Showing posts with label Counter-Revolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Counter-Revolution. Show all posts

Friday, 31 July 2020

الذكرى الثامنة والستون لأمّ الثورات!

Gamal Abdel Nasser Facts for Kids
حلّت علينا هذا الأسبوع الذكرى الثامنة والستون لثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952، وعلى الرغم من مرور ما يقرب من سبعة عقود على قيامها، إلا أنها لا زالت تثير العديد من القضايا الإشكالية، فمؤيدوها ما زالوا يحتفلون بالذكرى ويمجّدون قائدها الذي انتصر للفقراء والكادحين والمهمّشين وحقق لهم إنسانيتهم وأعاد إليهم كرامتهم المهدورة داخل وطنهم، وحقق انتصارات وضعته في قلوب الملايين سواء في وطنه الأصغر أو وطنه العربي الأكبر بل ومن قبل كلّ الأحرار في العالم، ورغم الانكسارات ظلّت الجماهير متمسّكة به باعتباره القائد والرمز والأمل القادر على تجاوز الصعوبات والمحن، وعند وفاته خرجت الجماهير في أماكن عديدة على سطح المعمورة، كالطوفان لتودّعه ولتخلد ذكراه.
أما معارضوها فما زالوا يستغلون الذكرى ليجددوا الهجوم عليها وعلى قائدها ويصفونهما بكلّ نقيصة، ويحاولون تشويه كلّ إنجازاتها بل وصل الأمر للخلاف حول مسمّاها ذاته وهل هي ثورة أم لا؟ ولا شكّ في أنّ هؤلاء المعارضين المهاجمين للثورة وقائدها قد أصابهم بعضاً من ضرر نتيجة قيام الثورة وانحيازها لجموع الشعب وبالتالي سحبت من تحت أقدامهم جزءًا من ثروة وسلطة ومكانة كانوا يحصلون عليها قبل قيام الثورة في ظل حكم ملك غير مصري (ألباني) استولى على الحكم بالوراثة، ومندوب سامٍ للمحتلّ البريطاني كان هو الحاكم الفعلي للبلاد، وكان آباء وأجداد المهاجمين للثورة وزعيمها اليوم يحصلون على الثروة والسلطة والمكانة من خلال قربهم وتقديم فروض الولاء والطاعة للملك والمندوب السامي.
وما بين هؤلاء المؤيدين وألئك المعارضين يدور دائماً السجال، لكن الغريب في الأمر حقاً هو اتساع دائرة المعارضين لتضمّ إليها أبناء وأحفاد بعض من انتصرت لهم الثورة من أبناء الفلاحين المعدَمين الذين كانوا يعملون بالسخرة وفي ظلّ ظروف غير إنسانية لدى البشوات الذين منحتهم أسرة محمد علي (الألباني) مئات وآلاف الأفدنة دون وجه حق فقط لأنهم كانوا يعملون في خدمة البلاط الملكي، وجزء من حاشية الملك المغتصب ثروات الوطن، ويأتي تطاول هؤلاء على الثورة وزعيمها في محاولة لإخفاء أصولهم الاجتماعية الحقيقية بعد أن تمكنوا من الصعود لأعلى السلم الاجتماعي بفضل الثورة وإنجازاتها على المستويات كافة.
وعندما تسأل هؤلاء هل كان أبوك أو جدك باشا منحه الملك قطعة أرض من الخاصة الملكية، فتكون الإجابة لا كان أبي وجدي فلاحاً معدماً حافي القدمين، حصل على خمسة أفدنة بفضل الثورة وقانون الإصلاح الزراعي، ولدينا داخل البيت صورة للزعيم جمال عبد الناصر وهو يسلّم أبي أو جدي صك الملكية، وبفضل هذه الأفدنة الخمسة استطاع أبي أو جدي تعليمنا وإدخالنا للجامعة بعد أن أصبح التعليم مجانياً بفضل الثورة، وبعد التخرّج حصلنا على وظيفة بفضل القوى العاملة التي أنشأتها الثورة، وأرسلنا لبعثات بالخارج وعدنا لوظائفنا المحفوظة وتدرّجنا بها إلى أن أصبحنا في مكانة مرموقة توازي مكانة البشوات في العصر الملكي!
إذن لماذا تهاجمون الثورة وزعيمها؟! وهنا تجد إما عجزاً عن الإجابة أو إجابات خارج نطاق العقل والمنطق.
ومن القضايا الخلافية على الثورة حتى الآن هو مسمّاها، فالمعارضون لها ما زالوا يصفونها بالانقلاب في محاولة للتقليل من شأنها والنيل منها، ولهؤلاء نقول إنّ الثورات لا يُحكم عليها إلا بنتائجها، فالتعريف العلمي للثورة يقول: «إنها إحداث تغيير جذريّ إيجابيّ في بنية المجتمع الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والسياسية والثقافية». ومن هذا المنطلق يمكننا التأكيد وبما لا يدع مجالاً للشك في أنّ ما حدث في 23 يوليو 1952 هو ثورة بكلّ ما تحمله الكلمة من معنى، فقد أحدثت الثورة تغييراً جذرياً إيجابياً في بنية المجتمع على المستويات الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والسياسية والثقافية كافة، ومكّنت الغالبية العظمى من المصريين من ثروات وخيرات بلادهم، وأحدثت تغييراً جذرياً في البنية الطبقية، فخلال أيام معدودة تحوّل الفلاحون الأجراء إلى ملاك وانتقلت آلاف الأسر من الطبقة الدنيا إلى الطبقة الوسطى مباشرة، وخلال سنوات معدودة أيضاً انتقل آلاف آخرون من أسفل السلم الاجتماعيّ إلى أعلاه بفضل التعليم المجاني وفرص العمل.
وبعد كلّ ذلك يأتي مَن يحاول تشويه الثورة والنيل منها ومن زعيمها وإنجازاتها فتجد مَن يهاجم تأميم قناة السويس ويدعو لعودة تمثال ديلسبس، ومَن يهاجم السدّ العالي الذي حجب الطمي والأسماك خلفه، ومن يهاجم القطاع العام لسوء إدارته ويسعى لبيع ما تبقى منه، ومن يهاجم التعليم والصحة المجانية نظراً لعدم جودتهما، وإذا كان ذلك المهاجم من أبناء أو أحفاد بشوات ما قبل الثورة كان يمكننا أن نجد له العذر لهذا الحقد وهذه الكراهية للثورة وقائدها، لكن غالبية المهاجمين لها اليوم هم من أبناء الفقراء والمعدَمين الذين لولا الثورة ما حصلوا على مكانتهم الحالية وكان وضعهم الحقيقي عمالاً زراعيين حفاة عراة يعملون بالسخرة لدى بشوات ما قبل الثورة كما كان وضع آبائهم وأجدادهم. وفي الذكرى الثامنة والستين للثورة نقول لهم عودوا إلى رشدكم، فثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952 هي أمّ الثورات، اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.

حلّت علينا هذا الأسبوع الذكرى الثامنة والستون لثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952، وعلى الرغم من مرور ما يقرب من سبعة عقود على قيامها، إلا أنها لا زالت تثير العديد من القضايا الإشكالية، فمؤيدوها ما زالوا يحتفلون بالذكرى ويمجّدون قائدها الذي انتصر للفقراء والكادحين والمهمّشين وحقق لهم إنسانيتهم وأعاد إليهم كرامتهم المهدورة داخل وطنهم، وحقق انتصارات وضعته في قلوب الملايين سواء في وطنه الأصغر أو وطنه العربي الأكبر بل ومن قبل كلّ الأحرار في العالم، ورغم الانكسارات ظلّت الجماهير متمسّكة به باعتباره القائد والرمز والأمل القادر على تجاوز الصعوبات والمحن، وعند وفاته خرجت الجماهير في أماكن عديدة على سطح المعمورة، كالطوفان لتودّعه ولتخلد ذكراه.
أما معارضوها فما زالوا يستغلون الذكرى ليجددوا الهجوم عليها وعلى قائدها ويصفونهما بكلّ نقيصة، ويحاولون تشويه كلّ إنجازاتها بل وصل الأمر للخلاف حول مسمّاها ذاته وهل هي ثورة أم لا؟ ولا شكّ في أنّ هؤلاء المعارضين المهاجمين للثورة وقائدها قد أصابهم بعضاً من ضرر نتيجة قيام الثورة وانحيازها لجموع الشعب وبالتالي سحبت من تحت أقدامهم جزءًا من ثروة وسلطة ومكانة كانوا يحصلون عليها قبل قيام الثورة في ظل حكم ملك غير مصري (ألباني) استولى على الحكم بالوراثة، ومندوب سامٍ للمحتلّ البريطاني كان هو الحاكم الفعلي للبلاد، وكان آباء وأجداد المهاجمين للثورة وزعيمها اليوم يحصلون على الثروة والسلطة والمكانة من خلال قربهم وتقديم فروض الولاء والطاعة للملك والمندوب السامي.
وما بين هؤلاء المؤيدين وألئك المعارضين يدور دائماً السجال، لكن الغريب في الأمر حقاً هو اتساع دائرة المعارضين لتضمّ إليها أبناء وأحفاد بعض من انتصرت لهم الثورة من أبناء الفلاحين المعدَمين الذين كانوا يعملون بالسخرة وفي ظلّ ظروف غير إنسانية لدى البشوات الذين منحتهم أسرة محمد علي (الألباني) مئات وآلاف الأفدنة دون وجه حق فقط لأنهم كانوا يعملون في خدمة البلاط الملكي، وجزء من حاشية الملك المغتصب ثروات الوطن، ويأتي تطاول هؤلاء على الثورة وزعيمها في محاولة لإخفاء أصولهم الاجتماعية الحقيقية بعد أن تمكنوا من الصعود لأعلى السلم الاجتماعي بفضل الثورة وإنجازاتها على المستويات كافة.
وعندما تسأل هؤلاء هل كان أبوك أو جدك باشا منحه الملك قطعة أرض من الخاصة الملكية، فتكون الإجابة لا كان أبي وجدي فلاحاً معدماً حافي القدمين، حصل على خمسة أفدنة بفضل الثورة وقانون الإصلاح الزراعي، ولدينا داخل البيت صورة للزعيم جمال عبد الناصر وهو يسلّم أبي أو جدي صك الملكية، وبفضل هذه الأفدنة الخمسة استطاع أبي أو جدي تعليمنا وإدخالنا للجامعة بعد أن أصبح التعليم مجانياً بفضل الثورة، وبعد التخرّج حصلنا على وظيفة بفضل القوى العاملة التي أنشأتها الثورة، وأرسلنا لبعثات بالخارج وعدنا لوظائفنا المحفوظة وتدرّجنا بها إلى أن أصبحنا في مكانة مرموقة توازي مكانة البشوات في العصر الملكي!
إذن لماذا تهاجمون الثورة وزعيمها؟! وهنا تجد إما عجزاً عن الإجابة أو إجابات خارج نطاق العقل والمنطق.
ومن القضايا الخلافية على الثورة حتى الآن هو مسمّاها، فالمعارضون لها ما زالوا يصفونها بالانقلاب في محاولة للتقليل من شأنها والنيل منها، ولهؤلاء نقول إنّ الثورات لا يُحكم عليها إلا بنتائجها، فالتعريف العلمي للثورة يقول: «إنها إحداث تغيير جذريّ إيجابيّ في بنية المجتمع الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والسياسية والثقافية». ومن هذا المنطلق يمكننا التأكيد وبما لا يدع مجالاً للشك في أنّ ما حدث في 23 يوليو 1952 هو ثورة بكلّ ما تحمله الكلمة من معنى، فقد أحدثت الثورة تغييراً جذرياً إيجابياً في بنية المجتمع على المستويات الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والسياسية والثقافية كافة، ومكّنت الغالبية العظمى من المصريين من ثروات وخيرات بلادهم، وأحدثت تغييراً جذرياً في البنية الطبقية، فخلال أيام معدودة تحوّل الفلاحون الأجراء إلى ملاك وانتقلت آلاف الأسر من الطبقة الدنيا إلى الطبقة الوسطى مباشرة، وخلال سنوات معدودة أيضاً انتقل آلاف آخرون من أسفل السلم الاجتماعيّ إلى أعلاه بفضل التعليم المجاني وفرص العمل.
وبعد كلّ ذلك يأتي مَن يحاول تشويه الثورة والنيل منها ومن زعيمها وإنجازاتها فتجد مَن يهاجم تأميم قناة السويس ويدعو لعودة تمثال ديلسبس، ومَن يهاجم السدّ العالي الذي حجب الطمي والأسماك خلفه، ومن يهاجم القطاع العام لسوء إدارته ويسعى لبيع ما تبقى منه، ومن يهاجم التعليم والصحة المجانية نظراً لعدم جودتهما، وإذا كان ذلك المهاجم من أبناء أو أحفاد بشوات ما قبل الثورة كان يمكننا أن نجد له العذر لهذا الحقد وهذه الكراهية للثورة وقائدها، لكن غالبية المهاجمين لها اليوم هم من أبناء الفقراء والمعدَمين الذين لولا الثورة ما حصلوا على مكانتهم الحالية وكان وضعهم الحقيقي عمالاً زراعيين حفاة عراة يعملون بالسخرة لدى بشوات ما قبل الثورة كما كان وضع آبائهم وأجدادهم. وفي الذكرى الثامنة والستين للثورة نقول لهم عودوا إلى رشدكم، فثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952 هي أمّ الثورات، اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Tuesday, 2 June 2020

Our Grim Future: Restored Neoliberalism or Hybrid Neofascism?

June 01, 2020

Our Grim Future: Restored Neoliberalism or Hybrid Neofascism?
With the specter of a New Great Depression hovering over most of the planet, realpolitik perspectives for a radical change of the political economy framework we live in are not exactly encouraging.
Western ruling elites will be deploying myriad tactics to perpetuate the passivity of populations barely emerging from de facto house arrest, including a massive disciplinary – in a Foucault sense – drive by states and business/finance circles.
In his latest book, La Desaparicion de los Rituales, Byung-Chul Han shows how total communication, especially in a time of pandemic, now coincides with total vigilance: “Domination impersonates freedom. Big Data generates a domineering knowledge that allows the possibility of intervening in the human psyche, and manipulating it. Considering it this way, the data-ist imperative of transparency is not a continuation of the Enlightenment, but its ending.”
This revamping of Foucault’s Discipline and Punish coincides with reports about the demise of the neoliberal era being vastly overstated. Instead of a simplistic plunge into populist nationalism, what is on the horizon points mostly to a Neoliberalism Restoration – massively spun as a novelty, and incorporating some Keynesian elements: after all, in the post-Lockdown era, to “save” the markets and private initiative the state must not only intervene but also facilitate a possible ecological transition.
The bottom line: we may be facing a mere cosmetic approach, in which the deep structural crisis of zombie capitalism – barely moving under unpopular “reforms” and infinite debt – still is not addressed.
Meanwhile, what is going to happen to assorted fascisms? Eric Hobsbawm showed us in Age of Extremes how the key to the fascist right was always mass mobilization: “Fascists were the revolutionaries of the counter-revolution”.
We may be heading further than mere, crude neofascism. Call it Hybrid Neofascism. Their political stars bow to global market imperatives while switching political competition to the cultural arena.
That’s what true “illiberalism” is all about: the mix between neoliberalism – unrestricted capital mobility, Central Bank diktats – and political authoritarianism. Here’s where we find Trump, Modi and Bolsonaro.
From Anthropocene to Capitalocene
To counterpunch zombie neoliberalism, those believing another world is possible dream of a social-democratic revival; wealth redistribution; or at least neoliberalism with a human face.
That’s where eco-socialism jumps in: a radical rupture with the diktats of the Goddess of the Market, the product of a healthy rebellion against ultra-authoritarian neoliberalism and illiberalism.
In sum, that could be seen as a soft adaptation of Thomas Piketty’s analyses: to break the domination of capital by economic democracy, in the spirit of mid-19th century social democracy.
It’s quite interesting, in this aspect, to consider Fully Automated Luxury Communism, by Aaron Bastani, a refreshing utopian manifesto where we see that once society is stripped off everything superfluous linked to alienation, it’s still possible for everyone to find all the necessary technical means to live “in luxury” without recourse to infinity growth imposed by Capital.
And that brings us to the direct link between the Anthropocene and what has been conceptualized by French economist Benjamin Coriat as the Capitalocene.
Capitalocene means that our current state of appalling planetary degradation should not be linked to an undefined “humanity” but “to a very defined humanity organized by a predatory economic system.”
The state of the planet under the Anthropocene must be imperatively linked to the hegemonic economic system of the past two centuries: the way we developed our system of production and legitimized indiscriminate predatory practices.
The bottom line: to go beyond it, the economy must be reoriented and rebuilt, part of a “big bang in public and economic policies.”
In the Anthropocene, Promethean humanity must be contained so the rape of Mother Earth can be properly tackled.
Capitalocene for its part describes Capital as the crucial root and conditioner of the current world-system. The result of the struggle against the ravaging effects of Capital will determine the possible future of eco-socialism.
And that refocuses the importance of the commons – way beyond the opposition between private property and public property.
Coriat has shown how Covid-19 laid bare the necessity of the commons and the incapacity of neoliberalism to address it.
But how to build eco-socialism? Should it start as eco-socialism in one country (somewhere in Scandinavia)? How to coordinate it across Europe? How to fight ossified EU structures from the inside?
After all both Restored Neoliberalism and illiberalism already count on powerful states and networks. A good example is Hungary and Poland continuing to function as cogs of the German industrial supply chain.
How to prevent someone like Bill Gates to take control of a UN organization, the WHO, thus forcing it to invest in programs that fit his own personal agenda?
How to change the WTO’s free market rules, according to which buying palm oil and transgenic soya contributes to the de facto deforestation of large tracts of Africa, Asia and South America? This is a state of affairs that allows wealthy nations to actually buy the destruction of ecosystems.
Revolution, not reform
Even if neoliberalism was dead, and it’s not, the world is still encumbered with its corpse – to paraphrase Nietzsche a propos of God.
And even as a triple catastrophe – sanitary, social and climatic – is now unequivocal, the ruling matrix – starring the Masters of the Universe managing the financial casino – won’t stop resisting any drive towards change.
Diversionist tactics supporting an “ecological transition” fool no one.
Financial capitalism is an expert in adapting to – and profiting from – the serial crises it provokes or unleashes.
To update May 1968, what’s needed is L’Imagination au Pouvoir. Yet it’s idle to expect imagination from mere puppets such as Trump, Merkel, Macron or BoJo.
Realpolitik once again points to a post-Lockdown turbo-capitalist framework, where the illiberalism of the 1% – with fascistic elements – and naked turbo-financialization are boosted by reinforced exploitation of an exhausted and now largely unemployed workforce.
Post-Lockdown turbo-capitalism is once again reasserting itself after four decades of Thatcherization, or – to be polite – hardcore neoliberalism. Progressive forces still don’t have the ammunition to revert the logic of extremely high profits for the ruling classes – EU governance included – and for large global corporations as well.
Economist and philosopher Frederic Lordon, a researcher at the French CNRS, cuts to the inevitable chase: the only solution would be a revolutionary insurrection. And he knows exactly how the financial markets-corporate media combo would never allow it. Big Capital is capable of co-opting and sabotaging anything.
So this is our choice: it’s either Neoliberal Restoration or a revolutionary rupture. And nothing in between. It takes someone of Marx’s caliber to build a full-fledged, 21st century eco-socialist ideology, and capable of long-term, sustained mobilization. Aux armes, citoyens.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Friday, 29 November 2019

Western counter-revolution tragically on display at gas price hike protests



A picture taken on November 17, 2019 shows a scorched gas station that was set ablaze by protesters during a demonstration against a rise in gasoline prices in Eslamshahr, near the Iranian capital of Tehran. (By AFP)
A picture taken on November 17, 2019 shows a scorched gas station that was set ablaze by protesters during a demonstration against a rise in gasoline prices in Eslamshahr, near the Iranian capital of Tehran. (By AFP)
Thu Nov 28, 2019 08:18AM [Updated: Thu Nov 28, 2019 08:24AM ]
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of the books ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’ and the upcoming ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism.’

A simple question for you: are there, for lack of a better word, “counter-revolutionaries” in Ukraine, Hong Kong, or Syria? By that I mean: do those nations have people on the far extremes of the political spectrum who will provoke, take advantage of, and even relish in violence against their governments?
Obviously, only a liar or somebody foolishly playing devil’s advocate would not respond that, yes, in these nations there are many such persons — the proof is overwhelming.
So why would it be so hard to believe that there are such persons — counter-revolutionaries — in Iran, and that they hijacked recent protests over gas price hikes to provoke, take advantage of, and devilishly relish in death and violence against the government? Iran, unlike the nations I listed — and unlike almost every nation, period — actually had a popular revolution for extremists to counter in the first place.
Iranians are reminded of their exceptionalism when, for example and for certain, such far-right groups drove on a motorcycle to a gas hike protest, fired on the crowd, and fled.
Such vicious, armed people — the allies of the governments of many of those reading this article — are obviously the worst, most anti-democratic type of criminal. Their goal is just as obvious: to foment a counter-revolution in Iran.
What is unfortunate regarding the West’s coverage of the national tragedy which was the violence at the Iranian gas hike protests is that there isn’t the barest mention of this very real, very life-and-death, very accurate reality.
The term “counter-revolutionary” staggers the Western mind in its tracks — they seem to think it has been consigned to history? Or because there are no revolutionary countries in the West, and many ones filled with neo-imperial propaganda, perhaps they cannot even conceive of the existence of counter-revolutionaries?
The impact of such naivety is profoundly deadly.
Iranian counter-revolutionaries are aware of this yawning Western blind spot, and so they know that every single Iranian death — when reported by Amnesty International or Western journalists — will be blamed on the government and national security forces even though every Iranian knows that this is false and impossible.
The sweet, good-hearted innocents at Amnesty and the desk-only journalists in London, Paris, and New York City simply do not have the experience, or maybe even the editorial approval, to write this truthful question asked by every Iranian: how many innocent deaths were caused by counter-revolutionaries, and how many counter-revolutionaries pushed their far-right views all the way to their own demise?
We don’t know, as an official government report of the deaths has not yet been released. But everyone in Iran has an idea of the answer — a lot of them.
And there were many innocent deaths of protesters, too. This is why the gas hike protests are a tragedy.
And we know, because no one denies the right to self-defense, that the government simply had to fire back: when somebody drives by on a motorcycle and opens fire… what is the alternative for any civil servant working in security?
What needs to be impressed on non-Iranians is that there are regular protests in Iran and that they are not violent. Iran is not Cuba, which has no protests besides the “Ladies in White.” Iran is also not China, which has almost too many protests to keep track of. Iran is also not the US, which seemingly forgot how to protest in between the end of their Vietnam invasion and the election of Donald Trump. So if Iran has many protests which do not get violent, why did these?
The gas price hikes were launched without warning, and I assume it is because the government knew that they would be very unpopular… but they didn’t want them to be explosive.
And by “explosive” I mean that they didn’t want the old-money monarchists, the insane MKO who are even less popular than the criminal monarchists, ISIL (an attack of theirs caused 70 innocent casualties in Tehran in 2017), the cynical mercenaries bought by Western nations and their Arab monarch puppets, the secret service agencies of such nations which of course target Iran (is this is not a great number of people, already?) to have time to plan their drive-by shootings, building bombings and arsons at a  moment of heightened social unrest. I would say it’s not that the government wanted to catch the Iranian people by surprise, but to catch these illegitimate, undemocratic, far-right, definitely “counter-revolutionary” forces by surprise.
Were there legitimate protests against the gas hikes? As I mentioned, of course, and nor were they unusual or unexpected.
But attacking a police station, probably to get weapons — it is a normal journalistic question to ask if these are the works of counter-revolutionaries or “normal protesters,” regardless of the passport such attackers hold? Take a moment to imagine what the Western mainstream response would be be if French Yellow Vests did that — the idea that any of them would receive the barest sliver of public support is preposterous.
Just like with the Yellow Vests, the West lies about the true authors of protest violence
This should be stating the obvious to anyone with a rudimentary political awareness, but in the Iranian context, a “far-rightist” is synonymous with a “counter-revolutionary.” This is the case of every society which had a revolution since 1917, and Iran is no different. There is no “far-right” party in China, Cuba, Iran, or in any revolutionary nation because revolutionary nations all banish/declare war on far-right forces, after all.
It is difficult for Westerners to understand the recent Iran protests because they are denied this historical-political honesty and context about Iran. Their difficulty is further compounded by the fact that the top NGOs and the Western mainstream media cannot or will not admit that in Western nations the far-right is firmly a part of their establishments, unlike in Iran.
Look at the Yellow Vests in France: across the West, they have been portrayed as violent, far-right thugs masquerading as protesters. The reality is — and I have been there nearly every Saturday and can testify — the scenes of extreme violence always come from Black Bloc members who infiltrate the protests. Black Bloc is totally detrimental to the legitimate pro-democracy and socioeconomic demands of the Yellow Vest protesters; their ultra-left anarchism is totally unwanted; they are easily infiltrated by rogue cops, who merely have to wear black; French riot cops don’t lift a finger to stop Black Bloc’s vandalism — they are either colluding or, certainly, told to allow violence to occur in order to discredit the Yellow Vests.
The Yellow Vests are innocent protesters, just like the Iranian gas hike protesters — they are unarmed and cannot possibly stop people from committing unreasonable violence. Therefore, how can the West blame the Yellow Vests for violence they disavow and have no part in? I don’t know… but that is certainly what they have done for a calendar year.
The real violence comes not from Iranian gas price hike protesters nor Yellow Vests (who started following a gas price hike) in either of their situations, but from outside, unwanted, self-interested forces with incredibly dubious democratic intentions.
It is crystal clear: just as the West doesn’t report that it is Black Bloc committing violence and not the Yellow Vests protesters, the West also doesn’t report that it is far-right/counter-revolutionaries who are the authors of violence in Iran.
The Iranian government must absolutely punish police wrongdoings whenever proven. They must not be like France, which last week finally opened their first trial for police brutality despite the full calendar year of incredibly calculating repression. Iran has had a short-lived paroxysm of violence — the French government cold-bloodedly wages police brutality with sadistic regularity and precision.
However, comparing France and Iran is to compare apples and bowling balls. France’s government doesn’t have to spend one second thinking about catching “anti-France” forces “by surprise.” France is not beset by many rich, far-right groups / nations / monarchs / ex-monarchs / terrorists who get out of bed in the morning with the sole goal of destabilizing their national system.
Iranians, unlike the French, know this article is full of truths.
They know that because they know what propaganda is: France just had its bloodiest day since being kicked out of Beirut some 40 years ago, as 13 French soldiers died while fighting in Mali. President Emmanuel Macron immediately tweeted, “These 13 heroes had just one goal: To protect us.” Now that is laughable propaganda about France’s “one goal!”
Nobody can believe that, but many in France and the West do — all part of the “war on terrorism,” right? But Malians know better: a January 2018 poll in the capital of Bamako revealed that 80% of respondents believe that France’s army is in Mali only to defend its own interests. Which is, of course, obviously the case. Macron immediately and robotically made his phony “war on terror” claim because he knows such scaremongering propaganda is desperately needed to stop honest discussion.
Just as many Westerners will believe Macron’s false propaganda, many Westerners will believe 100% that the Iranian government is responsible for every recent death. The emphatic, self-righteous certainty with which Western propaganda insists this falsehood and inaccuracy is appalling.
Iranians believe otherwise — some told me the majority of the dead were ardent counter-revolutionaries. This is a common perception, but it cannot be verified yet — what’s certain is that innocents did die, and that is a tragedy.
US clarifies its ‘diplomacy:’ allow a counter-revolution or starve to death
The real economic problem in Iran is the Western sanctions blockade. Such sanctions are made to create instability to the point of civil war. The West also funds groups which are designed expressly to create the most sparks precisely at times of heightened dissatisfaction and difficulty.
Those are all facts, and why would they not have been on full display at the gas price hike protests?
They were, but honest analysis of Iranian politics has few forums available. This article has discussed and analyzed these rarely-discussed realities which Iranians know well and will not deny.
In Iran, the violence comes from an ultra-violent right but the West naively acts as if such a political sector in Iran does not exist. The West also naively acts as if within their own nations there is not establishment support of far-right, conservative, certainly “counter-revolutionary” ideas and groups. It should thus be clear why the West is so unwilling to support revolutionary Iran in maintaining its revolution.
The West allies with the far-right across the world. Iranians know this, and they also pay the price. They pay the price at the gas pump, as the West’s blockade has undoubtedly forced the recent price increase, and they pay the price in so very many liters of blood, just as they have done ever since the beginning of the Western-forced invasion by Iraq in 1980.
Why can such realities not be even be broached in Western media or by Western NGOs? To this, I have no satisfactory answer.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just said, essentially, that Iran has to have a counter-revolution if “they want their people to eat.” As Yemen proves (in case North Korea did not do this already), the US is fine with starvation as a “legitimate” political tactic.
What is certain, sadly, is that no Western journalist called Pompeo a “far-rightist,” a “fascist” or a “counter-revolutionary” — they all simply nodded and reported what he said without question, contestation, or a hint of shame.
The counter-revolutionaries lost in Iran recently, again; Iran mourns that they still keep trying. The nation mourns most of all because of the West’s never-ending blockade against Iranian self-determination.
The terroristic inhumanity of their starvation-strangulation-sanction policy is something which cannot be broached in Western media, NGOs, governments or among many Western citizens, as well.

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!