I agree. Many of the "AN won, get over it" pieces share a somewhat arrogant perspective. As if it's all explainable, but well-fed liberals here can only understand it from the perspective of other well-fed liberals in Tehran. But not me. I understand it as it really is.
Although, to be fair, Lenin (from Lenin's Tomb) has called them out on this more than once:
"Finally, it was inferred that the workers were socially conservative and had little time for middle class people who wanted more liberal legislation. This picture, while touching on important truths, is also rather
patronising in its assumption that the workers only care about bread and butter issues and that they tend toward sullen bigotry when it comes to issues of democracy and womens' rights."
Also:
"
Even if the protesters were all middle class, I would want them to win. Truth be told, I would want them to win even more than they bargained for - to win so comprehensively that they gave a shot in the arm to the working class and facilitated their rapid self-organisation outside of the Islamic Labour Council approved unions."
That piece posted on there today by Yoshie is laughable, so was the Milne piece the other day. The assumption (of course) of this sort of reductive analysis is that everyone occupies a determined position on one side or the other of the posited class dichotomy; complexity and ambiguity is not permitted, since every actor will naturally perpetuate a political position - already inscribed anterior to any action - accorded by his class interests. There is no outside...
But there are people incapable of being anything other than simplistic from any position along the political spectrum... it's not particular to Marxists.
