We are enormously grateful that two supporters of www.RaceForIran.com have come forward with a generous and challenging offer to help sustain www.RaceForIran.com: if contributions amounting to $500 are made to www.RaceForIran.com by midnight, Eastern Standard Time, on January 6, 2011, these two supporters will contribute a matching amount. This is an all-or-nothing proposal—if the $500 target is not met by midnight on January 6, the match is forfeited; if, however, www.RaceForIran.com has received $500 in total contributions by then (remember, small contributions add up), then another $500 gets put in the pot. Please note that there is a $20 paypal button option on the sidebar of this page and that a check for any amount can be sent to the New America Foundation at the address listed in the sidebar.
The pair of prospective donors who have issued this challenge wish to remain anonymous, and we will honor their request. But we are deeply grateful for their support, and hope it will prompt others to meet their challenge.
We promise to be back with more posts right after New Year’s. In the meantime, best wishes to all for a wonderful 2011!
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
I will contribute US$1,000 by cheque as soon as I return from vacation. I’m not sure it will be received by January 6 2011 but I will try my best.
I struggled with it since I am WAY down on the below poverty level, but I just contributed $20. Believe me, this is as rare behavior as it gets with me, so be appreciative!
I do like this site. It’s very well done (well, except for the upside down thread posting method). It’s one of a dozen or so sites I check every day first thing after I’ve done the email and iGoogle News pages and RSS feed.
The only thing that could make it better would be a picture of Summer Glau at the top of the page a la http://www.summer-glau.net/wp/ :-)
what anyone “thinks”…..
In the past few days, there has been a plea for funding for this site. One of the most compelling reasons provided for support has been that the site presents views and perspective about the U.S. foreign policy toward Iran that are not getting a fair and balanced exposure and consideration both by the decision makers and by the U.S. public at large. This has provided a good opportunity, at least for me, to reflect a bit about the concept of free speech, what it means, and the rights and responsibilities that go with it.
Many posts have either directly discussed or alluded to free speech in one form or another. Some have argued how free speech is lacking in Iran. Others have pointed to cases that show otherwise. A few people have even discussed the lack of free speech in the U.S. and various forms that it takes. Some speeches are censored by aggressive smear campaigns, others are drowned in the sea of rhetoric and trumpeted out of hearing range; some are curbed by deliberate underfunding, others are obscured by selective reporting; some are diverted and hi-jacked by specific groups and individuals, others are willfully mis-interpreted and words twisted to convey completely different meaning that was originally meant. But what does it really mean to have the right to speak? To free speech? Are there limits? Are there guidelines? Should there be limits? Should there be guidelines? If yes, based on what rationale should those guidelines be set? Or, should people be able to say anything at any time? If so, what would be the consequences of this? All these questions dance in my head as I try to figure out what to say and what not to say; how to say something and when to say something, or should I support a space for one perspective or another. As I read the posts, I realize that many people get into back-and-forth discussions based on assumptions, by all sides, that are left unexamined. This makes a lot of posts rather contradictory. Perhaps this time is as good as any time, to share these thoughts with you. Perhaps it is helpful in making decisions whether to contribute or not.
I find myself having a really hard time accepting any right decoupled and alienated from the responsibilities that go with that right. I cannot, for example, think that I have the right to life in a society separate and independent of the responsibilities that goes with that life: responsibilities to myself, to my family and friends, to people in my community, and to people all over the world (current and future generations). If I think I have the right to gain a particular knowledge or skill, then I must also think that I have an obligation and responsibility to use that knowledge and skill to better my own life, the life of those around me, and all other people. I also think that I have the responsibility to apply that knowledge and skill carefully, thoughtfully, and reflectively so that I do not do more harm than good. I think this is not easy though. It does require great wisdom that is not easy to gain and maintain. Once I have gained that wisdom, how do I exercise courage to actually practice it? By all accounts, I do not find these things easy. I am willing, however, to give it try. Because ultimately, my intention is to contribute to achieving a healthy world and all that it entails physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, and more. I also think that I have an obligation to try to be just to the extent that is possible. That means, for instance, that I would not disproportionately invest my energy and resources in my physical health such that I completely neglect my spiritual health as these are so interconnected. Similarly, I do not advocate for investing in one individual, one group, one nation, and one generation such that another individual, another group, another nation, and another generation are completely neglected and “screwed” so to speak. I, for example, do not believe that the Iranian people should, in one or two generation, guzzle up the oil and the gas and all natural resources at the expense of all generations to come. So, I welcome designations of a year called “eslahe olgooye masraf” (Reforming the Patterns of Consumption) in Iran that are then followed up with policies and actions in subsequent years. Are they perfect? Of course not. Could they be better? Of course. They are, by all accounts, steps in the right direction to illustrate that the right to “oil” is so entirely linked to very critical responsibilities about how, when, where, and why or why not to use this critical resource. I contrast that with the U.S. policies that I see. Anyone who has any understanding of the U.S. also knows that energy wastes, un-regulated consumption, mindless borrowing, un-wise productions of items that are absolutely toxic to our health, life, and planet are at their highest. Yet, what was the advice Bush the Lesser gave to the American public right after Sept. 11th? Be patriotic. Go shopping. And what gift Obama, the champion of pocket ‘change’, has to give? Another few trillion dollars added to the Empire of Borrowed Wealth. These “rights” that are decoupled and alienated from responsibilities.
Now, what have any of these to do with free speech? I think, just as our body needs to consume proper nutritious food free of pesticides and toxins to remain healthy, so, too, our collective and individual minds need healthy servings of knowledge, words, ethics, and the like on a regular basis to remain healthy. Bodies that run on empty calories, toxic foods, trans-fatty acids, processed sugars and the like are fertile grounds for heart attacks, diabetes, cancers, and all the ills that follow. In addition, when the body gets too busy working on a non-nutritious “food”, for example, it postpones/delays all other vital activities (including immune systems functions) till it’s done with digestion and elimination of this “food”. Similarly, when individual and collective minds of a society are bombarded relentlessly by nonsense, junk information, malicious utterances, and the like, those minds cannot process what is truly needed for them to flourish, excel, and evolve. I grew up hearing from my parents that one is given two ears and one mouth so it means the ratio of one’s listening to one’s speaking should be 2:1. It may not look like (at least from the posts I do on this site) that I have listened to my parents’ advice. But I surely try. I do see also, that under the banner of free speech, toxic information, informational spams, empty speeches are given a wide latitude to grow but useful, constructive, and healthy information and speeches are silenced under the banner of anti-defamation this and that, character assassinations, and false labels in the U.S. Alarmingly and vary painfully, I also observe that people in the U.S. are increasingly indoctrinated (through various means including the media) to have a sense of entitlement to say absolutely anything at any time and any where about anything, a bad case of verbal diarrhea of a sort, and expect absolutely no consequences and no responsibility about what they say so long as they stick to junk-speeches.
I also see that very deep discourses are happening in Iran about these very concepts of rights to speech and deeds that are either linked or de-linked from responsibilities that go with those rights within Iran. They are being played out in films, trials, blogs, websites, newspapers, the seminaries in Qom, TV and radio programs, and conferences and seminars. I personally believe in dialectical approaches to illustrate differences between critical speeches and “verbal diarrhea” rather than coercive measures to the degree that is possible as the former approach raises the public’s consciousness and the latter approach is only a short-cut. I am also hopeful and see early signs that these discourses are heading the right direction and would progress should there be no threat of war.
What does this mean for the contribution plea, well, it all depends on what anyone things what his/her responsibilities are.
I most certainly value what you do along with Juan Cole but unfortunately I’m not a position to contribute.
Best wishes for the New Year
Race for Iran is an island of sanity and truth in an ocean of lies. Thank you very much for your heroic efforts on behalf of peace.