Now guess which countries staged a coup against the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran in 1953, which brought the current oppressive regime to its power:
A very narrow minded view. There are plenty of undemocratic and authoritarian countries around the world, Iran is hardly unique and perhaps not even the worst. And so-called democratic countries are sometimes not much better - a trip through US foreign policy over the years is pretty horrific, the violent oppression of the Palestinians by Israel, and others. None of this should have anything to do with whether a country’s citizens and academics should have access to scientific knowledge and conduct research. In fact scientific knowledge and a better educated population is one of the best ways to combat authoritarianism and oppression.
American/Westerner tries not to condemn a nation of 90 million people because of their government's actions (impossible!). This is the same twisted, devilish logic that murdered millions of Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Afghans, and Viets, etc., because why not?
Condemn a nation? What part of "affection unspeakable" do you not understand?
All you have to assert is that Iran is not a totalitarian theocracy, and that academic research reliably benefits the Iranian people at the expense of their oppressive overlords' agenda.
I don't understand the rest of your comment. The answer to "why not murder millions of" any given nationality is because it is unspeakably horrible, grossly detrimental to human flourishing, and a violation of our highest ideals.
I really don't know why you're attributing to me the sentiment of "because why not?". I certainly don't intend to express it.
Sanctions against totalitarian states exist to prevent private companies from empowering murderers like Khamenei. You can argue that they're not murderers, but you can't argue that sanctions are imposed "because why not."
> Good! Iran is an undemocratic, authoritarian theocracy run by violent, repressive misogynists.
I can practically replace Iran with US here, and this would actually still be true.
Trump is a massive misogynist. Both Biden and Trump are internationally violent and both would actively support a genocide happening through their closest ally.
The next president of the US is either Misogynist Trump, or Kamala Harris which no American has voted for in a primary for - making it undemocratic. In this regard, both Iran and the US are picking from a pre-selected pool of candidates.
---
So, govt bad therefore people shouldn't be able to access research material?
> The trick is, really, how to make these libraries accessible to individuals but only insofar as they're not pawns of the regime.
Research is going to mostly be happening in universities, which are usually regulated by the government. Education is also connected to the government. The answer is you don't.
> Individually, I love you all with affection unspeakable; but, collectively, I look upon you with a disgust that amounts to absolute detestation.
edit: FWIW I didn't flag you or downvote you. I upvote you for taking me seriously enough to contest.
> I can practically replace Iran with US here, and this would actually still be true.
That's valid! The US is predominantly bought and paid for by an oligarchy of monopolists who set restrictions on research. Political donations and lobbying efforts significantly influence grant eligibility by shaping the priorities and policies of funding agencies, and that imposes a chilling effect on academic attention.
If you, a cosmopolitan, say that the US' system is less free than Iran's, then I concede. The sanctions are cruel and unjust. I didn't realize that US academic institutions were more stringently curtailed than Iranian ones. I assumed that the Revolutionary Guard would penalize/harass individual researchers or labs for producing subversive research—above and beyond a preferential allocation of funds.
> Kamala Harris which no American has voted for in a primary for - making it undemocratic
This is undemocratic, but not in the way that you mean. Our first-past-the-post primaries ignore second picks, so it's unimaginable that she'd have gathered no votes in a runoff. That being said, you are again correct: the United States' two party system is undemocratic in that these private institutions share total authority over the docket. But, again, I don't think that it's worse than the influence of Iran's clerical councils. Is it?
> Thanks?
I don't know what to tell you. I don't hate you. You tell me what you need, and I'll do it.
The thing that’s allowed the Iranian government to keep going, at least in my opinion, has been economic destitution of the people of Iran. Largely caused by the sanctions, and primarily the secondary sanctions set by the US.
Right wing governments love economic hardship because it allows for them to unify a portion of the people under that messaging.
There’s even evidence that with apartheid South Africa, sanctions were actually solidifying their hold on the country there. The fall of that government isn’t really attributed to sanctions.
