Thread: Iran and Bubba's Political Beer Analogy

While Americans have eagerly embraced the image of Mousavi the Reformer and the idea of a second Iranian revolution, they would be well advised to take a closer look beyond the headlines and eye-catching imagery.

While Mousavi parts ways with Ahmadinejad on strict enforcement of the state's Islamic-based moral codes, he shares the incumbent's views on Iran's unrestricted right to pursue nuclear power. Though he believes Ahmadinejad's belligerence and denial of the Holocaust have given the nation a negative image globally, he believes only that the tenure of the regime should be changed and not it's fundamental structure.

Are Iranians marching in tens of thousands against perceived electoral fraud and governmental corruption, yes. However, they're not fighting in the streets with their children at their feet. Let's be starkly clear. There's no popular groundswell calling for the overthrow of the current political structure, no talk of a new constitution for one to tip their hat to.

Allow me to open up the Big Book of Bare Knuckled Bubba Political Analogies, if you will. In essence, the crux of the controversy is akin to choosing between Bud and Bud Light. You're merely deciding which flavor you want; in the end you're still drinking beer. If you opted for vodka, whiskey or my personal favorite, Jagermeister, then you'd be talking about a substantive change. Granted, you'd still be drinking alcohol, but it would be a completely different form of alcohol from that of beer.

Applying Bubba's beer analogy to the current situation in Iran, the Iranian people are arguing over the choice between Regime or Regime Light - one is the tried and true, status quo King of Repression while the other is less filling and has a lighter moral code that tastes great. Both are nothing more than brands distributed by the same brewery. Furthermore, the brewery enjoys an iron-clad monopoly on it's market. One that it has no intention whatsoever of relinquishing, mind you.

In the end, the choice is between whether the iron gauntlet of the regime and the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be sheathed in the Member's Only jacket of Mr. Ahmadinejad or the velvet glove of Mr. Mousavi. Regardless of who ultimately wears it, the iron gauntlet remains. Americans should remain ever mindful of that, lest their emotions get the better of them and they once again find themselves bitterly disappointed that what appeared to be promising blips of change on Iran's political radar were nothing more than false echoes.

Originally Posted by The Bare Knuckled Pundit

Are Iranians marching in tens of thousands against perceived electoral fraud and governmental corruption, yes. However, they're not fighting in the streets with their children at their feet. Let's be starkly clear. There's no popular groundswell calling for the overthrow of the current political structure, no talk of a new constitution for one to tip their hat to.

Wrong.

Commentary Blog Archive Seven Demands

Demonstrators in Iran distributed seven demands in print yesterday.

1. Dismissal of Khamenei for not being a fair leader
2. Dismissal of Ahmadinejad for his illegal acts
3. Temporary appointment of Ayatollah Montazeri as the Supreme Leader
4. Recognition of Mousavi as the President
5. Forming the Cabinet by Mousavi to prepare for revising the Constitution
6. unconditional and immediate release of all political prisoners
7. Dissolution of all organs of repression, public or secret


Hundreds of thousands of these have been disseminated.

By the way, CNN covered the situation in Iran all day, so that's a good sign.

Originally Posted by The Bare Knuckled Pundit

While Americans have eagerly embraced the image of Mousavi the Reformer and the idea of a second Iranian revolution, they would be well advised to take a closer look beyond the headlines and eye-catching imagery...

In the end, the choice is between whether the iron gauntlet of the regime and the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be sheathed in the Member's Only jacket of Mr. Ahmadinejad or the velvet glove of Mr. Mousavi. Regardless of who ultimately wears it, the iron gauntlet remains. Americans should remain ever mindful of that, lest their emotions get the better of them and they once again find themselves bitterly disappointed that what appeared to be promising blips of change on Iran's political radar were nothing more than false echoes.

BKP,

Those who see things from a more idealistic vantage point want to believe that if the protestors prevail, Iran would be transformed into a reasonably friendly, fairly liberal democracy. Those who take the Realist position note that the four Presidential candidates were selected by the Guardian Council, recall Mr. Mousavi's role in restarting Iran's nuclear program, and understand that the authority of the President is very limited relative to the authority held by Iran's Supreme Leader. From the Realist perspective, one could expect that the geopolitical situation would change only modestly e.g., perhaps toward a guarded effort in the direction of somewhat greater engagement with the West (if the conservative clerics permit it), were the protestors to succeed in unseating Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Certainly, there can always be the hope that Mr. Mousavi himself has been transformed by the public's energy. However, that is a very long shot proposition. Such extraordinary and sudden personal transformations are quite rare.

Hopefully, the will of the people will be respected so that Iran can get on the path toward a gradual domestic transformation that would ultimately lead to a shift in the political balance of power that favors Iran's elected government. However, at least in my view, the substantive differences over key issues between the U.S. and Iran are likely to persist through the near-term regardless of who prevails.

Originally Posted by donsutherland1

BKP,

Those who see things from a more idealistic vantage point want to believe that if the protestors prevail, Iran would be transformed into a reasonably friendly, fairly liberal democracy. Those who take the Realist position note that the four Presidential candidates were selected by the Guardian Council, recall Mr. Mousavi's role in restarting Iran's nuclear program, and understand that the authority of the President is very limited relative to the authority held by Iran's Supreme Leader. From the Realist perspective, one could expect that the geopolitical situation would change only modestly e.g., perhaps toward a guarded effort in the direction of somewhat greater engagement with the West (if the conservative clerics permit it), were the protestors to succeed in unseating Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Certainly, there can always be the hope that Mr. Mousavi himself has been transformed by the public's energy. However, that is a very long shot proposition. Such extraordinary and sudden personal transformations are quite rare.

Hopefully, the will of the people will be respected so that Iran can get on the path toward a gradual domestic transformation that would ultimately lead to a shift in the political balance of power that favors Iran's elected government. However, at least in my view, the substantive differences over key issues between the U.S. and Iran are likely to persist through the near-term regardless of who prevails.

I too am a realist, just more optimistic.
And the Supreme Leaders stance that the election results will stand is actually a good thing in the long run. The protestors will remain unsatisfied, and hopefully a yearning for more democracy will fester.

As with our own country recently, the politique du pire (politics of the worse) with eight years of Bush brought about a fairly radical change.

And we also don't need our pols meddling in their affairs anytime soon.
For now, we citizens having our own protests in solidarity with the people of Iran is plenty.