Analysis
Beyond political smokescreens, we are now offered the opportunity to behold the true disgraceful face of the reformist and moderate factions. That these currents are perfectly aligned on each other when it comes to their treasonous agenda, is evidenced by Sadeq Zibakalam's staunch defence of Faeze Rafsanjani elsewhere in this same debate with Ali Alizadeh.
Zibakalam, who's held the chair of political science at the University of Tehran for numerous years and influenced generations of students with his systematic idealization of western regimes and whitewashing of zionist crimes, happens to be one of the foremost activists and public spokespersons for the coalition of reformist parties. What Zibakalam is uttering here is a direct translation of the deeper ideological convictions and political program pursued by the liberal factions (reformists and moderates alike). Unlike politicians running for office, the likes of Zibakalam feel free to forego the formal etiquette his counterparts usually stick to. Thus Zibakalam and his ilk will be granting an insight into the raw essence of liberal thinking in Iran, as well as in the liberal project for Iran.
As these latest antics unequivocally highlight, liberals adhere to and happily submit to extremist Jewish supremacism. Their views are thoroughly marked by inverted cultural racism, pathological contempt for their motherland and its civilization and an equally twisted magnification of the western imperialist order and even more so of zionism.
Incidentally, this shows how "little" political pluralism there is in the Islamic Republic, how "little" rival political camps differ from each other... not!
To put things into context, after a period of relative silence consecutive to their defeats at the 2021 presidential and 2020 legislative elections, liberals have now initiated a political offensive in hopes of grabbing power once again in the upcoming elections of 2024 and 2025. To this effect, they intend to bank on last year's riots and reap its political fruits by attracting voters who sympathized to varying degrees with the riots - or at least with the counter-revolutionary, westernized, secularist (if not borderline islamophobic), feminist, anti-traditionalist and in certain circles "ethnicist" themes under whose banner the unrest was conducted, subsumed as these themes were in a pathetic slogan originally coined by the PKK.
In this entire process, the very same hostile foreign powers which instigated riots last autumn are now mobilizing their colossal propaganda and psy-ops machinery to promote reformist and moderate candidates and to castigate revolutionary and principlist ones at the future elections, describing them as "oppressors", "religious fundamentalists bent on imposing restrictions on society" and so on and so forth. Tellingly, Reza Pahlavi, leader of one among arguably three poles of opposition in exile (monarchists, neo-liberal / leftist / separatist cluster, MKO), is on the record for striking an unprecedented conciliatory tone during a public speech few months prior to the riots, towards in-house liberals in the Islamic Republic. This was likely done on instructions from his backers in the west and/or Tel Aviv.
The mechanism through which reformists and moderates in Iran tacitly cooperate with the exiled opposition while capitalizing on the anti-IR propaganda aired by foreign-based Persian language broadcasters and online media, is nothing new. It has, however, been cemented over the past year under the auspices of the USA, EU and zionist entity.
A noteworthy and hazardous development is the aforementioned establishment of increasingly overt bridges between the exiled opposition and domestic liberals opposed to the basic tenets of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, including and especially its staunch insistence on emancipating Iran from imperial vassalage, its focus on independence and self-determination, principles which reformists and moderates have no attachment to and openly deride as symptoms of a supposedly retrograde worldview. Exiled oppositionists and domestic liberals have consistently been pursuing identical goals, largely echoing Pompeo's infamous twelve point conditions for "normalization" of ties with Washington as well as the political programs of all major opposition grouplets.
Namely: subjugation of Iran to zionist and American imperialism and cession of Iranian sovereignty to these regimes, disarmament, dismantling of Iran's peaceful nuclear program, de-industrialization and return to a mono-sectorial economy living off crude oil exports, tendential depopulation through measures bound to worsen the demographic crisis, and last but not least federalization of the Iranian government structure along "ethno"-linguistic lines as a prelude to Iran's balkanization and territorial disintegration.
What caused a rift between exiled oppositionists and local reformists / moderates despite the shared objective, is the question which one of them would have the "privilege" of implementing this sinister agenda at the behest of the imperial powers-to-be. Now however, instructions from Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv seem to encourage harmonization of these two actors' respective efforts. Hence Faeze Rafsanjani's recently "leaked" statements inviting every group that "seeks change" to set aside their differences and constitute a united front, with the inclusion of the exiled opposition - which, by definition, would comprise monarchists, the MKO and "ethno"-separatists acting side by side with reformists and moderates back home.
The impact of this mobilization can be felt across the counter-revolutionary media landscape in and outside Iran. If you suddenly notice an uptick in reformist / moderate activism on so-called "social media" you frequent, or if you come across increased noise against the principles of the 1979 Revolution, you will know why that is.
Back to Zibakalam's outrageous declarations: it is by no means a coincidence that this character would proceed to formulate such over the top provocations at this particular juncture. For one, the enemy seems to be plotting renewed riots and social disturbances come summer in order to pressure the Islamic Republic. Therefore, the enemy is doubling down on its promotion of the most vehement types of discourse, of talking points most conflicting with the founding principles of Iran's legitimate political order so as to radicalize those receptive to its propaganda.
Secondly, Zibakalam's tactic in the debate in question was designed to break taboos, to instill doubt in the listener's mind about some of the most obvious and firmly held beliefs such as love for the motherland and the desirability of freedom from imperial yoke. In this frontal way, liberals intend to gradually trivialize poisonous subversion and make it gain social acceptance, step by step.
It goes without saying that anyone jumping on the reformist / moderate bandwagon at this point, anyone casting their vote for representatives of these factions or calling on their compatriots to do so, will be playing willingly or not into the agenda of a cabal which officially views Iranians as subordinates to NATO regimes and zionists; which demonstrably loathes Iranian history, culture and civilization with an irrational passion; which lacks any ounce of patriotism and self-esteem; and which ultimately would offer the keys to the country's destiny to zio-American imperialists on a silver platter, if given the chance.
You may have issues with the Islamic dress code (hejab law) or other policies of the Islamic Republic. Granted. But if you believe this warrants helping back to power a current whose foremost representatives denigrate Iran in such an ignominious, barefaced manner, and who no longer have any qualms about revealing their alignment on exiled oppositionists handled by Iran's foreign enemies, then might I suggest you're getting your priorities awfully wrong. Every person to whom Iran means something cannot but keep the necessary distance from these imposters.
