June 17, 2003

ANDREW SULLIVAN is calling for bloggers to focus on Iran on July 9. I think that's a great idea, though I don't think we should skip coverage in the meantime.

Meanwhile Pejman Yousefzadeh and Matthew Yglesias wonder why the story of Iranians' struggle for freedom is seen by some as a "right wing" issue. And Don Watkins observes:

I mean, shouldn't this be the story for anti-war liberals? Here are a bunch of brave souls fighting a tyrannical regime through the old liberal favorite of massive protests. Here's the chance for them to get behind the cause of freedom without having to support war. Here's the chance for liberals to support the potentially most important win in the war against terrorism and they are hesitant to do it. Why? Because the "right wingers" (of which I am not one, by the way) were there first.

Which raises a number of questions: Why were they there first? And what does it say about liberals when differentiating and distancing themselves from conservatives becomes more important than the cause of human freedom? And why the hell is it that conservatives are having to explain to liberals that there are times when we must put our differences aside in the name of higher values? I mean, Jesus, since when did this become Bizzaro World?

Good questions, all. But I hope they won't discourage lefty bloggers from standing up for freedom against fundamentalist theocrats.

UPDATE: Bill Hobbs predicts that Noam Chomsky, et al., will soon be saying that the Iranian protests are all about oil. Meanwhile, Oxblog counts the ways in which Iran has been interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and NRO runs an Iranian student's account of the protests.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Meryl Yourish wonders why the Iranian protests aren't getting play on IndyMedia.