======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================


http://revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com/2010/01/on-nonviolence-in-iranian-peoples.html

Thursday, January 7, 2010
On Nonviolence in the Iranian People's Movement
Thanks to Arash Asaasi, for sending in this translation: original (in 
Persian) on Gozareshgaran website; initially posted at Sarbaalaayi. The 
writer Amin Hosoori's writings appear regularly in Khiaban newspaper, as 
well as on Gozareshgaran website.

On Violence in the Movement and Non-Violence
by Amin Hosoori / Monday, December 4, 2010
(translation: Arash Asaasi)

For the continuation and eventual victory of an anti-dictatorial 
movement, and in the face of the organized onslaught and oppression by 
the regime -- whose only means of survival is through the 
intensification of repression -- acquiring collective alacrity by the 
people for an 'organized defense' of each other and the movement is an 
undeniable necessity.

In the current opposition movement in Iran, although the need for an 
'organized defense' has become obvious for some time now, unfortunately, 
not only has this necessity remained unanswered at the level of ideas, 
but, quite the reverse, in a clichéd and morphed discourse on 
'nonviolent struggle' (reproduced against the backdrop of the ruling 
discourse), its exact opposite approach gets theorized and prescribed. 
Unfortunately, a superficial and incorrect understanding regarding 
'nonviolent struggles' is disseminated by reformist tribunes, platforms, 
and individuals aligned with them. This superficial understanding 
prevents the growth of a collective dialogue regarding the differences 
between 'self-organized defense' [by the people] and 'organized 
onslaught' [by the regime]. In other words, this difference too, much 
like the above-mentioned necessity [of self-preservation of the 
movement], gets lost behind the 'convincing' facade of 'violence is 
forbidden'. In such an illusion-ridden atmosphere of 'strength of 
morality', in which the collective dialogue about instances of 
onslaught, violence and defense gets blocked, it is natural that the 
collective search for practical methods of preparing for 'nonviolent 
struggle', and creating the conditions and the preparedness among the 
people for consciously organizing a 'self-organized defense' is driven 
to the margins.

Instead, when through 'trial and error' and in a natural fashion, people 
from within the movement and affected by its objective and horrendous 
conditions, seek an answer for the above-mentioned necessity [of 
self-defense and preservation of the movement], a flood of accusations 
and theoretical falsifications flows freely: Now, the holy principles of 
the non-violent struggle have been violated! Item: what we witnessed in 
the reformist media after the bloody Ashura events [of 28 Dec. 2009]. On 
the other hand, although among this faction -- which has the upper hand 
in terms of organization and numbers of followers -- the discourse 
regarding the harms of the spread of violence has thickened (with 
emphasis on 'dangers' of the growth of radicalism), other groups and 
media and in opposition to the first group, praise in advance any act of 
(possible) violence by the people, under the pretext of 'revolutionary 
force'. So, in effect, the media atmosphere regarding the issue of 
'violence' has turned into a slogan-ridden and impotent opposition 
between two polarized views: on one side stand those who, in an idealist 
and sentimentalist fashion and with a prescriptive outlook on the 
movement (with, of course, particular political interests), speechify 
regarding absolute negation of violence; and on the opposite side stand 
a few individuals and trends who, under the banner of political 
radicalism (1) and revolutionary behavior, believe that the violence of 
the regime must be answered by an equivalent violence, as they consider 
this a necessity for a revolutionary act. Fortunately, the media 
atmosphere is not bereft of critical and moderate outlooks; although 
these judgments have not yet been able to reduce the weight of the 
black-and-white outlooks in a noticeable way (2).

But, the events of the day of Ashura (bloody Sunday) can also be re-read 
from another viewpoint:

With the passing of several months from the start of the oppositional 
and justice-seeking movement of the people, the regime -- instead of 
recognizing the legitimacy of the protests and accepting the people's 
just demands -- at the same time that it denies the existence of the 
movement (3), has resorted to an ever increasingly violent crackdown 
against the dissidents (4). As a matter of fact, in their self-made 
quagmire there is no choice or tool left for the Islamic Republic but 
naked oppression and militarism. The continuation of the current 
conditions has led to a situation whereby the people, in order to guard 
and maintain their movement, must resort to standing up ever more 
powerfully in the streets. In the events of the day of Ashura, despite 
the immensity of the repression, people displayed unparalleled courage 
and resistance, and elevated the movement to a higher level of 
self-confidence and determination. At the same time, some people, in the 
process of defending themselves and resisting the blind onslaught of the 
paid thugs and the anti-riot police, or else affected by the limitless 
cruelties of the oppressive forces, in unexpected confrontations and 
battles, in a natural and purely emotional reaction (without any prior 
plans or preparation; meaning, unlike the methods used by regime's 
repression), committed certain acts of violence [...]. This took place 
-- as witnessed/recorded by video clips -- while simultaneously 
accompanied by a bigger number of people who were encouraging the 
rage-filled people to avoid violence, to calm down, and were attempting 
to stop the continuation of their extremist acts. But, in the end and 
after the publication of the news and images of the people's resistance, 
people like Mas'ood Behnood (5) and others -- who have been responsible 
for the spread of that superficial understanding of 'nonviolent 
struggle' -- turned some of these scenes of the youth losing their cool 
in the heat of the moment into excuses to moan, "We lost!" And others, 
like Ezatollah Sahaabi, then joined along the songs of lament (6). 
Without ever seeing the overall totality of the people's movement and 
their collective, sensible behavior on this day as contrasted to those 
exceptional moments; without ever mentioning a word about the systematic 
violence and the unbounded oppression of the regime on this day and the 
differences between systematic and organized violence and scattered 
instances of violence in [reaction to] the moment.

(clip)

________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to