[Zamuel]

Ok? Well, I guess I was right, you are spouting baloney

I defer to the expert on Iranian baloney.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

Are we seriously going to have an entire argument using baloney as a metaphor? If so, I'm in.

You wouldn't know baloney even if I slapped you in the face 100 times with it.

[skinster]

You're right. Radical Jew, Noam Chomsky, the leading luminar of "progressive" America, is pro Palestinian activist. The Palestinians are the only Arab people that support theocratic Iran, so when he says "the Arab world doesn't agree that Iranian nuclear development is a threat", he can show only the Palestinians. In a twisted minds of progressive America, the Palestinian death cult is regarded as "progressive". Beside them there are BDS bots, not necessarily Arabs, who find their propose in supporting the "Palestinians" and they too support Iran. See the Islamist propagandist in this board. The rest of the Arab Sunni world are scared to death by Iran nuclear option.

In the years when this interview took place (the prime days of Obama madness), Israel barred him to enter to Israel after he visited the Iranian proxy in Lenanon, Hizbollah, and had some hostile statements. Being Jew doesn't prove anything.

Indeed.

[Zamuel]

Are we seriously going to have an entire argument using baloney as a metaphor? If so, I'm in.

No, simply refer any more replies to the previous message.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

You don't lead a guy on like that Zam, I never knew you were such a catfish.

[skinster]

[Rancid]

Was listening to a pod cast where they were interviewing a guy in Iran that wanted to buy a Hyundai. He's not able to buy it because the prices has doubled since the sanctions. That is to say, the Iranian currently has fallen in value by 50%. If NPR is to be believed, the guy actually said he wants war to happen, in order to force change. Basically he was saying "things have to get worse before they can get better."

[Oxymandias]

@Rancid

The Iranian government should encourage domestic production in the face of these sanctions instead of relying on ridiculous neo-liberal policies which make Iran dependent on foreign goods. Iranian cars are actually pretty good despite not matching up to Japanese or Asian cars. In fact, if Iran actually supports it's automobile industry, it could reach the level of quality that can be seen in Japanese or Asian cars. Currently however, there is no incentive for anyone in Iran to buy domestic goods. This leads to people like the guy you're talking about who would prefer foreign goods over domestic ones because the domestic product is so bad in comparison to the developed foreign product that is currently circulating in the marketplace. Furthermore, this guy is perfectly right it wanting those foreign products because Iranian domestic products, despite their potential, still suck. This is less of a sign that the general population needs to change (which is what the government thinks) and more that the government needs to change. The government needs to build greater solidarity between it's local businesses and get them to work together to make sure that the means of production caters to the population not special interests.

[Zamuel]

The government needs to build greater solidarity between it's local businesses and get them to work together to make sure that the means of production caters to the population not special interests.

Good, that's right, did you know you're almost quoting the Shah? The supreme leader and his ayatollahs cannot however allow that much centralized power and authority, it threatens them. So Allah want's donkey carts and Allah gets donkey carts.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

I’m certainly not and if I am, you should have no reason giving me that quote (or are you going to tell me to go back up your point for you?). The Shah himself implemented free trade and neo-liberalism in Iran. I can’t see how someone who opposes neo-liberalism would implement such policies.

Also aren’t you the guy who said that the ayatollahs have too much authority? Why are you suddenly advocating that the ayatollahs should have more centralized capabilities?

Either way, the ayatollahs won’t be the ones that will build that solidarity which is why I said government not ayatollahs. Ideally, a separate government bureau (very similar to the MITI) responsible primarily for imports and exports but also to provide advice to local businesses regarding management and market knowledge along with modernizing them (I.e. incorporating computers into the workforce, encouraging investment in high growth high potential technologies, etc.). This bureau would also encourage cooperation between local businesses by organizing large scale projects which require the expertise of several businesses and managing cross-employment. It would not be the job of the ayatollahs. Furthermore, this nothing like what the Shah implemented given that his government was so goddamn centralized the government couldn’t function without him.

[Zamuel]

I’m certainly not and if I am, you should have no reason giving me that quote

Sorry I've returned the book I borrowed “The Fall of Heaven” Andrew Scott Cooper. Your statement echos one the Shah made in the early sixties about his "white revolution project."

Also aren’t you the guy who said that the ayatollahs have too much authority? Why are you suddenly advocating that the ayatollahs should have more centralized capabilities?

You're confused, I said the ayatollahs can't allow the government authority to organize production. That much power in the hands of a secular authority, is a threat to clerical dominance.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

Sorry I've returned the book I borrowed “The Fall of Heaven” Andrew Scott Cooper. Your statement echos one the Shah made in the early sixties about his "white revolution project."

Firstly, the book is highly biased. It is determined to focus on what was good in imperial Iran, while glossing over the grievances that led to the political revolt: the shah’s aversion to even peaceful resistance to his regime, the enduring resentment at his restoration to power in 1953 by the United States instead of allowing Iran's democratically elected secular president to take the lead, and the lingering view of him as an American imperialist puppet. Second, which chapter did you find the quote? Third, if the Shah did pay lip service to anti-neolibrealism, he certainly didn't apply it in Iran given how utterly pro-free trade Iran was during the Shah's rein and the multitude of jobs that were destroyed.

You're confused, I said the ayatollahs can't allow the government authority to organize production. That much power in the hands of a secular authority, is a threat to clerical dominance.

Oh, it seemed to me that you thought the ayatollahs are the government. In any case, you are correct in that regard.