4 ms·
I don't think the argument is that "you're bad anyway". Regardless of who you are, how you got into that situation and whether the protesters have a point, with
by dant 17y ago
I don't think the argument is that "you're bad anyway". Regardless of who you are, how you got into that situation and whether the protesters have a point, with a protest movement that big and motivated your options are same: crush the protests, re-run the election or form a unity government. If you choose to crush the protest then you give up the "government by consent of the people" type contract that you have with society. I think it's that fact that will drive western opinion more than the actual legitimacy of the result.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- riffic 17y agoexactly. It matters little anyways because it seems that Ahmadinejad and Yazdi were just going to prepare a coup anyways -- http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-279948 http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-279948 Choice words from this Yazdi figure: "Islam cannot accept that a group of people congregate and decide to initiate laws for themselves" (Ettela'at, 1 Oct. 1993) (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Taghi_Mesbah_Yazdi#Quotes_by_Ayatollah_Mesbah_Yazdi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Taghi_Mesbah_Yazdi#Quo... )
- cousin_it 17y agoAt this point I can't sincerely pick any side as the good guys. On one hand, I'm already sick of cookie-cutter "color revolutions" where "nonviolent" protestors oh-so-conveniently invite the support of Western nuclear superpowers to topple regimes unfavorable to the latter. On the other hand, I'm already sick of the only offered alternative, the emerging "multipolar world" fraternity of Ahmadinejad, Putin, Chavez et al. I kind of envy you Westerners. You have a simple moral principle that tells you which side to pick, a never-failing axiom: democracy is always best. But the recent history of my country (Russia) has given me a huge and readily observable data point against your axiom. So I can't honestly share your faith, even though I'd like to.
- abefortas 17y agoI am a Westerner and I have no such moral principle.
- dant 17y agoSo what's your point? That the people who want a say in how they're governed shouldn't express a view because the people who don't like to have a say are sick of hearing it?
- cousin_it 17y agoI assume you're referring to the second sentence of my comment. The idea of protesting against bad governments, all the way to armed rebellion, is perfectly okay with me. But I intensely dislike the idea of appealing to a foreign power to settle an internal dispute, especially if the appeal gets prompted by same foreign power. The classical conception of sovereignty, now sadly defunct, had an apt name for this technique: treason. Today it's called "color revolution".
- ajuc 17y agoSo protest is right if people go to kill their government by themselves? And when they can't do it by themselves and call for help, this is treason even when they didn't wanted the government that rules them in the first place? Now that's black and whit simplistic view of world. Is the concept of treason even relevant when you live in a your country and somebody rules it without your (and other people living there) agreement? I mean - I live in Poland, after WW2 Soviet Union ruled here (ok, not directly but by proxy:), is treason of such proxy government really treason? For me it's heroism, because people in Poland didn't wanted that government in the first place. Also - for me peaceful revolution is better than blood bath revolution any time.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- riffic 17y ago