42 ms·

As nntaleb postulates, once a dictatorship starts giving concessions, it is on its last legs. Therefore I do not believe this news.

DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
Lots of dictatorships make concessions and continue to stick around: take Cuba with its market reforms of the 1990s and 2000s, ditto North Korea. But I don’t believe this news either, but simply because I haven’t seen any reporting that independently verifies the claim being made.
- pasabagi 4y ago
  It's a different kind of concession, though. Elites like market reforms because they are positioned to get rich off them, so they can lead to a reinforcement of existing power structures.
- nextaccountic 4y ago
  Cuba actually has a democratic process, believe it or not.
  - 4str0n0mer 4y ago
    Many dictatorships actually do. The question is more like "is it a process that only exists on paper?". If an election ends with a 98% approval of the supreme leader (or whatever the designation), then it's probably rigged and just for show...
    - nszceta 4y ago
      Pray tell
    - pmontra 4y ago
      To give an example Italy had an election with 98.5% for the fascist party in 1929. That was to confirm or reject the list of house members appointed by the party. I mean, there were no candidates to chose from, the ones in the list would be... elected?
  - alehlopeh 4y ago
    So does Russia, believe it or not.
    - EGreg 4y ago
      Does Saudi Arabia?
      - DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
        Saudi Arabia doesn't pretend to be a democracy.
  - arlcode 4y ago
    So do China, North Korea or Russia. Sometimes there are even multiple parties. Is there a chance that the people in power (at any level of government) get voted out?
    - booleandilemma 4y ago
      Ha, your comment got me thinking: is there a chance Democrats and Republicans will ever be voted out?
      - Waterluvian 4y ago
        The Whigs did so it’s possible! ;)
        ClumsyPilot 4y ago
        thats 250 years ago damn it!
        midoridensha 4y ago
        This shows exactly how party change comes in a 2-party system (enforced by Duverger's Law due to first-past-the-post voting). One of the two main parties implodes for some reason, so the other party gets all the power. But that can't be sustained because there's different factions within that party, so the big party breaks in half, and you're right back to a 2-party system.
      - paulryanrogers 4y ago
        The party system in the US does feel rigged to entrench the two remaining parties in the US. My hope is dropping first past the pole and adding ranked choice will help break up the duopoly. Still, there are glimmers of hope now and again. Like Ross Pero running as independent or the Bull Moose party.
        smcl 4y ago
        The GOP really suffered in recent Alaskan elections after they adopted Ranked Choice voting. So expect them to very loudly and strongly oppose it being adopted anywhere, with a lot of bad-faith arguments implying it's a form of electoral corruption/manipulation and holding it up as an example of Democrat trickery.
- smcl 4y ago
  BBC are reporting it: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63850656 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63850656 Al Jazeera too: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/4/iran-prosecutor-general-signals-morality-police-suspended https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/4/iran-prosecutor-gen... RTE: https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2022/1204/1339880-iran-morality-police/ https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2022/1204/1339880-iran-moralit... and plenty more besides. I have no idea if it's a sincere declaration (like, maybe they'll still enforce these laws but using regular police instead of the morality police, for example) but "Iran claim to be suspending the morality police" is a statement that appears to be true.
  - DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
    *Now*, I believe it (well, I believe the announcement has been made) - and I'm cautiously optimistic that the regieme will follow-through on their promise, somehow.
    - smcl 4y ago
      Ah sorry I hadn't realised that there was a narroow moment where it wasn't widely covered yet :) I upvoted, if that's any consolation
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- sos_humanity 4y ago
  > Lots of dictatorships make concessions This is a strategic move by the Islamic Republic and they timed it carefully because there are calls for another round of protests just in a few days. The government hopes to mitigate public unrest by giving them false hope. I'm Iranian and have witnessed the government killing and imprisoning children (e.g., a 9 year old boy who was in a car with his father, not even protesting). There's a reason the UN is now investigating human right violations by the regime. To this regime, people are just statistics—just a couple years ago, the government massacred more than 1500 people on the streets and didn't blink an eye. In fact, right after that, they continued the JCPOA negotiations with the West. Many Iranians wish our country didn't have oil and gas so that other countries would leave us alone. The free and abundant resources of money only make the regime corruption worse. At least in a dictatorship that struggles with income, some attention would be paid to construction and manufacturing. But the (non)Iranian regime has just been stealing the nation's wealth for over 4 decades, essentially funneling it to Swiss banks. Maybe that's why the Switzerland refused to sanction the Islamic Republic just like Germany and Britain.
- ianai 4y ago
  The line I’ve heard (Stephen Kotkin) “dictatorships just have to be good at one thing: defeating all political alternatives.” Shuffling around the police isn’t allowing for a political alternative to the regime.
inglor_cz 4y ago
Well, Saudi Arabia is morphing from a religious to a secular dictatorship right in front of our eyes. They (or, more precisely, MbS) are making a lot of concessions that do not matter to them anymore, like women being allowed to drive.
- bongoman37 4y ago
capableweb 4y ago
Hard to say something complex like a dictatorship gets overturned by just one variable. I much more favor the view laid out in "Revolutions: A Very Short Introduction" by Jack A. Goldstone. > There are five elements that create an unstable social equilibrium: economic or fiscal strain, alienation and opposition among the elites, widespread popular anger at injustice, a persuasive shared narrative of resistance, and favorable international relations. With those in mind, Iran doesn't seem that close to a revolution, yet.
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  Two of the conditions (economic or fiscal strain + popular anger at injustice) seem to be met in Iran, plus the third one (narrative of resistance) is somewhat met, as Shi'a cultures tend to regard martyrdom highly and current governmental repression created a lot of martyrs. I don't believe that all five conditions have to be met in order to see a revolution. In plenty of places like Portugal in 1974 or South Korea in the 1980s, situation was much less dire than in Iran today.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    Portugal was in Europe, South Korea had the support of USA. Iran economic conditions are created mostly by the west imposing sanctions. Popular anger is a minority yet, we see it a lot because it benefits the western propaganda, I'm quite sure it's not as widespread in Iran, not because of censorship alone, but because the majority still believe that the real enemy is the western corruption. We've seen it in Afghanistan, a war created by the US without a real motivation that Obama transformed into a liberation of the afghan people which in the end turned into bringing some woman from Kabul with their kids to the west to live like western women, leaving behind their traditions and husbands while the majority of the people lived in small rural villages and hoped for the Talibans to return and bring back their way of life. And it finally happened, for two reasons - it costed too much, despite the people always saying that freedom has no price, it obviously has one and it's not very high - American soldiers were dying for the cause and there was nothing of economic value on the table to die for We should stop meddling with other people's revolutions, if Iran will revolt it should be because Iranian people have done it.
sofixa 4y ago
On the contrary, throwing small concessions to the rabble helps a dictatorship remain in power. Refusing to bend only makes it more susceptible to a revolution gaining enough momentum.
- m000 4y ago
  s/a dictatorship/the establishment/g and then reflect back on the BLM protests...
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
in the case of Iran, it doesn't matter. They will stay in power, possibly for a long time, nobody wanna handle a revolution in the area right now. Not even their enemies. This is also a reform that doesn't change the laws, it's just facade, as many had predicted.
baandam 4y ago
Matl 4y ago
Honest question; What motivation should a government like Iran's have to listen, if any concession it does give is seen in the West as a great opportunity to show that it is weak, on its last legs etc. to try and overthrow it? I am not naive enough to think this is the case here, but say theoretically at some point someone with power in such a government has a human moment and actually wants to give some concessions, say because they have a daughter and can empathize or whatever. Shouldn't we in the collective West be making it so that it is a no-brainer for this person to give this concession, without having to think about how Western governments are going to capitalize on the move to show 'weakness of the regime' etc.? I do not believe overthrowing governments works, if simply because there will always be a feeling then among some parts of the population that it is a puppet, subservient government to whomever helped it win and that they deserve a 'native' government. This fuels a cycle of overthrow and counter-overthrow and does not actually help the people up their standard of living. Sanctions are in the same vein, only making the people suffer. As such, I believe the only reasonable course of action is to make such governments give concessions over time and encourage them to do so via positive reinforcement. They need to arrive at democracy just like the West had time to do.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  Why the fixation on the West? This is an entirely Iranian revolution, lead by their own people, with their own, very plain goals.
  - easytiger 4y ago
    Iranian government and it's clerical regime use populist anti western ideas to largely justify their existence. Like most Arab elite, the Persian elite are preoccupied with the Anglosphere
    - Matl 4y ago
      I think that's a fair point, but I'd also say that the neocons have been fixated on Iran for a long time. So it's a self-feeding cycle.
  - 4y ago
Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
Putin made some concessions after protests in 2012. It bought him time to introduce harsh laws with extreme punishments for protests, strengthen riot police and state security. Then he proceeded to crush / jail / force to emigrate everyone who protested.
mdp2021 4y ago
> once... concessions, ...last legs Have you followed in the past few days the "debate" about stay-at-home orders in the Middle Empire? "Last legs" there?

DaiPlusPlus 4y ago

Lots of dictatorships make concessions and continue to stick around: take Cuba with its market reforms of the 1990s and 2000s, ditto North Korea. But I don’t believe this news either, but simply because I haven’t seen any reporting that independently verifies the claim being made.

pasabagi 4y ago
It's a different kind of concession, though. Elites like market reforms because they are positioned to get rich off them, so they can lead to a reinforcement of existing power structures.
nextaccountic 4y ago
Cuba actually has a democratic process, believe it or not.
- 4str0n0mer 4y ago
  Many dictatorships actually do. The question is more like "is it a process that only exists on paper?". If an election ends with a 98% approval of the supreme leader (or whatever the designation), then it's probably rigged and just for show...
  - nszceta 4y ago
    Pray tell
  - pmontra 4y ago
    To give an example Italy had an election with 98.5% for the fascist party in 1929. That was to confirm or reject the list of house members appointed by the party. I mean, there were no candidates to chose from, the ones in the list would be... elected?
- alehlopeh 4y ago
  So does Russia, believe it or not.
  - EGreg 4y ago
    Does Saudi Arabia?
    - DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
      Saudi Arabia doesn't pretend to be a democracy.
- arlcode 4y ago
  So do China, North Korea or Russia. Sometimes there are even multiple parties. Is there a chance that the people in power (at any level of government) get voted out?
  - booleandilemma 4y ago
    Ha, your comment got me thinking: is there a chance Democrats and Republicans will ever be voted out?
    - Waterluvian 4y ago
      The Whigs did so it’s possible! ;)
      - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
        thats 250 years ago damn it!
      - midoridensha 4y ago
        This shows exactly how party change comes in a 2-party system (enforced by Duverger's Law due to first-past-the-post voting). One of the two main parties implodes for some reason, so the other party gets all the power. But that can't be sustained because there's different factions within that party, so the big party breaks in half, and you're right back to a 2-party system.
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      The party system in the US does feel rigged to entrench the two remaining parties in the US. My hope is dropping first past the pole and adding ranked choice will help break up the duopoly. Still, there are glimmers of hope now and again. Like Ross Pero running as independent or the Bull Moose party.
      - smcl 4y ago
        The GOP really suffered in recent Alaskan elections after they adopted Ranked Choice voting. So expect them to very loudly and strongly oppose it being adopted anywhere, with a lot of bad-faith arguments implying it's a form of electoral corruption/manipulation and holding it up as an example of Democrat trickery.
smcl 4y ago
BBC are reporting it: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63850656 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-63850656 Al Jazeera too: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/4/iran-prosecutor-general-signals-morality-police-suspended https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/12/4/iran-prosecutor-gen... RTE: https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2022/1204/1339880-iran-morality-police/ https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2022/1204/1339880-iran-moralit... and plenty more besides. I have no idea if it's a sincere declaration (like, maybe they'll still enforce these laws but using regular police instead of the morality police, for example) but "Iran claim to be suspending the morality police" is a statement that appears to be true.
- DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
  *Now*, I believe it (well, I believe the announcement has been made) - and I'm cautiously optimistic that the regieme will follow-through on their promise, somehow.
  - smcl 4y ago
    Ah sorry I hadn't realised that there was a narroow moment where it wasn't widely covered yet :) I upvoted, if that's any consolation
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
sos_humanity 4y ago
> Lots of dictatorships make concessions This is a strategic move by the Islamic Republic and they timed it carefully because there are calls for another round of protests just in a few days. The government hopes to mitigate public unrest by giving them false hope. I'm Iranian and have witnessed the government killing and imprisoning children (e.g., a 9 year old boy who was in a car with his father, not even protesting). There's a reason the UN is now investigating human right violations by the regime. To this regime, people are just statistics—just a couple years ago, the government massacred more than 1500 people on the streets and didn't blink an eye. In fact, right after that, they continued the JCPOA negotiations with the West. Many Iranians wish our country didn't have oil and gas so that other countries would leave us alone. The free and abundant resources of money only make the regime corruption worse. At least in a dictatorship that struggles with income, some attention would be paid to construction and manufacturing. But the (non)Iranian regime has just been stealing the nation's wealth for over 4 decades, essentially funneling it to Swiss banks. Maybe that's why the Switzerland refused to sanction the Islamic Republic just like Germany and Britain.
ianai 4y ago
The line I’ve heard (Stephen Kotkin) “dictatorships just have to be good at one thing: defeating all political alternatives.” Shuffling around the police isn’t allowing for a political alternative to the regime.

inglor_cz 4y ago

Well, Saudi Arabia is morphing from a religious to a secular dictatorship right in front of our eyes. They (or, more precisely, MbS) are making a lot of concessions that do not matter to them anymore, like women being allowed to drive.

bongoman37 4y ago

capableweb 4y ago

Hard to say something complex like a dictatorship gets overturned by just one variable. I much more favor the view laid out in "Revolutions: A Very Short Introduction" by Jack A. Goldstone. > There are five elements that create an unstable social equilibrium: economic or fiscal strain, alienation and opposition among the elites, widespread popular anger at injustice, a persuasive shared narrative of resistance, and favorable international relations. With those in mind, Iran doesn't seem that close to a revolution, yet.

inglor_cz 4y ago
Two of the conditions (economic or fiscal strain + popular anger at injustice) seem to be met in Iran, plus the third one (narrative of resistance) is somewhat met, as Shi'a cultures tend to regard martyrdom highly and current governmental repression created a lot of martyrs. I don't believe that all five conditions have to be met in order to see a revolution. In plenty of places like Portugal in 1974 or South Korea in the 1980s, situation was much less dire than in Iran today.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  Portugal was in Europe, South Korea had the support of USA. Iran economic conditions are created mostly by the west imposing sanctions. Popular anger is a minority yet, we see it a lot because it benefits the western propaganda, I'm quite sure it's not as widespread in Iran, not because of censorship alone, but because the majority still believe that the real enemy is the western corruption. We've seen it in Afghanistan, a war created by the US without a real motivation that Obama transformed into a liberation of the afghan people which in the end turned into bringing some woman from Kabul with their kids to the west to live like western women, leaving behind their traditions and husbands while the majority of the people lived in small rural villages and hoped for the Talibans to return and bring back their way of life. And it finally happened, for two reasons - it costed too much, despite the people always saying that freedom has no price, it obviously has one and it's not very high - American soldiers were dying for the cause and there was nothing of economic value on the table to die for We should stop meddling with other people's revolutions, if Iran will revolt it should be because Iranian people have done it.

sofixa 4y ago

On the contrary, throwing small concessions to the rabble helps a dictatorship remain in power. Refusing to bend only makes it more susceptible to a revolution gaining enough momentum.

m000 4y ago
s/a dictatorship/the establishment/g and then reflect back on the BLM protests...

peoplefromibiza 4y ago

in the case of Iran, it doesn't matter. They will stay in power, possibly for a long time, nobody wanna handle a revolution in the area right now. Not even their enemies. This is also a reform that doesn't change the laws, it's just facade, as many had predicted.

baandam 4y ago

Matl 4y ago

Honest question; What motivation should a government like Iran's have to listen, if any concession it does give is seen in the West as a great opportunity to show that it is weak, on its last legs etc. to try and overthrow it? I am not naive enough to think this is the case here, but say theoretically at some point someone with power in such a government has a human moment and actually wants to give some concessions, say because they have a daughter and can empathize or whatever. Shouldn't we in the collective West be making it so that it is a no-brainer for this person to give this concession, without having to think about how Western governments are going to capitalize on the move to show 'weakness of the regime' etc.? I do not believe overthrowing governments works, if simply because there will always be a feeling then among some parts of the population that it is a puppet, subservient government to whomever helped it win and that they deserve a 'native' government. This fuels a cycle of overthrow and counter-overthrow and does not actually help the people up their standard of living. Sanctions are in the same vein, only making the people suffer. As such, I believe the only reasonable course of action is to make such governments give concessions over time and encourage them to do so via positive reinforcement. They need to arrive at democracy just like the West had time to do.

marcosdumay 4y ago
Why the fixation on the West? This is an entirely Iranian revolution, lead by their own people, with their own, very plain goals.
- easytiger 4y ago
  Iranian government and it's clerical regime use populist anti western ideas to largely justify their existence. Like most Arab elite, the Persian elite are preoccupied with the Anglosphere
  - Matl 4y ago
    I think that's a fair point, but I'd also say that the neocons have been fixated on Iran for a long time. So it's a self-feeding cycle.
- 4y ago

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago

Putin made some concessions after protests in 2012. It bought him time to introduce harsh laws with extreme punishments for protests, strengthen riot police and state security. Then he proceeded to crush / jail / force to emigrate everyone who protested.

mdp2021 4y ago

> once... concessions, ...last legs Have you followed in the past few days the "debate" about stay-at-home orders in the Middle Empire? "Last legs" there?