zlacker

[return to "Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal"]
1. sepiso+M45[view] [source] 2026-01-27 13:46:51
>>mhb+(OP)
An iranian expat here. I have been following the news closely, mostly getting my data from my friends in Iran before the internet shutdown and after it was (sort of) lifted.

The death toll is way above this number, you have to consider the fact that Iran is a big country with many small cities, and in my city alone (which is very small and rarely has any protest going on) many people have died (i don’t have the exact numbers but it could be anywhere between 100 to 200) and when you put this into perspective you will understand that in scale of the entire country a lot of people have died.

I have heard that not only they killed people on the street but they have chased those who fled and killded them at their places or hidings, let alone the killing of the injured ones in hospitals.

It’s is a big tragedy and people are reluctant to talk about it because those who are committing this massacre are MUSLIMS and support PALESTINE so this is a moral dilemma for the left lovers! because they see Mullah’s regime as one of their biggest allies when it comes to attack West/Israel/Free market

It’s a shame that all those activist that would shred themselves for Palestine are absolutely quite about Iran

◧◩
2. noah_b+0d5[view] [source] 2026-01-27 14:26:17
>>sepiso+M45
It’s very strange to go “why isn’t the left doing anything about this conflict when they cared so much about Palestine?”

My government doesn’t fund Iran.

◧◩◪
3. joenot+dh5[view] [source] 2026-01-27 14:43:15
>>noah_b+0d5
I think when westerners like myself notice the disparity in response amongst western progressives between the Palestinian and Iranian situations, they're talking more from a social lens than the geopolitical one.

A lot of my peers have been incredibly active on social media the last couple years supporting Palestinians. They've been mostly completely silent on Iran, the imbalance is notable.

◧◩◪◨
4. cdelso+ll5[view] [source] 2026-01-27 15:00:34
>>joenot+dh5
it's about preaching to the choir. I think it's an atrocity what happened to those Iranian supporters. But what's the point in posting about it? Everyone else thinks it's an atrocity. We have no power to change things in Iran.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. progra+Yq5[view] [source] 2026-01-27 15:25:12
>>cdelso+ll5
Sorry I think the GP's point is correct. I feel the same about how we hear very little about modern-day slavery, but lots about much more minor workplace issues in the west. I'm not saying don't discuss modern workplace issues, and don't battle for even better working conditions -- but the silence is deafening. If American children were working 12-16 hour days in sweatshops, it would be nonstop in the news.

By not speaking out, it lessens the moral standing of those making a huge ruckus over certain issues, but remaining silent on arguably far more serious ones.

The power to cause change in democracy rests mostly in influence over decision makers who hold the power and money. The ability to get the news and media and celebrities talking about an issue is what gives protestors and those shouting on the left power to change things. Ultimately politicians and the elites want to be "in the right" to hold onto their power and money.

As an example, suppose 80% of the population was suddenly in an uprising about atrocities in Iran, and the next major election hinged on this subject. If some political party takes the right actions, they win the presidency house and senate. Do you think nothing would happen? Trump has literally said he wants to annex Greenland -- anything is possible if leaders feel they have political mandate.

Sitting in comfortable silence or talking about relatively easier issues just allows the more complex issues to go unsolved.

Again, nothing against pushing for peace for people in Palestine, but claiming that we should just ignore things in Iran reduces the legitimacy of the cause.

The pro-peace activist in WWII, who knew of concentration camps, but never mentioned it, and even told others not to discuss it. They claimed there was no point, nothing could be done. But the legacy wasn't the pro-peace activism, it was denial of the glaring situation they ignored.

[go to top]