Nice dissection/analysis. In its own way, deeply telling of the times, it penetrates and condenses and illuminates a great deal of the social fabric, the mental landscape and outlook of all too many.

But that is in fact a very nice illumination.

The university know-nothing masses have proved fertile ground for Jihadists and their clever manipulation of images and slogans. They have even twisted traditional, Western feminist images convincing the know-nothings that Muslim oppression of women represents liberation.

Oppresion is something diffrent in each culture.

for example when arab look at palestian and see that jewish settlers come from russia like ehud olmert, or new york like netinyahoo or letuana( something like that) like Lieberman .... and claim palestian as their homeland and ask palesteniants to leave to another for no reason....arabs see this as terrorism and theft of land and illegal and immoral and a failure in the long run.

but jews around the world see this as a progressive and humane act.

so prospective differ. In the same manner what others see as oprresion to women in the ARAB ISLamic middle east, middle easterns see as a normal thing.

But as MIcheal B said its a very nice illumination

Arabian, see whatever you like. You know the word "arabia?" That signifies a place called Arabia...now Saudia. Go back there.

Peace under tyranny is an oxymoron.

Peace under islamofascism is an oxymoron.

I looked up the artist.

Ironically (or maybe not) he is seems to be a self-starter and apparently a fine entrepreneur.

I think maybe one could even say he is a capitalista, being a commercial artist and all:)

Go figure:)

Apparently, he is quite the plagarist, see:

http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm

for many examples.

Perhaps you can't see it through your obvious bigotry and your conspiracy-theorizing about the anti-Capitalist subliminal messages behind the intentionally obscure "Andre the Giant has a Posse" sticker campaign, but, yes, "Muslim women are at the vanguard of 'The Revolution.'" Unless you haven't noticed, the most geopolitically important event taking place right now is in Iran, where women of various levels of religious observance are leading the way in overwhelmingly peaceful mass protests against the clerical regime. They're the ones in outfits ranging from simple hijabs to full chadors, braving the tough Tehran streets, calling the men "cowards," beseeching the police to turn to their side, and enduring torture in Evin prison. (I'm sorry. "Enhanced interrogation techniques." The Iranian secret police are, after all, apprently not going much beyond what Vice President Cheney authorized, and we're not supposed to call that torture.)

If the squabbling between the clerics and between Ahmadinejad and Khamenei are any evidence, women like these and the movement they represent are the biggest threat to the regime right now, and all without any foreign meddling, missile attacks, or endemic embitterment toward the West.

For the first time in modern Iranian history there's a popular uprising led by people who want to open the country to the outside world and engage with America (and yes, they are inspired by Obama), and the masses are not blaming everything on the CIA or the Mossad. You know what they're chanting? "Down with Russia!" and "Down with the dictator!"

If there's any real hope of stopping Iran's supreme leader, it's courageous women like these, women in all manners of dress who are willing to cajole the men into action and challenge the cynicism and conservatism and xenophobia of their society.

To anyone with an imagination and who is aware of what's going on over in Persia right now, and who isn't still stuck fighting hippies and Communists in the culture wars of the 1960's (or who doesn't regularly compare modern-day Cambridge, MA, to the Soviet Union), the woman in Fairey's poster evokes the image of Neda Agha-Soltan before her brutal murder by the basiji. She's the one on all their posters now, and not some robed, scowling cleric.

As much as you guys are probably itching to let loose with the missiles and create another whole generation of young Iranians who seethe at American and Israel, the best thing that could happen to America, Israel, and Iran right now in the Middle East would be a peaceful and organic change in the Iranian regime.

Maybe they'll eventually be crushed by the regime. But the mark they have left on the world---through indelible pictures and videos that have been smuggled out of the country---will never be forgotten. There will forever be a new popular image of what a religious Muslim woman looks like. I really pity you that you have been so damaged by cynicism and 40-year-old culture wars that you cannot recognize hope when it's almost hitting you smack in the face.

You have every right to state your case, of course. But please, if you wouldn't mind, hold off on the screeds against Muslim women until after they're all out of Evin and Neda's body isn't still warm in her grave.

Aren't you the guy with the children's book store? How could anyone who sells books to children be so jaded and filled with bile? I feel bad for the parents who will inevitably stumble on your blog posting.

Um,

For the sake of some momentary focus, a single question:

What's the evidence any of what has recently occurred in Iran has been inspired by Obama? I'm aware of but a single statement by one of the Iranian dissidents as applied to BHO specifically, and that particular statement was an expression of disappointment and even disdain, not approval, much less a source of inspiration.

I had a feeling that someone here would pick out a single isolated comment from my posting and turn it into a referendum on the whole thing.

Since this seems to be the approach you're going to take (rather than, say, discussing any of my main points), and every subsequent comment you're going to make would require time-consuming research on the Internet on my part, there's little purpose in my setting aside time to rebut every single one of the no-doubt many such charges you're going to make. So I'll respond just this once so that you get the idea.

"What's the evidence any of what has recently occurred in Iran has been inspired by Obama?"

I don't know if you followed the televised debates or the blogging or the rapid twittering going on amongst young and reformist Iranians during the Iranian presidential campaign or during its chaotic aftermath, but Obama came up quite frequently. (His administration's desire for opening up talks was a central issue of contention during one of the debates between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad.) People long-apathetic about Iranian politics were energized for the first time by the prospect of engagement with an American president who publicly advocated opening a dialogue with their country, and whose middle name he shared with the leading reformist Iranian candidate, Mir Hussein Mousavi, who probably won the most votes. Mousavi's campaign borrowed heavily from the Obama campaign, both in imagery and techniques, and everyone was calling his wife the Persian Michelle Obama. (She's a pretty amazing woman herself. Successful, well-educated, and brimming with chutzpah. And she's religious, by the way.) It's been almost two months since the election, so good luck digging back that far on Twitter's #iranelection channel.

Polling about Obama is hard to come by under the Ayatollahs. But there's an excellent round-up of the Obama effect in Iran to be found at:

http://www.shiftingthedebate.com/shifting/2009/06/obama-and-the-iranian-election.html/

Digging up articles from the election period on the fast-changing Internet is not easy, but here are a few relevant pieces on how Obama directly and indirectly influenced the election:

http://www.alternet.org/world/140577/iran_goes_to_the_polls:_what_will_its_historic_election_mean_for_the_world/

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/irans-wired-generation-challenges-ahmadinejad/

You can find more examples for yourself, no doubt, if you try. Try Googling "obama mousavi."

But most of all, the reason why the Iranian people are so enthusiastic about a reformist, pro-dialogue candidate is because, for the first time in years, they believe there's a real American partner extending an open hand. They all saw that Iranian-New-Year's video. It so bothered the Supreme Leader that he had to come out in public against it. (That didn't win him any sympathy among the Iranian public, of course.) The Iranian young people weren't about to get off their butts and vote in this election when Bush was president. Bush is about the only person in Iran less popular than Ahmadinejad right now. The Iranian people had and continue to have nothing but contempt for Bush. Everyone over there, young and old, was pissed at being called part of "the axis of evil." They're still made about that.

And despite the "disappointment" you claimed about Obama, the Iranian people were quite happy that Obama tread so carefully on the Iranian issue and didn't feed their regime more propaganda points. That's one reason why the regime was openly blaming Britain (!) instead of the US. Do you realize what a coup that is, for the clerics to be blaming Britain instead of the US?

Yeah, it might serve our egos to have America's leaders talk tough and self-righteously about Iran, but right now everyone in Iran agrees that we would do better to keep our mouths shut and see what happens. No one was hoping for a bold American statement against the regime more than Khamenei---his regime lives on anti-Americanism, and now he's in a lot of trouble.

None of this has anything to do with the point of my original posting, though, which was about how bigotry could be so blinding as to cause a person to write a screed about Muslim women during a time when they're putting everyone else to shame by courageously leading the way in the most geopolitically important events going on in the Middle East today.

Good grief. Given your use of invective and your thoroughgoing presumption in general, I was attempting some focus not for purposes of a "referendum" (how would that even be possible?) but for the purpose stated. It was that simple.

As far as all the topics involved in this, the thirty year history since the Khoneimi revolution and all that has transpired during that period being reduced to "[enthusiasm for] a reformist, pro-dialogue candidate," I'll simply note there's a great deal more at issue during that thirty year period than an unwillingness to "dialog" on the part of the U.S.

Perhaps you need to learn what "dialog" entails, yourself? In part in means answering simple question, shorn of all that baggage you seem to carry around.

Ha! You think "Um" uses "invective" and is carrying "baggage"? Did you not read Hillel's original post?

What bothers me more than anything else is that this stuff going on in Iran now is precisely what we've been waiting for all these years: A massive, peaceful, homegrown, popular uprising by reformists and moderates against the clerical regime, all without any perceived American or Israeli meddling. And it's Muslim women who are at the vanguard.

I wondered how people like you would react to these unprecedented and long-awaited events. But instead of recognizing this rare and amazing opportunity, instead of sitting in awe at what these people are doing, instead of celebrating what they're trying to accomplish, instead of extending them our good wishes and offering what support we can within the obvious constraints they are working under, instead of worrying about their prospects, instead of re-evaluating stereotypes and prejudices about them, Hillel here is retreating to comfortable ground, inveighing against Muslim women and indulging in his usual tirades about Communists. (Communists? Really?)

Does he know that in one highly publicized incident during a mass protest in Tehran, women approached rifle-toting policemen with flowers? It's a shame that's not what sprung to his mind when he looked at that Shepard Fairey portrait, with the veiled woman whose weapon is actually carrying a flower.

Tell me, do you know what the word "jaded" means?

By the way, does he even research stuff before he writes his pieces? The "Andre the Giant has a Posse" campaign was intended as a study of pop-art, in-jokes, and subcultures. (In this case, the skater subculture.) It was partly inspired by Heidegger's concept of phenomenology. It was John Carpenter's movie "They Live," which starred pro wrestler Roddy Piper, that inspired the "Obey" slogan, as well as the "This is Your God" slogan. Fairey wasn't even born in the 1960s. How many times does Hillel mention the 1960s in his original post? What's "carrying around baggage" if not that?

People really ought to try a little self-examination once in a while. And letting go of all that cynicism.

And this image is of Zahra Rahnavard from the protest at Neda's grave today:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e20115724a5dc3970b-800wi

I hope these pictures reach you at some level.

Tehran? Iran? Who insinuated Iran into the exchange in this thread, and who advanced presumptive commentary in that vein, Mr. Self-Examination? What a dufus.

Check this out. What a stunning resemblance! (And a very moving one.)

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/photoblog/uploads/2009/06/rbz-local-iran-protest-07.jpg

Uncanny.

Only a heart of stone wouldn't be moved by that image. And that's the image that's going to come to my mind from now on whenever I see that Fairey portrait.

It's funny that "Um" sees the poster as representing someone like Neda Soltan and in the meantime one Muslim wrote an angry editorial in the Guardian complaining about "double standards": why are they making such a big deal about Neda, why don't they talk about Marwa Sherbini, the "Hijab Martyr"?

How about a vanguard of iranian women defying the islamofacist regime by NOT wearing the burqa?

THAT would take a lot of GUTS - for "progressives" to support the rejection of the forced wearing of the burqa.

Something "progressives" are not know for.

I can't believe I'm actually getting into this argument, but you're clearly too proud of your "zings" against "progressives" to have actually made an attempt to know what you're talking about.

First of all, the burqa is not Iranian dress. You're confusing the Sunni Wahhabism of the Saudis or the Afghans with the Shia of Iran. Conservative women in Iran don the chador, not the burqa.

Here's the chador:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Women_in_shiraz_2.jpg

and here's the burqa:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burqa_Afghanistan_01.jpg

Iranian women do not even weir a face veil, unless they are protesting the government and are afraid of being identified.

Now, even putting aside your confusion between the burqa and the chador, Iranian law does not mandate that women wear the chador. The conservatives in power require, unjustifiably of course, that women wear the hijab, which is just the head covering. Women who wear the full chador are not obligated to do so because of Iranian law. Indeed, the rest of Iranian women wear a simple hijab instead.

If you took one look at the photos or video of the Iranian protests, you would have seen thousands of protesting women wearing clothing ranging from the full chador down to a minimal hijab showing plenty of hair. The latter women were indeed challenging the Iranian hijab laws, and they have received abundant vocal support from progressives both inside and outside the country. At the same time, for obvious reasons, nobody who supports the protests is raising a stink about religious Iranian women who choose to wear the chador while also vocally opposing Ahmadinejad. Attacking people who are on your side is a pretty bad idea.

Do us all a favor. Before you spout off again, read a book, or at least do a Google search. It would save the rest of us the trouble of having to explain this stuff, and maybe people would take your comments more seriously.

Wanoo,

BFD. burqa, "chador". It's STILL the IMPOSED wearing of a black sack by Islamofascist men on women.

Something I thought "progressive" people would oppose.

But I am not surprised that progressively DUMB people like you Wanoo are more vexed by nomenclature than human rights of WOMEN in Islamfascist regimes.

You say that Conservative women wear the burqa/chador - as if wearing the sack is a womans CHOICE.

Care to direct us to pictures of Iranian women/girls freely walking the streets of Tehran WITHOUT the buraq/chador, wearing current style clothing like women in the West?

Wanoo, you should be ashamed of yourself due to your defense of islamofascist hegemony.

In the artist's own words, back in 1990. (http://obeygiant.com/about) Be sure to note the phrases in bold:

The OBEY sticker campaign can be explained as an experiment in Phenomenology. Heidegger describes Phenomenology as "the process of letting things manifest themselves." Phenomenology attempts to enable people to see clearly something that is right before their eyes but obscured; things that are so taken for granted that they are muted by abstract observation.

The first aim of phenomenology is to reawaken a sense of wonder about one's environment. The OBEY sticker attempts to stimulate curiosity and bring people to question both the sticker and their relationship with their surroundings. Because people are not used to seeing advertisements or propaganda for which the product or motive is not obvious, frequent and novel encounters with the sticker provoke thought and possible frustration, nevertheless revitalizing the viewer's perception and attention to detail. The sticker has no meaning but exists only to cause people to react, to contemplate and search for meaning in the sticker. Because OBEY has no actual meaning, the various reactions and interpretations of those who view it reflect their personality and the nature of their sensibilities.

Many people who are familiar with the sticker find the image itself amusing, recognizing it as nonsensical, and are able to derive straightforward visual pleasure without burdening themselves with an explanation. The paranoid or conservative viewer however may be confused by the sticker's persistent presence and condemn it as an underground cult with subversive intentions. Many stickers have been peeled down by people who were annoyed by them, considering them an eye sore and an act of petty vandalism, which is ironic considering the number of commercial graphic images everyone in American society is assaulted with daily.

Another phenomenon the sticker has brought to light is the trendy and conspicuously consumptive nature of many members of society. For those who have been surrounded by the sticker, its familiarity and cultural resonance is comforting and owning a sticker provides a souvenir or keepsake, a memento. People have often demanded the sticker merely because they have seen it everywhere and possessing a sticker provides a sense of belonging. The Giant sticker seems mostly to be embraced by those who are (or at least want to seem to be) rebellious. Even though these people may not know the meaning of the sticker, they enjoy its slightly disruptive underground quality and wish to contribute to the furthering of its humorous and absurd presence which seems to somehow be antiestablishment/societal convention. Giant stickers are both embraced and rejected, the reason behind which, upon examination reflects the psyche of the viewer. Whether the reaction be positive or negative, the stickers existence is worthy as long as it causes people to consider the details and meanings of their surroundings. In the name of fun and observation.