![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Thoughts On Iran
Jun. 23rd, 2009 09:04 amTwo thoughts on Iran, stolen borrowed from various sources:
One: Patterns of Revolutionary Change. An interesting read, and in my opinion, the money quote is:
"Bottom-up revolutions often begin with an expectancy of change that fails to materialize. The gravity of the expected change is almost immaterial. Thus, in early 1776, the men who would become our Founding Fathers waited months, expecting clemency or a compromise that never came; rather than halting revolution, Mikhail Gorbachev’s half-steps to freedom precipitated the death of the USSR; and the “defeat” of the quasi-reformer, Mir Hossein Mosauvi, evokes on the streets a yearning for change far beyond what the fairly moderate man ever even pretended to offer."
Two: a thought experiment: (hat tip Unqualifed Offerings, source Jim Lobe) regarding our policy with Iran.
The money quote:
"But to illustrate this obvious fact more sharply, consider the following thought experiment. In 1963, as King delivers his famous speech to the March on Washington, Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev delivers a public message of his own to the protesters. “We would like to tell these brave voices of freedom,” Khrushchev says, “that they have the full support and solidarity of the USSR. The Soviet Union and the United States Communist Party are ready and willing to perform any measures within our power to help our American brothers and sisters obtain their rights from this oppressive regime."
The bottom line: "Let us focus only on a simple tactical question: would Khrushchev’s statement aid the civil rights movement? Would it be welcomed by King and his associates? Why or why not?"
One: Patterns of Revolutionary Change. An interesting read, and in my opinion, the money quote is:
"Bottom-up revolutions often begin with an expectancy of change that fails to materialize. The gravity of the expected change is almost immaterial. Thus, in early 1776, the men who would become our Founding Fathers waited months, expecting clemency or a compromise that never came; rather than halting revolution, Mikhail Gorbachev’s half-steps to freedom precipitated the death of the USSR; and the “defeat” of the quasi-reformer, Mir Hossein Mosauvi, evokes on the streets a yearning for change far beyond what the fairly moderate man ever even pretended to offer."
Two: a thought experiment: (hat tip Unqualifed Offerings, source Jim Lobe) regarding our policy with Iran.
The money quote:
"But to illustrate this obvious fact more sharply, consider the following thought experiment. In 1963, as King delivers his famous speech to the March on Washington, Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev delivers a public message of his own to the protesters. “We would like to tell these brave voices of freedom,” Khrushchev says, “that they have the full support and solidarity of the USSR. The Soviet Union and the United States Communist Party are ready and willing to perform any measures within our power to help our American brothers and sisters obtain their rights from this oppressive regime."
The bottom line: "Let us focus only on a simple tactical question: would Khrushchev’s statement aid the civil rights movement? Would it be welcomed by King and his associates? Why or why not?"
100% complete
