Tyrannous Brothers of Faith
Reader comment on item: Assessing the Iranian Election

Submitted by Fay Voshell (United States), Jun 14, 2009 at 11:01

I believe you are thinking like a Westerner who regards politics as a sort of chess game in which those in power move others about the board according to strategies that have little to do with fundamental beliefs but everything to do with winning.

But the current leaders of Iran think primarily in terms of religion. Politics then follows theology. That is why Khamenei wanted Ahmadinejad to win. He wants theological purity first, and a moderate would not have reflected his fundamentalist views. Ahmadinejad and he are tyrrannous brothers of faith first; politicians, after.

Neither has fallen under the spell of the other. They are in basic agreement. All one has to do is to read the list of Khamenei's beliefs and actions and compare them to Ahmadinejad's.

On another subject we have disagreed about below; namely the advantages of tyranny in Iran vs. moderation.

Every day a tryant remains in place, supposed mouthpiece or no, human beings are being crushed, tormented and persecuted. To suggest greater ends might be achieved if tyranny remains in place is to accept the torment of those under the heel of oppression while we wait for a better end. We should never tolerate or accept evil because we think something better will come of that toleration.

Do you recall the reasons the allies gave for not bombing Auschwitz and other camps? They thought other, military goals were more important than ending the atrocities at a time in which they could have done so.

Such reasoning, as Natan Sharansky has pointed out in his book The Case for Democracy, is inimical to true freedom. Wherever tyranny shows its ugly face, the sooner it is removed, the better. After all, one oppressed individual is too many.

The above is why I had such a strong reaction to your "rooting" for Ahmadinejad.

Best,

Fay Voshell

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.