By Richard Sale, Middle East Times Intelligence Correspondent
What dictators like Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic and Ayatollah Khomeini had in common was their grasp of the blunt truth that whoever controls the streets controls the government and the country. As students of mob dynamics the late Mr. Milosevic and the Ayatollah Khomeini had few equals.
Khomeini knew the power of crowds from the 1979 revolution. As French sociologist Gustav LeBon noted, a member of a crowd descends to a very low degree of civilization. Like Milosevic, Khomeini was aware that crowds were inflammable, mindless, imbued with violent feeling but incapable of thought, acting with the elation and excitement of “blind men who are blindest when they suddenly think they can see,” as Adam LeBor, a Milosevic biographer so neatly said.
Like Milosevic, the mullahs of Iran have always been expert at fashioning noble pretexts for their ruthless methods. The factuality of such pretexts doesn’t matter. The facts are what the clerics say they are. Adolph Hitler took over the Sudetenland to prevent “further outrages against the German people,” and to “protect German people who are not in a position to secure their political and spiritual freedom by their own efforts.” It didn’t matter that such statements were flagrantly false. What was important was their effectiveness in instilling in their people of sense of victim-hood.
Magnifying a sense of persecution is key. In the case of Belgrade, Yugoslavia until 1990 had been a federation of ethnic groups yet Milosevic portrayed his own group, the Serbs, as the hapless victim of 50 years of emasculation by Yugoslavia communists and non-Serbs. This fake picture of history was quickly expanded and incessantly repeated. A memo drafted in the mid-1980s by Serb nationalists said that Serbs were not simply the victim of communists but were the object of an “anti-Serb coalition” that included the Vatican, the United Nations, the United States and Western Europe.
Milosevic tirelessly used the Serb state media to sustain the sense among the Serbs as having been humiliated, isolated, belittled and ignored – innocent victims poisoned by racial prejudice. On more than one occasion, Milosevic likened the Serbs to Hitler’s Jews and portrayed them as helpless victims of the Turks as a pretext for furthering their lust for domination.
In other words, resentment was utilized to create political values. The philosopher Nietzsche described it as the revenge and vindictiveness of the weak upon their stronger enemies. The avid and brutal use of phony persecution as a way of gaining political ground meant seeing everything through the venomous eye of resentfulness, reveling in tales of murder, rape, arson, and torture.
Iran’s ayatollahs use the same tactic, endlessly repeating tales of being oppressed, robbed, ill-treated, enslaved, degraded, except in Iran’s version the chief evil was foreigners. To Iran’s clerics like Khomeini, Islam, the revealed faith of the one true God, had been victimized by vile foreigners, and Iran, in Khomeini’s words, had been “afflicted with division, weakness, and degeneration.” He also said: “The colonialists brought foreign laws to which God had given no power, spread their poisoned culture and thought...and we have lost the formations of the proper government.”
Milosevic was expert at staging “spontaneous demonstrations” that were nothing of the sort but carefully organized attacks by his security forces, which were used to sweep away rivals. But where Milosevic used street mobs to gain power the ruling clerics of Iran have always used force against street mobs to retain power and preserve and strengthen the status quo. Both Milosevic and Khomeini were skilled at using internal treason as the most effective way to bolster their positions and provide complete license for violent and brutal coercion of opponents. For both, dissent was corrosive and worked to undermine the state, and any method, however brutal, was authorized to come to its defense.
The mullahs basically allege that no authentic criticism of an Islamic republic can exist since only the Islamic state is valid. Therefore any popular discontent with the existing rulers is merely an assault by foreign powers who have always been hostile to Iran and who have worked incessantly for its downfall. Protestors are not honest Iranians, but always foreign tools or terrorists.
Since popular criticism places the survival of the Revolution in peril, the mullahs have never hesitated to use the most brutal and vicious force to strengthen their exclusive despotism. Iran in its early revolutionary stages never shrank from the use of terror to establish its authority. Tribunals charged people with “un-Islamic behavior” or “offending the revolution.” Khomeini said that “Criminals should not be tried. The trial of a criminal is against human rights. Human rights demand we should have killed them in the first place when it became known they were criminals.”
Thus, in today’s Iran, the moderate protestors and the hardline extremists represent two distinct and hostile political and government machines, but the moderates are vastly handicapped by their decency. They have joined the revolution in the name of human freedom and believe that the people have “rights” -- freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly. Where the moderates shrink instinctively from dictatorship and aim to expand democracy and popular participation, the extremists claim they alone and by right represent the will of the people, and they claim the undisputed authority to decide what is best for the nation. They claim to have the final authoritative voice in crucial decisions. They do not care how they come to prevail.
That is why the growth in power of the basij militia is such an ominous sign. Hitler once said that the leadership of any political movement was dependent on the “most disciplined, blindly obedient, best drilled” troops who were “not initiated” into the leadership’s “thought processes or higher strategy.” In brief, the foot soldier is to be part of an indoctrinated mob which does what it is told without question.
In addition, the Marxism inherent in much of Khomeini’s teachings can be clearly seen in the clerics ability to stand the truth on its head, to state as true what is false, to depict the casualty as the provocateur – turning the innocent victim of violence into a enemy of state as when Ayatollah Khatami recently alleged that Neda Soltani, a 26-year-old woman shot on the street, had been killed, not by armed militia but by her own associates. Elias Cannetti observed in Crowds and Power that “Rulers who want to unleash a war must first invent or procure a victim.” He added: “nothing matters but (their) death and it must be believed the enemy is responsible for this.”
Khatami’s allegation about Soltani was a perverted first step towards inventing a villain as a pretext for unleashing force as just as the arrest of the opposition and the coerced confessions. The fake charges of treason are an exact copy of the Stalin show trials of the 1930s, the difference being that Stalin’s confessors were shot afterwards.
That is “The Republic is the destruction of everything opposed to it,” Robespierre had once said, but Khomeini might just as well have. To Khomeini, political dissent was not honest disagreement but a product of willed perversity, a haughty, un-humbled will, a premeditated turning away from the established truth of the faith. Thus the terror Khomeini unleashed against opponents or rivals in Iran was truly horrific.
According to historian Paul Johnson, during the first two years of its existence, the Khomeini onslaught killed 1,000 Kurds, 200 Turcomans, twenty-three generals, 400 Iranian army and police officers along with 800 civilian former government officials. Then it turned and murdered 500 former liberal-secular allies and 100 on the Far Left. Khomeini shot 4,000 of his communists. His ferocity in persecuting Bahais was without parallel, but they were not alone: Jews, Christians, Shaikhis, Sabeans, orthodox Sunnis, and dissident Shia sects were also the terror’s victims. Graveyards were torn up, churches and synagogues demolished or wrecked or vandalized. The Islamic Judiciary murdered a Kurdish poet, Allameh Vahidi, aged 102, and killed a nine-year old girl, convicted of attacking “Revolutionary Guards.” It was now clear that the absolute power wielded by the victors had led them inevitably to the most extreme and criminal measures. “Do you really think we can emerge victoriously from the Revolution without rabid terrorism?” Lenin had asked.
So far it appears not.
###
Maybe if you make the type even bigger, people will believe it more.
Posted by: Nerf Herder | 26 July 2009 at 08:30 PM
"What was important was their effectiveness in instilling in their people of sense of victim-hood." Just like Rightwing talk radio is doing in the US. " ….except in Iran’s version the chief evil was foreigners." Except in rightwing radios version the chief evil are liberals, homosexuals and democrats.
Khomeini said that “Criminals should not be tried. The trial of a criminal is against human rights. Human rights demand we should have killed them in the first place when it became known they were criminals.” Guantanimo Bay, so much better since while the accused are guilty, no trial required, it doesn't have the firing squads.
"In brief, the foot soldier is to be part of an indoctrinated mob which does what it is told without question." Rush Limbaugh's ditto heads? No-one is calling for his (Limbaugh's) birth certificate, while allies on Fox proclaim 'Obamageddon' is at hand.
http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/24291128/obamageddon.htm
Posted by: Fred | 27 July 2009 at 12:47 PM
What part of this is true?
Comparing Iran with Hitler's Germany and Milosevic's Serbia sounds like neocon bullet points, aided and abetted by Zionist interests.
How many were killed in "Operation Cast Lead"?
OK, ask Paul Johnson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PaulJohnson1.jpg
to document the butcher's bill in Iraq.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | 27 July 2009 at 02:11 PM
Richard,
Thank you for taking the time to write this, and to share this, with us.
Posted by: jonst | 28 July 2009 at 10:18 AM
I really don't think Iran domesitc situation is that pivotal anymore. It has turn from simply "whacking neocon's last big threat" to mere piece in global geopolitical chessboard. (eg. US isn't the only player who can decisively knock out another player.)
Even if mousavi won through regime change scheme in the next 10-12 months, Russia and China will enter and defend their interest. Mousavi has to decide who he will allied with, and I can't see how him antagonizing Russia and China and running to US side will save Iran.
It is now pure big power game. China (energy supply, economic growth, buffer) , Russia (energy supply control, territorial integrity), US (energy, containment, global domination). Iran is an important flash point where (China's energy need, Russia buffer and US global expansion intersect.)
more and more the behavior of large power is toward confrontation and defending interest. Each knows the other weakness and ready to exploit, while positioning their pieces.
Plus Israel is really dangerous, it acts like a match in pool of gasoline. (I am surprised the whole thing hasn't exploded in regional conflict yet.)
--------
page 19, The Grand Chessboard - American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Zbig.
Eurasia is thus the chessboard on which
the struggle for global primacy continues to be played. Although geostrategy—the strategic management of geopolitical interests—may be compared to chess, the somewhat oval-shaped Eurasian chessboard engages not just two but several players, each possessing differing amounts of power. The key players are located on the chessboard's west, east, center, and south. Both the western and the
eastern extremities of the chessboard
contain densely populated regions,
organized on relatively congested space
into several powerful states. In the case of Eurasia's small western periphery, American power is deployed directly on it. The far eastern mainland is the seat of an increasingly powerful and independent player, controlling an enormous population, while the territory of its energetic rival—confined on several nearby islands—and half of a small far-eastern peninsula provide a perch for American power.
Posted by: curious | 28 July 2009 at 07:57 PM
There is a very interesting short piece by Ervand Abrahamian in the July 23 London Review of Books which has a nice summary of the role of the crowd in past (and current) Iranian political upheavals. It is well worth reading.
Posted by: dan bradburd | 29 July 2009 at 10:44 AM
Perhaps this is worth an extra post to generate some comments:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/business/energy-environment/29oil.html?em
I don't think the CFTC is the correct regulator. A hefty tax would stop speculation quicker than an exchange rule or the CFTC.
Posted by: Fred | 29 July 2009 at 11:53 AM
just declare war and get it over with already.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1104208.html
U.S. briefs Israel on new Iran nuke sanctions
American officials briefed Israel this week on the administration's ideas for intensifying sanctions against Iran if it fails to respond to President Barack Obama's offer of dialogue.
U.S. National Security Advisor James Jones, who is now in Israel to discuss Iran's nuclear program, indicated that Tehran has until the UN General Assembly in the last week of September to respond. U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates delivered a similar message during his visit here earlier this week. If no satisfactory answer is received, the Americans said, they would work to form an international coalition to impose harsh sanctions on Iran.
A senior source in Jerusalem said the American message to Israel in these talks was to "lower its profile" and refrain from "ranting and raving" about Iran in public until the international evaluation on Iran takes place at the end of September. "Until that date, we must give diplomacy a chance," the official said.
Advertisement
New sanctions would mainly aim to significantly curb Tehran's ability to import refined petroleum products. Despite its huge crude oil reserves, Iran has only limited refining capacity, so it imports large quantities of refined products such as gasoline.
Posted by: curious | 31 July 2009 at 01:26 AM
curious, two comments about the article http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1104208.html>you alert to. First on the larger scenario by http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/>Richard Silverstein. He mentions a joint US/Israel "Red Flag" exercise too. Barak Ravid:
And, second a comment by The Magnes Zionist/"Jerry Haber" on http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2009/07/dutch-government-has-no-intention-of.html>Barak Ravid, it's author. Admittedly not quite the exact context. But I seem to remember, he mentioned this before.
Ravid was also, if I remember well, the main source for the fact that the Gaza war happened after "month of planning". No matter if true or not, it surely was a sucessful story.
Posted by: LeaNder | 31 July 2009 at 10:35 AM
10 months from now, when global demand of oil recover (Asia/latin america) and Saudi still pissed with the fact that there is no Palestinian resolution, the new law above will cause US recession.
(Iran, Iraq, venezuela, Russia comparises of 30% of global oil supply. Each one of them couldn't care less if US is gone.)
They are going to dismantle US oil supplier and asian supplier will take care the rest.
and on that note, afghanistan oil cost just in crease by a little bit.
Like I say, the 3 big conflicts US are in are feeding each other (Israel, Iraq, afghanistan) and now Iran.
W shape recession is a guarantee.
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/31/1006939/senate-would-ban-iran-dealers-from-supplying-reserve
Senate would ban Iran dealers from supplying reserve
By Ron Kampeas · July 31, 2009
WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The U.S. Senate approved legislation that would ban companies that deal with Iran from supplying the U.S. strategic oil reserve.
The amendment was part of an energy and water supply bill that passed Thursday evening and would ban companies that sell at least $1 million in refined petroleum to Iran from supplying the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Iran is a major supplier of raw crude, but its refining capabilities have deteriorated and it imports much of its refined petroleum. The U.S. reserve is the world's largest supply of reserve oil.
The legislation, which must now be reconciled with a similar bill in the U.S. House of Representatives, is part of a broader congressional push to pass legislation that would enable President Obama to cripple Iran's economy should it not stand down from its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Posted by: curious | 31 July 2009 at 11:41 AM
anybody has scenario? mine is looking nastier by days.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601104&sid=aMiQmByND.2A
The U.S. Defense Department wants to accelerate by three years the deployment of a 30,000-pound bunker-buster bomb, a request that reflects growing unease over nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea.
Comptroller Robert Hale, in a formal request to the four congressional defense committees earlier this month, asked permission to shift about $68 million in the Pentagon’s budget to this program to ensure the first four bombs could be mounted on stealthy B-2 bombers by July 2010.
Hale, in his July 8 request, said there was “an urgent operational need for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high-threat environments,” and top commanders of U.S. forces in Asia and the Middle East “recently identified the need to expedite” the bomb program.
The bomb would be the U.S. military’s largest and six times bigger than the 5,000-pound bunker buster that the Air Force now uses to attack deeply buried nuclear, biological or chemical sites.
Posted by: curious | 01 August 2009 at 12:13 AM
The http://mondoweiss.net/2009/08/saudi-king-said-mr-peace-process-is-all-talk-no-action.html>Roger Cohn article Phil Weiss links to is worth reading completely. A lot about Dennis Ross (starts at page 3 top) and the Obama administration neatly framed with Iran streets and Iranian voices.
Posted by: LeaNder | 02 August 2009 at 01:49 PM
economic war is on. Israel better be worth all these.
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8805121097
Oil prices jumped above $70 a barrel Monday in Asia on investors' expectations that a recovering global economy will boost crude demand.
Benchmark crude for September delivery was up 73 cents to $70.18 a barrel by midday Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. London Brent crude increased 70 cents to $72.40 a barrel on Monday. On Friday, the contract rose $2.51 to settle at $69.45.
Oil prices seesawed last week before surging Thursday and Friday as investors bet that crude demand, which has been tepid this summer, will eventually pick up as the economy improves.
Meantime, Iran's OPEC governor Mohammad Ali Khatibi pointed to "optimistic signs in the oil market" and underlined that the news over revival of the global economy would push oil prices to reach $80 a barrel by January.
Posted by: curious | 03 August 2009 at 12:11 PM
Hmm, I somehow missed this. Following links from http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=278>here to http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=47794>this neocon experts panel and finally to Barak Ravid again, admittedly yellow cake rings a bell:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtStEng.jhtml?itemNo=1102021&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1&title=%27Despite%20tensions,%20U.S.,%20Israel%20unite%20to%20track%20uranium%20to%20Iran%20%27&dyn_server=172.20.5.5>Despite tensions, U.S., Israel unite to track uranium to Iran
Since Germany is among the 10 recipients, I wonder if anybody here in charge of the heightened controls for business with Iran is still not aware what it is all about.
Posted by: LeaNder | 03 August 2009 at 10:01 PM