Liberals can be every bit as susceptible to war propaganda as conservatives. Many will brand themselves as anti-imperialist and say they don’t support war, but XXX is a brutal dictator who has to go. Every US president of my lifetime has been brutal, but liberals never call for revolution in western countries because they would have to live with the consequences or die during the violence.
Now, when I talk about “liberals”, I’m not talking about all liberals—I’m talking about a certain brand of liberal that is loud, influential, and hugely problematic. Such liberals recognise the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were catastrophic failures. Only problem is they have learned nothing and fall for regime change lies almost every time.
War propaganda is clever because it uses different approaches for pro-war conservatives and regime change liberals: To get liberals on board, you get some attractive women in France or Canada to tear off the hijab and smoke cigarettes and burn pictures of the Ayatollah. You appeal to the western feminist who likes to pretend all Iranian women are like them but sneers at anyone wearing a headscarf out of choice.
Once your war propaganda is out there, you get your operatives to each recruit a few hundred Iranians and hope you can spark riots, knowing both liberals and conservatives will support them.
When the riots start, you push the narrative that the whole nation is on the side of the rioters and crying out for western liberation, but this is not close to reality. Countries are not monoliths. People do not all think the same way.
Anti-government riots have fizzled out and Iranians are still marching for their government, but that part is removed from the story. Why would you ignore that, unless your intention was to sow further unrest with a false narrative?
Liberals can’t help but ventriloquise for entire nations because they think every country should be run according to their ideals. They act like their ideals are what every nation wants, even though a quarter of a century of failed regime changes in the Middle East has proven otherwise.
Most Iranians are concerned with getting on with their lives and hoping the US and Israel don’t bomb them. To argue ordinary Iranians would support the destruction of their country is sinister.
Rioters firebombed public buildings and mosques and vehicles and fire trucks and people’s homes. They shot police officers and bystanders and liberals acted like this was legitimate protest, like they wouldn’t have supported using force against such riots if they were taking place at home.
Liberals show you pictures of a young woman who opposed her government and was tragically killed, but they won’t show you pictures of the three-year-old girl who was killed by rioters. Her name was Melina Asadi. Her funeral was held two days ago.
Mossad has been bragging about its role in the riots, but liberals are still pretending they were organic. Trump is bragging that “help is on its way”, but liberals are not mad that he means “bombs”, they’re mad about the hijab.
It’s not just the Iranians they don’t like who will suffer and die, but the ones they do like. Iranian women are about to be blown to pieces by the US, but hopefully those bombs are dropped by a female pilot, right? A girl boss?
Westerners will performatively tear off the hijab, unaware Iranian women no longer have to wear the hijab. Women walk through bustling shopping malls in Tehran without punishment after enforcement was suspended due to its unpopularity.
Many Iranian women still wear the hijab, but liberals don’t consider them women. They ignore that huge parts of Iran are deeply conservative, that even many liberal Iranians will choose their own government over the West, and that the current Iranian government is fairly moderate and has slightly improved women’s rights.
Iran has a long way to go, and most Iranians want better, but this doesn’t change the fact liberals are mad at an Iran that doesn’t exist and want an Iran that can’t exist. Liberals will argue that Iran’s system is not democratic because nothing changes, no matter who Iranians vote for, but you can say the same about the US and UK.
The way to promote human rights is not to push for regime change or impose your values, but to lead by example and incentivise better behaviours. The West imposes sanctions that starve people. It sanctions any countries that show solidarity with the sanctioned country, and if all else fails, it bombs you, seizes control of your country and loots it.
Iranians would not be allowed by the empire to have a real democracy any more than we would. If their government falls, Israel has made it clear it will bomb Iran like it bombed Syria following the fall of Assad. At this point, Iran would be demilitarised and forced to obey. The West would not allow a situation similar to when Egypt elected the Muslim Brotherhood.
We have seen Donald Trump and the so-called crown prince in exile inciting violence in Iran. Reza Pahlavi dismissed the bloodshed, saying: “This is war and war has casualties”. Excuse me, but who gave this man the right to declare war? Pahlavi is the son of a brutal former dictator who was installed by the US and acted as its puppet.
The western vision of “democracy” is the death of sovereignty. If you think Iranians are desperate to be friends with Israelis and hand their resources over to the US, and if you think that fondness is reciprocated by the nations that razed Gaza, I’m afraid you are part of the problem.
Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.
You are absolutely correct. When it comes to regime change, the progressives are hard to distinguish from the neocons. Look at AOC asking the Trump administration to do more about the poor oppressed rioters in Iran. AOC is no less of an opportunist than Tulsi.
The propaganda is so thick...it amazes me how many fall for it.