Baha’i Rants

Are you certain, Baquia? Perhaps they ought to wait a little longer. Iran is, after all, a nation blessed above all others:

“Ere long will the earth be turned into a paradise. Ere long will Persia be made the shrine round which will circle the peoples of the earth.” -The prophet of Nayin, Nabil’s Narrative

“Let nothing grieve thee, O Land of Tá (Tihrán), for God hath chosen thee to be the source of the joy of all mankind. … Ere long will the state of affairs within thee be changed, and the reins of power fall into the hands of the people. … The day is approaching when thy agitation will have been transmuted into peace and quiet calm.” -The prophet of Nur, Kitab-i-Aqdas

Are you certain, Baquia? Perhaps they ought to wait a little longer. Iran is, after all, a nation blessed above all others:

“Ere long will the earth be turned into a paradise. Ere long will Persia be made the shrine round which will circle the peoples of the earth.” -The prophet of Nayin, Nabil’s Narrative

“Let nothing grieve thee, O Land of Tá (Tihrán), for God hath chosen thee to be the source of the joy of all mankind. … Ere long will the state of affairs within thee be changed, and the reins of power fall into the hands of the people. … The day is approaching when thy agitation will have been transmuted into peace and quiet calm.” -The prophet of Nur, Kitab-i-Aqdas

Dan, I’m not very good at interpreting prophecies so I’ll stick to prognosticating on Iranian economics The description of Iran which you provide is entirely possible in the future but before it can happen, I think we need a clean slate. The sort of clean slate that a total economic meltdown can only bring.

Countries have had amazing turn-arounds before. Take the example of Japan. After WWII it was a mess, “a hell hole” some may have said. Within a few decades it became an economic powerhouse with the highest literacy, per capita income, life expectancy, etc. It is possible. But you need a clean slate. Japan’s clean slate was provided via merciless shelling by the Allied Command which reduced the country to rubble. They helped build it back up of course.

Iran’s meltdown may come without any bombs. At least I hope it will since I don’t want any more wars.

Dan, I’m not very good at interpreting prophecies so I’ll stick to prognosticating on Iranian economics The description of Iran which you provide is entirely possible in the future but before it can happen, I think we need a clean slate. The sort of clean slate that a total economic meltdown can only bring.

Countries have had amazing turn-arounds before. Take the example of Japan. After WWII it was a mess, “a hell hole” some may have said. Within a few decades it became an economic powerhouse with the highest literacy, per capita income, life expectancy, etc. It is possible. But you need a clean slate. Japan’s clean slate was provided via merciless shelling by the Allied Command which reduced the country to rubble. They helped build it back up of course.

Iran’s meltdown may come without any bombs. At least I hope it will since I don’t want any more wars.

Baquia. I agree with you. No more wars if possible. The great good thing that could come of this economic crisis is that Iran’s regime would tumble bloodlessly.

Baquia. I agree with you. No more wars if possible. The great good thing that could come of this economic crisis is that Iran’s regime would tumble bloodlessly.

Here’s a similar article discussing Venezuela
Some might have an interest.

Randy

Here’s a similar article discussing Venezuela
Some might have an interest.

Randy

Thanks Randy. Yes, I think no doubt any and all oil producing countries will feel a chill but most are in better shape. Even Venezuela is better positioned than Iran economically. Iran is a wobbly table with three legs, oil+gas, pistachios and carpets. Their strongest “leg” is getting kicked from under them. Unless the whole world gets addicted to sitting on persian rugs eating mountains of pistachios, I don’t think they will be ok.

Thanks Randy. Yes, I think no doubt any and all oil producing countries will feel a chill but most are in better shape. Even Venezuela is better positioned than Iran economically. Iran is a wobbly table with three legs, oil+gas, pistachios and carpets. Their strongest “leg” is getting kicked from under them. Unless the whole world gets addicted to sitting on persian rugs eating mountains of pistachios, I don’t think they will be ok.

Friedman: Sleepless in Tehran

Friedman: Sleepless in Tehran

[quote comment=""]Friedman: Their strongest “leg” is getting kicked from under them. Unless the whole world gets addicted to sitting on persian rugs eating mountains of pistachios, I don’t think they will be ok.[/quote]

People such as yourself (including myself up to 2003) continually prognosticated an imminent collapse of the Iranian regime going since the Summer of 1979. Any day now. Thirty years later – after the tumult of a Post-Revolutionary era including War with Iraq, Sanctions, Student Movement, etc – the mullahs are still in power and a meltdown qua revolution booting the mullahs out is nowhere near a remote possibility today as it was in 1981 when the leftist uprising against the mullahs occurred and Bani Sadr (the IRI’s 1st president) left Iran for permanent exile. That was the only time this regime has ever faced a dire situation anywhere near the resemblance of a meltdown collapse. We are nowhere near that today — not even by a long shot.

For all their problems and fascistic heavy handedness, the one thing the Iranian emigre (especially in the United States) has consistently done is to underestimate the mullocracy; and it has consistently underestimated it to its own prolonged and perpetual emigre-hood. For all their obscurantism, the elite of this regime have shown that they can play – and in some cases out-play – a geopolitical chess match and hold their own with the best of them. Deliberate misinformation from Iranian intelligence fed to Iraqi opposition groups (who in turn fed them to American and European governments) is what is primarily responsible for leading George Bush down the garden path and into the Iraqi quagmire. If America had had the good sense to enlist Iran into its war with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, assuredly this war would’ve already been a footnote to history and won decisively. That this regime is now cooperating with that effort, and given how that effort seems to go from bad to worse for NATO with each passing day, don’t think for a second that the Iranians don’t have a hand in it. And on and on it goes.

Clearly this regime has shown its durability and has consistently defied all speculations/or movement regarding its imminent collapse. As such, for better or worse, the Islamic Republic of Iran is here to stay for at least another twenty-five years, if not more, so get used to it.

Now your opinion that Iran is on wobbly economic legs is also grossly exaggerated and it is the language and point of view of the LA based emigre pundits, who have gotten it wrong consistently since 1979 (note the Baha’i-friendly Zia Atabai of NITV whose erroneous prognostications, not to mention his predilection for making up or otherwise exagerrating “meltdowns,” is a matter of public record). Although global oil prices have only now slowly begun to decline (not by much), since late last year Iran has reaped massive financial dividends that produced liquidity and revenue circulation in sectors of the national economy that people were earlier predicting wobbliness. Explain that one. So instead of reading propaganda in the American press, let me point you to European and Asian news outlets who are giving the more balanced picture of the Iranian situation that does not remotely prognosticate wobbliness. Add to that the fact that other than a handful of EU countries, no one else seems to be cooperating with US spearheaded sanctions (the Chinese are not cooperating, neither are the Russians nor most of Eastern Europe nor South America) and your analysis is even more way off. Wishful thinking by emigre Iranians with political axes to grind and who have virtually no on-the-ground contact with Iran does not make fact.

So given this, Iran is not on wobbly legs at all. In fact, as soon as George W Bush leaves office on January 20th – and provided a last ditch act of geo-political stupidity does not emanate from the Neo-Cons – you will begin to see for yourself that as of the beginning of the Obama administration, Iran will be in a position of strength undreamed of eight years ago – much of that thanks to the idiotically myopic policy making of the past eight years that ended up strengthening the very hand of the mullahs it was meant to weaken, which is why many of the activists of the opposition now are now telling America “thanks for nothing.”

“halaa khar raa biyaar o baaghaali bar kon”

Wahid

[quote comment=""]Friedman: Their strongest “leg” is getting kicked from under them. Unless the whole world gets addicted to sitting on persian rugs eating mountains of pistachios, I don’t think they will be ok.[/quote]

People such as yourself (including myself up to 2003) continually prognosticated an imminent collapse of the Iranian regime going since the Summer of 1979. Any day now. Thirty years later – after the tumult of a Post-Revolutionary era including War with Iraq, Sanctions, Student Movement, etc – the mullahs are still in power and a meltdown qua revolution booting the mullahs out is nowhere near a remote possibility today as it was in 1981 when the leftist uprising against the mullahs occurred and Bani Sadr (the IRI’s 1st president) left Iran for permanent exile. That was the only time this regime has ever faced a dire situation anywhere near the resemblance of a meltdown collapse. We are nowhere near that today — not even by a long shot.

For all their problems and fascistic heavy handedness, the one thing the Iranian emigre (especially in the United States) has consistently done is to underestimate the mullocracy; and it has consistently underestimated it to its own prolonged and perpetual emigre-hood. For all their obscurantism, the elite of this regime have shown that they can play – and in some cases out-play – a geopolitical chess match and hold their own with the best of them. Deliberate misinformation from Iranian intelligence fed to Iraqi opposition groups (who in turn fed them to American and European governments) is what is primarily responsible for leading George Bush down the garden path and into the Iraqi quagmire. If America had had the good sense to enlist Iran into its war with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, assuredly this war would’ve already been a footnote to history and won decisively. That this regime is now cooperating with that effort, and given how that effort seems to go from bad to worse for NATO with each passing day, don’t think for a second that the Iranians don’t have a hand in it. And on and on it goes.

Clearly this regime has shown its durability and has consistently defied all speculations/or movement regarding its imminent collapse. As such, for better or worse, the Islamic Republic of Iran is here to stay for at least another twenty-five years, if not more, so get used to it.

Now your opinion that Iran is on wobbly economic legs is also grossly exaggerated and it is the language and point of view of the LA based emigre pundits, who have gotten it wrong consistently since 1979 (note the Baha’i-friendly Zia Atabai of NITV whose erroneous prognostications, not to mention his predilection for making up or otherwise exagerrating “meltdowns,” is a matter of public record). Although global oil prices have only now slowly begun to decline (not by much), since late last year Iran has reaped massive financial dividends that produced liquidity and revenue circulation in sectors of the national economy that people were earlier predicting wobbliness. Explain that one. So instead of reading propaganda in the American press, let me point you to European and Asian news outlets who are giving the more balanced picture of the Iranian situation that does not remotely prognosticate wobbliness. Add to that the fact that other than a handful of EU countries, no one else seems to be cooperating with US spearheaded sanctions (the Chinese are not cooperating, neither are the Russians nor most of Eastern Europe nor South America) and your analysis is even more way off. Wishful thinking by emigre Iranians with political axes to grind and who have virtually no on-the-ground contact with Iran does not make fact.

So given this, Iran is not on wobbly legs at all. In fact, as soon as George W Bush leaves office on January 20th – and provided a last ditch act of geo-political stupidity does not emanate from the Neo-Cons – you will begin to see for yourself that as of the beginning of the Obama administration, Iran will be in a position of strength undreamed of eight years ago – much of that thanks to the idiotically myopic policy making of the past eight years that ended up strengthening the very hand of the mullahs it was meant to weaken, which is why many of the activists of the opposition now are now telling America “thanks for nothing.”

“halaa khar raa biyaar o baaghaali bar kon”

Wahid

Wahid,

I have to give credit where credit is due. This is an excellent post you have written. I, myself, tuned out Friedman about three years ago. I still read him to keep informed but I usually pay it no mind. He has been consistently wrong about everything. Everything he has to say is at some level just another perpetual “Friedman unit.” The only person who has been more consistently wrong about everything from day one is arch Neocon chickenhawk warmonger Bill Kristol. He has not gotten one single thing right. How the NYT can cut him a pay check is beyond me.

I did like Friedman’s “The World Is Flat” though.

Wahid,

I have to give credit where credit is due. This is an excellent post you have written. I, myself, tuned out Friedman about three years ago. I still read him to keep informed but I usually pay it no mind. He has been consistently wrong about everything. Everything he has to say is at some level just another perpetual “Friedman unit.” The only person who has been more consistently wrong about everything from day one is arch Neocon chickenhawk warmonger Bill Kristol. He has not gotten one single thing right. How the NYT can cut him a pay check is beyond me.

I did like Friedman’s “The World Is Flat” though.

Wahid,
as you rightfully state, many have repeatedly predicted the downfall of the IRI. However, I wasn’t one of them and as the quotes from years ago prove, I was saying the opposite. As well, in your comments you quote me but link to Friedman (?).
In any case, I may be wrong – it wouldn’t be the first time! The dividends that you refer to, I assume you mean the “rainy day” fund that was started by Khatami – has been spent. Putting aside all that, can you tell me how Iran’s economy would survive if oil were to go down to $40 or lower? that’s a big if but assuming such a scenario were to happen as it did in the early 90′s, how do you think the Iranian economy could survive a total collapse?

Wahid,
as you rightfully state, many have repeatedly predicted the downfall of the IRI. However, I wasn’t one of them and as the quotes from years ago prove, I was saying the opposite. As well, in your comments you quote me but link to Friedman (?).
In any case, I may be wrong – it wouldn’t be the first time! The dividends that you refer to, I assume you mean the “rainy day” fund that was started by Khatami – has been spent. Putting aside all that, can you tell me how Iran’s economy would survive if oil were to go down to $40 or lower? that’s a big if but assuming such a scenario were to happen as it did in the early 90′s, how do you think the Iranian economy could survive a total collapse?

[quote comment=""] Putting aside all that, can you tell me how Iran’s economy would survive if oil were to go down to $40 or lower? that’s a big if but assuming such a scenario were to happen as it did in the early 90′s, how do you think the Iranian economy could survive a total collapse?[/quote]

Five years ago I would’ve said Iran is screwed. Not anymore. First, if something like this occurred, which it can (and which is why Iran together with Venezuela are presently forming an ad hoc bloc precisely to stop this from happening and keep OPEC from caving in to North American-European schemes), America’s primary economic ally in the region (i.e. Sa’udi Arabia) would be the first to be hit — and it would be hit badly. A drop in per barrel costs is more dangerous for the Sa’udi kingdom right now than it would be for Iran, given 1) Iran’s trading relationships with all those countries America and Europe treat with kid gloves (Russia, PRC, Venezuela, etc) and 2) the Iranian economy has developed an industry base that could potentially help keep it afloat in some manner in the short term. Also do not forget the relationship Iran now has with Russia.

Besides wanting the bomb (which it does, make no mistakes), part of the nuclear energy program is catered precisely to this end.

But that aside, Iran’s elite have formed both in the global private sector and the public sectors massive economic investment relationships everywhere that in an emergency situation they could conceivably rely on temporarily to keep themselves in power. Take the Emirates, for example. There is almost a parity amount of private (and some public) investment in the UAE as there is by Americans and Europeans. Most of this investment are from individuals or foundations in some way connected to the regime. If Iran gets hammered by plummeting markets (or war), so does the UAE and the other Gulf kingdoms. It is that simple. The dependency of the UAE and the rest of the Gulf on stability with Iran cannot be underestimated – and everybody knows this.

How the mullahs have generated such mega-revenue beyond Iran is basically to have taken the traditional Shi’ite waqf system and the hussle and bussle of the bazaar and tweaked it (or out gamed the free market system of the West), playing a money game of backgammon “kharr zerangi” on international money, stock and property markets that simply baffles the mind. These people are smart. One example of this is the amount of private liquidity and assets owned by individual members of this regime in North America itself, let alone Europe and elsewhere. I am sure you are aware, for instance, that the Rafsanjani family own some very expensive property in Toronto and outlying areas of Ontario in Canada. These sorts of activities by the mullahs are occurring everywhere, and they are a lot smarter than the Shah and the Pahlavis ever where in how to both generate and hide their money. And where money is concerned, these people are not coy. They will play with just about anyone – and do. You would be surprised to learn the actual identities of certain silent partners of certain Iranian run businesses in Los Angeles itself.

Another aspect is that Iran has also managed to create covert military manufacturing industries in the past decade and a half (small time by the standards of Europe-North America-Russia-China, but alarming nevertheless to those in the US and Israel who are clamoring for outright military confrontation) either in partnership (i.e. Chinese, Russians) or owned outright by itself throughout the Middle East – and I have heard it has investments in this industry in parts of Africa as well as South America. You saw some of this in action – test cased – during the 2006 confrontation between Israel and the Hezbollah in Lebanon. A lot more can be said, but if push came to shove – where this regime even to sacrifice hundreds of thousands – it could keep itself intact for a long time.

But there won’t be a dramatic crash in the price of oil, whatever current indicators (which aren’t showing anything right now, really). Iran’s current economic problems is due to the mismanagement of the past three and a half years. As such Ahmadinejad will not be reelected to a second term. He will gone next summer – and not soon enough!

That said, I am looking forward to the coming Obama administration because if they can implement a Chinese (Nixon-Mao) style rapproachment with Iran, it will in short order start bringing back to power the moderates and reformists and thereby curb the political excesses of the regime and spread the wealth around a little more amongst average joe. But don’t expect these guys to role over anytime soon. They’re going to be around for a few years more, and Iran’s economy is already showing signs of growth.

Wahid

[quote comment=""] Putting aside all that, can you tell me how Iran’s economy would survive if oil were to go down to $40 or lower? that’s a big if but assuming such a scenario were to happen as it did in the early 90′s, how do you think the Iranian economy could survive a total collapse?[/quote]

Five years ago I would’ve said Iran is screwed. Not anymore. First, if something like this occurred, which it can (and which is why Iran together with Venezuela are presently forming an ad hoc bloc precisely to stop this from happening and keep OPEC from caving in to North American-European schemes), America’s primary economic ally in the region (i.e. Sa’udi Arabia) would be the first to be hit — and it would be hit badly. A drop in per barrel costs is more dangerous for the Sa’udi kingdom right now than it would be for Iran, given 1) Iran’s trading relationships with all those countries America and Europe treat with kid gloves (Russia, PRC, Venezuela, etc) and 2) the Iranian economy has developed an industry base that could potentially help keep it afloat in some manner in the short term. Also do not forget the relationship Iran now has with Russia.

Besides wanting the bomb (which it does, make no mistakes), part of the nuclear energy program is catered precisely to this end.

But that aside, Iran’s elite have formed both in the global private sector and the public sectors massive economic investment relationships everywhere that in an emergency situation they could conceivably rely on temporarily to keep themselves in power. Take the Emirates, for example. There is almost a parity amount of private (and some public) investment in the UAE as there is by Americans and Europeans. Most of this investment are from individuals or foundations in some way connected to the regime. If Iran gets hammered by plummeting markets (or war), so does the UAE and the other Gulf kingdoms. It is that simple. The dependency of the UAE and the rest of the Gulf on stability with Iran cannot be underestimated – and everybody knows this.

How the mullahs have generated such mega-revenue beyond Iran is basically to have taken the traditional Shi’ite waqf system and the hussle and bussle of the bazaar and tweaked it (or out gamed the free market system of the West), playing a money game of backgammon “kharr zerangi” on international money, stock and property markets that simply baffles the mind. These people are smart. One example of this is the amount of private liquidity and assets owned by individual members of this regime in North America itself, let alone Europe and elsewhere. I am sure you are aware, for instance, that the Rafsanjani family own some very expensive property in Toronto and outlying areas of Ontario in Canada. These sorts of activities by the mullahs are occurring everywhere, and they are a lot smarter than the Shah and the Pahlavis ever where in how to both generate and hide their money. And where money is concerned, these people are not coy. They will play with just about anyone – and do. You would be surprised to learn the actual identities of certain silent partners of certain Iranian run businesses in Los Angeles itself.

Another aspect is that Iran has also managed to create covert military manufacturing industries in the past decade and a half (small time by the standards of Europe-North America-Russia-China, but alarming nevertheless to those in the US and Israel who are clamoring for outright military confrontation) either in partnership (i.e. Chinese, Russians) or owned outright by itself throughout the Middle East – and I have heard it has investments in this industry in parts of Africa as well as South America. You saw some of this in action – test cased – during the 2006 confrontation between Israel and the Hezbollah in Lebanon. A lot more can be said, but if push came to shove – where this regime even to sacrifice hundreds of thousands – it could keep itself intact for a long time.

But there won’t be a dramatic crash in the price of oil, whatever current indicators (which aren’t showing anything right now, really). Iran’s current economic problems is due to the mismanagement of the past three and a half years. As such Ahmadinejad will not be reelected to a second term. He will gone next summer – and not soon enough!

That said, I am looking forward to the coming Obama administration because if they can implement a Chinese (Nixon-Mao) style rapproachment with Iran, it will in short order start bringing back to power the moderates and reformists and thereby curb the political excesses of the regime and spread the wealth around a little more amongst average joe. But don’t expect these guys to role over anytime soon. They’re going to be around for a few years more, and Iran’s economy is already showing signs of growth.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]

Wahid,

I have to give credit where credit is due. This is an excellent post you have written. I, myself, tuned out Friedman about three years ago. I still read him to keep informed but I usually pay it no mind. He has been consistently wrong about everything. Everything he has to say is at some level just another perpetual “Friedman unit.” The only person who has been more consistently wrong about everything from day one is arch Neocon chickenhawk warmonger Bill Kristol. He has not gotten one single thing right. How the NYT can cut him a pay check is beyond me.

I did like Friedman’s “The World Is Flat” though.
[/quote]

Craig,

If you had not listened to people like Steve Marshall over the past couple of years you would’ve read lot more from me like this, and far better.

Now re: Friedman, I stopped reading official American political and economic pundits working for the major US newspapers over a decade and half ago – and I think you should too. Noam Chomsky opened my eyes early on in my college years that the press in America is a propaganda machine churning out endless half truths and misinformation – pure and simple. Back during the election of 2000 and its aftermath with the Florida recount (and you can go through my USENET archives of posts and check for yourself), reading the European and Asian political pundits convinced me that America and the world was in for a rough, rough ride; that the Bush (p)residency was in fact a Goldwater presidency 36 years into the future, and that these Neo-Cons would make the Reagan years look like nothing by comparison. I called Bush a Fascist in November 2000, two weeks after that farcical (s)election just as the Supreme Court decided the matter. I have been proven right on all counts. Some of the people I was then hanging out with virtually, such as Randy Burns (who voted for Bush in 2000 BTW), at the time opined that there was no substantial difference between Gore and Bush. Others, such as mild supporters of the Iranian regime in the US posting on USENET, had fallen under the spell of Dick Cheney’s 2000 election campaign spiel that a Bush administration would begin economic dialogue and lift the then remaining sanctions from Iran and unfreeze remaining Iranian assets in the US from the 1970s. I correctly showed that this was all electioneering blather and that these people were dangerous Fascists. Everyone dismissed what I said about the Bushites, including Juan Cole who has since gone on to become one the most formidable public opponents of the Bush administration’s Iraq debacle.

The same goes for 9/11. The comparison of September 11 to Hitler’s Reichstag fire was first made by yours truly less than 24 hours after it happened, and on USENET as well as a yahoogroups list then frequented by Alex Jones. This characterization has sense become a central canon of the 911-Truth movement, and one and on it goes…

I don’t know what it is: but there are certain things manifestly self-evident (both by an inductive-deductive process of reasoning as well as pure intuition). For some reason, the mainstream culture of “information” in North America is complete corrupted and as such has made many people either oblivious to or otherwise doubt themselves when unassailable facts and truths are put in front of them. Alexis De Tocqueville (the greatest sociologist of the American political culture and mind who has ever lived) said it best when he observed that by and large mainstream Americans tend towards a received dogma of what the truth ought to be rather than what the truth actually is. He said that this has led America (and he was writing in the 1830s) into a political culture where the ‘tyranny of the majority’ holds sway and permeates all facets of public life and activity, and that ultimately some then unknown demagogue would one day emerge and in the name of the received American dogma of truth unravel everything that America claims to be. I would say this all happened a long time ago, but in the Bush years it was made official.

I think you Americans need to listen less to your newspaper pundits and take more seriously disenfranchised French aristocrats who came to your nation’s shores in the 19th century and saw all the fundamental flaws that is the American experiment. Let me recommend, if you haven’t already, that you read cover to cover an unexpurgated copy of Alexis De Tocqueville’s DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA. This is ‘the’ book people should have been reading more during the past eight years.

As for Obama: he is the last ‘great’ chance America has. If this chance is somehow blown, America is finished for good. And that you can take to the bank.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]

Wahid,

I have to give credit where credit is due. This is an excellent post you have written. I, myself, tuned out Friedman about three years ago. I still read him to keep informed but I usually pay it no mind. He has been consistently wrong about everything. Everything he has to say is at some level just another perpetual “Friedman unit.” The only person who has been more consistently wrong about everything from day one is arch Neocon chickenhawk warmonger Bill Kristol. He has not gotten one single thing right. How the NYT can cut him a pay check is beyond me.

I did like Friedman’s “The World Is Flat” though.
[/quote]

Craig,

If you had not listened to people like Steve Marshall over the past couple of years you would’ve read lot more from me like this, and far better.

Now re: Friedman, I stopped reading official American political and economic pundits working for the major US newspapers over a decade and half ago – and I think you should too. Noam Chomsky opened my eyes early on in my college years that the press in America is a propaganda machine churning out endless half truths and misinformation – pure and simple. Back during the election of 2000 and its aftermath with the Florida recount (and you can go through my USENET archives of posts and check for yourself), reading the European and Asian political pundits convinced me that America and the world was in for a rough, rough ride; that the Bush (p)residency was in fact a Goldwater presidency 36 years into the future, and that these Neo-Cons would make the Reagan years look like nothing by comparison. I called Bush a Fascist in November 2000, two weeks after that farcical (s)election just as the Supreme Court decided the matter. I have been proven right on all counts. Some of the people I was then hanging out with virtually, such as Randy Burns (who voted for Bush in 2000 BTW), at the time opined that there was no substantial difference between Gore and Bush. Others, such as mild supporters of the Iranian regime in the US posting on USENET, had fallen under the spell of Dick Cheney’s 2000 election campaign spiel that a Bush administration would begin economic dialogue and lift the then remaining sanctions from Iran and unfreeze remaining Iranian assets in the US from the 1970s. I correctly showed that this was all electioneering blather and that these people were dangerous Fascists. Everyone dismissed what I said about the Bushites, including Juan Cole who has since gone on to become one the most formidable public opponents of the Bush administration’s Iraq debacle.

The same goes for 9/11. The comparison of September 11 to Hitler’s Reichstag fire was first made by yours truly less than 24 hours after it happened, and on USENET as well as a yahoogroups list then frequented by Alex Jones. This characterization has sense become a central canon of the 911-Truth movement, and one and on it goes…

I don’t know what it is: but there are certain things manifestly self-evident (both by an inductive-deductive process of reasoning as well as pure intuition). For some reason, the mainstream culture of “information” in North America is complete corrupted and as such has made many people either oblivious to or otherwise doubt themselves when unassailable facts and truths are put in front of them. Alexis De Tocqueville (the greatest sociologist of the American political culture and mind who has ever lived) said it best when he observed that by and large mainstream Americans tend towards a received dogma of what the truth ought to be rather than what the truth actually is. He said that this has led America (and he was writing in the 1830s) into a political culture where the ‘tyranny of the majority’ holds sway and permeates all facets of public life and activity, and that ultimately some then unknown demagogue would one day emerge and in the name of the received American dogma of truth unravel everything that America claims to be. I would say this all happened a long time ago, but in the Bush years it was made official.

I think you Americans need to listen less to your newspaper pundits and take more seriously disenfranchised French aristocrats who came to your nation’s shores in the 19th century and saw all the fundamental flaws that is the American experiment. Let me recommend, if you haven’t already, that you read cover to cover an unexpurgated copy of Alexis De Tocqueville’s DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA. This is ‘the’ book people should have been reading more during the past eight years.

As for Obama: he is the last ‘great’ chance America has. If this chance is somehow blown, America is finished for good. And that you can take to the bank.

Wahid

Wahid, my suspicion is that these funds outside Iran do not constitute a sovereign investment of the sort that Norway, Kuwait, et al. have but is basically kleptocracy. My suspicion is also that as things start to go down the drain the rats will jump ship, like they are starting to in China. But who knows, I may be completely wrong as you say. We’ll see, IF oil continues to go down and give Iran a negative “oil shock”.

Wahid, my suspicion is that these funds outside Iran do not constitute a sovereign investment of the sort that Norway, Kuwait, et al. have but is basically kleptocracy. My suspicion is also that as things start to go down the drain the rats will jump ship, like they are starting to in China. But who knows, I may be completely wrong as you say. We’ll see, IF oil continues to go down and give Iran a negative “oil shock”.

[quote comment=""]Wahid, my suspicion is that these funds outside Iran do not constitute a sovereign investment of the sort that Norway, Kuwait, et al. have but is basically kleptocracy. My suspicion is also that as things start to go down the drain the rats will jump ship, like they are starting to in China. But who knows, I may be completely wrong as you say. We’ll see, IF oil continues to go down and give Iran a negative “oil shock”.[/quote]

The system in Iran is a kleptocracy, absolutely. But it is lot less so than the period under the Pahlavis, a kleptocracy which the Bahais benefited under. Even if meager, it is also a kleptocracy which has managed to diffuse both wealth and (at least the illusion of) social mobility more widely and more successfully amongst various strata of society much better than the Shah and his father ever did – not to mention the other regimes in the region which are plutocratic kleptocracies of the worst despotic oligarchic sort. For all of its faults – which are innumerable – this system has managed to survive crisis after crisis and it has rooted itself firmly on a level that makes any short-term overthrow almost impossible.

Bottom line is this, the people of Iran no longer have the stomach for the sort of massive social turmoil and overhaul which we witnessed under the last revolution. The hope is for reform, not revolution; and this regime has (for good or ill) managed to convince almost all strata of society (including many on the outside) that another revolution would most certainly break-up the territorial integrity of Iran and impoverish its people forever into permanent Bangladesh status. Given this, people will generally in such circumstances back the bastards to the end – particularly when there is outside, Western meddling at issue.

Also, I usually do not put much stock in the reportage of such periodicals as the ‘Christian Science Monitor’. The rats of the uhj system will jump ship much, much sooner than the mullahs. That you can take to the bank.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]Wahid, my suspicion is that these funds outside Iran do not constitute a sovereign investment of the sort that Norway, Kuwait, et al. have but is basically kleptocracy. My suspicion is also that as things start to go down the drain the rats will jump ship, like they are starting to in China. But who knows, I may be completely wrong as you say. We’ll see, IF oil continues to go down and give Iran a negative “oil shock”.[/quote]

The system in Iran is a kleptocracy, absolutely. But it is lot less so than the period under the Pahlavis, a kleptocracy which the Bahais benefited under. Even if meager, it is also a kleptocracy which has managed to diffuse both wealth and (at least the illusion of) social mobility more widely and more successfully amongst various strata of society much better than the Shah and his father ever did – not to mention the other regimes in the region which are plutocratic kleptocracies of the worst despotic oligarchic sort. For all of its faults – which are innumerable – this system has managed to survive crisis after crisis and it has rooted itself firmly on a level that makes any short-term overthrow almost impossible.

Bottom line is this, the people of Iran no longer have the stomach for the sort of massive social turmoil and overhaul which we witnessed under the last revolution. The hope is for reform, not revolution; and this regime has (for good or ill) managed to convince almost all strata of society (including many on the outside) that another revolution would most certainly break-up the territorial integrity of Iran and impoverish its people forever into permanent Bangladesh status. Given this, people will generally in such circumstances back the bastards to the end – particularly when there is outside, Western meddling at issue.

Also, I usually do not put much stock in the reportage of such periodicals as the ‘Christian Science Monitor’. The rats of the uhj system will jump ship much, much sooner than the mullahs. That you can take to the bank.

Wahid

Ahmadinejad recently boasted that Iran would survive with $5 oil. No one expects anything more than empty bravado from this puppet but considering his previous predictions, that Obama would never be allowed to become president, even if everyone in the US voted for him, and that oil prices would never fall below $100, it is safe to assume that Iran will indeed undergo tremendous economic pain. Perhaps enough to cause a regime change from within.

Ahmadinejad recently boasted that Iran would survive with $5 oil. No one expects anything more than empty bravado from this puppet but considering his previous predictions, that Obama would never be allowed to become president, even if everyone in the US voted for him, and that oil prices would never fall below $100, it is safe to assume that Iran will indeed undergo tremendous economic pain. Perhaps enough to cause a regime change from within.

[quote comment=""]Ahmadinejad recently boasted that Iran would survive with $5 oil. No one expects anything more than empty bravado from this puppet but considering his previous predictions, that Obama would never be allowed to become president, even if everyone in the US voted for him, and that oil prices would never fall below $100, it is safe to assume that Iran will indeed undergo tremendous economic pain. Perhaps enough to cause a regime change from within.[/quote]

There’s a saying in Persian I am sure you’re familiar with, “bokhor aash be-hameen kheeyaal baash.”

This regime went through worse in the ’80s. It survived that and it will survive this as well. Besides, something that most of you American expats don’t seem to understand, is that the Iranian people themselves don’t have the stomach for regime change — the desires and wishful thinking of the expat crowd notwithstanding.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]Ahmadinejad recently boasted that Iran would survive with $5 oil. No one expects anything more than empty bravado from this puppet but considering his previous predictions, that Obama would never be allowed to become president, even if everyone in the US voted for him, and that oil prices would never fall below $100, it is safe to assume that Iran will indeed undergo tremendous economic pain. Perhaps enough to cause a regime change from within.[/quote]

There’s a saying in Persian I am sure you’re familiar with, “bokhor aash be-hameen kheeyaal baash.”

This regime went through worse in the ’80s. It survived that and it will survive this as well. Besides, something that most of you American expats don’t seem to understand, is that the Iranian people themselves don’t have the stomach for regime change — the desires and wishful thinking of the expat crowd notwithstanding.

Wahid

For some reason, OPEC is reluctant to cut supply. Perhaps it is because they know that members always cheat, especially when they are in dire straits and need the petro-dollars.

For some reason, OPEC is reluctant to cut supply. Perhaps it is because they know that members always cheat, especially when they are in dire straits and need the petro-dollars.

[quote comment=""]For some reason, OPEC is reluctant to cut supply. Perhaps it is because they know that members always cheat, especially when they are in dire straits and need the petro-dollars.[/quote]

Perhaps. But in the face of wolves such as the US and its allies it is a good tactic, and one that works most efficiently.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]For some reason, OPEC is reluctant to cut supply. Perhaps it is because they know that members always cheat, especially when they are in dire straits and need the petro-dollars.[/quote]

Perhaps. But in the face of wolves such as the US and its allies it is a good tactic, and one that works most efficiently.

Wahid

Well, if demand declines due to the global financial crisis, and supply is not curtailed, that would imply prices will fall hard. Not sure how that is a good tactic for oil producing countries.

Well, if demand declines due to the global financial crisis, and supply is not curtailed, that would imply prices will fall hard. Not sure how that is a good tactic for oil producing countries.

[quote comment=""]Well, if demand declines due to the global financial crisis, and supply is not curtailed, that would imply prices will fall hard. Not sure how that is a good tactic for oil producing countries.[/quote]

Your “if” depends on demand declining to radical levels unprecedented even by the standards of the 1930s. It also depends on countries like the US and Canada being able to cut foreign oil dependence by up to at least 20 percent. Since that is not going to happen, and North America is nowhere near being able to enjoy even modest standards of independence vis-a-vis foreign oil, without or without the GFC, you are still dealing with a regime that can weather the storm – as they did throughout the 1980s.

Wahid

[quote comment=""]Well, if demand declines due to the global financial crisis, and supply is not curtailed, that would imply prices will fall hard. Not sure how that is a good tactic for oil producing countries.[/quote]

Your “if” depends on demand declining to radical levels unprecedented even by the standards of the 1930s. It also depends on countries like the US and Canada being able to cut foreign oil dependence by up to at least 20 percent. Since that is not going to happen, and North America is nowhere near being able to enjoy even modest standards of independence vis-a-vis foreign oil, without or without the GFC, you are still dealing with a regime that can weather the storm – as they did throughout the 1980s.

Wahid