Our Hoder is an assimilated Western liberal. And to such a being, all things that turn out painfully, in a manner that common sense observers previously predicted, in spite of powerful well-meaning psychic emanations from Ottawa and Toronto, there are always Other explanations for the bad results. An executioner and hostage taker becomes "president," not because of a rigged election and a passive populace that wouldn't come out to vote, no. He is "president" because of the evil manipulations of Los Angeles expat television. The fault is not in ourselves, but in the stars. Of course.
- By: Red Lief on July 2, 2005

Have you considered that maybe you're totally out of touch and the majority of people just aren't interested in your West-friendly pandering "progressiveness"? You deign yourself knowing what's better for the masses and sniff at the resuts of the elections -- democracy, to you, simply seems to be a route to bring "your" side to power. How out of touch you are! Sitting in Toronto pontificating away. Your war-blogging friends in the US blogosphere may toast you, but it's only because they see you as a pliant tool in pushing their agenda. The common man on the street in Teheran has more self-respect and dignity than you alcohol-drinking sleazebags in the West
- By: Iqbal on June 28, 2005

Bastard. You are a mullah's agent
- By: sirus on June 27, 2005

What will the new "president" of Iran do as a leader of millions? I cannot predict the future, but the situation looks grave to me.
- By: Mike on June 27, 2005

Dear Hoder It may not be relevant to this post , but im writing in here since the contact page was not uploaded in your persian blog. But i would like to congrat you for this radio program with Mr behnoud , it was really wonderful so friendly and without any typical radio style ( which is always very unfriendly and very far) , I really enjoyed. God Bless ya.
- By: ehsan on June 26, 2005

the reformers keep saying they want to make changes from within the system. Dream on!
- By: dariush on June 26, 2005

This is a bit off-topic, but i'm curious why iranian bloggers don't seem to be discussing the fact that the USA has *already* started attacking Iran * bombing via proxy http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=67&ItemID=8126 * U2 spy-plane crashes after spying mission in Iran - http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/06/320110.shtml While Ahmedinejad might be a hardline fundamentalist, surely he would support a complaint against the USA in the United Nations Security Council for violating international law? Isn't this something that reformers, hardliners and everyone in between (in Iran) could agree on? Of course the USA will veto any decision by the Security Council, but it might help to get the agenda of debate in the western media shifted from "how should 'we' impose democracy and human rights on Iran?" to "does the USA have the right to bomb Iran just because it wants to carry out regime change?".
- By: Self Determination on June 26, 2005

The show is over. Remember, over 50% did not vote. So Ahmadinejad got the vote of 30% of the people, in an election where 99% of the candidates were not allowed to run. When does everyone want to wake up and realize that the vote of the people does not matter in Iran? The people with true power in Iran have decided that they no longer need to put on a show for the outside, they have made their deals and got what they want. The reformers have served their purpose, and it is now time to go. We are just seeing the true face of power in Iran, which has not changed one bit in the last 26 years. While some reformers may have had great intentions, their legacy will be recorded in history as appeasing an inhumane system by giving it an appearance of legitimacy. Now as I look back, all I can say is, "jolly good show!" I am with the 70%, and hope that one day we can find real freedom. No substitutes! -An Iranian
- By: An Iranian on June 25, 2005

If you think that by buying satellite air time you'll find a formula for bringing down a brutal dictatorship, you are really clueless. Your analysis would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic for Iran. You are more and more deluded in your with each post because even though you have been to Tehran you are out of touch with reality and blind to what this regieme is. Fascist rule, when vieled in the garb of religion, can never reform. It can only collapse after alienating ring after ring of its base of support.
- By: Barmak Nikbakht on June 25, 2005

The political situation in Iran is quite similar to what happened in Germany before Richie III (1918-1933), There is high unemployment, general dissatisfaction, social gap, poverty and above all a massive percentage of young’s that create enough elements for a social crisis and may lead the country to some type of fascism. A populist president like Ahmadi-Nejad could easily enjoy his popularity by emphasizing on the fundamental mottos of Iran’s revolution (equal society, oil money, and better income for poor), Unlike Hitler, Ahmadi-Nejad may not be able to attack any neighbor country, but he can put pressure on Iranian upper and middle-class to keep his supporters happy. It is too early to believe what may be happening in the next upcoming years, but if today-Iran is stepping into the same path that Germany did before the WWII, it could be seen as a catastrophic failure in history. The result would be a country with a tight-security and isolated from the world with an illiterate population that are happy to meet ends, and are unable to digest that real world around them. The world community will not be able to step in because, Iran cleverly will not attack any of its neighbors and they can not do much about the human rights as the can not do anything for China nowadays. The intellectuals of Iran will have to bend over the totalitarian power or become alienated from the society by force, at any options, the population will not listen to them just like today. I personally do not believe that Iranian people are capable of any change or social reform. The problem has root in history and in Iranian people. So let us face the reality, welcome to another dictatorship, welcome to another dark age.
- By: Javad Ghorbati on June 25, 2005

"...satellite TVs which has a much wider reach than print and Internet, are promoting exactly the opposite message of the reform,"?! You must be kidding. Less than 1% listen/watch those programs and they are people more interested in partying, whisky and fashion than in participation in the political process. The problem is not in those disgusting satellite programs. The problem is that the so-called Reform movement, for 8 years, greased the engine of regime and left so many people frustrated enough not to participate, and a huge number of poor to follow the populist message of Mr. Ahmadinejad and vote for him.
- By: Ahmad Payam on June 25, 2005

What happens now?
- By: Mike on June 25, 2005

I love your English! Could you spare some time to teach me how to write Persian in English by translating the text on a word-by-word basis?!
- By: ali on June 25, 2005

I hate to be impolite, but does this trend of discussion mean you all take for granted that this was a free and fair election?
- By: Nichevo on June 25, 2005

How do you expect people in lower socioeconomic classes to afford satellite TV and so forth? Do you expect the so-called reformers in exile from abroad to spread their propaganda and expect people to really listen? They have no idea what it is to live in poverty from their lush homes in Los Angeles, Great Britain, etc. Second, why did the reform movement fail to reach people despite what appeared to be a technological advantage? Answering this question is the key to the solution. Hint, perhaps technology isn't always the answer. And the reasons are rather simple. They, along with much of the world, failed to understand the pluralism that exists within Iran. Understanding this pluralism is the first step to the solution.
- By: Behrooz on June 25, 2005

I think what has happened is indicative of the extremely harsh class divide that exists in Iran. Many upper-middle class Iranians, living abroad or in Iran are well-educated politically and intellectually astute and have access to computers and the internet on a daily basis. The working-classes, the urban poor and the rural poor are marginalised in the Western media and are snubbed vociferously by the bourgeois Iranian diaspora and, most scathingly, by the Iran's urban elite. Their power as an electoral sphere was grossly underestimated throughout this election and the Western media was very much taken aback by the amount of support Ahmedinejad apparantly wielded. Very few of 'us' have been to places like Baluchestan - we would have little reason to go there - I have lost count of the amount of times acquaintances have refered to such places as "the arse-holes of Iran". But that is part of the problem. Well-educated people with money will always be prey to the naivity of assuming that society is better-off with liberal democracy. The fact is that for many people, liberal democracy is meaningless - a desire for a society which is governed by virtue and piety (read: religious institutionalism), a state-owned economic infrastructure (read: Ba'thist economics) and civic order (read: facism) trumps any desire to be free, secular and modernised. There is an entire population of individuals in Iran who are sick of being the butt of the jokes of Iran's well-off few. For them the revolution had a real meaning, their support for Ahmedinejad is just their attempt to rekindle that flame. Personally, I am horrified by Ahmedinejad's victory. But I can't deny that somehow, the reforimists, despite all their good intentions, dug this grave for themselves.
- By: g on June 25, 2005

How can then the reformist movement reach larger sections of the society? I believe the unprecedented communication amongst the affluent Iranian middle class both through blogs, email etc, with themselves and establishing links with the outside world, created the illusion that we are the Iranian society and we have this incredible power of communication and organisation which can bypass the repressive apparatus of the reactionary state. Well, this massive disparity in the accessibility of the means of communication/information, not only kept us apart from the palse of the Iranian soiety but led us into a deluded image of ourselves and our country. You say "They [the reformists] have to invest time and money in satellite TV channels etc. and try to decrease the wide-spread apathy, especially among the youth". If we talk about We, instead of They, perhaps we can discuss how to go forward from here. I appreciate what you say about the need to callenge the wide spread apathy, but have no idea who should do it and how. After all, the reform movement consists of us. Where can we go from here? One thing that comes to my mind is not to criticise others and start from ourselves and assumptions and assessments we have made and to reexamine them with honesty. The first step is perhaps to try and know our country ... Ahmadinejaad seems to have known it better than I, I must admit that with the deepest of regret.
- By: Nazee on June 25, 2005

Perhaps a lesson for the ommate reformollahi could have been not to alienate those who would take their side and did during Khatami's era of lies and ineptitude; but your rhetoric remains the same and now you are encouraging the reformists to start making satellite channels to compete with other discontents with the Islamic Republic of fascism. All the while if instead of talking shit about the opposition you would engage them, it wouldn't come to this. But in any case you and the likes of you have been forcing your views and shouldn't have any problem with open fascism of Ahmadinejad. He is the truest face of the regime you are working so hard to preserve. Once you make your satellite channels after beating up on the exiles after kicking their ass and exiling them in the first place, just wait to be called an out of touch satelliter. You are the reason Ahmadinejad and his likes terrorized people 26 years ago, and by disqualifing the same people he terrorized then again, you have contributed to it, in the name of your sham Islamic republic. Re-forming fascism is what has kept fascism going until now. Congradulations.
- By: Amir on June 25, 2005

So now you are sucking up to head of "chomaghdaran and chaghokeshan". For the past 8 years you and people like you tried to tell us that what was happening in Iran was a move forward. It was all love and peace. So how about this for analyzing the situation; You had no clue you and people like you who tried to give a good face to the system wasted your time and ours at best or were in it with the worst elements of the system who were very successful to pacify the people and you are as guilty as anyone else. I am pretty sure the "president elect" and out going president, you know the head of "non-violent" movement laughing all the way to the bank today.
- By: x on June 25, 2005

At last a balance analysis. Looks like your trip to the homeland has helped you to see the reality of our country! Before jumping to conclusions and trying to blame "tahrimis" and others, we should reflect on what happened. There is a new reality in our country. A huge majority of our compatriots decided to vote for Ahmadi Negad, because they saw in him something that we failed to see. All we saw was an unattractive 'abdar bashi' with a bad suit and worse haircut. What our compatriots saw in him was someone who really cares for their plight. They saw a mirror image of themselves. Lets face it, these people do not care about democracy and all this shebang. They want someone who cares about their dire situation. Now we can put them down and say they're a bunch of uneducated good for nothings who have ruined our grand plans for our country. They will turn back and tell us take that democracy and shove it! The divide between us and them is enormous. They have chosen Ahmadi Negad and whether we like it or not, we must accept the fact. The people have spoken.
- By: Mohamad on June 25, 2005

"satellite TVs which has a much wider reach than print and Internet, are promoting exactly the opposite message of the reform, which has proved it only benefits the regime, especially during the elections, by creating an atmosphere of apathy." Can you please elaborate on this point? How did satellite TV cause apathy?
- By: BP on June 25, 2005