July 5 Musings

Note: This blog is likely to be moved. I am unimpressed with the Blogger editor after having used it a few times. I'm not sure. I am considering just using a regular web host and designing my own site. This is definitely a long-term project as it is my vehicle for changing careers gradually.

The turmoil in Iran continues, and it continues to be fascinating to a student of transformative political change (that's just a fancy euphemism for "revolution"). The Iranian regime appears to be going out of its way to prove its illegitimacy and undermine the confidence of the educated segments of its population (one who reads me for a while will come to know that I have a real contempt for uneducated polities). The regime is now full-on calling the election protest movement a foreign campaign. Mousavi is being accused of being a foreign agent or "fifth columnist." He is being accused directly of treason.

Republicans and neocons here in the US will say that the regime's attempts to blame the West show how Obama's policy was wrong, but I contend that the reverse is true. By staying out of it as long as he did, President Obama made the Iranian regime look even more ridiculous. Everybody with a brain who paid any attention can plainly see that the US did not "interfere." This is the part where we hold up our hands and look around, saying, "See? See? I didn't say anything and they still accuse me. Now who will you believe?" Once again, Obama has placed the US on the rhetorical/ideological high ground and forced adversaries to show themselves. The end result of the election turmoil and US response is going to be greater international support for the inevitable conflict with Iran, and a decrease in Iranian unity.

The Iranian elite is fragmented. News reports give indications of elements of the clergy and governing elite that oppose the virtual coup that has taken place. What the ruling elements have done is stripped off the mask. They have shown themselves for the tyrannical thugs that they are. Many ordinary Iranians have seen for the first time what their government is truly like (and not as different from our own as most Americans would like to believe). The "peace" that now appears to be the norm in Tehran is a result of brute force, not consent. Everybody knows it. Khamenei is revealed for what he is: a religious Stalin.

* * * * * * * *

I will soon begin to write a lot more about Russia. In the long term, I aim to craft myself as a Russia expert and write on US-Russian relations. I do have a background there, although not in any resume way. In college, I crafted an unofficial minor in Russian studies. I took courses in Russian literature, Soviet society, Russian history, and Soviet government and politics. I predicted the fall of the Soviet Union when Gorbachev rose to power, based on the principle that nothing is more perilous for a bad government than attempting to reform itself.

Obama leaves for Russia today. It should be an interesting trip. The Russians appear to be of two minds with regard to the US. In one hemisphere, they want to cooperate with us and be friendly. In the other, they want to return to the great power rivalry. In future entries, or in a more scholarly paper, I will argue that what appears to us as either posturing or Russian paranoia in their responses to the missile shield and NATO expansion is in reality quite understandable from the Russian point of view, and that American policy toward Russia can achieve true breakthroughs when it fully comprehends the Russian point of view. For today, however, let me just say that while I hope Obama stands firm on the missile shield (I am a staunch believer in aggressively pursuing any kind of defensive option), flexibility on NATO expansion would be beneficial.

My intended study of Russia and metamorphosis as a Russia Expert will be assisted by my new bride's studies. In August, she will begin her undergraduate studies at Virginia Commonwealth University here in Richmond. VCU is a great school, by the way. My wife will be taking elementary Russian in the fall. She intends to graduate VCU with an international studies degree and fluent in Russian and Arabic. Her ability to read Russian-language writings and converse with Russians (and eavesdrop when they think nobody understands their language) will be priceless for me. I am hoping that my new career will be complementary to hers and allow us to leverage each other's efforts. We'll see how it works out for us.

* * * * * * * *

Yesterday should have seen an entry. I apologize. How can I let July 4 go by without some comment on Jefferson? It is his day more than anyone else's. I've seen a couple books about him recently that I want to read. Another visit to Barnes & Noble is in order. :) I love going to Barnes & Noble despite it being a huge corporation. I also love it because my bride (hereinafter, "Loveofmylife") may soon have a job there. Anyway, more on Jefferson when I get those book titles.

* * * * * * * *

US Soccer had a good day yesterday. Following up on the Confederations Cup triumph, a very young US team squashed Grenada in the Gold Cup opener. The result is not noteworthy for the result so much as it is for the roster that achieved it. This is a young, internationally inexperienced roster of backups and future prospects. It is the type of roster that has frequently struggled to put away inferior opponents. Will the US win the Cup? We'll see. Advancement from the group should be a given. Mexico looms in the other group, but the Little Bitches (my name for the Mexican national team, which I will explain in a future blog) sent a team similar to ours, young and second string. The first teams won't face each other until August 12 in Azteca. That's when we will see if the US team can gulp in enough actual air to extend its dominance over the Little Bitches.

* * * * * * * *

Loveofmylife has gone gaga over Lady Gaga of late, and I must admit I can see why. Random remark.

Wandering off now.....

Iran: Losing by Winning

It appears that the power structure has successfully put down the election dissent and destroyed the opposition. They have won the battle with brutal and unflinching repression, but have they lost the war? As averred in an earlier blog, successful repression often just drives dissent underground and undermines public respect and affection for the law. When the dissent was driven by a core population group and involved enduring issues, the successful repression frequently strengthens opposition in the long run. Will that turn out to be the case in Iran?

Take this tidbit from an International Herald Tribure article about Iran and the collapse of dissent:

Like many others who spoke, Mahtab said she was depressed by what she had
seen since the election. She said that she was not a political person and had
not even voted June 12, but that the repression on the streets was “beyond
belief.”

“I am disgusted, and wish I could leave this country,” she said.

She said she had seen a paramilitary officer outside the shop hit a
middle-aged woman in the head so hard that blood streamed down the woman’s
forehead. When Mahtab and her colleagues tried to leave the shop to go
home, she said, the forces began clubbing them while shouting the names of
Shiite saints. “They do this under the name of religion,” she said. “Which
religion allows this?”

Daily life has also been affected. Although people are still going to
work, some parents have been reluctant to take their children to day care,
fearing that unrest on the streets would prevent them from picking up their
children. University exams have been postponed and many families have traded
parties for small get-togethers, where the election is a constant topic of
conversation.

“People are depressed, and they feel they have been lied to, robbed of
their rights and now are being insulted,” said Nassim, a 56-year-old
hairdresser. “It is not just a lie; it’s a huge one. And it doesn’t end.”

Mahtab and Nassim must be American agents or sympathizers, if the Iranian government is to be believed. No, they are ordinary Iranians who were not involved in demonstrations or even sympathetic to the opposition, but they are shocked and dismayed by what they witnessed their government do to people they know are ordinary Iranians. The government believes it can discredit the dissent by blaming it on "outside agitators", that tired old refrain, but do you think it will fool Mahtab and Nassim?

The next time dissent breaks out in Iran, a whole lot of Mahtabs and Nassims will be more likely to support the dissent, either tacitly or actively. It may not look like it now, but the Islamic Republic's legitimacy within Iran has been damaged more by its victory in battle than by the issues that sparked the protest.

Was the Election Rigged?

The linked article from the Washington Post uses numerical analysis -- the frequency of particular digits in the last place of the reported election results, and of last-two digit combinations -- to state with scientific certainty that the Iranian election results were fraudulent. He may be right. The analysis is persuasive, and very likely the announced vote tallies were phony.

But does that mean the election was rigged, or that it was "stolen" from Mousavi? That is a different question. One might counter with "why manufacture election results if not to change the winner?" Good question, but one might have compelling reasons to manipulate the numbers even when the desired candidate won on the real, fair numbers.

The first possibility appeals to my love of irony. One could anticipate charges of election fraud and decide to manipulate the results to inflate the margin of victory, on the theory that a wide victory margin is perceived to be less susceptible to abuse than a close one. In order to prevent critics from claiming that Ahmadinejad's 51-49% margin was provided by a few fake votes, the election authorities make it look like a landslide. This attempt has backfired, of course, if that is what they were trying to do.

Another possible reason to manipulate election results without changing the victor would be to provide a more powerful mandate for the new president. If the truth is that he was elected largely on the votes of one or two population factions but was heavily opposed by others, his ability to rule could be compromised. The country would be polarized. But if it looks like his appeal was widespread, cutting across demographic and ideological lines, a broad mandate can be crafted for him. Under this theory, the election fraud was designed to persuade undecideds and moderate opponents that the winner has broad appeal and to be supportive, and to bludgeon opponents into submission (resistance is futile).

We probably won't know until the Islamic Republic falls and its archives are opened what really happened in the Election of 2009, and if the results were manipulated, why. The relative popularity of the different candidates is a matter of debate. The consensus seems to be that Ahmadinejad is the favorite of the poor and working classes, religious conservatives, and the conservative rural communities, while Mousavi was favored by the upper classes and the educated urban populations. It's a bit of a throwback to late 60's America, with Nixon's "Silent Majority" and the noisy youth.

If this picture is correct, then I am inclined to believe that Ahmadinejad (I'madinnerjacket is a hilarious nickname) did, in fact, win the election. The populations presumed to prefer Ahmadinejad tend to be much larger than the elements given to Mousavi. They draw far less attention to themselves, however, because they are not out in the streets, and they typically do not express themselves eloquently. Church-going farmers aren't often appearing on TV or writing op-ed pieces and blogs.

My take on the election is not unique. I read an analysis piece in the Post a week ago from a "policy expert" opining that Ahmadinejad probably did win. His explanation was persuasive. It fit with my educated intuitions about the political makeup of most populations. This analysis is probably behind the Obama Administration's cautious response to the election controversy. It would not be wise for the U.S. Government to proclaim its moral outrage over a stolen election that frustrates the will of the people when the announced election results really did reflect the will of a majority of the people -- even if fraudulent.

Iran will be interesting to watch. There clearly is a high level of discontent with the established order in the country. I doubt the majority of protestors care so much about Mousavi himself. He was merely the candidate around whom the dissatisfied could coalesce. The crisis is more about the Iranian political order than the election of 2009. So far, the ruling elite is responding in a classic fashion, a fashion that more often than not promotes a more committed, disciplined, widespread opposition over the long-term. When repressive regimes respond to popular discontent with repression -- how else can they respond? -- that response tends to be successful when the discontent is from a discrete minority group or about a transient issue, but extremely unsuccessful when the discontent is from a substantial portion of the dominant group and over fundamental political issues. That bodes ill for the Ayatollahs.

The Rebirth of a Renaissance Man

Welcome to my new blog. The Peripatetic Mind. Look up "peripatetic" and you find that it means "walking or traveling about; itinerant." However, it also has a more focused definition, "walking or traveling about to teach." A "peripatetic" is a wanderer, or more specifically, a wandering teacher -- a wandering muse, if you prefer. Yes, the Peripatetic Mind is a wandering teacher.

Capitalize it and Peripatetic means "of or pertaining to Aristotle or the Aristotelian school of philosophy." A "Peripatetic" is "a follower of Aristotle." Aristotle, of course, was the wandering philosopher of ancient Greece. He gave us Socrates, a fellow who committed a self-righteous suicide for the sake of reason, not faith.

All of the above definitions will animate this blog. Each of the above definitions provides clues as to my purpose. The blog will touch on many subjects. It will go places to learn, and then to teach. It will be informed by philosophy. It will be an attempt to find guidance in reason and logic. Brought up a Roman Catholic by parents who were "born again" and moved toward nondenominational fundamentalism (despite being intelligent people otherwise), I am not big on faith. Faith opposes questions. It denies answers. It is antithetical to reason. During my adolescence I stumbled upon the choice between Faith and Reason, and I chose Reason. Why? Because Reason welcomed difficult questions and explored for answers.

My wandering mind has been a weakness of mine when it comes to making a career. It makes decisions as to which path to follow more difficult. I am constantly looking to switch courses. As a result, I drifted into the career I inhabit, and it does not suit me as I would like. This blog is an attempt to turn that weakness into a strength, to capitalize on it by Capitalizing it.

ONCE UPON A TIME, I went by Joyce Junior. It was one of my first online personae. That was before the World Wide Web (WWW) was developed. It was in the world of BBSes. Joyce Junior used a 2400 baud dialup modem. The USRobotics 19200 modem was a revolution. Now I am going by Jefferson Junior.

Joyce Junior was the nom de plume of Sam Adams for his rabble-rousing. Joyce was some English revolutionary "long ago" when Adams was inciting crowds in Boston. Joyce Junior was a firebrand, a polemicist, a trouble-maker for the cause of American liberty.

Jefferson was a mature revolutionary. He looked to philosophy and law. He was a revolutionary who also governed. He created the Library of Congress. He founded the University of Virginia, my alma mater and still the home of my mind. He was an architect and a designer, an inventor and a gardener. He was also a financial failure. Most of his projects went unfinished, he was always in debt, and he died poor. His library became the seed for the Library of Congress when it was sold off to pay his debts.

The change from Joyce Junior to Jefferson Junior reflects my maturation process. I am no longer interested in rabble-rousing and intellectual trouble-making (non-violent methods were always central to my theory of revolution). Now I am interested in philosophy and architecture, governance and gardening. I am also, fittingly enough, a financial failure. Permanently in debt and likely to die poor. Most of my projects go unfinished. But I have a deep passion for the correct governance of my people and desire to be part of the Great Conversation.

I am a man in my early forties with two children from a first marriage, about to enter my second marriage. I left my wife two years ago for reasons that will remain private, and in less than a week I will marry my 20-year-old fiancee. My 10-year-old daughter will lead her down the aisle. In my past I took many drugs, but I still made it through undergrad and law school. I am hounded by debt collectors; some of "my buddies" call ten times in a day. I have no health or life insurance. I have stumbled and bumbled my way through life, but somehow I have progressed to a place where I am happy. I feel younger than I did at 22. I am taking on new challenges. I look ahead and see a future. I am crafting a new life, and this blog is part of that. It is the Rebirth of a Renaissance Man. General Sherman is my inspiration.

Welcome to my blog. It will grow and develop. I have a Road Map for Peace in my head. The blog will touch upon many subjects repeatedly, subjects like Israel, Iran and the Middle East, Russia, Europe, populist socialism and drug wars in Latin America, China and great power hegemonic struggles, the Drug War and marijuana liberation, the culture of narcissism, health care and insurance, environmental and energy policy, family law and the state of boys in this country, and probably a miscellany of others as well, including World Cup soccer (I am a despairing fan of the USMNT). Don't worry, I will keep it organized.

I hope your mind will find a rest stop here. I don't want to be your "home page." I'm not Google or Yahoo or MSN or any of the other major players in cyberspace who want to dominate your Desktop. I just want to be a place you stop in for a beer (a Sam Adams Boston Lager perhaps?) and good conversation, or perhaps for a little revolution-making.