Iran’s Growing Revolution vs. the Democrat’s Intervention

Linked on our blogs with Worker’s Action. – Published on Global Research.ca, by Shamus Cooke, December 28, 2009.

On Sunday in Iran, mass protests were drowned in blood by government authorities; at least ten reportedly have been killed with hundreds injured.  The events have been given ample coverage in the U.S. media, with the intention of further demonizing Iran’s repressive government. Absent in the American media are the deeper implications of the protests, which, to anyone paying close attention, constitute a powerful revolutionary movement. 

This movement has grown exponentially in a very short period of time.  Although only beginning in June over allegations of voter fraud, the movement is now endorsed by millions of combative Iranians, demanding “death to the dictator,” while they waive an Iranian flag that’s missing the Muslim insignia. Massive demonstrations in the streets and university campuses have directly confronted police repression and in some cases have overcome it. The New York Times describes a scene found only in instances of revolution:

There were scattered reports of police officers surrendering, or refusing to fight. Several videos posted on the Internet show officers holding up their helmets and walking away from the melee, as protesters pat them on the back in appreciation. In one photograph, several police officers can be seen holding their arms up, and one of them wears a bright green headband, the signature color of the opposition movement. (December 27, 2009).

The recent killing of protestors is likely to have the opposite of its intended effect:  protestors are likely to become even more demanding and radicalized.  After the shots were fired, thousands of demonstrators were heard yelling: “I’ll kill, I’ll kill those who killed my brothers.” If the current Iranian government survives the revolutionary movement, it will do so only after a prolonged period of extreme domestic crisis and repression … //

… This Iranian revolution, if successful, has profound implications for the Middle East and beyond. The last Iranian revolution, in 1979, shook off the U.S.-installed puppet dictator and made Iran an independent country.

Unfortunately, the aspirations of the people were choked off by the Ayatollahs, who stopped the revolutionary movement in its tracks by murdering progressives by the thousands.

Because the Middle East continues to be dominated by U.S. puppets or directly by the U.S. military, Iran’s independence continues to be a source of inspiration for millions in the region. Regrettably, the stunted outcome of the 1979 revolution is also viewed as a goal for many of these same people, who wrongly see a religious government as more just and equitable than what they currently experience under U.S. domination.

The popular revolution in Iran is likely to come into conflict with not only Mullahs, but in addition, powerful corporations. The people will not be satisfied submitting to either, making this revolution inherently more radical than the “pro-democracy” label given by the U.S. government. If Iran were to complete a revolution that made its goal to spend its oil wealth and other riches on the people, it would send an example that would rock the Middle East.
Any U.S. or Israeli intervention would be useless, which is precisely why they may try to abort the baby before it is born.

Those in the United States involved in the anti-war movement must be aware of the unfolding events in Iran. The people of Iran must be allowed to complete their revolution without U.S. intervention. HANDS OFF IRAN!

Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action. He can be reached by e-mail …  (full text).

Comments are closed.