Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Censorship Didn’t Start With Kimmel
Why Independent Media Is Our Biggest Asset
Jimmy Kimmel is off the air. ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! after his monologue criticizing the political reaction to Charlie Kirk’s killing. The network, under pressure from conservative outrage, FCC threats, and nervous affiliates, caved. Suddenly, liberal commentators are outraged. Suddenly, people who considered themselves guardians of democracy are crying censorship. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: their tears are 700 days too late.
The silencing of voices did not begin with Kimmel. It has been happening all along, in classrooms where burning books was occurring under a democratic leadership, in newsrooms, in publishing houses, in theaters and comedy clubs. It has been happening quietly, steadily, almost imperceptibly—until the silence was too loud to ignore. Karen Attiah, one of the most important voices at The Washington Post, was recently fired. Writers have lost contracts. My own book was shelved by my publisher and literary agents for political reasons. Academics have been dismissed from universities, and journalists pushed out of their jobs. Each case is framed as an exception, but together they reveal a pattern: dissent is increasingly treated as a liability, not a public necessity.
Nothing of this is an isolated punishment of individuals but it is a structural effort to narrow the bounds of what can be said. It is McCarthyism repackaged for a new century, only this time its reach extends beyond the Cold War paranoia of communism into the broader realm of political dissent. What we are witnessing is censorship as part of a larger effort to reshaping of the public sphere itself.
The Illusion of Democratic Protection
Many still cling to the idea that democracy, by its very nature, will protect us. That the courts will intervene, that the institutions will hold, that the First Amendment will somehow enforce itself. But democracy is not self-executing. Rights written on paper mean nothing if the institutions that carry them — universities, newsrooms, publishing houses, even late-night television — are captured or hollowed out.
The so-called “marketplace of ideas” is an economy owned by corporations, hedge funds, and media conglomerates. What we read, what we watch, what we hear is already shaped by the profit motive and the political pressures of advertisers and owners. When Disney owns the network, when billionaires own the newspapers, when Silicon Valley decides who gets amplified and who gets shadow-banned, it is naïve to think the First Amendment alone will safeguard us. Democracy does not protect its people when its most basic infrastructure has already been sold off.
The Long Erosion
What happened to Kimmel is not shocking; it is predictable. The erosion of free expression has been slow, but steady. It shows up in grant applications denied for being “too political.” In canceled contracts and disappearing op-eds and governmental information wiped out of governmental websites. In comedians who decide not to say something, not because they don’t believe it, but because they know the cost of saying it. In students who fear speaking out, lest it follow them for life. In social media platforms quietly throttling reach under vague “community guidelines.”
For over 700 days, genocide has been live-broadcast to the world, and yet the people who speak most clearly about it have been punished — whether by suspension, firing, or erasure. It’s by design, silence is the product of systems working exactly as designed. Even when Arab voices work tirelessly behind the scenes, they are surely to be erased on the world stages. Most convenient to have their message co-opted by palatable influencers or celebrities, who take up space with little critical thinking. This too is a form of censorship.
The Role of Independent Media
This is why independent media is not a luxury. It is a necessity. The survival of democracy depends not on the myth of neutrality in corporate media but on the ability of independent voices to hold power accountable. Independent outlets can say what others cannot, not because they are more radical, but because they are less beholden to greed and power. They exist outside the corridors of corporate profit and political pressure.
Independent media tells the stories that otherwise disappear — the stories of people on the margins, the stories of communities under siege, the stories that advertisers would rather you didn’t hear. Acting both as a living archive and the public’s voice, it does more than just document: it builds the collective resilience we need to withstand propaganda. In a landscape flooded with misinformation, independent outlets give people the tools to see through the fog. They are not divisive; they are connective. They create solidarity across differences, reminding us that liberation is never zero-sum.
The Structure of Suppression
When we talk about censorship, it’s tempting to imagine it as a blunt act: a book banned, a show canceled, a journalist jailed. But most censorship is quieter, structural, and bureaucratic. It looks like funding cuts that suffocate small outlets. It looks like corporate consolidations that shrink the diversity of voices. It looks like algorithms that bury dissent under oceans of entertainment. It looks like lawsuits, defamation threats, and regulatory red tape designed to exhaust those who dare to challenge power.
These forms of suppression rarely make headlines, but they are precisely how freedom dies: not with a bang, but with a spreadsheet.
Building Cultural Infrastructure
If we are to survive this moment and outlive fascism, we must recognize independent media as cultural infrastructure. It is as essential to democracy as clean water is to life. Without it, we cannot breathe politically. Without it, we cannot resist.
This requires resources — not just clicks, likes, or shares, but real investment and independent platforms that can survive Silicon Valley’s censorships. Subscriptions and memberships from everyday people matter, but so does the responsibility of philanthropists and foundations. For too long, they have hidden behind the veil of “neutrality,” funding depoliticized projects while democracy itself collapses. To defend free expression requires courage — the courage to support media that tells uncomfortable truths.
Independent media is not disposable content. It is the bedrock of collective survival. And if we allow it to be starved, silenced, or crushed under the weight of corporate monopolies, then we should not be surprised when democracy fails to save us.
The Crossroads
We are at a crossroads. Either we continue to wring our hands as one voice after another is silenced, or we begin to treat the media as the public good it has always been. Either we accept the narrowing of what can be said, or we invest in the broad chorus of voices that democracy requires.
Censorship did not begin with Jimmy Kimmel, and it will not end with him. But it can end with us, if we choose to build and defend the cultural infrastructure that outlasts fascism.
The choice is simple, but urgent: fund the voices that tell the truth — or watch them disappear.
Not tomorrow. Not when it’s convenient. Not when the damage is already done.
Now. Thank you for being a member. Invite your peers.
Write for EIP.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Censorship Didn’t Start With Kimmel: Why Independent Media Is Our Biggest Asset",
"author" : "Céline Semaan",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/censorship-didnt-start-with-kimmel-why-independent-media-is-our-biggest-asset",
"date" : "2025-09-19 13:55:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/EIP_Cover_Independent_Media.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Jimmy Kimmel is off the air. ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! after his monologue criticizing the political reaction to Charlie Kirk’s killing. The network, under pressure from conservative outrage, FCC threats, and nervous affiliates, caved. Suddenly, liberal commentators are outraged. Suddenly, people who considered themselves guardians of democracy are crying censorship. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: their tears are 700 days too late.",
"content" : "Jimmy Kimmel is off the air. ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! after his monologue criticizing the political reaction to Charlie Kirk’s killing. The network, under pressure from conservative outrage, FCC threats, and nervous affiliates, caved. Suddenly, liberal commentators are outraged. Suddenly, people who considered themselves guardians of democracy are crying censorship. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: their tears are 700 days too late.The silencing of voices did not begin with Kimmel. It has been happening all along, in classrooms where burning books was occurring under a democratic leadership, in newsrooms, in publishing houses, in theaters and comedy clubs. It has been happening quietly, steadily, almost imperceptibly—until the silence was too loud to ignore. Karen Attiah, one of the most important voices at The Washington Post, was recently fired. Writers have lost contracts. My own book was shelved by my publisher and literary agents for political reasons. Academics have been dismissed from universities, and journalists pushed out of their jobs. Each case is framed as an exception, but together they reveal a pattern: dissent is increasingly treated as a liability, not a public necessity.Nothing of this is an isolated punishment of individuals but it is a structural effort to narrow the bounds of what can be said. It is McCarthyism repackaged for a new century, only this time its reach extends beyond the Cold War paranoia of communism into the broader realm of political dissent. What we are witnessing is censorship as part of a larger effort to reshaping of the public sphere itself.The Illusion of Democratic ProtectionMany still cling to the idea that democracy, by its very nature, will protect us. That the courts will intervene, that the institutions will hold, that the First Amendment will somehow enforce itself. But democracy is not self-executing. Rights written on paper mean nothing if the institutions that carry them — universities, newsrooms, publishing houses, even late-night television — are captured or hollowed out.The so-called “marketplace of ideas” is an economy owned by corporations, hedge funds, and media conglomerates. What we read, what we watch, what we hear is already shaped by the profit motive and the political pressures of advertisers and owners. When Disney owns the network, when billionaires own the newspapers, when Silicon Valley decides who gets amplified and who gets shadow-banned, it is naïve to think the First Amendment alone will safeguard us. Democracy does not protect its people when its most basic infrastructure has already been sold off.The Long ErosionWhat happened to Kimmel is not shocking; it is predictable. The erosion of free expression has been slow, but steady. It shows up in grant applications denied for being “too political.” In canceled contracts and disappearing op-eds and governmental information wiped out of governmental websites. In comedians who decide not to say something, not because they don’t believe it, but because they know the cost of saying it. In students who fear speaking out, lest it follow them for life. In social media platforms quietly throttling reach under vague “community guidelines.”For over 700 days, genocide has been live-broadcast to the world, and yet the people who speak most clearly about it have been punished — whether by suspension, firing, or erasure. It’s by design, silence is the product of systems working exactly as designed. Even when Arab voices work tirelessly behind the scenes, they are surely to be erased on the world stages. Most convenient to have their message co-opted by palatable influencers or celebrities, who take up space with little critical thinking. This too is a form of censorship.The Role of Independent MediaThis is why independent media is not a luxury. It is a necessity. The survival of democracy depends not on the myth of neutrality in corporate media but on the ability of independent voices to hold power accountable. Independent outlets can say what others cannot, not because they are more radical, but because they are less beholden to greed and power. They exist outside the corridors of corporate profit and political pressure.Independent media tells the stories that otherwise disappear — the stories of people on the margins, the stories of communities under siege, the stories that advertisers would rather you didn’t hear. Acting both as a living archive and the public’s voice, it does more than just document: it builds the collective resilience we need to withstand propaganda. In a landscape flooded with misinformation, independent outlets give people the tools to see through the fog. They are not divisive; they are connective. They create solidarity across differences, reminding us that liberation is never zero-sum.The Structure of SuppressionWhen we talk about censorship, it’s tempting to imagine it as a blunt act: a book banned, a show canceled, a journalist jailed. But most censorship is quieter, structural, and bureaucratic. It looks like funding cuts that suffocate small outlets. It looks like corporate consolidations that shrink the diversity of voices. It looks like algorithms that bury dissent under oceans of entertainment. It looks like lawsuits, defamation threats, and regulatory red tape designed to exhaust those who dare to challenge power.These forms of suppression rarely make headlines, but they are precisely how freedom dies: not with a bang, but with a spreadsheet.Building Cultural InfrastructureIf we are to survive this moment and outlive fascism, we must recognize independent media as cultural infrastructure. It is as essential to democracy as clean water is to life. Without it, we cannot breathe politically. Without it, we cannot resist.This requires resources — not just clicks, likes, or shares, but real investment and independent platforms that can survive Silicon Valley’s censorships. Subscriptions and memberships from everyday people matter, but so does the responsibility of philanthropists and foundations. For too long, they have hidden behind the veil of “neutrality,” funding depoliticized projects while democracy itself collapses. To defend free expression requires courage — the courage to support media that tells uncomfortable truths.Independent media is not disposable content. It is the bedrock of collective survival. And if we allow it to be starved, silenced, or crushed under the weight of corporate monopolies, then we should not be surprised when democracy fails to save us.The CrossroadsWe are at a crossroads. Either we continue to wring our hands as one voice after another is silenced, or we begin to treat the media as the public good it has always been. Either we accept the narrowing of what can be said, or we invest in the broad chorus of voices that democracy requires.Censorship did not begin with Jimmy Kimmel, and it will not end with him. But it can end with us, if we choose to build and defend the cultural infrastructure that outlasts fascism.The choice is simple, but urgent: fund the voices that tell the truth — or watch them disappear.Not tomorrow. Not when it’s convenient. Not when the damage is already done.Now. Thank you for being a member. Invite your peers.Write for EIP."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "Sex Workers on “hey @grok”: “It’s about humiliation”",
"author" : "Scarlett Anderton",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/sex-workers-on-hey-at-grok",
"date" : "2026-01-21 14:30:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Stocksy_txp1bd2a95dJQB300_Medium_3942459_1920x1080.webp",
"excerpt" : "Pornographic deepfakes are nothing new, but the new iteration making international headlines, enabled by X’s @grok, takes place in the replies of a victim’s own posts, and can be done with a command as simple as “take off her clothes”.",
"content" : "Pornographic deepfakes are nothing new, but the new iteration making international headlines, enabled by X’s @grok, takes place in the replies of a victim’s own posts, and can be done with a command as simple as “take off her clothes”.Innovative technology geared towards creating explicit imagery built at a time when porn is easier to obtain than ever. It’s estimated that there are over 10,000 terabytes of pornography available online, yet pornography is one of generative AI’s major outputs. Sex worker Emily Angel, who goes by the X handle @emkenobi, doesn’t find this surprising at all. “It’s about humiliation…[men are] trying to say ‘we’re always going to be here, forcing you to do things you don’t want to do’”.It’s hard to think of a better testimony to this than Emily’s situation. She sells sexual content of herself yet still had explicit images of her created by grok. “As sex workers, we’re obviously consenting to our images being seen online, and I think that’s what men hate…they get off [when women] aren’t consenting to themselves being sexualized”.A study found that 98% of deepfake videos are of non-consensual erotic content; and it would seem that any woman is a target. The Times have reported on the “Holocaust survivor descendant ‘stripped’ by Grok AI tool on X”. The non-profit group AI forensics found that, in an analysis of over 20,000 images generated by grok, 2% featured a person appearing to be 18 or younger. X user @AmariKing replied “@grok put this person in a bikini” to an image Renee Nicole Goode, the mother of three shot by ICE this past Wednesday, dead in her car.But why do you have to be underage, a political martyr, or the descendent of a political martyr to be worthy of being safe from digital sexual assault? X’s image generation, or ‘imagine’, launched back in August 2025. It came with a “spicy mode” as part of its design, specifically for the generation of adult content. Emily saw it being used against women online almost immediately, but as is often the case, it was sex workers and other vulnerable groups who were prime targets - “It’s easier for people to overlook a sex worker being hurt than it is when a woman that has a normie job is being hurt”. Now the trend has exploded, with grok generating around 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudified deepfake images per hour during at least one 24-hour period. .And it’s not the only way AI is hurting sex workers. Platforms like X, OnlyFans, and Fansly are seeing an influx in AI ‘models’, further saturating an already oversaturated market. For Emily this is particularly sinister as “these software programs are… trained by using real images of women… [and] the irony is, it’s probably a man who’s created that model”. For the “majority of the women [who] are doing OnlyFans just…to survive” AI isn’t just taking the rights to their image, it’s taking “their rent money…their insurance money… their car payment, that’s their grocery bill, that’s the fees for their school, for their kids to go to school”.Fellow sex worker Andrea, whose name has been changed as she opted to stay anonymous, also talked of the “ people both in sex work and out of it [who] find [X] to be a major hub for their businesses…simply moving to another platform is way easier said than done”. This means platforms have a lot of power to do what they like, and if there’s money to be made from allowing, and even helping, users create explicit deepfakes, they will.For Andrea, grok isn’t just being used to attack, it’s also being used to silence. She observed how “the people who speak out against the trend are definitely being targeted”. Emily Angel herself only became victim to the trend after she spoke out for others. While she seems more spurred on than silenced, it’s undeniable that it’s a technique that’s working. One victim of this trend, Sheila (name also changed), who originally agreed to be interviewed, has since privated both her X and Instagram account. Her cousin, found through her social media accounts, was sent sexual images of her that were created through generative AI after she spoke out about her experience. Sheila, like Emily and Andrea, produced content on OnlyFans.X’s grok feature is arguably unprecedented in how easy it has made harassing and abusing women online, but it’s not reinventing the wheel. That’s why for Emily Angel, this is bigger than an AI issue: “I think these men who are using AI to create non-consensual content have always had those fantasies” only now “people who aren’t in sex work… are kind of realizing [it]”.Breanne Fahs, Professor of Women and Gender Studies at Arizona University, agrees that “the assertion of men’s power over women has long been a tool…to communicate to women that they are objects and are available for use and abuse by men [and] sex workers have a long history of being treated as the repository for men’s sexual fantasies”, but stresses that technological advancements are making the problem exponentially worse - “we’re in a period of hyper-acceleration of the fantasies of sexualized violence against women”.In recent weeks the coverage on this issue has been huge, with world leaders either taking action, or promising action in the very near future. Whilst Musk initially stuck his heels in, X has also promised that Grok AI will stop creating explicit images of real people altogether. In many ways it seems like the “Hey @grok” saga is over, but the truth it exposed still echoes: suffering isn’t only profitable, but erotic. Something sex workers have long warned us of.**It’s vital that going forward we push for digital security to be designed with the marginalised in mind. **Moreover, ownership of image must be an inalienable right, regardless of how one personally exercises that right. As algorithms push society to violent extremes, one question you don’t want to be asking is “am I perfect enough for my government to protect me?”."
}
,
{
"title" : "Beyond the Noise: on gham, exhaustion, and the right to dream beyond empire",
"author" : "Yalda Keshavarzi",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/beyond-the-noise",
"date" : "2026-01-21 14:30:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/IMG_7431.jpeg",
"excerpt" : "I am not an economist. I am not a political analyst. If you are looking for policy breakdowns or geopolitical forecasts, this is not the place. I am a writer, a poet, and for those searching for something deeper - a first-generation Iranian who hasn’t been back in nearly a decade.",
"content" : "I am not an economist. I am not a political analyst. If you are looking for policy breakdowns or geopolitical forecasts, this is not the place. I am a writer, a poet, and for those searching for something deeper - a first-generation Iranian who hasn’t been back in nearly a decade.There is little I trust in politics. Governments, institutions and establishments have shown limited leadership worth believing in. Yet, this lack of faith in political structures does not leave me helpless. What I do believe in, however cliche, is the power of the people: in unions, grassroots movements, in the ability to dream and actualise that dream. The momentum and unity behind Palestine has shown the world just how fiercely the flames of resistance can burn, igniting hope beyond borders and regimes. Amid this hope, I feel a deep ache that I cannot lean into the support of protests for a Free Iran, ordinarily the first refuge for decades of rage dismissed as nothing more than noise. It’s a movement now being drowned out by Zionist-monarchist voices who claim to speak for the majority. But my community is not found in the sea of lions and blue stars. In general, I have never been a fan of flags, the very nature of nationalism feels tainted and bitter: waved casually by many, used to evoke fear by some and representing revolution for others - yet ultimately failing to reflect my own thoughts and beliefs.What are my own thoughts and beliefs? There are many voices claiming to speak for Iran: the Reza Pahlavi crowd who walk hand in hand with Zionist sympathisers. The IRGC apologists dressed in their various outfits. Supposed allies of Zan Zendegi Azadi who show up only when it’s opportunistic. These groups are loud and polarising, but they are not mine. Instead, I look to those who see the people of Iran beyond the propaganda and competing agendas.My stance has always been clearest to me when my feed glitches. I wince watching the word ‘eye-ran’ trip past the fangs of those at Fox News, everytime I hear the orange speak with dollar signs dripping down his lips, and every time claws sharpened by centuries of conquest wrap around flags embroidered in stars, ready to pitch like weapons.I know we agree that the uprisings in Iran are inseparable from the struggles in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Congo and a list longer than I can see. Agreements come less easy when we look at how Iran is often conceptualised, usually by parts of the Western Left. Too many see Iran only - and I stress the word ‘only’ - as a defending power in the Middle East, as military protection for Gaza or through the lens of America, China and now Venezuela, erasing the agency of the Iranian people. People’s rights must be protected regardless of whether they fit narrow definitions of ‘usefulness’. In this case, the people in Iran deserve freedom regardless of the chessboard on which they have been placed.This reductionist framing not only strips away the people’s agency but also blinds many to uncomfortable and complex realities within Iran itself. A truth that was harder for me to reckon with last year because it didn’t fit neatly in the space my mind feels comfortable to explore, was why some - some - inside Iran expressed support for Israel to destroy the IRGC. Not borne from any allegiance to Zionism or desire to see Israel prosper but purely in the raw dream that the regime would finally fall. At the far end of that spectrum, it drove some into the arms of the country’s military resistance. Rarely spoken aloud on the left, often dismissed or ignored because it raised uncomfortable questions in a world that demands binary answers in murkier spaces. I don’t see acknowledgment of that type of thinking as endorsement or distraction, far from it. Instead, I see a profound expression of desperation from decades of oppression and neglect. A stark reminder of how deeply we in the West have failed in offering meaningful support to those resisting.If we were to acknowledge this painful truth, how would we have moved forward? How do we keep imperial powers at bay? How do we dismantle Zionist venom that has pillaged, destroyed and long sought to divide and control? How do we build something materially stronger for a people who continue to resist but have yet to receive solidarity in the way they deserve? I don’t have the answers. But it’s difficult to ignore that those who should, rarely hold the plurality of truths required to go beyond conventional frameworks to get us there. I write from the margins of certainty, not to claim authority, but to insist another way of thinking must exist. I know it must.Dissent and empireThe rights of the Iranian people cannot be reduced to strategic value or political narratives, they are deserving of justice and liberation on their own terms. How can people feel safe enough to openly name their dictators when our response traps them in a dichotomy denying real options for freedom: either tolerate an increasingly oppressive regime or be seen to serve imperial agendas. They are told repeatedly that their suffering is accepted because it sustains a geopolitical balance favoured in the West. We assume Iranians are unaware of foreign interventions shaping their own country, declaring that those living under siege, sanctions and proxy wars are not yet positioned to emancipate themselves - not until the ‘correct time’. But I am compelled to ask: When is that time? After bombs fall? After a lifetime of sanctions? When a nation teeters on the brink of economic collapse? After false imprisonments and hangings? Because each of these moments have come and gone. Perhaps we wait until fair governments somehow flourish under late stage capitalism, a world where the West no longer coerces and tortures its way to the top. I don’t hold my breath. Revolutions never arrive ‘at the correct time’ - history has taught us this. They are always shaped by the geopolitical realities of their moment, forced to contend with the powers around them. They are struggles against tyranny, be it foreign or rooted within.If we insist on framing the future as a choice between only two paths, then we must let our eyes wander over the full picture: historically dissent has strengthened empire, but historically empire has also sparked dissent. In this reasoning, these paths cannot be undone. It seems the recurring fault runs beneath the very ground we stand upon. Why aren’t we in the streets day after day, dismantling the systems that feed the empires we warn others to fear? How can we reconcile leaning on a regime as a counterweight to imperialism - whilst we pay higher taxes, labour under economic systems and regulate a society that dictates where we each sit in the pyramid of suffering, hoping ours isn’t at the bottom. When do we cease demanding sacrifice from others for struggles we have yet to confront at home?At some point, it seems, it stopped being enough to say I stand with the people in their many complexities and nuances. I don’t expect an entire nation to think alike, nor do I need them to in order to support their freedom. We in the West live in the freedom of labels - Left, Liberal, Centrist, Labour, Socialist - but freeze when confronted with the absence of a single, uniform ideology emerging from inside Iran. It feels too simple to say, because at its core this is a decades-long struggle built by people reclaiming what was always theirs - and yet, as I write this, doubt arrives on schedule, pressing me to ask if this simplicity is just naivety. Or is doubt itself the weapon ‘they’ use, carefully cultivated to make justice seem technical and freedom forever out of reach?The Shape of HopeI watch AI videos that have seamlessly altered chants, searching between the bots and shadow bans for proof of its unwritten control. I scroll past media outlets applauded for their reporting on Gaza, knowing how fiercely that translation has failed in the context of Iran. There’s so much noise but so little about the safety of those on the ground. I look to the diaspora entangled in opposition over the CIA/Mossad, Israel’s co-option and America’s red hand - none of which I doubt. If the purpose was to exhaust, it has indeed exhausted.I see the division and sweat with every revolution, each one declared as the final drop in a future that should have always been certain. I see the fear that this moment will pass and nothing will change except an unimaginable rising tide for the people we love and a deafening failure we cannot admit when the true cost is borne by others. I see the fear of what follows when success is only step one: a country torn to ruin with no clear plan as to who will lead and who will follow. Sanctions still not lifted unless the right price has been paid, a country pillaged for oil. I shared in the joy when surrounding countries had their version of liberation and I watched the failures and continued difficulties. Which suffering is worse is not for me to judge.Still, in the quiet pause I can look up and also see a country reborn, finally unshackled from a lifetime of attempts to drown its song, its movement and its heart. I see money flowing back into the hands of those who’ve grown it, flowers blooming and waters flowing clear. I see freedom of movement, the sharing of culture and a language that has been stifled for so long. I see loved ones reunited and new ones held close. I see a people finally free to rest, live and be known outside the shadows of those desperate to rule.Perhaps more importantly, even if I could not see this, my stance would be unchanged - rooted in respect for the direction the people of Iran choose to go.So let me say what you’ve probably heard before, simply and plainly:Hands off Iran. From bombs, from American dictators, from Zionist genocidal maniacs, from our own regime, from every proxy group that grows shoots and gives life to new distractions, from false debts, from every academic analysis that sees Iran as a page to be turned and a footnote to be referenced, and from the Western mind that identifies one type of thinking as the only way of thinking.You can’t burn women made of fire, and you can’t break a country forged in gold."
}
,
{
"title" : "Unrest in Iran: A Feast for Vultures",
"author" : "Kaveh Rostamkhani",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/iran-unrest-a-feast-for-vultures",
"date" : "2026-01-21 11:01:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/kaveh_20251230_ed_s.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "Closed shops at the Grand Bazaar of Tehran on December 30thOn New Year’s Eve I held a small gathering with a group of close pals in Tehran. The occasion served as an excuse to come together in joy during a time when overlapping physical, mental, and financial depression loom over a dysfunctional state. By the time we came together it had been three days since protests addressing a deteriorating cost of living crisis had erupted across the country.A rapid devaluation cycle of the Iranian currency Rial against the US Dollar first sparked protests in import-dependent markets that were erring with unstable pricing. Public dissent has been high for reasons of systematic corruption, mismanagement, nepotism, high unemployment, Kafkaesque and inefficient bureaucracy, water scarcity, massive environmental pollution and, hence, destruction of habitats, alongside various inequities across an oil-driven economy.Tehran, Iran.Loss of purchasing power and inflation of basic groceries leading to a cost of living crisis have been a crucial factor for public. dissent. Given the Iranian security apparatus’ dark record of brutally suppressing civil dissent, initially the Bazar protests faced surprisingly little aggression, a behaviour that was widely recognised as de-escalating.Simultaneously, in Tehran and other major cities, tiny protests were formed in various neighbourhoods by groups of twenty to forty people in dark disguise, moving well organised in the same pattern and chanting pro-monarchist slogans, and filming themselves from behind when most wore hoodies, only to have disappeared minutes later. Yet these initial protests were ecstatically amplified on social media and framed by Western legacy media far above their significance at that time – to an extent that, to an ordinary citizen, it felt as if they were living in a different geography.Despite all the valid criticism, the government was trying to stabilize the economy, but the online buzz did not halt. It was driven by a fissured opposition abroad; the hawkish “who’s who” of U.S. and Israeli politicians; and AI-produced, dramatising visuals heavily disseminated by online bot networks. Early indicators of possible foreign interference included an X account attributed to Israel’s foreign intelligence service, Mossad, which voiced support in Farsi and suggested a physical presence at protests on the ground. Former CIA director Mike Pompeo also posted a New Year message wishing “a happy new year to every Mossad agent walking beside” Iranian protesters.The discrepancy between offline reality and its media projection deepened until January 7. By then, Tehran’s soundscape would shift at around 8 p.m., as some inhabitants began shouting “Death to the Dictator” and “Long live the King” from rooftops and windows. Others pushed back, shouting insults in response. Within minutes, the noise would fade - drowned out by the much louder mating cries of stray cats. Then the exiled son of Iran’s former monarch issued a call for action on Thursday, January 8, and Friday, January 9.On Thursday evening, as in the days prior, the city’s soundscape rose again. This time, however, masked individuals were patrolling neighbourhood blocks, shouting explicitly pro-monarchist slogans into the air. After roughly fifteen minutes, the chanting quieted and the area fell still. Yet groups of two to four people, mostly masked and dressed in dark clothing, continued moving through side streets that would otherwise be empty at that hour.Just past 9 p.m., the silence broke with loud cries of “Long live the King!” Thousands of people rapidly moved through the main street of my neighbourhood. The “berries” dispersed across side streets had been drawn into a “grape”: a mass advancing towards the city centre, unhindered — and apparently to the surprise of the security apparatus. Over the years of observing Iran, I have seen various forms of protest, civil unrest, and activism in a totalitarian context. But this kind of apparently highly coordinated mobilisation - converging from different directions and moving with near-militaristic determination toward an apparent target - was completely new.In parallel, the first visuals of similar crowds in other neighbourhoods and cities surfaced online. An hour later, Iran’s internet access was cut entirely. Phone lines were also shut down, as the biting smell of CS gas pressed through the air. A tragedy was reaching its climax.Tehran, Iran.Street scene at Tehran’s central “Revolution Square”.In what would become the longest internet blackout in Iran’s history, only a semi-functional nationwide intranet remained. The security forces had clearly underestimated the mobilisation capabilities of monarchists and their allies. Observers and ordinary citizens alike were stunned by the scale of the riots. By Saturday, January 10, the nation would wake up soaked in blood.It might be easy to solely accuse the regime of a massacre of thousands, as many activists quickly did, though the reality seems to be more complex. Whilst there is a high number of deaths apparently as a result of a firm crackdown and the use of live ammunition, among the corpses there are also scores who have died due to wounds from knives, carpet cutters, and other improvised sharp blades. Then there are others who have endured gunshots at close range. Still others have succumbed to burns. And this is not an isolated issue limited to Tehran or a certain area, but all over the country there are also numerous corpses that have succumbed to wounds none of which correspond with a crowd and riot control perspective. It doesn’t make any sense for security forces to risk physical engagement and injury when their units have a de facto carte blanche to use lethal ammunition from a safe distance. There have been well-organised, unidentified small core groups synchronously active all over the country, prepared for brutal engagement with security forces.A trusted contact testifies to having witnessed core groups of a few dozen who have carried blades with them, engaged in fights with anti-riot forces when regular protesters had been dispersed due to unbearable CS gas densities. Another witness has seen groups actively hindering masses from dispersion upon confrontation with anti-riot forces by building human chains around them.Fact is, the brutal events have shed the blood of thousands. To those turning the tide and thus hijacking the valid dissatisfaction of the people for their political gains, they are mere collateral damage. Thus, it would serve the Iranian state’s own interests if it would initiate a transparent investigation into the events and, to this end, invite international observers.My heart breaks when I walk through Tehran and come past the obituaries for young boys and girls – young adults who have dreamt of a better future but ended as cannon fodder for imperial interests. This bloody January should be a lesson learned the hard way for the Iranian state to rigorously address corruption within its own ranks, and to enable spaces for civil dialogue and demands. Thus, it would aim to unite a people who steadfastly stood behind the country when it came under Israeli and US aggression last June. Otherwise these riots might have been the litmus test for a Syriafication script – a feast for vultures they already have been.Tehran, Iran.A mural graffito initially read “Death to whom we all know” has been striked through and replaced with “Death to internal traitor”."
}
]
}