These are the same 300 million people unable or unwilling to organize and protest peacefully in their own nation, when the presidential elections of both 2000 and 2004 were successfully stolen in front of the entire world.

Perhaps Iran is supposed to serve as some kind of “teachable moment,” to quote the parlance of the modern bourgeoisie, a cleansing moment in which the unwashed American may be tutored in the fundamental processes necessary to secure a democratic state.

More realistically, it would appear much more likely to be designed as a stern example (like Tiananmen Square April, 1989), of what happens to those who would challenge authority in a totalitarian society.

This bittersweet moment of moral repugnance in the streets of Tehran, is intended to provide a highly visual and visceral example of why Americans should continue their well-advised habit of refraining from actions which might bring into question the legitimacy of their own government.

Considering the miniscule coverage afforded the much larger and more focused public protests conducted by the people of Mexico in response their own stolen presidential election in 2006, the stark contrast of nearly constant coverage of Iranian dissent has more to do with American media serving the interests of the Israeli state than with actually exposing corruption.

What hope is there that we can overcome the apathy of an indifferent electorate, when Michael Jackson’s death is the leading news story for a longer period of time than democratic action taken in the face of violent suppression, in order secure liberty and justice? The American Revolution would have made page 12.

“The price of democracy is eternal vigilance.”-Thomas Jefferson