The Uprising in Iran and the Lessons to be Learned: 2. The Nature of the People’s Movement and why we Support It

Whenever historic changes take place they take place at a tremendous speed. Especially revolutions are known for changing society and the consciousness of people rapidly over the course of days and sometimes even hours. The events in Iran have again proved this to be true. Friday the elections happened and no one imagined a possible uprising no matter what the outcome would be. I knew that there would be anger and despair, but I didn’t think it could grow into an actual movement of opposition of millions. The economy undoubtedly was a major factor in this development.

However several criticisms and issues have been raised of this movement. People from all over the world and all over the political spectrum have given their opinions, and unsurprisingly a lot of reactionary garbage is to be found all over the place. Some self-proclaimed leftists from the west (since no leftist in Iran would even think to proclaim the same kind of nonsense) have called the uprising an “exclusively student movement”, a “movement of neo-liberalism and free-market reformism”, and some have even claimed that the CIA had a hand in it.

One such “leftist” (if these people are left-wing who needs right-wingers?) said:

“The reality is that the social base of Anmadinejad’s [sic] voters is overwhelmingly working class, and they mobilized to keep him in his spot because it was in their self-perceived class interest to barricade in and not allow Mousavi to successfully “reform” (carry out a neoliberal attack on jobs, price caps, social programs) the entire country.”

The vast majority of Ahmadinejad voters were overwhelmingly working-class! They were so working-class that millions of them decided to demonstrate against the person they had just voted for overwhelmingly. It is typical of a person who does not know anything about Iran to say such idiotic things, for they imagine that the people in Iran must be happy with the way things are being run there. I mean, they have pretty decent healthcare right? They have all the oil and gas in the world, and apparently the labor market is doing just fine, with the hundreds of thousands of unemployed not being taken into account, that is.

This is the Big Lie going around in the heads of these people about Iran. When they watch the country being slandered and vilified by mainstream media they get a type of reflex to support anything about the Iranian state, from its reactionary political system to its mass arrests and public executions of people, who are so free and happy with the state of their nation that they just couldn’t help risk their lives destroying it.

The facts are different. Events in Iran over the past few days have shown them to be different, though these types of people won’t be convinced by anything. They would rather attack people’s movements from their ivory tower in the west than contribute anything constructive to it. Yes, we do not have any illusions about it, we do not believe that this movement as it currently exists is a revolutionary socialist one, but we do not slander it or repeat the lies about it that are being spread by the official Iranian propaganda machine. And we certainly do not support the suppression of it, thereby putting ourselves on the side of reaction.

“But we are the opposite of that!” These people cry without shame. “We are only believing and repeating these lies because we are anti-imperialists!” Does anti-imperialism excuse this behavior? Does it even have anything to do with it? Yes, anti-imperialism, all of us on the left agree with this, but anti-imperialism does not equal pro-Islamism or pro-Iranian despotism. The reason we oppose imperialism is because we oppose the oppression of people that is caused by it. It is absurd to oppose imperialism on this basis internationally, but not oppose it on the same basis nationally.

A great socialist once said:

“With regard to the more backward states and nations, in which feudal or patriarchal and patriarchal-peasant relations predominate, it is particularly important to bear in mind the need to combat Pan-Islamism and similar trends, which strive to combine the liberation movement against European and American imperialism with an attempt to strengthen the positions of the khans, landowners, mullahs, etc.” [1]

Ironically it is not only the Mullahs who are striving to combine the liberation movement against imperialism with an attempt to strengthen their position (both Mousavi and Ahmadinejad have done this, using it against each other, and Khamenei thrives on it), but some western leftists as well.

As I said before, we should not have any illusions about the people’s movement as it currently exists. The current movement is limited and tied to Mousavi. The current movement is not yet class-conscious. The current movement has not yet drawn towards itself the mass of the entire people. The current movement is not yet lead by the advanced and class-conscious section of the working-class. These are all the real problems with the current movement. These are the problems we should be addressing, and these are the problems that will decide the fate of the movement.

There is no doubt that the movement is progressing and that it is by itself dealing with these problems. Friday, before any such movement existed, there were hardly any chants that were anti-government. Saturday, the first mass demonstrations chanted “Death to the dictator!” but equally they chanted for Mousavi. Sunday the latter sentiment was toned down a bit, while the former increased due to Mousavi’s call for restraint [2]. Monday, the reverse happened due to Mousavi’s renewed calls for a re-election. Tuesday again Mousavi’s side grew given his increasing opposition. What can we deduce from this? Mousavi is clearly being pulled to the opposition side under pressure of the people’s movement. He’s bending but soon enough he will break. There is only so far you can bend as a supporter of the Iranian state when calls are being made for its overthrowing.

It is however important to remember the dynamic of these events. Daily it can change from one side to the other. One day we can be disillusioned while the next we are being overly optimistic. We must not lose our heads by these changes. We must stay firm on our demands, and we must continue to analyze the movement and try to influence it towards independence. Only when the people’s movement has cut off Mousavi and has found strength in its own leadership, then it can proceed to the next step. This pre-revolutionary situation will then become a revolutionary one, which will smash the despotic Iranian state and replace it with a democratic one, for when despotism falls freedom, equality, and liberation from all oppression and exploitation takes its place.

There are now two sections of Iranian society in opposition to one another. One which is essentially fighting for change, and is in a majority (comprised of the most advanced section of the working-class, students and intelligentsia), and the other which is fighting for conservation of the old rotten regime (comprised of the most backward elements of society, clerics, government officials, religious militias, well to do peasants and others who are in direct pay of the dictatorship). In between these two groups is the rest of Iranian society. They must take sides between the two, and their actions will define the nature of this movement as it develops over the next few days and weeks.

The most efficient way of having them on the side of revolution is to be united for revolution ourselves. Our calls for freedom, equality, democracy and justice need to be united in ourselves instead of in a member of the ruling system. They will do nothing but fool us again like they did 30 years ago, and generations upon generations will suffer under it. Throw off the shackles of Mousavi and unite with the call that you have shouted so many times now in the heroic demonstrations of the past few days: “Don’t be afraid, we are united!”