481–490 of 844 posts
This is certainly the end of peaceful Iranian protests. Whether it leads to a violent revolution or a static police state like North Korea remains to be seen.
> Whether it leads to a violent revolution or a static police state like North Korea remains to be seen. The official name of Iran is "The Islamic Republic of Iran" and it is a country ruled by sharia law. Countries ruled by Sharia are already totalitarian states.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. There are deeper aspects in this tragedy. I don't want to be called "leftist" because I don't want to belong to any tribe. But I do embrace a lot of the humanist ideals of the so called "progressives" and I think they might have some moral ground in here. But feel free to call me whatever you want. In my perspective, the oppression in Iran is different from what is going on in Gaza. It is more like what h…
> a lot of the humanist ideals of the so called "progressives" To the best of my knowledge this is not progressive but christian in origin in our westerner societies... never mind you are not a christian. In the west it has been like that historically.
It seems protesting a dictatorship, of whatever kind, is pointless and dangerous. Meaning, the people should be able to defend themselves against the violence directed to them.
> It seems protesting a dictatorship, of whatever kind, is pointless and dangerous. Dangerous, probably but they can't stop us all. Pointless? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think when westerners like myself notice the disparity in response amongst western progressives between the Palestinian and Iranian situations, they're talking more from a social lens than the geopolitical one. A lot of my peers have been incredibly active on social media the last couple years supporting Palestinians. They've been mostly completely silent on Iran, the imbalance is notable.
it's about preaching to the choir. I think it's an atrocity what happened to those Iranian supporters. But what's the point in posting about it? Everyone else thinks it's an atrocity. We have no power to change things in Iran.
By not speaking out, it lessens the moral standing of those making a huge ruckus over certain issues, but remaining silent on arguably far more serious ones.
The power to cause change in democracy rests mostly in influence over decision makers who hold the power and money. The ability to get the news and media and celebrities talking about an issue is what gives protestors and those shouting on the left power to change things. Ultimately politicians and the elites want to be "in the right" to hold onto their power and money.
As an example, suppose 80% of the population was suddenly in an uprising about atrocities in Iran, and the next major election hinged on this subject. If some political party takes the right actions, they win the presidency house and senate. Do you think nothing would happen? Trump has literally said he wants to annex Greenland -- anything is possible if leaders feel they have political mandate.
Sitting in comfortable silence or talking about relatively easier issues just allows the more complex issues to go unsolved.
Again, nothing against pushing for peace for people in Palestine, but claiming that we should just ignore things in Iran reduces the legitimacy of the cause.
The pro-peace activist in WWII, who knew of concentration camps, but never mentioned it, and even told others not to discuss it. They claimed there was no point, nothing could be done. But the legacy wasn't the pro-peace activism, it was denial of the glaring situation they ignored.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
lol @ “west/israel/free market”. I think you have an aliasing bug. Why would leftists (or anyone) be confused who the bad guy is here? Generally as a rule of thumb for international conflict you can count on the left to be on the side of the underdog, no matter how naive a view that may be in a given circumstance.
> Why would leftists (or anyone) be confused who the bad guy is here? Because there are literally pro-Palestine protests that have supporters of Iran's supreme leader[1]. I've seen a lot of comments and sentiment from leftists in support of Iran. What bug(s) do you have, that you didn't know this? [1]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-04/international-reactio...
Even more rich because Iran is currently massacring their /leftist/ population who were protesting for rights like /free markets/. How does that dissonance feel to you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s very strange to go “why isn’t the left doing anything about this conflict when they cared so much about Palestine?” My government doesn’t fund Iran.
There have been protests in countries that do not “fund” Israel too, so it’s not about funding only. The protests have also been against the Israeli government so you’d anticipate at least protests against the Iranian government if not against one’s own government which they protest because of funding. But we don’t see those protests against the Iranian regime. It reminds me of US protestors protesting the removal of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think when westerners like myself notice the disparity in response amongst western progressives between the Palestinian and Iranian situations, they're talking more from a social lens than the geopolitical one. A lot of my peers have been incredibly active on social media the last couple years supporting Palestinians. They've been mostly completely silent on Iran, the imbalance is notable.
it's about preaching to the choir. I think it's an atrocity what happened to those Iranian supporters. But what's the point in posting about it? Everyone else thinks it's an atrocity. We have no power to change things in Iran.
And by doing so, it would likely cause change and or discussion by those in power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s very strange to go “why isn’t the left doing anything about this conflict when they cared so much about Palestine?” My government doesn’t fund Iran.
I think when westerners like myself notice the disparity in response amongst western progressives between the Palestinian and Iranian situations, they're talking more from a social lens than the geopolitical one. A lot of my peers have been incredibly active on social media the last couple years supporting Palestinians. They've been mostly completely silent on Iran, the imbalance is notable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would leftists (or anyone) be confused who the bad guy is here? Because there are literally pro-Palestine protests that have supporters of Iran's supreme leader[1]. I've seen a lot of comments and sentiment from leftists in support of Iran. What bug(s) do you have, that you didn't know this? [1]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-04/international-reactio...
Because someone held a flag in austrailia 8 months before this current Iranian conflict, you assume “the left” (globally!?) is in support of the Ayatollah? Even more rich because Iran is currently massacring their /leftist/ population who were protesting for rights like /free markets/. How does that dissonance feel to you?
Where did I imply that, justonceokay? And no, I don't think every leftist supports the Ayatollah. Do you think every leftist, globally, doesn't support them?
I was as vague as you were, in referring to leftists. I gave a concrete example of there being confusion about who the bad guys, since you questioned why leftists (or anyone) would be confused.