but I hope that helps to put things into perspective.

One more thing - specific thing in Iran is that current ruling group has a wide support of rural proletariat as it positions against minority of liberal urban intelligentsia. Thus these demonstrations have more similarity with attempts to out Chavez than with "colour revolutions" of Eastern-Europe.

My guess is that if cops and army fail to disperse demonstrations, things will end somewhat like with Mineriada of Romania in 1990.

live coverage of the protests at the moment on Revolutionary Road: http://shooresh1917.blogspot.com/2009/06/minute-by-minute-with-revolution.html

I would like to share your optimism. However working class combaitivity generally follows and do not lead in middle east. Here the level of decomposition is deeper then you might imagine. Nationalism, secterianism etc are too strong. It is not a coincidance that islamism is the product of this region. Social decomposition, Long decades of wars and civil war with no proletarian open rejection, worst forms of state capitalisms, genocides... This is the history of middle east -and indeed capitalism- but we should see the quantitative difference...

That is why I think that in the M.E. the acceleration of the working class movement might be expected to come later than any other parts of the world.

This is the general context I tend to think about any movement in M.E.

Sorry, but how does this square with the empirical fact of resurgent, albeit still nascent, working class movements in Egypt and Iran. I mean in Egypt they've managed to get independent unions*, which is no small feat under a regime that has monopolized all political and social life since the 1950s.

And Islamism is simply just not a "product of this region" (which is a bit of a weird statement considering Islamism would be a product of those regions that have large Muslims populations. And Islamism did "start" in Egypt AND Pakistan, so again you're not entirely correct), it was directly fostered by various regimes (local, regional and the US) to combat leftist and/or secular-nationalist movements.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the ME is ripe for a working class revolution at any time in the near future, but what is occurring in Egypt and Iran show that not everything is as bleak as you make it out to be. However, in basically the rest of the ME the situation is more or less how you describe it.

*whether this is will turn out to be a good or a bad thing is another issue.

These background remarks on Moussavi vs Ahmadinejad are by the chair of the London-based 'Hands Off the People of Iran' (HOPI), an anti-war coalition of Iranian exiles and supporters.

Again, I'm not in agreement with the political position of this statement, but post it because it's useful information.

Hieronymous

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charades, anyone?
Yassamine Mather
14 vi 2009

The main ‘reformist’ candidate Mir-Hossain Moussavi has declared the elections a “charade” and claimed Iran was moving towards tyranny. Thousands of protesters (not all of them backers of Moussavi) have taken to the streets to demonstrate against the re-election of Ahmadinejad.

Of course, HOPI condemns the arrest of over 900 demonstrators and 100 leading ‘reformists’, most of the latter ones supporters and collaborators of Moussavi.

But we should not forget that Moussavi does not consider the nine previous presidential elections in Iran's Islamic Republic - most of them with very dubious results - a “charade”. In the 2009 election, he did not bat an eyelid when the Council of Guardians disqualified over 400 candidates. He did not think the process was a “charade” when the supreme religious leader intervened time and time again to defend Ahmadinejad.

Even now, although he is furious about losing the elections, he is not calling on the Iranian people to support him. Instead, he is addressing the 'Religious Centres of Guidance' (elite shia Ayatollahs) to denounce the result. He is no fan of democracy and mass movements. Like his predecessor Mohammad Khatami, Moussavi is well aware that the survival of the 'Islamic order' is in his interests. That is why, even when he is clearly a victim of the supreme leader's lunacy, he cannot rock the boat.

Moussavi’s terrible past
After all, irrespective of the illusions of their supporters, Moussavi and the other reformist candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, are no radical opponents of the regime. For eight years, Moussavi served as prime minister of the Islamic republic - during some of the darkest days of this regime. He was deeply involved in the arms-for-hostages deals with the Reagan administration in the1980s, what came to be known as ‘Iran-gate’. He also played a prominent role in the brutal wave of repression in the 1980s that killed a generation of Iranian leftists. During this period, thousands of socialists and communists were jailed, with many of them executed while in prison.

Moussavi has attempted to refashion himself as a 'conservative reformer' or a 'reformist conservative', by expressing his allegiance to the supreme leader and by claiming to have initiated Iran’s nuclear programme, which he promised to continue. He also criticised the release of British navy personal in 2007 as “a humiliating surrender”. Defending his government's anti-Western credentials, Ahmadinejad claimed that “prime minister Tony Blair had sent a letter to apologise to Iran”. Within a few hours, the foreign office in London issued a stern denial that such a letter was ever sent. Moussavi tried to exploit this ‘weakness’.

But he clearly failed. The supreme leader could not tolerate his former protégé Moussavi. Although his politics are almost indistinguishable from those of Ahmadinejad, he was just a bit too ‘progressive’ on two points:

(1) He promised to be more liberal over women’s dress code and said he would expand women's rights – within the parameters proscribed by the religious state, of course.

(2) He promised to use more diplomatic language and a more amenable attitude in dealings with the West, especially the USA. Despite this diplomatic ‘packaging’, however, he remains committed to defending Iran's nuclear program (including the right to enrich uranium).

Mass protests
These elections were a “charade” from the day they started. All four candidates are supporters of the existing system. All support the existing neo-liberal policies and privatisations. All four are in favour of Iran's nuclear programme.

But we should not underestimate the anger of the Iranian population against this blatant manipulation of the results. Iranians had to choose between the lesser of two evils - and when the worse was declared winner, they showed their contempt for the system by huge demonstrations culminating in the massive protests of June 13th 2009.

Until early June, most Iranians had shown little interest in these elections, as they knew that neither candidate would lead to real change. But it was the live TV debates that changed the apathy. The debates between Ahmadinejad/Moussavi and Ahmadinejad/Karroubi have been unique events in the history of the official media of the Islamic Republic. The debates confirmed what most Iranians know through their personal experiences – but which they have not yet heard on the official media:

• Ahmadinejad stated that Iran had been ruled for 24 years (up to his presidency) by a clique akin to an economic and political mafia. 'Elite' clerics such as the reformers Rafsanjani and Khatami had “forgotten their constituents” and were corrupt.

• Moussavi stated that the economy has been in a terrible state, particularly in the last four years.

The situation in Iran is very fluid. Over 900 protesters and 100 'reformist' leaders have been arrested, including the brother of former president Khatami. Moussavi and his wife have gone underground. There are signs of the beginning of an internal coup. Thirty years after the Iranian revolution, if Iran's supreme leader believes he can suppress the opposition, he will be making precisely the kind of mistake that led to the overthrow of the Shah's regime in 1979. The foundations of the Islamic Republic regime are shaking.

The protests of June 13 were the largest demonstrations since 1979. After the euphoria of the last two weeks, when Iranians participated in their millions in demonstrations and political meetings, no state - however brutal - will be able to control the situation. The events of the last few weeks show that there is real hope that the Iranian people can get rid of this regime - be it in the guise of Ahmadinejad or the no less undemocratic and corrupt ‘reformists’.

Today I'm stuck at work and have managed to stay pretty glued to the internet and CNN (I know it's total crap) trying to stay up to date with what is happening in Iran. It appears like the uprising is becoming increasingly generalized rather than focused on the election, however, I am pretty sure that it will not lead to anything resembling communism. So, what is the value in watching how this all plays out? Personally, I am interested in learning as much as possible about how and why the calls for a re-election are becoming a generalized revolt. Why is everyone else paying attention to what will most likely be a process of the Iranian capital and state restructuring itself to survive this moment of crisis? Does anyone know of any texts that would be useful in understanding what is going on?

smg

Why is everyone else paying attention to what will most likely be a process of the Iranian capital and state restructuring itself to survive this moment of crisis? Does anyone know of any texts that would be useful in understanding what is going on?

Good questions.

A study group I'm part of just read Rosa Luxemburg's The Mass Strike and this situation in Iran seems similar in that living under the absolutism of the czar seems parallel with living under the absolutism of an Islamic theocracy. It becomes a political struggle simply to dissent.

Similarities also abound with the anti-dictatorship movement in South Korea in 1987 when student Lee Han Yeol was killed at Yonsei University, sparking a million-strong mass demo in Seoul and thousands of other protests throughout the country, which in turn were a catalyst for a strike wave with 3,479 strikes, most of which occurred from June through September, that paralyzed the economy and forced the regime of Chun Doo Hwan to call for popular elections.

The student movement in Beijing in 1989 was perhaps drawing inspiration from the movement in South Korea, as well as the People's Power movement in The Philippines in 1986 and the strike wave in Taiwan in 1988. The Tianamen Square protests originated with students, but in the end it was mostly workers in the square who were mowed down as unofficial unions were popping up across the country to organize a strike wave that the government was determined to crush.

I doubt that Iran will follow this trajectory of popular protest leading to mass strikes, but who knows? We can only hope.

Is Iran Khodro the only union on strike? The Tehran bus drivers' union has made a statement against the regime, how bought the other unions? How do revolts that start with students and/or political activists transform into a wide spread revolt of the working class? This did not happen in Greece in December 08. Will it happen in Iran?

smg

How do revolts that start with students and/or political activists transform into a wide spread revolt of the working class? This did not happen in Greece in December 08. Will it happen in Iran?

To you last question: who knows?

When Alexandros Grigoropoulos was murdered last December, the Greek uprising was instigated by youth and students. Exarcheia, the heavily anarchist district where he was killed, is where the Polytechnic University is located and where the anti-junta movement was sparked after the massacre of students there on November 17, 1973. That movement grew to include workers. I could be wrong, but wasn't the highlight last December the occupation of the trade union federation offices? And the occupations of all kinds of public buildings, like schools and universities? And the work stoppages?

And look back at France in 1968. The street fighting by students in the Latin Quarter around the Sorbonne University not only drew in young workers, but was the catalyst for the 10,000,000 strong general strike.

Again, we can only hope that something like that occurs in Iran, although it doesn't seem very likely -- unless the Iran Khodro strike spreads to other sectors and workplaces.

But to answer the gist of what you're asking, I think that open revolt against the regime creates a rupture in their ability to maintain control. This opening creates the possibility for others to revolt against the exploitation of class society, hence the way struggles beginning with students in France in '68, South Korea in '87, and China in '89 sparked rebellion at the point of production involving mass strikes.

Mainstream news sources reported 13 deaths in yesterday's demos. Here are some photos from those protests and street battles (on Saturday, June 20th):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fhashemi/sets/72157619758530748/show/

The following is an excerpt from an Iranian ex-pat comrade living in Europe:

[...]the armed forces in Iran are spread [thin], i.e. there are not few, but many of them under control of the regime, the lengthening of protests, and even a the lengthening of non-compromising situation between the ruling fractions, MAY split these armed forces, and in the worst case end up with Lebanonization of Iran -specially when we take in account the many nationalist movements around Iran. This scenario of course depends on what workers will do in their work places.

As with work places, there is more or less full silence now. Workers have not yet managed to either organize themselves or find out what they want of their own in this situation -which again, reminds me [of] the beginning of [the] 1978-9 uprising. And as the workers councils (or better said, workplace/factory committees) is pretty known and has a long history in Iran, it would not surprise me at all that with continuation of the crisis situation we observe a new rising of workers councils all around the country.

Lets hope and fight for this last scenario!

Soon Mousavi will announce full national strikes, probably starting with Petrochemical - prepare for this.

Does anyone have any more info on this? Predictions? Hopes?

smg

Why is everyone else paying attention to what will most likely be a process of the Iranian capital and state restructuring itself to survive this moment of crisis?

I think it's more than that.
The 1956 Hungarian Revolution did not lead to communism either but there were worker's councils that attempted to establish workers' control in the workplace. The same could very well happen in Iran, at least to an extent, and this possibility is an exciting one.
I don't think any communists are under the illusion that this recent rebellion has the potential to turn into a world revolution, but its revolutionary character cannot be denied imo. Only liberal Western media are still trying to paint this as a fight for "fair elections" (and even CNN are sort of undermining this official stance by showing videos of women who declare they're fighting for freedom, not Moussavi).

Vlad336

[
I don't think any communists are under the illusion that this recent rebellion has the potential to turn into a world revolution

except for myself. i want that to be noted, cause i said so for the last 1 1/2 years (not here, somewhere else).

I think it's more than that.
The 1956 Hungarian Revolution did not lead to communism either but there were worker's councils that attempted to establish workers' control in the workplace. The same could very well happen in Iran, at least to an extent, and this possibility is an exciting one. I don't think any communists are under the illusion that this recent rebellion has the potential to turn into a world revolution, but its revolutionary character cannot be denied imo. Only liberal Western media are still trying to paint this as a fight for "fair elections" (and even CNN are sort of undermining this official stance by showing videos of women who declare they're fighting for freedom, not Moussavi).

Maybe I'm pessimistic but I have a hard time imagining worker's councils popping up like toadstools anytime soon in Iran. Especially, since the working class seems to be almost invisible: no large strikes, no occupations, one or two statements from unions but mostly silence. And regarding the women who say they are fighting for freedom what do they mean? Freedom like we see in the capitalist West? Or another kind of freedom all together? Does ideology even matter at this point in the revolt?

I wood not trust ICC reports.
They are sectarians- this is first and they are liars- second. And they are liberals- that is number three. For tham any riot is rong. If they see riot they start spreading total liy about that. I have an examples. Don't trust tham.

more statements from Iranian unions:

* Coordinating Committee to Help Form Workers’ Organizations - http://workers-iran.org/News/Statement%201,%20coordinating%20committee,%20June%202009.htm
* Free Trade Union of Iranian Workers - http://iwsn.org/labour/free-union-workers-18jun09.htm

From the IBTimes http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/20090622/iran-cleric-rafsanjani-khamenei-ahmadinejad.htm

Iran's clerical establishment is considering scrapping the position of the Supreme Leader, currently held by Ayatollah Khamenei and forcing out President Ahmadinejad according to reports.

The country's Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts is reported to be considering the formation of a collective leadership to replace the position of supreme leader, according to Al Arabiya, citing sources in the holy city of Qom.

From Eurasia Civil Society
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insightb/articles/eav062209.shtml

A source familiar with the thinking of decision-makers in state agencies that have strong ties to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said there is a sense among hardliners that a shoe is about to drop. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani -- Iran’s savviest political operator and an arch-enemy of Ayatollah Khamenei’s -- has kept out of the public spotlight since the rigged June 12 presidential election triggered the political crisis. The widespread belief is that Rafsanjani has been in the holy city of Qom, working to assemble a religious and political coalition to topple the supreme leader and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"There is great apprehension among people in the supreme leader’s [camp] about what Rafsanjani may pull," said a source in Tehran who is familiar with hardliner thinking. "They [the supreme leader and his supporters] are much more concerned about Rafsanjani than the mass movement on the streets."

An elite coup?

And from the tweets:

RT @Tymlee: RT People of Saqz went on general strike today & close the Bazaar. #iranelection. RT @omidhabibinia National Strike: Many offices and shops not working as ussual. #iranelection. National Strike: Half of Shops at Tabriz Bazzar is closed. #iranelection. From ElectionIRANews: National Strike: Some of Bazzar Shops has closed in Isfehan. #iranelection. RT IRIB, state TV about 30% of employees are absent today, National Strike has begun. #iranelection.

I can't see a national strike lasting if Ayatollah Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad get the boot. Nothing I've read seems to suggest people will continue to revolt if there is a political coup. I cant think of a statement I have read that suggests a level of class consciousness and/or rage that would propel the revolt onward. My general feeling is that a regime change will satisfy a lot of folks in the streets and will be used to justify cracking down on those still in revolt.

**IMPORTANT**

From a reliable Twitter source:

People – no business in Iran TUESDAY – sorry we are all on STRIKE

This has been confirmed.

Will be updated with more details as they come in.

**CLICK BELOW FOR UPDATES**

National strike called for Tuesday in Iran

Posted by Craig Kanalley on 6/22/09 • Categorized as Middle East, elections
//

It is now after midnight in Iran – officially Tuesday – and Breaking Tweets can now verify that a national strike has indeed been called for on this day in Iran.

Numerous reliable Twitterers in Iran are now confirming this news. Many are saying that Mir Hossein Mousavi himself called for the strike, however the official Twitter and Facebook pages for Mousavi do not yet mention it. It is possible he communicated this through other means.

Even so, there is a clear organization for this general strike, first rumored several days ago. Trusted Iranian Twitterers said confirmation of the strike would not come until the last possible moment so that it catches the government off guard, and confirmation is now surfacing.

There is a call for all workers, government and non-government, not to show up to work and for Iranians to do no business on Tuesday. Many have called for bazaars to shut down. Some are calling for the strike to last longer than Tuesday to further disrupt the nation’s economy and cripple the current government.

The question is how many will participate and how effective the strike will be, as SMS, cell phone networks, and many Web sites remain offline in various parts of Iran. Mass protests the last few days have undoubtedly been disrupted and there has been confusion due to the lack of communication channels. It is also uncertain how widespread this movement will be outside of Tehran.

Source: http://www.breakingtweets.com/2009/06/22/national-strike-called-for-tuesday-in-iran/

http://riseoftheiranianpeople.com/2009/06/22/strike-called-for-tuesday/#more-977

smg

An elite coup?

I can't see a national strike lasting if Ayatollah Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad get the boot. Nothing I've read seems to suggest people will continue to revolt if there is a political coup. I cant think of a statement I have read that suggests a level of class consciousness and/or rage that would propel the revolt onward. My general feeling is that a regime change will satisfy a lot of folks in the streets and will be used to justify cracking down on those still in revolt.

Yeah, but is it too optimistic of me to think that the new elite would be much weaker and more vulnerable than the old guard?

Farce

Yeah, but is it too optimistic of me to think that the new elite would be much weaker and more vulnerable than the old guard?

yes, far too. it could turn ut to be more stable. theoretically. and, since we don't know everything, we cannot rule that out.
once musavi is firmly in the saddle this thing will be gone for a long time.

punkgirlie16

Farce

Yeah, but is it too optimistic of me to think that the new elite would be much weaker and more vulnerable than the old guard?

yes, far too. it could turn ut to be more stable. theoretically. and, since we don't know everything, we cannot rule that out.
once musavi is firmly in the saddle this thing will be gone for a long time.

So you're saying that even if I cross my fingers and hope, really really hard, that Mousavi'd turn out to be vaguely equivalent to Kerensky in 1917, only he'd be overthrown by a genuine worker's revolution and not by the Bolsheviks, it's not going to happen? Laaaame. :( This situation seemed so much more promising when I didn't know much about it.

magidd

Do you know any revolutionary libertarian groopes in Iran?
People who support statless comminism and seforgernised proletrian strugle?
Melacholic Troglodytes?

You can try contacting Against the Wage:
againstwage (at) yahoo.com
They are mostly exile Iranians, and they work with some people inside Iran, which are involved with the Coordinating Committee to Form Workers' Organizations (http://www.hamaahangi.com/english/)

The English language web site of Against the Wage seems to be down, but you can still find pdf-versions of their newsletters on their Farsi site. Some of these have interviews with or articles by Mohsen Hakimi who recently spent a couple of months in prison in Iran for helping to organize a May Day rally.
http://www.simaiesocialism.com/atw_e/atw1.pdf
http://www.simaiesocialism.com/atw_e/atw2.pdf
http://www.simaiesocialism.com/atw_e/atw3.pdf
http://www.simaiesocialism.com/atw_e/atw4.pdf
http://www.simaiesocialism.com/atw_e/atw5.pdf

Rumor has it that this piece was written for the New York Times but then turned down. I could not find a URL for this piece. I reproduce it here assuming it can be legitimately attributed to Žižek.

WILL THE CAT ABOVE THE PRECIPICE FALL DOWN?

Slavoj Zizek

When an authoritarian regime approaches its final crisis, its dissolution as a rule follows two steps. Before its actual collapse, a mysterious rupture takes place: all of a sudden people know that the game is over, they are simply no longer afraid. It is not only that the regime loses its legitimacy, its exercise of power itself is perceived as an impotent panic reaction. We all know the classic scene from cartoons: the cat reaches a precipice, but it goes on walking, ignoring the fact that there is no ground under its feet; it starts to fall only when it looks down and notices the abyss. When it loses its authority, the regime is like a cat above the precipice: in order to fall, it only has to be reminded to look down… In Shah of Shahs, a classic account of the Khomeini revolution, Ryszard Kapuscinski located the precise moment of this rupture: at a Tehran crossroad, a single demonstrator refused to budge when a policeman shouted at him to move, and the embarrassed policeman simply withdrew; in a couple of hours, all Tehran knew about this incident, and although there were street fights going on for weeks, everyone somehow knew the game is over. Is something similar going on now? There are many versions of the events in Tehran. Some see in the protests the culmination of the pro-Western “reform movement” along the lines of the “orange” revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia, etc. – a secular reaction to the Khomeini revolution. They support the protests as the first step towards a new liberal-democratic secular Iran freed of Muslim fundamentalism. They are counteracted by skeptics who think that Ahmadinejad really won: he is the voice of the majority, while the support of Mousavi comes from the middle classes and their gilded youth. In short: let’s drop the illusions and face the fact that, in Ahmadinejad, Iran has a president it deserves. Then there are those who dismiss Mousavi as a member of the cleric establishment with merely cosmetic differences from Ahmadinejad: Mousavi also wants to continue the atomic energy program, he is against recognizing Israel, plus he enjoyed the full support of Khomeini as a prime minister in the years of the war with Iraq. Finally, the saddest of them all are the Leftist supporters of Ahmadinejad: what is really at stake for them is Iranian independence. Ahmadinejad won because he stood up for the country’s independence, exposed elite corruption and used oil wealth to boost the incomes of the poor majority – this is, so we are told, the true Ahmadinejad beneath the Western-media image of a holocaust-denying fanatic. According to this view, what is effectively going on now in Iran is a repetition of the 1953 overthrow of Mossadegh – a West-financed coup against the legitimate president. This view not only ignores facts: the high electoral participation – up from the usual 55% to 85% – can only be explained as a protest vote. It also displays its blindness for a genuine demonstration of popular will, patronizingly assuming that, for the backward Iranians, Ahmadinejad is good enough – they are not yet sufficiently mature to be ruled by a secular Left. Opposed as they are, all these versions read the Iranian protests along the axis of Islamic hardliners versus pro-Western liberal reformists, which is why they find it so difficult to locate Mousavi: is he a Western-backed reformer who wants more personal freedom and market economy, or a member of the cleric establishment whose eventual victory would not affect in any serious way the nature of the regime? Such extreme oscillations demonstrate that they all miss the true nature of the protests. The green color adopted by the Mousavi supporters, the cries of “Allah akbar!” that resonate from the roofs of Tehran in the evening darkness, clearly indicate that they see their activity as the repetition of the 1979 Khomeini revolution, as the return to its roots, the undoing of the revolution’s later corruption. This return to the roots is not only programmatic; it concerns even more the mode of activity of the crowds: the emphatic unity of the people, their all-encompassing solidarity, creative self-organization, improvising of the ways to articulate protest, the unique mixture of spontaneity and discipline, like the ominous march of thousands in complete silence. We are dealing with a genuine popular uprising of the deceived partisans of the Khomeini revolution.

There are a couple of crucial consequences to be drawn from this insight. First, Ahmadinejad is not the hero of the Islamist poor, but a genuine corrupted Islamo-Fascist populist, a kind of Iranian Berlusconi whose mixture of clownish posturing and ruthless power politics is causing unease even among the majority of ayatollahs. His demagogic distributing of crumbs to the poor should not deceive us: behind him are not only organs of police repression and a very Westernized PR apparatus, but also a strong new rich class, the result of the regime’s corruption (Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is not a working class militia, but a mega-corporation, the strongest center of wealth in the country).

Second, one should draw a clear difference between the two main candidates opposed to Ahmadinejad, Mehdi Karroubi and Mousavi. Karroubi effectively is a reformist, basically proposing the Iranian version of identity politics, promising favors to all particular groups. Mousavi is something entirely different: his name stands for the genuine resuscitation of the popular dream which sustained the Khomeini revolution. Even if this dream was a utopia, one should recognize in it the genuine utopia of the revolution itself. What this means is that the 1979 Khomeini revolution cannot be reduced to a hard line Islamist takeover – it was much more. Now is the time to remember the incredible effervescence of the first year after the revolution, with the breath-taking explosion of political and social creativity, organizational experiments and debates among students and ordinary people. The very fact that this explosion had to be stifled demonstrates that the Khomeini revolution was an authentic political event, a momentary opening that unleashed unheard-of forces of social transformation, a moment in which “everything seemed possible.” What followed was a gradual closing through the take-over of political control by the Islam establishment. To put it in Freudian terms, today’s protest movement is the “return of the repressed” of the Khomeini revolution.

And, last but not least, what this means is that there is a genuine liberating potential in Islam – to find a “good” Islam, one doesn’t have to go back to the 10th century, we have it right here, in front of our eyes.

The future is uncertain – in all probability, those in power will contain the popular explosion, and the cat will not fall into the precipice, but regain ground. However, it will no longer be the same regime, but just one corrupted authoritarian rule among others. Whatever the outcome, it is vitally important to keep in mind that we are witnessing a great emancipatory event which doesn’t fit the frame of the struggle between pro-Western liberals and anti-Western fundamentalists. If our cynical pragmatism will make us lose the capacity to recognize this emancipatory dimension, then we in the West are effectively entering a post-democratic era, getting ready for our own Ahmadinejads. Italians already know his name: Berlusconi. Others are waiting in line.

http://communism.blogsport.de/

5. There are reports that divisions within the Revolutionary Guard are beginning to surface. There is speculation that one of the commanders, Afzali, has either resigned or been abdicated from his post.

6. Rallies are expanding in many other cities of Iran, and street demonstrations have not been diminished in Tabriz, Isfahan, Kermanshah and other cities. Although the size of the demonstrations is smaller, they are more violent and forceful.

7. The killings of demonstrators will definitely result in more defiance and bolder actions of the protesters and gain more legitimacy for the green movement and its leadership. More killings will definitely delegitimize further the supreme leader’s authority. Imposing a government, after mass killings, on the Iranian people is a much more difficult task.

If members of the revolutionary guard join the protests and the protesters get increasing brazen and bold is there a chance this will become more than an elite coup? What happened to the general strike?

People are going to work. No one has asked the people to stay at home. No one has called for a strike. Mousavi has not asked people to do this. In fact, I was at Tehran’s Grand Bazaar yesterday. I spoke to many of the merchants. I told them I heard there was a strike today but you’ve all showed up to work. As one of them said, “Lady, I voted for Mousavi. If Mousavi asks us to go on strike, I will. But who will pay my bills?”

http://riseoftheiranianpeople.com/2009/06/25/were-there-strikes-in-tehran-yesterday/#more-1087

However, some of the tweets or whatever they are called are saying that there is some striking that is going on. With or without mass strikes is Iran likely to enter a revolutionary situation? I'm still saying no.