@SalarHaqq
I don't feel offended when he criticizes Iranians abroad, many of them are indeed of the lowest cultural spectrum of Iran.
Neither would I have any issues with this. However I never saw that specific user criticize Iranians living
abroad. He basically only insults (rather than criticizes, I would say) Iranians back home.
Also not some politicians inside Iran, as said the interviewer of Zarif disgusted me too and I feel ashamed about such people holding high position ("typical low culture Iranian male").
So between patriots its ok to criticize.
See brother, your comment right here highlights the subtle yet decisive difference between that user's antics and your healthy (self-)critical outlook. Here you clearly made use of
nuanced, differentiating semantics: "
some politicians inside Iran", "typical
low culture Iranian male" -
not "
typical Iranian male" sui generis, as that user wrote. You're thinking of a specific category within Iranian society, the user however is thinking Iranian society as a whole.
In my opinion, his categorical generalizations exceed the boundaries of the sort of legitimate self-reflection you are referring to. A patriot in his right mind for instance would never say "Iranian women are the biggest whores I have ever seen", because:
1) It's simply not true, and every "patriot" ought to know it. Especially if that person resides and has grown up in the land that is the source and cause of the prevailing global sexual degeneracy and perversion, i.e. the USA, and is most affected by it too. It is simply preposterous to pretend such a thing, when it is plain obvious that there are masses of decent, chaste religious women in Iran, and when their proportions by far exceed those of their equivalents in western countries.
2) It is insulting. You are talking of your own kin, even if you want to lament the misbehaviour of
some amongst them, you will use different terminology and show some akhlagh, not behave like some foul mouthed American insulting other nations. This does not reflect the Iranian culture and upbringing I am familiar with, but rather a westernized, neurotic type of attitude if not a deeply hostile one.
Let me give you another example: in his recent exchange of insults with "Dariush the Great", the user under discussion claimed he would hit the latter's "
ugly Persian nose"... Seriously? Ethnic slurs against one's own people by a supposed patriot? Now I wouldn't be able to follow anyone on this if they argued that such language too is admissible between patriots. I have only ever witnessed this sort of thing among the ghettoized, uprooted and oppressed Black American population. But this user is from an entirely different social-economic background. Looking around, I have never encountered tolerance for this particular sort of rhetoric among patriotic elements of any nationality anywhere, to be honest.
To answer you, no, I don't think IR is a failed system and I don't think Immortal thinks that either by now.
Thanks for your confirmation. Then may I also invite you to consider henceforth that individual's comments about the JCPoA and about Iranian foreign policy in general, which he seeks to portray as failures or symbols of weakness and incompetence all around (if the examples I quoted do not suffice).
In short, you are of the opinion (please correct me if I'm wrong) that reformists / moderates and revolutionaries in Iran act overall in concert or in conformity with each other, and that this mutual interplay has largely been a success that has strengthened Iran's position in the international and domestic arenas, served her interests and is securing her future.
This individual however is trying to suggest to Iranian users here that both political camps are utter losers and failures. Indeed, as we know, the user repeatedly comes up with his rant about the JCPoA supposedly being the "Supreme Leader's deal" (an incorrect analysis in my opinion, as I believe it was
forced upon the Supreme Leader, who did not like to acquiesce to it and has a very different vision for Iran's future development, but
saw himself obliged to do so in order to avoid civil war; the liberals most of the time do have the means and will to threaten triggering civil war or to threaten the stability of the entire system in a game of brinkmanship and political extortion against the Leader, much like they tried to do in 2009 - but my personal take does not stand to debate here).
Now, whenever this individual comes up with that particular talking point, he always does so in response to those of us who consider the JCPoA either as an act of treason or as a grave political mistake, and as the brainchild and flagship project of the sole liberal camp. And what does he then respond? He doesn't claim that the JCPoA,
while having been conceived jointly by both factions within the system,
is actually anything but a sign of systemic policy failure or weakness, like you would argue. No. Instead, this individual will only express the first part of the proposition, and never claims he does not consider it a failure. As if to say: "you people who scapegoat the liberals should in fact realize that the entire IR is guilty of what you accuse the liberals of. You are right to be angry / disappointed / etc, but you should direct this at the IR in general, not just at the liberals within the system" (he also spells out this sort of idea quite explicitly, by the way).
This is consistent with his rhetoric about corruption, where at every mention of the malpractice of liberal officials (under whose rule, during Hashemi Rafsanjani's presidency, significant levels of corruption were actually introduced for the first time in the IR), the individual in question will jump in to portray the IRGC and revolutionary forces as "equally corrupt". He repeatedly labelled Iran (sui generis, with no differentiation) as a "mafia society". The way I see it, the person has nothing much positive to say about the IR (and not even about Iran), and it seems to me their aim is to prevent users from identifying the liberal camp as the actual faulty one, only
to encourage them to oppose the system as a whole.
The user's propensity to take US and zionist propaganda at face value is another aspect I find disturbing. On key events and issues, the user treats zio-American sources as trustworthy while dismissing Iranian ones. When things aren't too clear, the user will more often than not favor the enemy's narrative over Iran's. He even quoted the
Kuwaiti Al-Jarida newspaper recently to support his assertion that sardar Hejazi has been assassinated. This is while informed observers are fully aware that Al-Jarida is nothing but a Mossad front used to disseminate fake news, either for psy-ops reasons or to communicate cryptic messages to local agents or associated services. It is the same newspaper which claimed that zionist F-35's had overflown Iran unhindered (a claim the user ironically rejects), and many other such obvious fabrications. Zionists do not even seek to hide the fact that Al-Jarida is a fake news outlet, and some of them even indirectly admit as much. Yet to that user, it is good enough a source. However if Al-Jarida carries the story, chances are that it is not factual, in reality. And posts like that get "liked" by some members who are just not sufficiently informed and therefore fall prey to whatever is being put to them.
Lastly, the user treated sardar Hajizadeh, whom I believe you rightfully appreciate - as every patriotic Iranian with a sound understanding of reality should, as a "liar", adding: "I recognize a liar when I see one".
I'll leave it at that. To each his opinion, afterall. Regards.
