What is your proof for such an accusation? Although they represent a wide spectrum of political ideologies, they have been rather specific in their declarations of what they are seeking. See below. http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/article_2919.shtml
Yes, I already had read that. They have made clear not what government they want, but rather that they "trust the Iranian people to later decide as to which ideology or leader suits them best."
In other words, the link you provided does not answer my question, but rather it says "we aren't going to answer that; we'll let the people later answer it."
That is not good enough. Obviously, whenever a revolution occurs, the leaders of the revolution will have great sway with the people in getting what they want as the form and content of the governance.
Saying "set aside our political preferences" is another way of saying "trust us", and history has shown time and again that leftists cannot be trusted, even when their intentions are completely noble, because the ideology is hopelessly flawed.
There is a lot which is very good in the articles presented in that link. The devil can be in the details. For example,
Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for ones self and family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection, such as pension plans for government employees.
This could mean something innocuous, or it could mean state mandated socialism. Taking it on faith that it won't be the latter would be foolhardy. Similarly
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. Motherhood and childcare are entitled to special care and assistance
Again I am seeing the foundation of state socialism.
Everyone is entitled to a universal medical coverage, with a major focus on preemptive medicine.
And again.
Everyone has the right to education... Free education shall be provided from elementary until the completion of a masters program. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available.
More free stuff! Everything is free! Isn't that why they call it
freedom?
After seven years and subject to the specific educational facilitys discretion, high school and above teachers/professors have to be given lifetime employment, without fear of dismissal for any reason.
Oh yeah! Let's give the universities to people and give them total freedom from responsibility! Imagine the state run education system in the hands of lifetime appointed full-fledged Marxists. No, there is no risk of that! And no risk of the education system turning into a propaganda factory and brainwashing apparatus.
And so forth throughout.
No wonder they want us to "set aside our political preferences and unite in establishing these rights". I'd love to go to my foes and say "let's not fight. Let's instead unite in establishing everything I believe in as a starting point."
You aren't dispelling my fears. You are magnifying them. I fear you are desiring to send the people of Iran from the hell of a state run theocracy to the hell of a state run socialist meatgrinder.
You seem to need to know, in great detail, the exact form of government that will replace the Islamic Regime if the popular movement inside of Iran is successful, before you can give your support.
OK... You are entitled to your position.
You and I probably share many of the same concerns and preferences in what should replace their current government. But I am sure you would agree that at some point the people of Iran will have to make up their own minds and choose the form of government they want to live under. In the meantime, we can engage them now, encourage them and educate them as to why we believe one system is superior to another.
There are many Iranian groups that are willing to state their preferences in detail.
SMCCDI is an umbrella organization and represents a broad spectrum of thought inside of Iran. It is trying to provide a unifying voice that western governments and the US government seems to want. They also need this unity to push for a national referendum on the type of government the people want. Some want a constitutional monarchy, some a secular democracy and others want an Islamic Republic, to name a few. Without this unity they do not stand a chance at having a vote on such a referendum.
You claim…”They have made clear not what government they want…”
But below are a few examples of the kind of the government they did speak about …
http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/article_446.shtml
“The Separation of Religion and State:
History has shown the mixture of religion and politics is a deadly combination, regardless of epoch, society or the religion involved. We are not blaming Islam as some of us are devout Muslims, but rather simply the mixture of religion and politics.
We seek the separation of religion and state and the establishment of a secular government.
“ The Separation of Powers:
The Islamic republic has clearly demonstrated the undesirability of unrestricted, unaccountable power. Power centralized in the hands of one or a few and without accountability or checks and balances is a recipe for dictatorship.
As such, the executive, judiciary and legislative branches of the government need to be independent of each
“A Decentralized Government:
The overbearing hand of the central government needs to be strictly regulated. More political and economic authority needs to reside with the local, city and regional provinces. Without compromising Iran’s territorial integrity, the elected local authorities should be given more rights to settle their own affairs.
A decentralized system is best suited for our country, as the Iranian people have been living together as one people for almost 3 thousand years. They are not newly formed states trying to form a federation or a union.
The central government in Tehran has the exclusive authority to maintain a standing army, conduct foreign policy, regulate the nation’s financial markets, and to ensure the proper functioning of the welfare system.
“Free Markets & WTO:
Why have we failed to become a rich, industrialized country, despite our abundant natural resources? Maybe the answer is self-evident. As a nation, we have focused too much on tapping what lays underneath the ground, rather than in the minds and hearts of our people. The quest for oil has led to foreign manipulation and interference. Even worse, oil has functioned as an easy and independent source of income for the governmental authorities, making them indifferent and insensitive to the economic plight of the people.
Creation of wealth from natural resources relies on political connections and, hence, is far more likely to lead to corruption than when a society has no other option but to organize the creative resources of its people. The latter requires an appropriate legal framework and institutions, whereas the former mostly relies on who one knows.
That is why other countries rich in natural resources have also fallen into the same trap. Not one member of OPEC has a viable non-petroleum based economy. In much the same way, Argentina, boasting so many natural resources, today has almost the same income per capita as it did 100 years ago. Conversely, countries that prospered such as Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong did so without being "blessed" with abundant natural resources.
Realizing that they had nothing to offer the world but the skills of their people, these countries focused on loosened, labor-intensive industries for exports to create jobs for their people (since they had no domestic market per say to sell to). They, subsequently, moved up the food chain and increasingly engaged in more sophisticated industries. Jobs were their first and foremost priority. Similarly, creating jobs should be our country’s number one economic policy. We have much to learn form the dynamic economies of these three countries.
The foundation of their economic miracle was based on an appropriate legal framework. With the theocracy’s arbitrary decision making, compounded by its corrupt and inefficient bureaucracy, no wonder entrepreneurs have no incentives to take risks and create jobs for the people. Its so-called foundations have a monopoly on a number of vital industries and are not accountable to public in any form. There is no transparency. To encourage private investment in the economy, we must first protect the rights of both the investors and workers against the overbearing hand of the government.
Private property must be protected to provide the right set of incentives for risk taking in order to create jobs for the people. Central to this objective is international trade. We need to engage the world economy and join the World Trade Organization.”
In my opinion, whatever form of government they ultimately chose would be greatly superior to what they currently endure.
I support them because I believe they simply want what we have (and all too often take for granted). We can try to help them build it or sit on the sidelines and criticize their efforts.
There are many Iranians who read our posts here and if you want to engage them in this debate I would encourage you to do so. This will take time and energy. They won’t necessarily be satisfied with your criticisms any more than you are of some of their “public position statements.” But if you are willing to spend the time and energy necessary, please join in.
Oh, and one last comment. You said…I fear you are desiring to send the people of Iran from the hell of a state run theocracy to the hell of a state run socialist meatgrinder…
What do you base that on???? I am a believer in free markets; I am a student of Hayek, Von Mises, and Friedman myself. Why would you accuse me of that? Lets not start making wild accusations of one another.