There is an element of indifference to the argument of who or what is leading the Iranian state. The contest in identity and ideology is being fought out in the state and in the same sense – the identity of the state is being cemented by an argument, ideology, or theocracy that has not learnt anything from January, February, March through to April.
Each argument within the state determines an argument that inviserates the identity of the artisan, and though the narrative of the state has been kept alive by the artisan, not the theocracy or IRGC. The theocracy is once again trying to stamp its authority on the people through the arrest of those who have thrown their weight behind the state and kept it relevant – the artisan. If it had not been for the creators of the Lego movies the state would not have had a narrative that it could use to reach out to the world.
But it is in music, sound and voices that arguments of identity are solidified among the people. The elements of voices creating a sound that whistles through the airwaves is part of the state and cements the identity of the young who the state needs to stand rather than be alienated by a theocracy that has lost the battle of how Iran reaches the young, middle aged and old.
This is such an important part of the states future, the argument of identity. And it is strange that the state is attacking a twenty nine year old singer who dared to perform without a hijab and to a mixed audience. The ludicrous argument is that there are two arguments that have caused the theocracy to further alienate the young, whether it understands why and how the state was ripped apart in the first place by an ideology that was alienated by the theocracy in the first place, which caused the security failure that ripped it apart, is quite extraordinary.
Iran today faces annihilation economically, people are facing massive inflation with the Rial at one million to the dollar, so what is the state offering to compensate the citizen. A voice, an identity or further devalue the efforts of the Iranian people to stand with the state. The numbers I have been given is that the young, old and middle aged are ninety percent against the theocracy, the populace hate the theocracy, what they represent and how they have devalued the standing of the people with an ideology that hangs, ( or threatens to hang), jails and whips those that challenge a system that is so archaic it is willing to deform, jail and kill the most important voices in the state.
The lack of an argument that can stand for the populace identifies the state as continuing the same arguments once again, which led to the people taking to the streets. In an earlier article I asked where the state was going and questioned the ideology that slaughtered the majority, kids and the dis-empowered. The conflict within the regime is evident and because of the conflict within, the theocracy is flexing its muscle to give seventy five lashes to a singer who stood on a plinth and tested the system.
Parastoo Ahmadi is a voice, a voice among millions, a voice the state needs and in the same manner that she has stood and bravely stood on a plinth and sung to an audience, her reward is to be tied down and lashed. It is not so much a revolutionary argument that she pushed, it is an argument of where the state goes from here. The concepts, ideology and theocratic argument is arcane and belongs with the ideologues who would be recognized with the ideologues and theologians in Afghanistan.
The question is why the ideology is so archaic in a time of war that the most beautiful voice would be lost to the millions who have heard Parastoo sing, but that isn’t the point, it is a point of killing music, sound and voices to the point of murdering Mahsa Amini all over again. The theocracies ideology ignores the war, disassociates the state from the populas and disentangles the theocracy from the people. The question is…. and remains the question…. where does the Persian state go from here?
Each lash will disentangle the state from another voice, in much the same way Khamenei has remained invisible. Is it a court or was the directive Khamenei’s this is the unusual question that must be asked?
Like all questions the argument of who is the leader of the Persian state, is it parliament, the theocracy or even the security council. Once again the question of the states identity is mixed with questions of who and what the state identifies with. The reasoning behind the theocratic judicial argument is a case of ideologues jostling to create the identity of the state, meaning the president’s speech at the UN -is and was- void. Of course there is a disconnect between parliament, the IRGC and theocracy, but the reasoning behind the lashes challenges the poorest, the middle class and the commercial ability of the state to manage its failure to look after every citizen in any way it can.
So rather than a narrative the state is moving to repress the voices that have stood with the regime throughout the war. I say regime as the last election only represented thirty eight percent of the voices in Iran. The factors that determine the survival of the (Islamic) (IRGC) or (parliamentary) state is the artisan who either gives a voice to the people or is tied down and lashed in much the way Mahsa Amini’s life was sacrificed.
It could have been argued that the fate of Parastoo Ahmadi is in the hands of the judiciary, but it isn’t, all those tied to the leadership of the state are guilty of destroying voices that have given the Islamic Republic a narrative and in the most awful time, it is the voice of the artisan that gives the state a narrative and it is the theocracy that challenges the essence of a people just trying to survive. Maybe Trump is right and the state is close to breaking, because it is certainly fragmented if the court lashes an artisan for finding a narrative that reaches the world.
Leave a comment