Beyond protesting

Protesting can go on forever in a closed system in which none of the actors are capable of inflicting crippling damages without also sacrificing sanctuary and ressources vital to their own forces.

We are already witnessing a stage in which media exposure in the West is dwindling not only due to the Iranian media black-out (very well written reports with Iranian witness reports are published nonetheless) but due to the fact that the Iranian protests have become feuilleton.

The feuilleton stage of media coverage

In the feuilleton stage of any media coverage reports tend to stack information, jumping leisurely from one topic like public demonstrations to background and current updates on political statements.

The individual elements of the story have already been covered and no longer qualifies for individual news pieces.

Coverage may be more in-depth and analysis more accurate, and previously contested facts aired mostly by bloggers and pundits can now be incorporated in main stream features.

But overall, journalists try to avoid repetition, and when media succumb to airing headlines or subheaders with words like "again" and "continues", you know the news value is deteriorating - in spite of resurging protests and disregarding the same level of political significance as earlier.

The bigger picture and the granulated view

In the feuilleton stage the key role shifts from ground reports to analysis from qualified observers and in depth coverage through feature articles and documentaries explaining the intricacies of a political conflict.

The bigger picture becomes increasingly important, and events as well as significant statements are tied to other popular genre stories (in this case nuclar non-proliferation, Israeli security and Middle East Conflict, G8 summits and protests, women's emancipation, European anti-Islamism, burka bans and so forth).

What is still lacking but must be expected to gain prominence is analysis of the geopolitical implications of the existence of an outspoken opposition, the economic future of Iran and the actual ideological content of the pro-Mousavi faction - topics I have frequently touched on lately and expect to take headlines in the days to come.

With high definition view of Iranian politics emerging, the world will also be interested in knowing what general direction they can expect Iran to take if they actively support a reformist Iran. In turn the open door for negotiations afforded by both USA and Russia can be utilized more effectively to make coordinated claims in the interest of the world community as a whole.

Arguing against fundamentalism

In line with this development the intellectual leaders of the protest movement should also take some time to examine and carefully communicate their own ideological beliefs. In many cases support for the Mousavi wing in the West has simply relied on assumptions that the opposition was more democratic, more pro-Western and more humanist.

I am not saying that these assumptions are wrong - they are even backed up by the prominent role of women, by written statements complaining human rights abuse and by the declarations demanding a more transparent republic. What is needed, however, is the entire academic reasoning that justifies a groundbreaking system change in Iran from the rational perspective and not just as a matter of public outrage.

You may argue that fighting for justice should be sufficient motivation, but it rarely is: People are more frequently motivated by economic needs. You may also feel it is more noble to protest injustice than to rationalize it in political arguments, but the strength of an ideology - and the purpose of an opposition in any system of governance allowing it - is to challenge the ruling class with rational arguments.

Saving the Iranian regime from itself

The heuristic process is the very raison d'etre of parliamentarism. We trust this system of free speech and open, direct involvement in politics on more than a representative level, because it increases the collective ability of a soceity to encompass all relevant factors and make the most informed decisions on the basis of the calculus of many intellects, not a few select.

If the opposition is to make significant headway with the ruling class, persuading them to soften their stance, the movement needs to build a super-structure on top of the organized and spontanous expression of dissent: Only by shifting a significant number of hardliners can they make way for concession.

This implies accepting and treating apparently non-rational actors as rational human beings. Instinct and moral outrage may speak against it, but there is one major factor, which speaks in favor of it: Human beings tend to be rational, simply because they are forced to it. One may say that humans succumb to irrational impulses, because they can.

But life is a hard master, and it does not suffer fools. There is a penalty for placing ideological or religious purity over realistic concerns. Reality will strike back with a vengeance even the fiercest revolutionaries or the most ruthless dictators cannot conceive of. The disasters we produce by neglicence and by ignorance far outdoes the atrocities we consciously produce.

The Iranian protest movement is essentially an emergency brake, a public movement to save Iran from the inescapable consequences of flawed and corrupted ideology. This is what must be understood by protesters and by supporters, before it can be comprehended by opponents. The moral high ground is one thing, but until it is used to communicate the benefits in rational terms, they cannot capitalize on it.

July 11 2009