[Marxism] Not a Twitter revolution, nor a velvet revolution

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/21814
It's not a Twitter revolution in Iran

June 28, 2009 By Reese Erlich

Iran is not undergoing a Twitter Revolution. The term simultaneously 
mischaracterizes and trivializes the important mass movement developing 
in Iran.

Here's how it all began. The Iranian government prohibited foreign 
reporters from traveling outside Tehran without special permission, and 
later confined them to their hotel rooms and offices. CNN and other 
cable networks were particularly desperate to find ways to show the 
large demonstrations and government repression. So they turned to 
Internet sites such as Facebook and Twitter in a frantic effort to get 
information. Since reporters were getting most of their information from 
Tweets and You Tube video clips, the notion of a "Twitter Revolution" 
was born.

We reporters love a catch phrase and, Twitter being all a flutter in the 
west, it seemed to fit. It's a catchy phrase but highly misleading.

First of all the vast majority of Iranians have no access to Twitter. 
While reporting in Tehran, I personally didn't encounter anyone who used 
it regularly. A relatively small number of young, economically well off 
Iranians do use Twitter. A larger number have access to the Internet. 
However, in the beginning, most demonstrations were organized through 
word of mouth, mobile phone calls and text messaging.

But somehow "Text Messaging Revolution" doesn't have that modern, sexy 
ring, especially if you have to type it with your thumbs on a tiny keyboard.

More importantly, by focusing on the latest in Internet communications, 
cable TV networks intentionally or unintentionally characterize a 
genuine mass movement as something supported mainly by the Twittering 
classes.

I witnessed tens of thousands of mostly young people coming out into the 
streets in spontaneous campaign rallies in the days leading up to the 
election - most of whom had never heard of Twitter.

They shared a common joy not only campaigning for reformist Mirhossein 
Mousavi, but in being able to freely express themselves for the first 
time in many years. When the government announced an overwhelming 
victory for hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad only two hours after the polls 
closed, people became furious.

Over the next few days, hundreds of thousands of Iranians poured into 
the streets in Tehran and cities around the country. They organized 
silent marches through word of mouth and phone calls since the 
government had shut down text messaging just prior to the election. 
Contrary to popular perception, these gatherings included women in 
chadors, workers and clerics - not just the Twittering classes. 
Spontaneous marches took place in south Tehran, a decidedly poorer 
section of town and supposedly a stronghold for Ahmadinejad.

Iranians initially It's a genuine Iranian mass movement made up of 
students, workers, women, and middle class folks. It may not be strong 
enough to topple the system today but is sowing the seeds for future 
struggles.

protested what they perceived as massive vote fraud, but that quickly 
evolved as the protests grew in size and breadth. In the week after the 
June 14 election, millions of Iranians vented 30 years of pent up anger 
at a repressive system.

Iranian youth particularly resented President Ahmadinejad's support for 
religious militia attacks on unmarried young men and women walking 
together and against women not covering enough hair with their hijab. 
Workers resented the 24 percent annual inflation that robbed them of 
real wage increases. Independent trade unionists had been fighting for 
decent wages and for the right to organize.

Some demonstrators wanted a more moderate Islamic government. Others 
advocated a separation of mosque and state, and a return to 
parliamentary democracy. They are well aware that when Iran had a 
genuine parliamentary system under Prime Minister Mossadegh, the CIA 
overthrew it in 1953 in order to promote the Shah as dictator. I didn't 
meet any Iranians calling for U.S. intervention; that's strictly a 
debate inside the Washington beltway.

Some Iranian friends have asked me why Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali 
Khamenei would throw his support behind Ahmadinejad when his presidency 
was so clearly damaging the country at home and abroad. Initially, 
Khamenei supported the president because they share common ideological 
and political positions. Later, the top clerical leaders saw the mass 
movement that coalesced around Mousavi's campaign as a direct threat to 
government stability and their future rule.

Since June 21, the top clerics, military and intelligence services have 
mobilized their entire apparatus to crush the movement for social and 
economic change.

The mass movement that sprang forth in the past few weeks has been 30 
years in coming. It's not a Twitter Revolution, nor even a "velvet 
revolution" like those in Eastern Europe.

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu