Iran’s Election a replay of 2004 US elections.
Mousavi Supporter www.huffingtonpost.com/
If one remembers the results by county of the 2004 elections it was a swath of red with small pockets of blue, even though the popular vote was much closer. It was a clear demarcation of rural (generally poorer and less educated) versus urban (and generally more educated). There is a very similar line in the Iran elections. The religious lines are similarly drawn with the conservative (more rural) clearly supporting incumbent Mr. Ahmedinijad and the liberal supporting Mr. Mousavi.
It is the religious aspect that is of interest. One may also recall that former President Bush was
Ahmedinijad Supporters photos.upi.com/
intensely unpopular outside USA in 2004. Mr. Ahmedinijad is also very unpopular outside Iran. The two candidates also resemble in personality. Both have simple very conservative philosophies (albeit very different ones) and are seen by their supporters as having strong religious values and strong national security values, even if a little weak on economy. In troubled times conservative religious people strongly crave security and stability. That was a key attraction of Mr. Bush. With him you knew come hell or high water he will stay the course. Mr. Ahmedinijad has also shown that he rarely wavers from his charted course, no matter how strong the international opposition becomes. Actually, with both men their international weakness was and is perceived as a source of strength within their constituents.
Where the two elections are very different is that the one in Iran while not quite a ‘beauty contest’ is hardly for the most powerful job in Iran. The most powerful job in Iran is the Grand Ayatollah Imam Ali Khamenei. He controls the military and the treasury. The President of Iran is perhaps as important as a combination of our Secretary of State with Department of Health and Human Services. In the daily lives in Iran the most significant difference would be how people live in Tehran, where one in five Iranians live. And it is in Tehran that Mr Ahmedinijad is most strongly opposed (remember city folks are liberal everywhere!) and it is what gets most western media attention.
There is another strong debate going on within the real ruling clergy in Iran with a growing opposition movement that is saying that being in power has strongly corrupted the clergy and also reduced religious values among the people. In support of this argument the situation in Turkey is often cited. Turkey has a ruling military that makes sure that religious people can never take power Turkey and this has led to, quite counter intuitively, a significant growth in religious values within Turkey.
Mixing religion and politics in the long run is good for neither. It is a lesson we are in some ways still learning. Interestingly, looks like Iran is going through a very similar struggle within it.
Khalid Shah, 50, is an American Muslim who came to the U.S. 32 years ago. He and his wife have lived in the St. Louis area since 1990, and have been active in a variety of interfaith activities as well as in the local Muslim communities. They have both spoken about Islam at a variety of houses of worship. After working as an engineer for most of his career, he is currently a small business owner. 
Mr. Shah,
Do the same conditions exist in Iran in their urban areas as the US? In our big urban areas unemployment, corruption, welfare, crime, STDs, educational drop out rates are higher than rural areas. Isn’t it interesting how our large urban areas have been run right under the ground by sound Democratic ideology and practises. I pray that Iran does not follow us in this path of self destruction. I am thankful that the architects of my country and military saw the benefit of incorporating many Judeo/Christian values into their plans. But it is so sad to see them being tossed aside by the “enlightened ones”.
Makes sense. Cities are where the universities are. There’s more acceptance of free thought in the large populations of cities.
Then, I suppose, one or both elections were rampant with voter fraud? If so that makes Shah’s comparison of city folks and country folks and who they vote for meaningless. How does one know where votes came from if there was fraud?
If “The most powerful job in Iran is the Grand Ayatollah Imam Ali Khamenei.” and the most powerful job in the United States is the President of the United States, how can there be any comparison of elections? When was the last time Khamenei was elected?
This post is a poor comparison of elections.
I consider myself to be a conservative christian. What I most strongly want is the right for everyone to pursue happiness and to have the resources necessary to reach their goals. Security and stability are necessary conditions to that end, even when times are not troubled.
Mr Ahmedinijad may not be popular in Tehran or, in general, outside of Iran but he has good relations with Hezbollah and Afganistan.
Terrific insight, one I had not considered nor would ever had. Thank you.
It will be interesting to see what impact the Grand Ayatollah has on the next term. Our congress acted in concert with our president with the obvious ourcome in history.
We underestimate the power of congress, I think sometimes at their encouragement. The perception that the president wields the real power allows congress to separate itself from the perception of responsibility, and under this illusion maintain personal realms of power.
Sound familiar?
Khalid, when I first read your little fantasy piece, I thought to myself “Self, where did he come up with this xxxx?”, now I know. Laura Secor, a “reporter” for the AP wrote the same story 5 days before your piece came out. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/08/opinion/main5072617.shtml
Did you lift your story from hers?
Khalid-
I don’t see the analogy the same way that you do. I also think your political bias is showing, illustrated by your use of a Huffington Post picture.
Khalid - It must have taken a huge shoehorn to cram this story about politics into a column on religion. I don’t often agree with your blogs but I generally appreciate your tone. I’m afraid, however, you’ve lost some currency (with me, at least)in trying to compare the 2004 U.S. election with this year’s Iranian vote. The only thing that comes through clearly is your distaste for President Bush and his policies. Please, don’t align yourself with the sore losers who to this day try to suggest Bush’s 2004 victory was tainted or that it can in any way be compared to the apparent corruption in Iran. (Bush should not have won in 2000, but it isn’t his fault the butterfly ballot in south Florida confused Gore voters.) I wonder, did you find it troublesome when Obama went crawling to Islamic leaders recently with his references to the “Holy Koran?” (I understand the Koran is holy to you and many others, sure. But would it have upset you if Bush had publicly talked about the “Holy Bible?”)
Davel is right, this is a poor comparison.
Where, exactly, did Americans battle with riot police? Where and when were news sites, the internet, and MySpace accounts shut down? When did some of the politicians speak in ways not to upset the religious conservatives? Iran’s election was clearly called before a large percentage of the votes could have possibly been counted. An article at MSNBC.com (which might quote the NYT I think) says the coordinated calling of the election, readiness of riot police, and systematic shut down of news and internet signs shows that this was a planned event. There is no similarity with the 2000 U.S. Presidential election.
Your less-educated rural conservative verses more-educated urban liberal vote is, quite frankly, rude and asinine (go ahead and remove that if you want, but I see no better way to describe it). There is no known connection between education and political beliefs, and for you to claim otherwise is ridiculous.
The heavy hand of religion in the Iran elections is also far different than 2000 here. People of different faiths may have voted differently, but their religious leaders didn’t interfere, their votes were counted, they didn’t riot, the news wasn’t censored, and due process was followed, UNLIKE Iran. Your comparison is awful…
Yeah, this is a stretch at best.
I too have my disagreements with Kahlid, but generally respect you. But, this is just bad form.
I’m sorry but the repeated attempts to draw comparisons with extremist muslims and conservative christianity is absoutely illegitimate. I have said it before, but muslims have a worldwide mess to deal with - just trying to point out that they’re not the only ones with problems doesn’t make thiers one of the biggest messes in the world. We get it, there’s some unfair stereotyping and nobody likes being singled out. There also some unfair disregarding of the real persistent and widespread problems.
As someone who has thought a lot about some of these ideas….allow me to propose some things to think about…..
RE: religious extremists…they are pretty much the same the world over. The only difference is the name they assign God. There isn’t much difference between, say, Matthew Hale in the US and a suicide bomber in Iraq, is there?
RE: Remember, as was pointed out here, that Ahmendinijad has very little real power. In many ways, I think, WE created him by actually paying attention to him. Between the western media fascination with him, and the US government giving him the appearance of a head of State (which he isn’t), we set some of this up.
Last, never forget that political Islam is not united. They have LONG memories. Iran, being Persian is feared throughout Arabia because of a guy you might have heard of from 3000 years ago…Cyrus the Great. It’s ethnic and tribal way before it got religious.
One more thing: think about the 1st amendment as something that protects the religious community from being too involved in power politics. How much has the Christian Community in the US lost by it’s alliance in recent years with the hard edge of the Republican Party?