7 ms·
This looks like it might be the end for the current regime. There are still people getting information out, and they are tearing down and burning state building
by observationist 10mo ago
This looks like it might be the end for the current regime. There are still people getting information out, and they are tearing down and burning state buildings - around 3000 protesters killed since the crackdown began, but there appear to be tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people who have risen up against the ayatollah, with an unknown number of state forces and officials killed. Crazy start to the year.
- spwa4 10mo agoFingers crossed
- andrewinardeer 10mo agoMy fingers are crossed that whatever happens post current regime that life is markedly better for the Iranian people. I'd hate to see civil war or mass starvation. Their currency has fallen off a cliff and continues to do so.
- tptacek 10mo agoSame concern (although the larger concern is that we've seen this movie before, and it doesn't end well for the protesters), but you can say this about literally every overthrow of every dictatorship. The only way out is through.
- SoftTalker 10mo agoPuts most of our western troubles in perspective. Things could be worse.
- spiderfarmer 10mo agoYes and the perspective I’m taking is that it is very depressing to see direction current events are taking us.
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoAnd doesn't become another neoliberal, corrupt vassal state beholden to the IMF.
- FergusArgyll 10mo agoYeah, that sounds absolutely awful compared to what it's like to live in Iran now
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoFalse choice. Both are bad.
- spwa4 10mo agoNope. Your "horror scenario" would be a definite improvement. Both are bad, perhaps, but not equally bad.
- Aloisius 10mo agoThe IMF is essentially a credit union with 191 member countries, so they'd become a vassal to most of the world - if by vassal, one means to agree to terms that might make it possible to repay loans. Some (including quite a few neoliberals) want to abolish the IMF altogether, though I'm unsure if letting countries collapse completely is really a better option.
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoLies. IMF isn't a charity. They come in and dictate policy and make money off misfortune. It's disaster capitalism. Edit: See also. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine
- Aloisius 10mo agoI did not say it was a charity.
- csomar 10mo agoVery unlikely. Unlike Syria or Venezuela, the Iranian regime has an ideological base and a very solid base of supporters. A civil war has more odds than that base of supporters accepting a new secular regime.
- squidbeak 10mo agoPopular revolutions will sweep any ideological base away, and it appears to be underway. The scale of the protests in the clips that have made it out have been impressive.
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoThat's a myopic, overconfident take because the traditionalist have zillions more weapons and organization.
- remarkEon 10mo agoI’ve been looking for data on this. Has anyone quantified what the regime’s base of support actually is amongst the general population?
- squidbeak 10mo agoI can't see that it would be anything other than guesswork. Polls are unlikely to be possible with any accuracy there. This is anecdotal, but I've heard from the few Iranians I've known that much of the population lead western lives behind closed doors. Their civil subjugation seems to come from the threat of violent punishment (torture / rape / death / disappearance) and a Stasi-esque domestic intelligence network.
- ebbi 10mo agoSmall sample, but talking about this with my Iranian friends, the sentiment among them and their wider network is that they do acknowledge that Iran has problems, that they need a change in leadership, but that they do NOT want a regime change at the hands of the US/Israel. For them that is a recipe for disaster and more carnage. In their view, the topology of Iranians and their political views would be: 10% - pro-US regime change intervention; 20% - ardent regime supporters; 70% - pro-regime change but without US involvement.
- EB-Barrington 10mo ago[dead]
- Cyph0n 10mo agoThis is not going to happen. It might have been a possibility if Israel didn’t decide to start a war and assassination campaign against Iran.
- blobbers 10mo agoIn the sense that Trump wouldn't have gotten elected if he hadn't been prosecuted for those documents? I agree that these types of things galvanize a population. Sometimes better to just let sleeping bears sleep.
- Cyph0n 10mo agoIn the sense that an offensive war - especially one that intentionally targets civilians and their families - rallies people around the flag and provides a boost of support to whoever is in power. The regime was organically declining in popularity. Israel’s war simply rejuvenated the regime’s supporter base without any meaningful gains on the ground. There was minimal impact to the enrichment campaign. And the fact that negotiation was used as a ruse by the Americans is definitely a motivation to pursue enrichment even further. Not to mention that regional powers are now wary of Israel’s expansionist nature and see nuclear power as the only true deterrent. Think about it: does anyone ever mess around with Pakistan or NK? This offensive directly led to the Saudi-Pakistan defense pact, with Turkey probably joining soon. I would also wager that both KSA and Turkey are starting or are considering starting their own nuclear weapons programs.
- breppp 10mo ago> The regime was organically declining in popularity. Israel’s war simply rejuvenated the regime’s supporter base without any meaningful gains on the ground. That is a statement that might make sense two weeks ago, but now? Evidently the effect Israel war had was not enough to prevents riots, or arguably might have emboldened them
- Cyph0n 10mo ago1. If you look closely, Western media is operating a coordinated campaign that is more interested than usual in what’s happening in Iran. 2. The scale of the protests is very likely overblown. 3. Iran’s purging of Mossad assets since the 12 day war has not yet wrapped up. The CIA is rumored to also have assets participating in these riots.
- ebbi 10mo agoI'm not so sure. There are plenty of pro-regime protests in Iran currently, and the general replies on interviews I've seen is "yes we have our problems, but we don't want Israel and the US fixing it", which tracks with a lot of sentiment I've heard from Iranian friends of mine. There was also a three year old killed by anti-regime protestors which has heightened the sentiments of pro-regime protestors.
- tptacek 10mo agoI don't doubt this is true but would also note that high-profile online outlets --- Ryan Grim's Drop Site News, most notably --- have run pieces talking about how huge anti-government protests are in fact pro-government protests, when that has turned out to be flatly false. (I don't know where they get this stuff). The Iranian anti-regime movement is very well established and is not the product of foreign intervention. It's actually not all that clear that foreign actors in the region favor regime change! (I'm not holding out much hope that these protests will actually topple the regime, though it would be amazing if they did.)
- ebbi 10mo agoI agree that the anti-regime movement is not all the product of foreign intervention, but I'd say some (and even wager majority) are. Not acknowledging foreign intervention in this aspect would not give a fuller picture of the dynamics.
- tptacek 10mo agoI think that's an extraordinary claim.
- ebbi 10mo agoWhy do you think it's extraordinary? I know quite a lot of Iranians, and when I talked about this with them about a year ago, their lay of the land given their own opinions and their wider networks opinion is that the majority of Iranians are pro-regime change but NOT at the hands of a US/Israeli intervention. There are anti-regime segments that are pro-US/Israel intervention, but they think this is a minority and they think most of them are products of foreign intervention. After Israel bombed Iran last year, there were a few Israeli cells that were uncovered in Iran, so suggesting there is some foreign intervention isn't out of the ordinary.
- nitwit005 10mo agoIt's possible, but remember that in an absence of any political or military rivals, you don't need the loyalty of the populace, only the military and police.
- literalAardvark 10mo agoBe that as it may, Iran has plenty of rivals.
- tptacek 10mo agoIt has plenty of adversaries. It doesn't really credibly project force, can't even control its own airspace, and its proxy network is in shambles.
- jjk166 10mo agoWell it sounds like the whole issue is that the regime has been tanking their economy due to years of funneling money to the Revolutionary Guard, and it's lead to them having to restrict more and more who they can provide favoritism to. It's unclear whether that means it's becoming more difficult to placate the IRGC or there are elements in the IRGC getting greedy, but either way it indicates the loyalty of the military and police can't be taken for granted.
- EA-3167 10mo agoPeople love to remember the hits and forget the misses. They'll happily chat about how "hunger was the key to the French Revolution" while forgetting how many starved in the USSR, North Korea, China, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, etc... They love to imagine that the suffering of a populace is some guarantee of both a revolution and the success of that revolution. For some reason the near-total destruction of Syria and ongoing conflicts in the MENA region don't seem to register. At this point I'm convinced that social media creates an environment that rewards wishcasting more than logical analysis based on precedent.
- swat535 10mo agoIranian here (speaking from outside), fair but you have to consider the circumstances. The regime currently is in its weakest position. Russia is busy with Ukraine, many of top IRGC commanders assassinated, HAMAS is in disarray, and their nuclear program has been crippled. The water shortage was the straw that broke the camel's back. Years of sanctions, economical downturn and abuses by the Regime piled up to the point of no return. Based on my last contact with my family, our people have crossed a line and there is no going back. What Westerners don't realize is that if your back is against the wall, all you have left is putting your life on line. People rather die trying because truthfully, what is the alternative?
- Sparkle-san 10mo agoThat's what I thought during the Mahsa Amini protests, perhaps this time will be different
- gm678 10mo agoI don't see any news source anywhere on the internet claiming that 3000 number - anti-government sources have said 'hundreds' of protestors have been killed, whereas the Iranian state media has been silent on the death toll except confirming 109 members of security forces killed.
- vorpalhex 10mo agoAs of two days ago, multiple Iranian hospitals said >2000 dead was their estimate.
- Aloisius 10mo agoI believe it's all unverified right now. > "Unverified reports indicate that at least several hundreds, and according to some sources, more than 2,000 people may have been killed," IHR said in a statement, adding that according to its estimate, more than 2,600 protesters had been arrested.[1] > However, starting with reports from a handful of Tehran hospitals, an informal, expatriate group of academics and professionals calculated that protester deaths could have reached 6,000 through Saturday.[2] > IHR said that "according to some estimates more than 6,000 may have been killed", but warned that the almost four-day internet blackout imposed by the Iranian authorities makes it "extremely difficult to independently verify these reports".[3] [1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-protests-us-trump-death-toll-latest-araghchi-claims-situation-under-control/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-protests-us-trump-death-to... [2] https://time.com/7345347/iran-protests-death-toll-estimate-thousands/ https://time.com/7345347/iran-protests-death-toll-estimate-t... [3] https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20260112-live-iran-s-khamenei-says-strong-turnout-at-pro-government-rallies-warning-to-us?arena_mid=xAUlqsUgv42vd2KSdvK0 https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20260112-live-iran-...
- pazimzadeh 10mo agoThere’s no opposition though? As much as some people outside Iran want, I don’t think the Shah’s son has enough of a base of support inside Iran. This doesn’t seem very different than the 2008 and Mahsa protests. Most likely there will be an internal reorganization towards economic reform and moderate social policies.
- observationist 10mo agoThere's a huge difference - in previous protests, they were begging the regime to hear their voices, to do the right thing - to reform, or change policy. This time, there's no calls for conciliation or change, it's outright "death to the tyrants" and an astonishing number of people hitting the streets. They're burning down mosques, tearing down statues, burning out police stations, lynching regime officials, going to officials houses and dragging them out, and so on. Also, it's been going on for 16 days at this point, and for some reason, is noticeably absent from world media. That feels significant, somehow.
- pazimzadeh 10mo agoWell, where are you getting this information if the internet's been cut off in Iran? All sides are spreading their propaganda so it's hard to say what's actually happening. There are reports of hospitals, banks and other institutional buildings being burned, even fire engines - but does it make sense for iranians to burn those? But the mossad stated they have agents acting in the field. https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-881733 https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-881733 FYI, statues of khomeini, etc were burnt during Mahsa Amini protests too. https://x.com/Joyce_Karam/status/1573372214833041409?s=20 https://x.com/Joyce_Karam/status/1573372214833041409?s=20 The question remains - after everything is burned to the ground, what opposition or leader is going to take control, if not the IRGC or military? > it's been going on for 16 days at this point, and for some reason, is noticeably absent from world media. That feels significant, somehow somehow, yes, but in a good or bad way? what is the significance? maybe the US/israel was gearing up to bomb Iran and the revolts would endear Iranian people to the Western public in a way that powers that be don't want? just thinking out loud here Edit: chanced on an article which kind of supports this idea A national security expert said President Donald Trump may already be prepared to act against Iran, suggesting a widely reported upcoming briefing on U.S. options could be intentional "deception" as deadly protests intensify in the country. https://www.foxnews.com/media/trumps-iran-briefing-may-deception-campaign-mask-moves-already-underway-expert-says https://www.foxnews.com/media/trumps-iran-briefing-may-decep...