Posted: Jun 17, 2010 10:53 pm
AndreD wrote:Barry Cade wrote:AndreD wrote:andyx1205 wrote:
So if you oppose being a puppet of the West and instead want to work for the people of your country, then you are just asking to be overthrown or assassinated?
Spoken like a typical defender of imperialism and oppression.
I wasn't supporting the Shah, I was just making the comment that Mossadegh was rather stupid trying to institute a bunch of reforms all at once - of course a fucked off British government is going to do something. Sort of like how one might say Hitler was foolish invading Russia, but not actually agree with his politics or actions.
Yeah, you're right. A democratically elected reformist prime minister, trying to make social reforms in his own country, is perfectly analogous with a Nazi dictator, ordering the invasion of one of his neighbours. You should write a book about this stuff. You could get Christopher Hitchens to write the foreword.
I wasn't comparing the policies of Mossadegh to the policies of Hitler. It was just the first example that came to mind of a well known action which resulted in the downfall of the one who instigated it. Agreeing with Mossadegh's policies has no bearing on the fact that they were entirely foolish and naively idealistic, and would obviously result in a backlash by other interested parties like the British government and the Shah.
Hogwash. Mossadegh was a remarkably moderate reformer. He nationalised the Iranian oil industry and insisted that the prerogatives of the Shah be curbed. He pushed for reforms of the voting system. Hardly Vladimir Ilyich bleeding Lenin. I'm not sure how piss-poor a reformer would have to be to avoid being labelled "entirely foolish and naively idealistic" by you. The villains of the piece were not Mossadegh and his associates, but rather the GB and US states and the interests they served — dressing up your apologetics as some sort of 'tough but true' real-politik entirely overlooks the necessity of Mossadegh responding to massive popular pressure. If anything, Mossadegh's moderate reformism was the least that could have been proposed under the circumstances — conservative forces directly opposed his policies on electoral reform and Mossadegh's constitutionalism prevented him from rallying the kind of mass, popular movement that could have effectively stopped foreign intervention. Like many reformers, Mossadegh learned the dangers of carrying out only half a revolution. If anything, he wasn't radical enough.