Iran, Democracy and Mainstream Media Fantasies

This blog told you long ago, as the media talked about the PREVIOUS election in Iran which "elected" Ahmadinejad, that elections in Iran are not "real". There is a state run media, and a "supreme leader" (the Ayatollah). It is absurd to suggest that Iran is, or ever has been (in recent years, anyway), a true "democracy".


Further. Preisdent Obama has said that we do not intend to Impose" democracy on other contries--do not intend to "impose our values".


Thus, I am somewhat bemused by what is happening in Iran. I expected NOTHING from the "election"--contrary to the Obama inspired "optimism" in the mainstream media. I knew the election was rigged, and further would have limited impact even if the religious leaders in Iran--the true rulers of a theocracy--allowed a "change" of government. Even Ronald Reagan was misled by the false lure of "moderates" coming to power in Iran, and got trapped into "trading arms--pretty useless ones--for hostages" in an attempt to strengthen "moderates" in Iran.


What bemuses me is two things. ONe is the mainstream media assumption--seemingly boutht into by world leaders--that Iran ever INTENDED to have a "fair" election, or that international "poll watchers" EVER were going to be in Iran. For that matter, I agree with Iran in one respect. This idea that the U.N. has a "right" to control any country's elections, absent that country's invitation, is an EVIL thing. It is evil because it raises expectations (that the U.N. matters, or can do anything), and creates a total FICTION that th world is different than it is. That is a truly dangerous and evil thing, even if leftists seem to think tathat total, "1984" style, fiction is the way to advance your agenda.


The second thing that bemuss me is the EXTENT of the apparent unrest in Iran. Is it possible that Iran can be on the verge of another "revolution"? I don't think so, but I am bemused by the exent of the protest rallies.


Then there is the mainstream media--hopeless, as usual. Is it really a "stunning" turnaround that the "supreme leader" "oredered" (shows where real power is) an "investigation" into the election? God, are these people STUPID. Do we know that it will be a "real" investigation, or what the motive is? Of course we don't. It may not be a "turnaround" at all. The "Anti-American, Despicable Associated Press" (always use complete, official name in first reference) was the one who I saw use the ridiculous phrase: "stunning turnaround". I have said before that every single person working for the AP should simply be shot, to put them out of their misery (meaning this figuratively, of course, although sutpidities like this incline me toward looking at the literal notion with more than a little favor).


Bottom line: Is this "unrest" imortant? I admit that I don't know, and it is hopeless to look to the mainstream media to tell me. My feelig is that it is no more important than the unrest in China a decade or more ago, where those students were SHOT i the main square. People always blather about "consequences", but I can't see that the unrest in China accomplished anything. Iran is smaller, and the people more volatile. So I guess there is some possibility of a real impact. My best guess right now is that the fundamental nature of Iran is not going to change--bad news.