Get PJ Media on your Apple

Faster, Please!

Iranian Sex and Circuses

June 1st, 2013 - 7:41 pm

Sure, it’s a young population, and Mr. Shahi reminds us, as David Goldman pointed out years ago as part of his analysis of the death of Muslim societies, that Iran has undergone the greatest drop in birth rates in human history.  And there are other data showing that traditional relationships are crashing and burning:  marriage ages are rising, divorce rates are up, abortions are increasing.  Males tell pollsters they are having more premarital sex (Unreliable IMHO, since males always claim that, don’t they?).  Let’s assume the numbers are accurate.  Do they add up to a revolution?  Revolutions are acts of hope, they are carried out by people–invariably young people–who think they can change the world.  Does the unprecedented crash in birth rates sound like a characteristic of a society full of hope?  Isn’t it rather the opposite, evidence of despair?

Of all the times to talk about sexual revolution, and credit a large part of it to an emerging, educated class of Iranian women, this would seem one of the least suitable.  Iranian society–most definitely including the women–is suffering under greatly increased repression.  Any sign of independent thinking, writing, movie-making or counter-cultural artistic endeavor is ruthlessly crushed, its practitioners imprisoned in record numbers, the Internet strangled by the regime.  And we’re supposed to believe that the Islamic Republic is being sabotaged by free love?  Not even the Woodstock crowd would believe it.

By the way, the unhappy fate of Iranian women, well known to all who follow Persian events, caused an extremely embarrassing moment for our diplomats, when a State Department spokesthing wouldn’t denounce the exclusion of all females from the OK List of presidential candidates.   Just thought I’d mention it.

The Real Story

It isn’t hard to understand Iran, or what we should do about it.  It’s just that hardly anyone wants to get it straight.  To its credit, the State Department still knows that the Iranian regime is the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism.  The Iranian who wanted to blow up a restaurant in downtown Washington, D.C., just got 25 years, for example, and you can ask the Syrians and Lebanese about Iranian terror.  Iran is our mortal enemy, sworn to destroy us, and working to do just that.  It’s a religious tyranny, a theocratic fascism that oppresses its citizens and doesn’t dream of giving them a say in what happens to them.  We should do everything we can to bring down that regime, support the opposition, and denounce the evil Khamenei and his henchmen every single day.

Forget about these fairy tales about sex, elections, and miracle software.  Get to work.  If we could bring down the Soviet Empire without waging open war, we can certainly bring the Islamic Republic to a well deserved end.

<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
"Revolutions are acts of hope...";
This explains the current revolution of deliberate ignorance in America. And Barrack Obama is Commander in Chief of this "Hope" brigade.

You really want to see what the Islamic empire ultimately wants for the United States? Take a look at the slide show the National Review Online has for the Syrian Civil War; Those photos depict what they pray for America to look like, and most likely will, with the band of juveniles We currently have at the helm of Our government.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" has kept many nations safe, but is completely ignored by the United States government.
Our military is engrossed in sexual & ethnic sensitivity training, and Our children are punished for fantasizing about guns.
We are breeding a society of lambs to appease the lion cubs.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...If we could bring down the Soviet Empire without waging open war..."

We did not bring down the Soviet Union. Our CIA didn't predict the Soviet Union's demise and our State Department was still making concessions to the Soviet Union the very day that evil regime fell. Worse yet, we helped our internally collapsed Russian enemy back to its feet so it can continue to threaten us today.

Only a classic, Soviet-style purge of our State Department--a mass head rolling from top to bottom--can alter our suicidal national course.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"To its credit, the State Department still knows that the Iranian regime is the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism."

Personally, I give that nod to Saudi Arabia.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (22)
All Comments   (22)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
The beginning of victory is when Americans refer to the Iranian dictators as "dictators that parade as religious".
As long as the occupants of the American executive branch are committed to maintain the Iranian dictators, that parade as religious, in power at all cost; "we" are at a distinct disadvantage in trying to get rid of them.
As long as Americans live in the Yuri (go to the edge of the world) Andropov utopia: Americans can be made to believe any type rubbish...; we do not have much chance of winning the fight to replace the Iranian dictators that parade as religious.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
David Goldman also pointed out that prostitution among Iranian women is growing by leaps and bounds, and that this, as much as any other factor ("when a country starts selling its women") is a major indicator of societal collapse. And I strongly dispute your contention --your generalization-- that revolutions are acts of hope. They are, often as not, acts of desperation.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Mr. Ledeen, thanks for a wonderfully well-written article. You seem to have the sense that, as with the Communists of the Soviet Union, the card-carrying Islamofascists of Iran are about 5% of the population while the rest shut their doors, cover their windows, heave a sigh of disgust, and wonder when it will all be over.

I dearly look forward to a resumption of relations with the talented, hard-working, and pro-capitalism people of Iran. Oh, and . . . I totally expect the Republicans to surrender another natural constituency to the Democrats when Iran normalizes.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Defeating evil is always simple; DIFFICULT, but simple.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"It isn’t hard to understand Iran, or what we should do about it." So what should we do about it? Please tell us. Or just keep writing posts that offer zero solutions, much easier than offering solutions.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I think you may have missed the solution --"....support the opposition, and denounce the evil Khamenei and his henchmen every single day.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
So nice to see your name (moniker) plastered here:
Do you want the J. Carney version, or the Michael Ledeen version?
And where's the BILL WESTERN version?
.......................;................;.................;..............;.............;............?????
(signed off automatically for lack of activity).
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Well I'll tell you pilgram, it sure ain't the John Wayne version.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"Revolutions are acts of hope...";
This explains the current revolution of deliberate ignorance in America. And Barrack Obama is Commander in Chief of this "Hope" brigade.

You really want to see what the Islamic empire ultimately wants for the United States? Take a look at the slide show the National Review Online has for the Syrian Civil War; Those photos depict what they pray for America to look like, and most likely will, with the band of juveniles We currently have at the helm of Our government.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" has kept many nations safe, but is completely ignored by the United States government.
Our military is engrossed in sexual & ethnic sensitivity training, and Our children are punished for fantasizing about guns.
We are breeding a society of lambs to appease the lion cubs.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...If we could bring down the Soviet Empire without waging open war..."

We did not bring down the Soviet Union. Our CIA didn't predict the Soviet Union's demise and our State Department was still making concessions to the Soviet Union the very day that evil regime fell. Worse yet, we helped our internally collapsed Russian enemy back to its feet so it can continue to threaten us today.

Only a classic, Soviet-style purge of our State Department--a mass head rolling from top to bottom--can alter our suicidal national course.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
We most certainly did bring down the Soviet Union. Reagan, Thatcher, the Pope brought it crashing down. Reagan also used the Saudi's by having them lower the price of oil to the point the Soviet's could not compete, losing their only source of income from their natural resources. It's history.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Right, "hurled".
If it weren't for the intense engagement of Reagan and Thatcher with Gorbachev, the USSR would be the most powerful nation on earth today.
But, if you get your history from today's sources, you'd never know that fact.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
You left out a Polish Pope and a Polish trade leader to whom many attribute the Soviet collapse. Victory has many authors. The fact remains that the Soviet Union expired of its own internal rot.

In any event, Reagan couldn't get elected in America today and Thatcher's passing was cheered by contemporary Brits chanting "ding dong the witch is dead." Russia and China and international Islam are ascendant and we are in steep decline.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Because morons wouldn't elect Reagan, and morons booed Thatcher is irrelevant to what they did. It's history.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Hey, hurled;
As much as I like the Polish, and appreciate their legacy, at this time their engagement was coincidental; Any and all corroboration was welcome.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"To its credit, the State Department still knows that the Iranian regime is the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism."

Personally, I give that nod to Saudi Arabia.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Besides, if Iran has been our sworn enemy for 30 years, then that's yet another argument against our intervention in Iraq.

Iraq and Iran were locked in an uneasy stalemate. They had even gone to war in 1987. Iraq's Republican Guard was a deterrent to Iran.

Our destruction of Iraq as a major power just strengthened Iran's strategic position.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Roger that!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The Iranian regime is a sworn enemy of the United States and ritually declares genocide against the people of the United States every Friday. The Iranian government reminds me of Henery Hawk from Looney Tunes; it's a tiny little chicken hawk that wants to kill a chicken. It is dangerous mainly because it isn't taken seriously. Washington officialdom has been acting like Foghorn Leghorn for at least thirty-four years.

“Clientitis” is essentially a form of pedantry. In order to conduct intelligent diplomacy, one needs to have a thorough grounding in world history and a more than thorough grounding in the history of one's own country. Understanding other cultures is important, which is precisely why it is important to know cultural context and precisely why it is important to understand one's own history well enough to understand the domestic overtones to one's foreign policy.

Requiring diplomats to learn American history would be a good start. Besides, many people who talk of understanding other cultures don't actually understand the cultures they are studying – precisely because they refuse to story their own history. Their tunnel vision blinds them to aspects of the very specialization they are studying. If only to serve as a corrective lens, Ronald Reagan's suggestion of a Bureau of American Affairs at the State Department has merit. That said, putting the Bureau of Indian Affairs under the State Department would be rather like dipping pure sodium into water.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"Requiring diplomats to learn American history would be a good start."

I'd say extend that to all aspirants for high office as well. Fail the test, you do not get on the ticket, simple as that.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The problem with that is that there are lots of different histories of America. The Leftists strongly prefer books like those of Howard Zinn which talk about an America built by rapacious capitalists on the backs of oppressed natives and slaves. As long as the test is slanted that way - which it surely would be if created by Leftists - diplomats with similar sentiments would have no trouble passing the test. Therefore, the tests wouldn't help restore sense to the diplomatic corps. In fact, they would even tend to help screen out people who didn't think along the same lines; some of them would surely be appalled at the thought of describing their own history as being a story of exploitation and plunder and choose a different career.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's wishful thinking that it would be effective because ideology trumps fact with these people.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All