Saturday, September 29, 2007

A new political discourse

Today, a Tamil visitor pointed me out to Iranian scholar's 10 academic questions to Lee Bollinger. Whether Bollinger responds to these questions is irrelevant. But a new form of political discourse is crystallizing around the (apparently careless!) statements made by Ahmadinejad.

The following is a comment by the information clearing house. I have not sought the permission of the commentator to cross post, but there is something very fresh in this perspective which I endorse (and color-code! )

* Nikogda kindly dropped by and left his blog address
Language is the clothing of thought, and how the Iranian president used it in New York this week cloaks an entire tactical line.

The comportment of the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran during his recent visit to the United States, as well as the content of his discourse, are setting a standard of enlightened statecraft that is evidently lacking among the leaders of the U.S. and its most toadying "allies" from the Anglo-American bloc (UK, Canada, Australia etc.)

For decades the Anglo-American powers all prided themselves and patted one another on the back over their superior ability to "manage change". Then in 1979 the Iranian people rose up and had the temerity to get rid of the Anglo-Americans' most sacred totem, Shah Reza Pahlavi and his Asian-fascist "Peacock Throne". Ever since that epochal event, the situation for the Anglo-Americans in western Asia has gone from bad to worse. Specifically in Canada, no opportunity to smear the Iranian revolution has been overlooked.

Over the past year, for example, a political science professor, Shiraz Dossa of St Francis Xavier University, has been demonised in the national media for the crime of attending the last conference in Teheran about the European Judeocide. John Ibbitson — the former Washington correspondent of Canada 's leading national newspaper, The Globe and Mail in Toronto — practically foamed at the mouth like some rabid animal. He raged that Dr Dossa's derring-do cried out for some kind of redress. Perhaps a body to police Canadian academia so such cancers can't recur once they have been put into remission by an alerted university administration might be created, or the criminal code amended?

Ibbitson's idiocies recall to mind the crazed member of the Canadian Senate, Raoul Dandurand, back in the 1920s. In the interwar years following the First and preceding the Second World War, this individual was in love with Canada becoming a neocolony not just of Great Britain but of the United States as well. He enthused in public about how Canada was now "a fireproof house... free from inflammable materials".

That period of so-called "peace" was a time in which the British were exterminating the Irish nmational movement on a mass scale. The British government schemed to suffocate the Ataturk government in Turkey that had replaced the corrupt and moribund Ottoman caliphate. At this time, Canada's peaceable American neighbours were sending in the Marines repeatedly to murder the peoples of Haiti, Nicaragua, and elsewhere in the hemisphere. The US oil barons stopped at nothing — including political murders, bribery and corruption as well as invasion threats to prevent the Mexican government's inevitable nationalisation of the country's oil. According to research published by Floyd Rudmin, the US Army was even planning the full-scale invasion and takeover of Canada.

Today, for the US and its toadying allies including the servile columnists of the corporate media, the room for such smugness and complacency among the ruling classes in Canada or any of the other Anglo-American countries has disappeared. Today, themost dangerously "inflammable material" is contemporary reality itself, with its daily proofs that Western global supremacy led by the Anglo-Americans cannot last forever.

Another world is possible and indeed necessary — but how to get there? World wars and genocides are not preferred methods. It is one thing if the imperial overlords compel the peoples fighting for liberation to turn the devastation of a world war or genocide to the account of the liberation struggle. However, this is certainly not the first choice of those fighting for social and national liberation. Some enormous disaster need not befall humanity first before anyone liberates their country from the yoke of empire. Averting such disasters is possible with enlightened statecraft. This seems to be objective #1 on the Iranian president's agenda.

With regard to enlightened statecraft, President Ahmadinejad sets a certain standard, and from a number of angles. He shares none of the bourgeois hangups of his Western imperial interlocutors and opponents. As a result, he comes across as apparently fearless. This always inspires confidence among those who want to see the imperial overlords brought down a peg or two.

No one was expecting a knockout punch at either the Columbia University engagement or the CBS 60 Minutes interview. However, what emerged there was better than a knockout bid. President Ahmadinejad's statecraft involved playing defence. However, it was a defence that upholds the Iranian nation's right-to-be by undermining the capabilities of the offence (led by the U.S.) to continue the offensive against the Iranian nation's right-to-be. Well... the Persians *are* one of the inventors of chess, no?

President Ahmadinejad builds a position on the basis of clearly articulated principle. Then, against the assault attempts of his opponents citing or hurling this detail or that detail against his wall of principle, he defends by reasserting the principle. The resulting drama of this confrontation serves to impress the principle on the listener-viewer. This is what gradually undermines any latent sympathy for the upholders of Western values etc.

It is brilliantly subversive. A friend of ours who was one of his students at Tehran University affirms that he is an inspired teacher. What has proven particularly stunning, however, are the effects of his style on North American audiences. No one can remember the last time any leader waged struggle for a political line in this manner.

On his last visit to New York City, when he accepted an invitation into the lion's den of the Council of Foreign Relations, he literally wiped the floor with those guys. The only individuals still bleating and babbling after he was done there were partisans of a certain notorious gang installed as a U.S.-backed junta on land stolen from the Palestinians on the shores of the eastern Mediterranean. Unsurprisingly, these are the partisans who are back once again for more punishment, spearheading the latest attempted public lynching of the Iranian president in New York City.

The first principle of the Islamic Republic's statecraft is the independence of the Iranian nation from foreign domination or subjugation. The first principle of the US-led bloc of imperial states is the unity and solidarity of their bloc. What is especially cunning is President Ahmadinejad's pitting of his government's first principle against the first principle of the US-led bloc. In this confrontation, it always emerges that the loudly proclaimed, allegedly "civilised values" of the US-led bloc are only rhetorical cover. What they= members of that bloc really have in mind are ruthlessly hegemonic schemes. Some scjemes entail the bankrupting of entire swaths of the global economy; other schemes envision invasions and occupations without end indefinitely into the future.

These are interimperialist contradictions. They are irrepressible. It eventually emerges further that the various members of the bloc proclaiming their vaunted unity around these "civilised values" are actually at one another's throats — over who gets to call the shots.

The Iranian President's approach serves to bring these contradictions back to the surface. When this happens, it simultaneously also deepens the contradictions in the ranks of the leaders of the US-led bloc, even as it alienates any remaining sympathies among the peoples of those countries for the stance of their government and their so-called "allies". If you doubt it, just look at the brouhaha that followed French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner's bloodthirsty imprecations against the Islamic Republic almost two weeks ago.

Interestingly, the Iranian president headed straight to Bolivia and then Venezuela to strengthen relations with two more countries, in the Americas and not in Asia, that can no longer tolerate peaceful coexistence under the Yankee jackboot. And what comes in today's news but word from the United Nations the permanent members of the Security Council — including the U.S., Britain and France — have decided that they cannot touch the "Iran question" again until November at the earliest. In short: a dignified victory for the policy of refusing to bend on fundamental principles such as the independence of the country for which the people shed their blood. Like the best tailor — or the richest tradition — among truly civilised people, the Iranians measured the cloth seven times or more before their President cut it.

24 comments:

fma7 said...

The Western media failed to show not only President AHMADINEJAD'S statecraft but purposely portrayed him as ignorant, backward and evil and prevented all discourse on the pertinent points he forthrightly addressed. He was articulate, calm and a superb chess player and confronted Americas, we can do as we please since we own the world high-handed hypocrisy.
I watched the Charlie Rose interview where Rose arrogantly apeing American corporate/administrative dogma looked sick/ready to vomit from overwhelming fear engaging President AHMADINEJAD but still cowardly refused/failed to address America's support of Israeli 60 year program of occupation and genocide in Palestine plus America's illegal and criminal invasion/occupation in both Iraq & Afghanistan.

The speech to the UNGA was hard-hitting and poigant while
CNN cut their interview to only 2 short questions-obviously no match for a fearless statesman willing to challenge topics western journalists are schooled to avoid.
Although suspect and not in favour of all Ahmadinejad's policies within Iran (yet while also uninformed of all that happens there},I appreciate his going toe to toe with the best of the western corporate media and addressing the US's THIRST FOR EMPIRE devoid of moral restraint and the Zionist stranglehold to back continued Israel occupation/genocide in Palestine.

Naj said...

I couldn't have said it better fma7

In this world, there are two types: the enlightened ones, and the gullible.

CNN's popularity speaks volumes of the intelligence of the crowds who subscribe to it.

By the way, I was in Texas some time ago and I realized the ONLY channel that a TV without cable or antenna could get was FOX! No PBS was broadcast!

Can't blame peopel for ignorance when taking the means of public education away!

an average patriot said...

naj
This woman who calls herself PresidentAhmadinejad is in the Iranian military and Blogs from Tehran.
I just heard from her for the second time and she doesn't write very often but maybe you want to touch bases if possible?
Ahmadinejad's Blogspot

Naj said...

Jim
====================
It is not hard to realize which blogs are worth spending time over and which are not. The blog you suggested is a trash! And internet is full of trash, sadly!

Also, it cannot be made by an Iranian. It is Arabs who call Iran's president AhmadinAjad!

Persians would say AhmadinEjad!
"Nejad" is a Persian word.

Anonymous said...

it cannot be made by an Iranian. It is Arabs who call Iran's president AhmadinAjad!
Persians would say AhmadinEjad!


Just friendly reminder of your words before:

As for Arabs, I don't think I have made any posts about Arabs at all

AhmadinAjad OR AhmadinEjad


It’s will be very wise by you if you be careful blaming any race of your thoughts Naj.

Read this he/she is not Arab the site owner well known one and the commentator, she may be as a like but she is from US. Not Muslim and Not Arab.

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/34434

Anonymous said...

Neocon 'godfather' Norman Podhoretz tells Bush: bomb Iran
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2558296.ece

Another war guru speaks

Naj said...

Anonymous,

Thank you.

I confess, Amro-effect has made me somewhat prejudiced!

Anonymous said...

We all may have some faults, but lets be clear as you wrote before.
Iran and Islam/Arab will be there for the rest of our life as neighbors but those the invaders one day will go, what we should do as a Muslim nations we should united to defend our land and our nations.

I know how your felling from those shaky sheikhs in the gulf but lets that not take your anger against Arab/Muslims, also as same when Arab speak about Iran's Mullah should that not anger you as such as we see there are many behaviors not really in the interest of Iranian nation.
Finally thank you, wish you all the best

Naj said...

Anonymous,

I agree with you. And as far as I can tell, the Iranian government has that policy as well. They are trying to maintain a civil and mutually respectful relation with Arab countries.

Arabs can criticize Mullahs, and Iranians can criticize Sheikhs and Saudis, and Wahabis and what not!

But what I have recently become aware of is the divide-and-conquer game at work, creating perso-phobia amongst Arabs, and rallying them against Iran's "so called" Hegemony!!

in any case, nice talking to you.
Cheers
Naj

Naj said...

James Street,

To put a little "for the Tomb of Hafiz" on your web page, does not make you an authority in Persian art, classic or contemporary!

To go blabber about my credentials based on my profile doesn't lift up your discredited narrow mindedness!

God bless you!

Nikogda Nichevo said...

Hello naj, and all,

'Nothing anywhere' here ( nothing anywhere is the English translation of the Russian phrase "nikogda nichevo"...)

I used to have a spot on Blogger and took it away. Some friends kindly re-posted some pieces at "aphenomenaluniverse.blogspot.com".

I participate in a research group that has developed a distinctive line of work. Some of it is summarised in a book published earlier this year by Nova Science Publishers, entitled "Economics of Intangibles". The broad thesis of that work is that Eurocentrism has created a lot of problems in the social sciences and their failure to predict anything even half-way correct for the last several decades.

More broadly, this thesis identifies similar deficiencies arising from Eurocentric outlook and its associated rigor mortis in the political response mechanism throughout the so-called Western world (especially as witnessed in the wake of 9-11). Throughout much of conventional (and overwhelmingly Western-dominated) philosophical and even scientific-technological discourse, the same disease (as in dis-ease) runs rampant.

This thesis developes a symptomatology describing many of the most commonly observed features of this general malaise. In politics, and in the social and natural sciences and economics, this takes the form of massive disinformation.

Disinformation literally disinforms us, renders us incapable of articulating an appropriate response when crises explode. In the processes of study and investigation in all these fields, the path for this disinformation to do its damage is prepared by what can best be described as "aphenomenal modelling" of reality and how it is "supposed to work", as opposed to dealing wih how anything actually works.

Regards

Naj said...

Nikogda thank you for coming by.

I am sure neoresistance can benefit from your expertise.

Please do visit often.

Best
Naj

Nikogda Nichevo said...

Forgot to mention while I was here last that some other snippets of mine, relating to Iran (and occasionally Iraq), are spread hither and thither within http://noidrocca.tripod.com/blog/

Regards

Larry said...

Check out this escellent post on Bush and Iran:

America Weeps

Anonymous said...

Shifting Targets
The Administration’s plan for Iran.
by Seymour M. Hersh
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/
2007/10/08/071008fa_fact_hersh

an average patriot said...

Naj
I have to tell you, what Ahymadinejad said I understand played well at home and that is all that matters. Sadly the childish verbal game he was playing with himself was invented here.
Bush the idiot is the master. It is known as BS. Ahmadinejad to anyone with any unbiased sense made a major and obvous embarrasment of himself but he showed no concern for that or logic.
Bush the idiot does it routinely and it is so embarrasing to a thinking person. Today i wrote my story that the chief liar now has an excuse to attack Iran that he can rally other fools around and he will.
I am sickened as this is no time to be proud of anything but to do everything ao avoid the unavoidable thanks to the misleadership of Iran and the US.

Naj said...

Jim,,

I beg to differ.

I don't think Ahmadinejad embarrassed himself. He is not faulty that your biased media takes his speech out of context and provides you with a mutilated version of what he said.

Also,

Ahmadinejad is not "misleading" Iran!
They are not doing ANYTHING wrong. They are cooperating with IAEA, and the y have been repeatedly saying they are willing to help US with Iraq.

It is YOUR CRIMINAL government that is dragging the world to destruction.

In Iran, we do not have gays LIKE YOU DO HERE!
That IS a fact!
Sexual orientation is NOT a discourse in Iran!

If you have sex with your boyfriend, no one is eves droping on your door, perhaps your wife!

The embarassment, from Lee Bollinger, falls on America.
Americans are RUDE! Simple!

Anonymous said...

NAJ,
I don't think Ahmadinejad embarrassed himself.


One of the most important pieces of news in the world at present is Mr. Ahmadinejad's trip to New York. In foreign policy when a country is put into isolation, clamorous trips may help to open the political atmosphere. These trips should not be of propaganda nature. We should make use of the opportunity of annual summit of UN and remedy the disturbed relationship with the world through negotiations with leaders and representatives of other countries.
http://webneveshteha.com/en/weblog/?id=2146309019

the y have been repeatedly saying they are willing to help US with Iraq.

Naj, in your view how and what Iran can help in Iraq?

Larry said...

Check out the list of reasons to not attack Iran from Earl's Place:

Earl's Place

Naj said...

disclaimer

I am feeling a bit guilty about that blanket statement of "Americans are RUDE"!

This is unfair.

But I find it abhorring to INVITE someone (EVEN AN ENEMY) to one's house, and then call them names!


======================
To the Anonymous:

I don't know HOW exactly should one advance diplomatic relations? By Bending in front of Bush and asking him to stick it up?!!

Anonymous said...

I don't know HOW exactly should one advance diplomatic relations? By Bending in front of Bush and asking him to stick it up?!!

Again reminder of your own words:

you learn to behave politely and courteously, or I shall not let your posts go through.

Articulate your points well if you want an answer.

First I asked very straight and legitimate question which you prompted by stating Iran can help US in Iraq.

Secondly as a blogger owner who control all the posts /comments you should either keep your view with yourself, or ignore the answer for the question.

Nonetheless looks you don’t know what you talking about and you don’t have any clue about the statement you did said, looks not more than a Parrot keep repeating same words as Mullah doing.

Keep bulling in “impolite” way and words is a reflection of your lack in a “behaviors of politeness and courteousness”

But looks you are less and less behaving politely and courteously

Naj said...

Anonymous
==============================

I agree with you, I am somewhat jumpy and irritable these days. Let's blame it all on the ignorance that unfolds around me all day!

I didn't try to be intimidating or insulting. But I just don't know how you think one should advance diplomacy with this George Bush. I am interested in your views on that.

I have already tried to communicate my views to Mr Abtahi, on the web site you sent me, but the comments didn't go through.

Re "Alireza Nourizadeh"
He is a spy. He is a liar. You are not my mother, per chance, sending me politeness reminders and links to your Alireza-joon, are you? ;)

Naj said...

Oh excuse me Anonymous: I forgot your Q about Iraq, my bad.

I think Iran and Iraq are very closely tied, culturally. Iraq is a sacred ground for Iranians. Iranians want to travel to Iraq, want to do trade with them, want to visit families, want to do pilgrimage.

Iran can help Iraq, and herself, by forming an alliance, economic and cultural. This is the one time in modern history that Iraq is not run by Iran-hater megalomaniacs. It is just NATURAL that Iran feels cozy with its neighbor.

Naj said...

Nikogda:

Iran and the Rise of its Neoconservatives perhaps ring th ebell you were asking for :)