Iran bans high speed internet

[AussieU2fanman]

Just when you thought that the Muslim world was progressing very slowly, they apparantly don't think they're progressing slow enough! So they thought the only thing slower than painfully slow progression is going the other way altogether, regression!

http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1924637,00.html

What other forms of regression bought about by a fervent hatred of Westerns will they implement into their already cripped society? Banning of cars? Medicine? Why doesn't Iran just hurry up and build those nukes and nuke themselves so they can start again in the dark ages. But Nukes are a Western idea! Did they imply that they only ban the good things that Western culture brings and they still need things that bring about death and destruction

Opinions?

 

[Se7en]

if you nuked the entire population of iran you would actually kill a good number of progressive muslims.

 

[ntalwar]

The US didn't have high speed internet until a few years ago, and a lot of American folks still don't have it. Not sure how it inhibits progress.

 

[AussieU2fanman]

The US didn't have high speed internet until a few years ago, and a lot of American folks still don't have it. Not sure how it inhibits progress.

The point is they are really trying to segregate themselves completely form the Western world - yes that means inhibiting progress. Can you see life in Iran progressing without any Western influence? I certainly can't. I really can't see how this can be anything but detrimental.

 

[ntalwar]

The point is they are really trying to segregate themselves completely form the Western world - yes that means inhibiting progress. Can you see life in Iran progressing without any Western influence? I certainly can't. I really can't see how this can be anything but detrimental.

It's not a complete segregation - just a limit to 128kpbs. Even in the US only 45% or so of the online population has broadband. Not everyone equates Western pop culture with progress.

 

[verte76]

That is true, if we bombed Iran, we'd kill a hell of alot of liberal Muslims. Iran has a very strong liberal movement, they're just not allowed to run for the country's Parliament. This needs to change.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Just see what happens to Iranian progressives when the primitive mullahs are handed atomic carte blanche.

 

[yolland]

Typical authoritarian behavior. From the article it sounds as if this is likely as much about making it harder for internal opposition groups to organize, as it is about making it harder to access Western pop cultural products. China blocks more websites than Iran does (using US-made filtering equipment in both cases), I guess that means they're going backwards too.

 

[Billy Rotten]

Iranians can't watch bad skateboarding stunts, teens lip synching, and homemade explosions on YouTube? They're probably better for it.

 

[AussieU2fanman]

Why are people constantly mentioning that the effect is exclusive to 'pop culture?'

"Every country in the world is moving towards modernisation and a major element of this is high-speed internet access," said Ramazan-ali Sedeghzadeh, chairman of the parliamentary telecommunications committee. "The country needs it for development and access to contemporary science."


It's not just 'skateboarding stunts and britney spears etc. etc,' that they're missing out on. Restricting of broadband obviously mitigates development in other areas, can you imagine our Western business world without such technology?

 

[A_Wanderer]

And the porn, won't somebody think of the porn?

(but in a positive sexual liberalisation way)

 

[ntalwar]

It's not just 'skateboarding stunts and britney spears etc. etc,' that they're missing out on. Restricting of broadband obviously mitigates development in other areas, can you imagine our Western business world without such technology?

The speed limit applies to only residential and internet cafe customers, not businesses. 128kbps is still fast enough for streaming video, webcams, etc.

 

[maycocksean]

Just when you thought that the Muslim world was progressing very slowly, they apparantly don't think they're progressing slow enough! So they thought the only thing slower than painfully slow progression is going the other way altogether, regression!

http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1924637,00.html

What other forms of regression bought about by a fervent hatred of Westerns will they implement into their already cripped society? Banning of cars? Medicine? Why doesn't Iran just hurry up and build those nukes and nuke themselves so they can start again in the dark ages. But Nukes are a Western idea! Did they imply that they only ban the good things that Western culture brings and they still need things that bring about death and destruction

Opinions?

Well, it if weren't the blanket statements about "the Muslims" I wouldn't have anything to post as I agree that authoritarian restrictions in Iran are a bad thing.

As others have pointed out there are many liberal-minded Iranians in Iran. I went to school and was friends with a couple of them in high school. One girl in particular was progressive by just about anybody's standards!

There's no doubt that the religious clergy that has an iron grip on government in Iran and certainly the current president of Iran is just short of certifiable, but that does not reflect on all of the ordinary people of Iran. Not by a long shot. You might do well to do a little research into what regular, middle-class Iranians are like, before making such blanket statements. They had a great article in TIME magazine a month or so back. . .

 

[maycocksean]

China blocks more websites than Iran does (using US-made filtering equipment in both cases), I guess that means they're going backwards too.

Yeah, I wonder what religious fanatcism is motivating the Chinese in their censorship?

 

[A_Wanderer]

I think that the point has been made that moves to control the internet (also done under the auspices of the UN in the quest to breakup ICANN) is for authoritarian ends (countries like China, Iran, Zimbabwe and Cuba have a vested interest in controlling what people are able to access and proliferate). This will to power may be motivated by any number of factors and in the case of the Mullahs it is the power of the religious authorities against liberalism.

 

[AussieU2fanman]

Re: Re: Iran bans high speed internet

Well, it if weren't the blanket statements about "the Muslims" I wouldn't have anything to post as I agree that authoritarian restrictions in Iran are a bad thing.

As others have pointed out there are many liberal-minded Iranians in Iran. I went to school and was friends with a couple of them in high school. One girl in particular was progressive by just about anybody's standards!

There's no doubt that the religious clergy that has an iron grip on government in Iran and certainly the current president of Iran is just short of certifiable, but that does not reflect on all of the ordinary people of Iran. Not by a long shot. You might do well to do a little research into what regular, middle-class Iranians are like, before making such blanket statements. They had a great article in TIME magazine a month or so back. . .

Obviously nobody's that stupid to generalise like that, I should have worded it better, I rushed it too much (I'm too young and lazy). I know that so many people are against this movement in Iran (as is stipulated in the article), and evidently it's the authoritarian movement that is controlling Iran that is responsible for such ludicrious policies, not 'every single Muslim in Iran.' We've had these debates on generalising various groups before, however my point should have been transparent enough and common sense should have applied to see what I was alluding to.
I just hope those progressive Muslims in Iran can somehow persuade the goverment to change their minds or open them altogether (no idea how). I fervently resent these types of governments that thrive on oppression of their peoples rather than their prosperity (and see this as the only way to progess (how?)), and I look forward to the day when they realise.....maybe us Westerns are 'right,' so to speak.

 

[verte76]

I once had access to a website run by a liberal Muslim from Iran. It was a gutsy thing for him to do, and I just hope he had trouble with his server and not the government when the site went down. We would exchange notes by e-mail. It was an interesting experience, to say the least.

 

[maycocksean]

Re: Re: Re: Iran bans high speed internet

Obviously nobody's that stupid to generalise like that, I should have worded it better, I rushed it too much (I'm too young and lazy). I know that so many people are against this movement in Iran (as is stipulated in the article), and evidently it's the authoritarian movement that is controlling Iran that is responsible for such ludicrious policies, not 'every single Muslim in Iran.' We've had these debates on generalising various groups before, however my point should have been transparent enough and common sense should have applied to see what I was alluding to.
I just hope those progressive Muslims in Iran can somehow persuade the goverment to change their minds or open them altogether (no idea how). I fervently resent these types of governments that thrive on oppression of their peoples rather than their prosperity (and see this as the only way to progess (how?)), and I look forward to the day when they realise.....maybe us Westerns are 'right,' so to speak.

Fair enough. I just wanted to poke a little a bit at your initial post and see where you were coming from. I see your point. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[maycocksean]

I think that the point has been made that moves to control the internet (also done under the auspices of the UN in the quest to breakup ICANN) is for authoritarian ends (countries like China, Iran, Zimbabwe and Cuba have a vested interest in controlling what people are able to access and proliferate). This will to power may be motivated by any number of factors and in the case of the Mullahs it is the power of the religious authorities against liberalism.

That's all I'm saying.