Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Totalitarian Orwell Machines

posted at 7:48 pm on October 1, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view

SeeDubya has written a terrific post over at JunkYardBlog, on the death of the Burma revolt and what it might mean to any democracy movement in Iran.

The point that he makes about Iran’s royalists mixing in with the various anti-mullah forces is a very valid one. Several of the anti-Ahmadinejad demonstrators that we saw in NYC last Monday weren’t democrats. They were carrying signs pining for installing the Shah’s son on the throne that Jimmy Carter forced the Shah himself to abandon in 1979.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

“…the Shah’s son…”

Well, we’d all prefer an elected (classic) liberal, capitalist, anti-jihadist in Iran … but if we had to choose between a monarchy and the theocracy now in place, we’ll take the monarchy. Perhaps he can call for elections and make himself a figurehead, you know, like the Queen of England … and the Vice President of the U.S.

The Iranians who supported the islamic revolution back in ‘79 regretted it within a few years and would love to get rid of them.

Tony737 on October 1, 2007 at 8:03 PM

I will never buy another Burma Shave product as long as I live.

JayHaw Phrenzie on October 1, 2007 at 8:09 PM

Several of the anti-Ahmadinejad demonstrators… in NYC… weren’t democrats

.

“Democracy” is a meaningless, if not suicidal lure without a Constitution and Bill of Rights in place, first, that guarantee the people’s inherent and inalienable rights and secure their freedom.

Otherwise you just enable the Islamically-brainwashed majority to destroy all rights and freedom by the ballot.

One man, one vote, one time.

The Shah’s son is preferable to the mad mullahs.

If the Persian people can get rid of the nuke-hungry ayatollahs and put in a figurehead of their past glories, more power to them.

profitsbeard on October 1, 2007 at 8:13 PM

In Burma the warlords commit mass murder, and the UN sends an envoy.

In Darfor, UN peace keeping troops are attacked, so the UN troops bail out.

In Lebanon UN peace keeping troops are attacked, and they ‘button up, hunker down’, and do nothing.

Meanwhile Robert Mugabe destroys an entire country, with mass famine, and probably worse yet to come, and other African leaders defend him because they don’t want their own positions of power scrutinized.

Now murderous gangster thugs, and tyrants outnumber decent world leaders in the UN, and head up UN committees like ‘human rights’.

Someone please explain why we even participate in that farce. I had to debate that very question in high school 40+ years ago, and the arguments haven’t changed since.

So the question then becomes, “are we learning anything, yet?”

rockhauler on October 1, 2007 at 8:52 PM

Right now whats going on in Burma speaks volumes.
It emmboldens Chevaz,Putin,Communist China,Hezbolla,
Fata,the islamic goons in Lebanon,Syria,and IminadinnerjacketandImcertifyednuts,oh ang AQ.

Oh and I forgot,it emboldens MoveOn.Org to.

canopfor on October 1, 2007 at 9:07 PM

Huh, all roads lead back to Carter…, huh…

Kini on October 1, 2007 at 9:09 PM

So the question then becomes, “are we learning anything, yet?”

rockhauler on October 1, 2007 at 8:52 PM

Nope, Its going to get worse.
This is just one of many examples.

John O’Sullivan, NRO

August 26, 2005, 4:42 p.m.
Endangered Sovereignty
U.N. bureaucrats are making a quiet power grab.

In less than a month’s time — the 16th and 17th of September — the world’s great and good will be gathering at the U.N. building in Manhattan for what is officially called the High Level Plenary Meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. This meeting, attended by the heads of government of most countries, including the major powers, has become a regular event in recent years, but one of ceremonial importance rather than of substance.

This year, however, the meeting will be very significant indeed. For the plenary session will almost certainly pass an obscure document, now circulating in draft form among U.N. delegations, that calls on the assembled governments to re-affirm their support for the U.N.’s Millennium Declaration Goals and the other declarations of U.N. conferences over the past 30 years. It will ask them to support the achievement of these goals in a coordinated and integrated manner, to renew their commitment to…

Falling asleep already, are you? Well, that is precisely the intention of those who composed these anodyne phrases. When bureaucrats seize power, they do it not with swords but with chloroform. And this document is a power-grab by people of whom you have never heard, the officials of the U.N. Secretariat, working in tandem with the diplomats of those countries and international organizations that would like to expand the power of the U.N. and its various agencies over both the citizens and governments of member nations.

You might suppose that, given the spreading scandal of the U.N.’s Oil-for-Food program, in which a regiment of U.N. officials was corruptly assisting Saddam Hussein to outwit the very sanctions they were supposed to be enforcing, the U.N. Secretariat would be on the defensive. And tucked away towards the end of this document, there are provisions to increase the transparency and accountability of U.N. agencies and their officials. In a rational world they would be whole of the document.

Alas, a reader who has the fortitude and diligence to plough through all of its 158 provisions will discover that its main thrust is to extend the U.N.’s power directly into countries and over the lives of citizens, corporations and private bodies. That ambition is not, of course, advertised. Most of the language used, in addition to being sleep-inducing, is mildly benevolent in tone. For instance:

“We recognize that development, peace and security and human rights are interlinked and mutually reinforcing and cannot be enjoyed without each other.

http://www.nationalreview.com/jos/osullivan200508261642.asp

Speakup on October 1, 2007 at 9:19 PM

It seems the Iranians don’t know what they want. They didn’t like the shah and for good reason, and they suffered ten times that damage from the revolutionary Ayatollahs afterwards.

I don’t see a stable democratic non-extremist Iran for at least 100 years.

Free Constitution on October 1, 2007 at 9:38 PM

Iran will not last 100 years. They are on a path to destruction that is as sure as tomorrow. Their leaders are determined to develop something to help them start the last war. They hope that in doing so, they will bring forth the 12th Imam to establish Islams dominance of the whole world. Most of the left and liberals who think they can reason with those who are willing to strap bombs to their children to destroy their enemies, that being those who do not believe as they do. It is fortunate there are men in positions of power that will never allow Iran to reach their goal. Even if it means the destruction of that nation, and it will.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on October 1, 2007 at 11:57 PM

To my eyes the sum total of all that I have absorbed about the middle east over the last 20 years is that these people are incapable of self rule. They are trapped in a ridgid religious/tribal mindset and have been kept so ignorant for so long that they can’t conceive liberty based on a principle where men discuss their differences and compromise so that they may live together. Their religion brooks little compromise and their intertribal competition seems only capable of breeding hatred.

The West has the flexibility to except them into this planet’s brotherhood of man but I’m not sure that they can do the same. If it comes to a fight, they will lose and they are either too ignorant to recognize that fact or brainwashed into believing that dying for Islam is not in fact death. Unfortunately if it comes to a fight we will all lose too much and it will never solve the problem.

I’m not religious but if given the choice I would rather see a world based on Christianity than one based on Islam. History has proven that Christianity breeds innovation and progress in most areas (Islamics didn’t get us to the moon) where Islam by its very nature breeds strict conformity under threat of death. (irealize that I’m generalizing more than is acceptable…. sorry)

I hope to live long enough to see how this issue is resolved.

Ernest on October 2, 2007 at 9:21 AM

The Crown Prince has been outspoken in calling for elections to determine the form of governmenet that replaces the Islamic Republic. Should the Iranian people vote for a restoration of the monarchy, he’s also made it clear it would be a constitutional monarchy, not an absolutist one.

Mike Honcho on October 2, 2007 at 9:34 AM

Off topic a bit, but speaking of that Tienanmen Square photo:

It was oh so pathetic and yet so very liberal of Jefferson Airplane to use that photo as the backdrop to their big reunion press conference many years back. No more Starship… this is the original ’60s Jefferson Airplane, rekindled in their hippie spirit by the events in China! Support freedom! Buy out sh!tty new record!

saint kansas on October 2, 2007 at 10:53 AM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.