Iranian Elections: The ‘Stolen Elections’ Hoax

Class struggle and imperial propaganda

(First my comment: I cannot control if the statement below is propaganda or truth, but it’s time for this reflection:

  • 1. poor people have nothing to win with a freedom giving the possibility for those with better places and more money to forget them in their rat holes;
  • 2. poor people, having been lost for generations, for hundreds of years in their rat holes, no more know what is freedom and therefore act for security, means, a strict control over all these “bourgeois”.
  • 3. Conclusion: as long as the freedom fighter forget the poors, the dumbs, the rats, they will again and again loose their cherished freedom. Same is valuable for poor Chinese peasants, having nothing to f… about the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Therefore – when elections are coming – they will vote for security, not for freedom. Means: not for bourgeois’ ideas.
  • 4. That’s all, folks).

Published on, by James Petras, June 19, 2009.

(Change for the poor means food and jobs, not a relaxed dress code or mixed recreation … Politics in Iran is a lot more about class war than religion. – Financial Times Editorial, June 15 2009).

Despite the forecasts by western opinion leaders and reporters based in Tehran, the outcome of the Iranian presidential election leaves no room for doubt: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won by a landslide victory. This is hardly surprising, observes Professor James Petras, since people voted according to class interests : the incumbent national-populist candidate drew his support from the far more numerous lower classes while the pro-western elite voted for the liberal candidate, boosted by the western media. A similar electoral scenario has already been witnessed in other countries.


There is hardly any election, in which the White House has a significant stake, where the electoral defeat of the pro-US candidate is not denounced as illegitimate by the entire political and mass media elite. In the most recent period, the White House and its camp followers cried foul following the free (and monitored) elections in Venezuela and Gaza, while joyously fabricating an ‘electoral success’ in Lebanon despite the fact that the Hezbollah-led coalition received over 53% of the vote …

… The consequences of the electoral victory of Ahmadinejad are open to debate. The US may conclude that continuing to back a vocal, but badly defeated, minority has few prospects for securing concessions on nuclear enrichment and an abandonment of Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas. A realistic approach would be to open a wide-ranging discussion with Iran, and acknowledging, as Senator Kerry recently pointed out, that enriching uranium is not an existential threat to anyone. This approach would sharply differ from the approach of American Zionists, embedded in the Obama regime, who follow Israel’s lead of pushing for a preemptive war with Iran and use the specious argument that no negotiations are possible with an ‘illegitimate’ government in Tehran which ‘stole an election’.

Recent events suggest that political leaders in Europe, and even some in Washington, do not accept the Zionist-mass media line of ‘stolen elections’. The White House has not suspended its offer of negotiations with the newly re-elected government but has focused rather on the repression of the opposition protesters (and not the vote count). Likewise, the 27 nation European Union expressed ‘serious concern about violence’ and called for the “aspirations of the Iranian people to be achieved through peaceful means and that freedom of expression be respected” [3]. Except for Sarkozy of France, no EU leader has questioned the outcome of the voting.

The wild card in the aftermath of the elections is the Israeli response: Netanyahu has signaled to his American Zionist followers that they should use the hoax of ‘electoral fraud’ to exert maximum pressure on the Obama regime to end all plans to meet with the newly re-elected Ahmadinejad regime.

Paradoxically, US commentators (left, right and center) who bought into the electoral fraud hoax are inadvertently providing Netanyahu and his American followers with the arguments and fabrications: Where they see religious wars, we see class wars; where they see electoral fraud, we see imperial destabilization. (full long text).

Comments are closed.