Iran

[anon47629474]

Im not sure the US will stand by if that happens.

[ohai]

The worst US will do is make some light sanctions that will not be anywhere close to the nuclear related ones. It’s not like Trump really cares about Iran’s domestic issues. He just tweets whatever he feels like without really thinking. For the Iranian government, at some point, it will be more desirable to just accept some international disapproval than just have chaos everywhere. The alternative, which is to offer meaningful reforms to appease the protestors, doesn’t seem likely. Why would those leaders offer concessions when they have jobs for life, and have been through worse protests?

[anon47629474]

because the money is gone.

[SamCryBaby]

@ohai

The worst US will do is make some light sanctions that will not be anywhere close to the nuclear related ones. It’s not like Trump really cares about Iran’s domestic issues. He just tweets whatever he feels like without really thinking. For the Iranian government, at some point, it will be more desirable to just accept some international disapproval than just have chaos everywhere. The alternative, which is to offer meaningful reforms to appease the protestors, doesn’t seem likely. Why would those leaders offer concessions when they have jobs for life, and have been through worse protests?

Also, the majority of the participants in these protests do come from lower income brackets of the country, who are fed up with the way things are and blame the supreme leader for the economy and their general dissatisfaction. In my opinion, the reason the regime has stalled any major oppression of the riots until now is due to the lack of overlap these protestors have with other socioeconomic classes of the population. If it was the middle class who were rioting they would have been cracked down much earlier and severely (like the 2009 elections) because:

1. They do have leaders within the government and the regime who may have been exiled or imprisoned but are still very influential both within the middle class and branches of the government (something these folks don’t have).
2. Are college educated and can and will be able to influence the lower classes of the society.

As much as I feel sorry for them these protestors don’t have much common ground with the folks who participated in the 2009 post-election riots and thus cannot recruit the majority of the population .

[ohai]

Lots of countries have bad economies. Compare Iran’s unemployment rates to those of Spain or Greece, for instance. In the worst case, things can become like Venezuela, where the people starve but the leaders still cling to power.

From my limited perspective, there is no legal way to turn over the government, and no real incentive for Iran’s leaders to step down. So, they will exercise their autocratic options before considering compromise.

[ohai]

@SamCryBaby

Also, the majority of the participants in these protests do come from lower income brackets of the country, who are fed up with the way things are and blame the supreme leader for the economy and their general dissatisfaction. In my opinion, the reason the regime has stalled any major oppression of the riots until now is due to the lack of overlap these protestors have with other socioeconomic classes of the population. If it was the middle class who were rioting they would have been cracked down much earlier and severely (like the 2009 elections) because:

1. They do have leaders within the government and the regime who may have been exiled or imprisoned but are still very influential both within the middle class and branches of the government (something these folks don’t have).
2. Are college educated and can and will be able to influence the lower classes of the society.

As much as I feel sorry for them these protestors don’t have much common ground with the folks who participated in the 2009 post-election riots and thus cannot recruit the majority of the population .

Ok. So your opinion is that the government will just accept some equilibrium level of protests, as long as there is limited contagion? Maybe that is the case.

[SamCryBaby]

@ohai

@SamCryBaby

Also, the majority of the participants in these protests do come from lower income brackets of the country, who are fed up with the way things are and blame the supreme leader for the economy and their general dissatisfaction. In my opinion, the reason the regime has stalled any major oppression of the riots until now is due to the lack of overlap these protestors have with other socioeconomic classes of the population. If it was the middle class who were rioting they would have been cracked down much earlier and severely (like the 2009 elections) because:

1. They do have leaders within the government and the regime who may have been exiled or imprisoned but are still very influential both within the middle class and branches of the government (something these folks don’t have).
2. Are college educated and can and will be able to influence the lower classes of the society.

As much as I feel sorry for them these protestors don’t have much common ground with the folks who participated in the 2009 post-election riots and thus cannot recruit the majority of the population .

Ok. So your opinion is that the government will just accept some equilibrium level of protests, as long as there is limited contagion? Maybe that is the case.

Yes. History has shown the government is (more) tolerant towards the lower income brackets due to the lack of risk they possess. The students and middle class are the ones that will cause the most reaction.

[igor555]

FATWA