The election of a supposed moderate president in Iran - a highly debatable concept [debatable as in it's an affront to credibility] when it comes to a theocracy where no candidate is even allowed to run for the office unless pre-approved by the theocracy which is sort of like saying you're free just so long as you accept that our definition of free means you're not free - it’s remarkable how the West, where we created democracy as an escape from the abuses of repressive absolutism continues to act as if when it comes to the non-Western world repressive absolutism can of course co-exist with notions of personal liberty, free speech and a conscience of one’s own - it’s this insanity of modern liberalism that gorges itself on phoney egalitarianism which is really just a means for imposing conformity, suppressing dissent, of demonizing your enemies if they dare suggest one thing or person is better than another because idealism cannot exist in an environment where its dictatorial notions of fairness are legitimately challenged - in other words, idealism is perforce autocratic by nature - you see this insanity expressed in the elevation of multiculturalism over the idea of the melting pot which seems to be motivated by the pathological needs of the left to see that Western culture feel ever contrite for being successful because of course the left is not completely comfortable with the way the West became successful [see recent events in Sweden where ridiculously generous welfare payments are given immigrants for doing nothing at all which encourages immigrants to not integrate into the prevailing culture since they don't really need to go out and get a job which means the welfare state must be seen by the liberal elite in Sweden as a way for the West to pay reparations to all the people in the world it so horribly abused etc etc] - you see this insanity in how the EU evolved from troubled child into dysfunctional adult, this left wing need to dictate that all cultures are the same, or, expressed otherwise, the differences don’t matter because left wing ideology is uncomfortable with the way these qualitative differences are defined - well, Europe is finding out the differences do matter and pretending they don’t in order keep inflated the idealist whimsy of the left is not a viable option come the end of the day and you’ll pay for your foolishness - but I digress -
The election of this supposed ‘moderate’ in Iran should prove interesting as it plays out because of the way it ought to shine a light on whether idealists [liberals] or sceptics [conservatives] have a more accurately nuanced view of the world. Liberals of course will see the ‘moderate’ tag and be strongly inclined to take it at face value, and there’ll be lots of talk about how this is a new beginning and if we stay open minded and ‘receptive’ real change can happen etc etc. Conservatives on the other hand will see any claims of moderation as a ruse, a public relations scam designed to make it much more difficult to play hardball on sanctions, a smiley face to cajole the dimwitted UN, thereby allowing the Ayatollah, the real president of Iran, to run out the clock on getting a bomb.
I’m not saying the election was fixed necessarily, nor am I saying that there won't be cosmetic changes that intimate a moderation of sorts - I’m saying the result would not have been allowed to happen if the theocratic powers that be were not comfortable with it happening. As the dynamics of it play out I’m guessing much truth will be revealed, not only about Iran, but about us.
