Iranian woman who bravely stood on a pillar box in Tehran waving her hijab is missing

It's one thing to require public behaviors like covering up, and quite another to suppress free speech and prevent candidates from running for office.

 

Marxism isn't the way to world goverance. Collective production is unworkable in any of the models employed so far or even seen proposed. A central tenet of Marxist economics, the Labor Theory of Value, is complete nonsense and is refuted by the laws of supply and demand.

 

Marx was provocative, but not particularly instructive.

 

You strike me as being anti-women.

An absurd claim you couldn't begin to support.

 

No.

I like women very much

But some are more appealing than others

 

Marx was instructive even when he was wrong because he helped clarify certain economic dynamics. He was living during a time when the labor theory of value was being used by economists, before the marginal revolution. He took the labor theory of value to its logical end and, in the process, helped illuminate certain things about capitalist economies such as the boom and bust cycles.

 

I figure there are three reasons for the head scarves:

1 - It protects from head lice, which was probably the original intent. All women wore head caps at one time, and now do it as a sign of respect in many Christian Churches.

2 - It's a sign of rebellion towards Western impositions in Islamic countries.

3- It's a 'nationalist/religious' symbol of their affiliation in non Islamic countries. ​

Orthodox Jewish women also covered their heads with scarves, but now wear wigs which I think defeats the purpose if the intent is modesty.

What I find ridiculous is how our government is destroying nations and having millions maimed and killed, and yet Americans will condemn others for something as ridiculous as women wearing headscarves.

 

Iran's system certainly has its flaws but even those flaws can be overstated. Every system vets candidates one way or another. And that way, in certain systems, involves vetting them based on their campaign war-chest based on who has pandered the most to the more powerful lobbies and interest groups. Whatever vetting system is used, you don't have a million people on the ballot to choose from.

In Iran's case, the vetting is done more openly and if a genuinely popular figure with sufficient following is vetted, that would adversely affect voter participation. To be sure, the choices that emerge from Iran's system aren't always representative of the kind of choices people would prefer, but since these candidates need to gain votes and since the system likes to encourage voter participation, even in the less inclusive system in Iran, you will find politicians do what politicians do everywhere that they are looking for votes: try to pander to public sentiments and what drives voters to the ballot box.

 

Before making judgement on whether Iranians want to change their system, it might be a good idea to look at our societies through the eyes of an Iranian. What I see are people looking so grotesque from foods which are killing them, and everyday talk filled with obscenities and hatreds.

 

Have you actually visited London or is your glib statement based on something you read or saw on TV? London has no Sharia law (other than marriage contracts amongst Muslims) or no go zones as some media outlets have suggested.
A British Muslim Mayor does not mean London has Islamic law.

 

As long as they're not upset about being treated badly.

 

We don't rely on Adam Smith's ideas, so why would we rely on Marx?

Why would anyone today look at the value of something as determined by the labor in it? Is a one-ounce gold nugget I stoop to pick up only worth my effort bending over to grab it?

You tell me--what did Marx get right about economics? He didn't identify the cause of boom-and-bust cycles.

 

Yes, and...? Ranting U.S. pols overstate and prevaricate as a reflex.

Iran vets to stop candidates from running for office who would upset the theocracy. We use money to vet candidates with the intention of weeding out candidates would might overturn the capitalist system in its present form.

How easy is it to get to be a "genuinely popular figure" when the state controls the media? Besides, I doubt the kleptocracy running Iran cares if voter turnout is down because they reject the candidacy of a popular figure.

The criminal justice system in Iran reinforces the regime. It's corrupt.

 

She is probably undergoing gang rape therapy.

 

I doubt it! More than likely they're examining her mental health. Wouldn't we if someone went against convention - and in a public place no less? Then again, maybe they're checking her finances, to see if she was paid by the CIA or MI6? One never knows.

 

I've never heard someone refute the LTV in a way that didn't reek of pure ignorance and I'm not sure if I want to see if you'll be the exception or not, because there's a 99% chance you'll just be another play-by-play of an argument I've had before.

 

In what way do I treat women badly?

 

I taught economics for many years. The value of anything is determined by the laws of supply and demand, not the value of labor involved in its production.

 

Then you should agree that illegal aliens hurt working Americans

 

not implausible in that part of the world, it's happened before in Iran
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/iranian-women-prisoners-detail-torture-death-was-like-a-desire

 

Employers hiring illegals are the other part of the problem.

 

Classical liberal economics is apologism, not a science.

 

Who said economics is a science? Calling economics an apologism is just plain dumb, however.

Marxists are often conclusions working feverishly on their premises.

 

Do you even know what Marxian economics says?

 

Sounds akin to a woman

taking off the top of her bikini at a California beach.

​