What does Chis Floyd have to say about Iran?

[liteworker101]

Through a Glass Darkly: Sifting Myth and Fact on Iran
Written by Chris Floyd
Iranian academic Ali Alizadeh points out an important fact missed by many who see nothing but sinister American manipulation behind the post-election protests in Iran: that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's economic policies -- touted as a possible reason that he expanded his vote total by 10 million over the last election, a bounty ostensibly harvested from the grateful rural poor -- are actually much more in line with his old nemesis, George W. Bush. As Alizadeh notes (via the Angry Arab):

It needs to be emphasized that Ahmadinejad’s economic policies are to the right of the IMF: cutting subsidies in a radical way, more privatization than any other post-79 government (by selling the country to the Revolutionary Guards) and an inflation and unemployment rate which have brought the low-income sections of the society to their knees.

snip to the end:
Moussavi -- a long-time paladin of Iran's ruling establishment, a conservative who was once a hardline prime minister himself, closely aligned with the Ayatollah Khomeini (America's own "Great Satan" of yore) -- is hardly the pliable stooge sought by the Potomac plotters. Of course, as we noted earlier this week, this fact doesn't necessarily make him a Jeffersonian hero of human liberty, either -- an Aung San Suu Kyi of Iran. The corporate media's portrayal of the Iranian uprising is indeed a lazy slotting of chaotic reality into neatly defined, "color revolution" stereotypes; but their misjudgment needn't be compounded a comparable stereotyping the other way. (The corporate media's false depiction of Moussavi as a "liberal" has ironically been seized upon by some American dissidents as proof that he is a color-revolution cut-out for Western interests, even, as some have described him, an "Iranian Ahmad Chalabi." If he were a returned exile who had spent years in the pay of the CIA, that might be true. But that is not the case. Again, it is no endorsement of Moussavi to point out these facts.) As Alizadeh notes, the crowds appearing at the protest rallies are

made of religious women covered in chador walking hand in hand with westernized young women who are usually prosecuted for their appearance; veterans of war in wheelchairs next to young boys for whom the Iran-Iraq war is only an anecdote; and working class who have sacrificed their daily salary to participate in the rally next to the middle classes. This story is not limited to Tehran. Shiraz (two confirmed dead), Isfahan (one confirmed dead), Tabriz, Oroomiye are also part of this movement and other cities are joining with a predictable delay (as it was the case in 79 revolution).


As I noted the other day, no one knows how the current turmoil will turn out -- or how the various power-players, including the many elite factions inside Iran and the many vultures circling outside, will attempt to mold the chaotic reality to their own advantage. But it seems to me that the circumstances in Iran cannot be forced into any simplistic template. For while it is true that the American imperium does indeed seek to exert its influence everywhere and always, it does not and cannot engender and control every event on earth. We risk partaking of the courtiers' own hubris -- and their mythology of American exceptionalism -- if we make that automatic assumption.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/3/1782-through-a-glass-darkly-sifting-myth-and-fact-on-iran.html


I posted an article by Paul Craig Roberts, ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5892840&mesg_id=5892840 ), now this from Chris Floyd. What does Robert Fisk have to say? All I'm saying is something is wrong here, something is making red flags go off in every direction for me. I haven't seen anything like this - it is disturbing to say the very least, especially in not being able to meke heads or tails of it. The traditional "follow the money" and "who benefits" models aren't working this time, at least for me.

And please I mean to offend no one here at DU, there are far too many wise and knowledgeable posters here that I respect immensely.

[Oregone]

1. Prepare to be flamed in 3...2...1....

:popcorn:

[libodem]

If he doesn't say that the Neocons

invented Economic Hit Men and Political unrest for the purpose of overthrowing governments then he got it wrong. I'm just glad it's not privatize social security week or off shore drilling. We are being played like a violin. DU should know better.

[libodem]

2. If he doesn't say that the Neocons

invented Economic Hit Men and Political unrest for the purpose of overthrowing governments then he got it wrong. I'm just glad it's not privatize social security week or off shore drilling. We are being played like a violin. DU should know better.

[Karenina]

3. Thank you, Liteworker101! Floyd is required reading!

Welcome to DU! :toast:

[liteworker101]

6. Thank you.- it means alot coming from you!

[Obamanaut]

9. There is no such word a 'alot.' It is 'a lot.'

[Hannah Bell]

4. This is distortion: "Ahmadinejad’s economic policies are to the right

of the IMF: cutting subsidies in a radical way, more privatization than any other post-79 government (by selling the country to the Revolutionary Guards)"


Before the recent troubles, what I'd read was:

-ahmadinejad was the author of heavy subsidies to the poor & the rural;

-recent proposed cutbacks come under pressure from other entities demanding same due to decline in oil revenues, not ahmadinejad's desire;

- ahmadinejad's base in the rev guard gets rewarded with control of selected industries as counterweight to the mullahs who have same (& would prefer to have more...)


Mousavi's platform is the same removal of subsidies, plus more opening to foreign investment. Mousavi's support = urban, business class, portion of the mullahs...ahmadinejad's = rural, poor & working class, military & portion of mullahs...as a generalization...

sure, bush loved hmadinejad's policy so much, that's why he budgeted more money to overthrow him...

it's a question of who gets the graft & how much foreign capital is allowed in, that's all.

[Karenina]

7. As far as I've been able to reckon

the RG has quite a grip on the economy. The Golden Rule: Those wit da GOLD RULE! :shrug: They've also got big time firepower.

I have no "allegiance based on principle," preference or prediction, finding my own understanding enhanced by remaining neutral and LISTENING CAREFULLY.

[Hannah Bell]

8. The richest person in the country isn't RG. A channeled some graft to his base.

Like his predecessors channeled it to theirs.

Point is, Chris Floyd's account is a distortion. If you read old reports, it's very apparent that A increased subsidies to the poor/rural, was one of the prime movers of such programs.

For machiavellian purposes, no doubt; nevertheless, he's not anti-subsidy. He proposed reduced subsidies recently to placate the business faction & counter Mousavi's anti-subsidy/free market platform.

[laststeamtrain]

5. What's happening in Iran is so confusing it must, at least in part, be genuine. Go figure.n/t.