As we wait to see what will follow the latest protests in Iran, I’m struck by similarities and contrasts between our countries.
For instance, in Iran candidates for office are vetted by the religious establishment quite explicitly. Many Americans consider this a violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state, and I agree. As I understand it, Islam has a similar doctrine, and the Islamic Republic is in a way an attempt to finesse that issue.
On the other hand, our American doctrine is looser in theory but not much less so in fact. For example, I identify as a Zen Buddhist when asked in polls and so on. How many public offices in the US would be open to me, assuming I met the residency and other requirements? Suppose I converted to atheism — would that help me as much as converting to Christianity helped Obama? (Would Obama be President if he hadn’t converted?)
Here in San Francisco, neither would be much of a hindrance; I wouldn’t tend to get the Christian vote in any case, and it’s not as influential a block as in other spots. Of course my best shot, hypothetically (I’m not actually thinking of doing this), would be local office; not even in California would a Buddhist be elected to statewide office.
More importantly, national offices are pretty much closed to non-Christians, except for a few Jews. There’s one Muslim in Congress, and no doubt a large number of lapsed thises and unbelieving thats. But I argue that our ideology is as strictly enforced as the Iranian one; it’s just that our enforcement mechanisms are more distributed and less obvious. Which I grant is preferable, as far as it goes. I’m just saying the differences here aren’t as big as they seem.
One contrast in particular strikes me, the active engagement in civic affairs. Watch one of the mobile-phone videos submitted to the BBC (which the Beeb notes it cannot verify); or read the accounts of the crowd size and the silent marching. Can you imagine such actions from Americans?
Suppose some color became associated with the idea of universal health care, which we know the vast majority of Americans want now, and have wanted for many years. Maybe the color would be white, or red, or whatever. Suppose further a large march some summer Saturday afternoon, coordinated around the country, a peaceful demonstration with an underlying political threat. I’m betting that Congress would be scared into taking some useful action, and quick.
Thank god we’ve got television and movies and video games to keep that from happening. We haven’t sunk to Iran’s level yet.
The only thing I would add to the television, movies and video games would be fear.
Posted by: knowdoubt on June 22, 2009 5:56 AMChoosing a color for health care reform isn't such a bad idea, you know.
Posted by: Mike Goldman on June 22, 2009 11:52 AMChuck, we had at least that many antiwar marchers, and all around the country and abroad, too, and I don't recall anyone at all paying any attention, including CNN.
Posted by: Joyful Alternative on June 22, 2009 7:52 PMNot only what Joyful said, but we had "dedicated free speech zones" that were set often miles from the location where the people who they were protesting against could see them and where no media went at all. One example of how protesting Americans were treated if they stepped out of such free speech zones during the last administation was a guy from one state I formerly lived in named Brett Bursey. He was convicted of holding up a sign that said "No blood for oil" at an airport location that was open to the public but not open for protest of any kind.
In case you've forgotten about all the people arrested for holding up signs or otherwise peacefully protesting in the past right here in the US, here's a link from Slate to jog your memory:
http://www.slate.com/id/2107012/
The Imans of Iran just aren't as efficient as the Mullahs of America. Jerry participated in some of those marches, he knows the drill and I think I remember reading a comment or a post by him somewhere in the annals of this blog that he thought marching in the streets was effective at one time in this country but not anymore. I'm not sure how he feels about that now with a different group running things.
Would things be different under this administration? I don't know. Does anybody have an opinion? Are the Mullahs of America still in control of these things? Who's willing to round up a group of canaries to test out the air in the coal mines again?