The Human Rights Blog

This blog posting comes from Laurie King, a writer, human rights activist and adjunct professor at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown.

---

I've seen the heartbreaking video of the young Iranian woman, Neda,
dying on the street in Tehran a dozen times now. Unspeakably shocking,
horrible and tragic. I'm afraid her life and death will be used now in
possibly distasteful ways, though. The whole Iran story has left me
strangely distraught. I'm shocked by friends who seem to think the
protestors are pawns of imperial powers and completely devoid of sense
or agency. For some, a global war against neoliberalism trumps the
tragedies that this film clip embodies. Then there are the "let's go
to war and save the Iranian people" contingent. Most of whom are the
same people who would have applauded had Israel bombed the hell out of
Tehran, killing Neda and hundreds of others.

Iran has to find it's own way. For the US to intervene would be a huge
mistake. US legitimacy and credibility in the world is nil, after the
disastrous Bush-Cheney misadventures in the Middle East.

Then there is my bitter question: Why don't the deaths of Palestinian
children and women cause such outrage and alarm? That's why I say
"Down with Ideological Purity", or more to the point, down with anyone
who wants to mourn some deaths while ignoring others, or want to mourn
for reasons that are more self-serving than humanitarian.

And then there's the simply ridiculous and surreal: The call to
nominate twitter for a Nobel prize. Or, last night, seeing Mavis Leno,
wife of Jay Leno, on the Larry King (no relation!) Show talking about
how Iranian women are now finally "finding their voice." I can think
of ten Iranian women who could have spoken eloquently and incisively
about the shooting of this young woman. But no: We get the rather
inarticulate wife of a celebrity who knows nothing about Iran saying
"well, now Iranian women will be able to wear their chadors in a new
style that will allow them to show more hair!" (Apparently she is
active with some group called Feminist Majority. As if "feminist"
means the same thing all over the world, or as if what Americans think
of as liberated is what Iranians would think of as "liberated.")

The message of emotionally-overwrought US news coverage of Iran seems
to be that Modernization = Americanization, modernization is
inevitable, and America is a beacon of freedom to the world. Not to so
people living not far from Iran: Palestinians, who are, alas, a people
our country is ACTIVELY involved in oppressing in criminal ways. I did
not see journalists, congresspeople, pundits, or many Facebook and
twitter friends getting outraged at the murders of over 1000
Palestinians in January.

But do I think Ahmadinejad is some sort of model of a progressive
leader that the left should support? Hell, no. He's Iran's version of
George Bush. (Recall that he said that "There are no gay people in
Iran. That's a Western sickness.") The point is not "Is Mousavi better
or any different?" but rather, what else could a movement like the one
unfolding on the streets of Iran accomplish and change? Here we are
watching what appears to be a really transformative moment, but one
that everyone wants to harness to their own agenda. And to my friends
on the Left (where I sit myself): Does neoliberalism mean anything
different, or play out in new ways, in the new economic crisis
situation, in what can reasonably be described as the post-American
Empire period of the 21st century? What does that mean for a
progressive agenda? Do we even think and reflect anymore, or just
shout slogans? And if you are sitting in a Starbucks somewhere
updating your FB account from an iPhone and posting about how Iranian
youth are unwitting tools of the US or the World Bank or the IMF and
don't understand political economy, try facing people with guns who
don't want to hear you assert your will and desires in public.

The American left does not know much about Iran. So chill out and
listen and learn, people, before defending basijis or painting the
Supreme Leader as a victim. If the protestors prevail, the biggest
disappointment will be felt among the Likud in Israel and the neocons
in the US (note that Daniel Pipes said he'd vote for Ahmadinejad if he
were Iranian). With no Evil Mad Man of the week (which is overstating
the abilities and impact of a bumpkin like Ahmadinejad) to stir up
fear to legitimate an Israeli or American attack on Iran, it's gonna
be a boring summer for the warmongers in Israel and Washington.

And do note that Iranian youth are not protesting for the right to
wear miniskirts, body piercings, or play with the Wii all day. They
don't want to undo the Islamic revolution (which was initially all
about social justice before corrupt mullahs hijacked it), but rather,
to upgrade and adjust their system of governance in the way that they
see fit. Listening to the young Iranian people being interviewed, I
have to say they are smarter and more mature than most American
teenagers I know. I hope no more of them get killed by thugs. This is
what democracy looks like, my fellow Americans who did not go to the
streets to protest when Bush and Cheney stole the election in 2000
(and very possibly 2004, too).

A little respect for others' struggles is in order. It's not always
all about us (i.e., from the left feeling that the Iranians are not
protesting as they think they should, or the center-left's self- satisfaction that women's liberation is now breaking out, or the
right's maudlin crocodile tears for young women like Neda, whose death
they seem to want to use to push American intervention in a country
that has had very, very bad experiences with US interference. Maybe we
should all start intervening in our own systems of governance, which
don't reflect or embody much social justice. Ultimately, it's about
dignity not ideology. If you aren't supporting and safeguarding
others' dignity, then you are not a revolutionary.