Revolution by typewriter?

It is enough to be noted as problematic and then visit the wrong political site to be hanged in Iran. Freedom of press and speech is far more than we can expect from the regime, but it goes even further by making speaking out a crime punishable by death, with four netizens given the death penalty for the first time in 2012.

We all know how important the internet was in galvanizing the revolutionaries during the Arab Spring. Even within Iran in the 2009 election, the internet and Yahoo, in particular was vital in the organization of protests and demonstrations. With the election once again just around the corner, the internet could play a very significant role. However could is the operative word. The internet has the undoubted ability to influence the forty-five million (approx 60%) Iranian citizens online, however the government is systematically cracking down on the World Wide Web and all the freedom it has come to represent.

The regime itself is well aware of the power of the internet; the Ayatollah has his own website, twitter and perhaps most surprisingly instagram account. Moreover regime members are rumoured to dabble in the odd porn site, a crime in Iran.

However, that which it does not deny itself, it is most certainly attempting to deny its population. The Iranian government is doing all it can to influence its citizens to surf only on Iranian websites. It filters and significantly slows down access to external sites, such as Google and Yahoo, with the aim of causing Iranians to start using domestic sites simply out of frustration. In March of this year crackdowns began on using VPNs and Tor with only registered VPNs being able to be used. The government generously offers to sell VPNs however they then can of course monitor one's online activity. Now the regime is moving one step further with plans to implement an internal Iranian internet, much like an intranet. A system such as this already exists in North Korea, which itself is not exactly the most shining example for human rights. This move has been in the works for a while, although it is highly concerning that it might go into effect so close to the election.

In keeping with the theme we have become so used to seeing in Iran, the regime chooses rather to veil its citizens of all opportunity. Internally millions are being cut off to vital information before the elections, while externally it still maintains its charade of democracy. Will Iranian citizens be able to overcome the internet 'roadblocks' to organize effective opposition? Can there be a revolution organized by a typewriter? Share your thoughts below...

The right of choice

Choice is at the heart of our daily lives. We choose what to eat, when to eat, where to work, if to work at all. This choice is a fundamental human right, and the foundation of all school of feminism. Our right to choose is what women have been fighting for, for centuries. This choice is what women have been fighting for, for centuries. This choice however, unfortunately is in no way universal and many women around the world are blatantly denied the ability to choose the paths of their own existence.

This lack of basic rights that women have in Iran was made abundantly obvious with the story of Ermia, the winner of an Iranian singing contest. Here, the idea that she may even possess such a right as "choice" wasn't considered in the controversy that ensued after her appearance on stage. To give a little background, Ermia participated in an Iranian talent show in London -Googoosh Academy- where she appeared on stage with a Hejab and looser clothing, yet in shots of her behind the scenes she is shown with some of her hair loose and wearing tighter clothes. Most of us wouldn't consider this to be a problem at all as we understand the idea that one can choose how to present oneself on stage and how to approach religion. However Ermia and her hejab caused a storm on both sides of the Iranian political spectrum.


(The Guardian report on the story)

Those pro the regime were appalled that Ermia was filmed back stage with some of her hair showing. They spoke to the destruction that the western world is causing to Islam. They called Ermia a traitor to the religion for divorcing her Shiite husband and marrying a Christian man from Turkey, a crime punishable by death and a fact irrelevant to her appearance on the TV show.

Yet on the other hand, the fact that she should be filmed with a hejab at all was unheard of to the opposition. Surely she must have been put on the show as a mouthpiece of the regime, after all she had attended a conference on Islam in Turkey (ironically it was on this trip that she met her husband).

The tragedy here is that she was never viewed as an individual with an opinion and ideas of her own; she was always and only viewed as the pawn, regardless of the side of the argument.

The women in Iran are shackled in cloth and in law. They are silenced by their culture. Ermia, herself, managed to break many of these shackles yet the publicity her story received, shines a light on the plight of the Iranian woman. The rights that we forget about and take for granted, they long for; but there is no way for them to fight to receive such rights. As a global community of women that have a choice, I believe that we should choose to speak up for those that have no voice of their own. We need to raise the questions as to why women are held at such low esteem. Is this an issue that is inherent in Iranian culture? Is it a product of Islam? Will the women’s voices be heard in the upcoming election? What can we do to help?