为什么白左媒体对伊朗人民的伟大抗争保持可耻的沉默？

张平 X
@pingzhang632· 2026-1-9

为什么白左媒体对伊朗人民的伟大抗争保持可耻的沉默？不是有钱没钱那么简单。而是他们的整个叙事体系都会坍塌！ 西方自由媒体正在忽略伊朗起义，因为解释它会迫使他们承认一个他们拼命想避免的事实：伊朗人民正在反抗伊斯兰本身，这个事实粉碎了这些机构理解世界的道德框架。 理想情况下，报道一场起义不仅仅是展示人群和口号。它需要回答一个基本问题：人们为什么冒着死亡的风险？在伊朗，答案简单而不可避免。人民起义是因为伊朗伊斯兰共和国几十年来在神职人员体系下扼杀了生活的每一个方面——言论、工作、家庭、艺术、妇女和经济生存——将自由视为犯罪。没有办法讲述这个故事而不直面政权的本质。 西方媒体拒绝这样做，因为他们从根本上误解了伊斯兰。更糟糕的是，他们选择不理解它。 在西方进步话语中，伊斯兰已被种族化。它不被视为一种信仰体系或政治意识形态，而是被当作种族或民族的代名词。批评伊斯兰被框定为对“棕色人种”、阿拉伯人或“中东”的攻击，仿佛伊斯兰是一种肤色而不是一种教义。 这种混淆源于历史无知。西方自由媒体经常将整个文明压缩成单一刻板印象：“所有中东人都是阿拉伯人”、“所有阿拉伯人都是穆斯林”，以及“所有穆斯林都是一个单一的、被白人欧洲殖民者压迫的身份群体”。伊朗人在这个框架中完全消失了。他们的语言、历史和文化——波斯语，而不是阿拉伯语；古老，而不是殖民；独特，而不是可互换——被抹除。 通过将伊斯兰视为种族身份而不是意识形态，西方媒体剥夺了数百万人民拒绝它的能力。伊朗抗议者变得难以理解。他们的反抗无法被处理，除非打破伊斯兰不得被批评的规则。因此，媒体不是倾听伊朗人，而是盖过他们的话——或者完全忽略他们。 伊朗起义对西方媒体如此具有威胁性的另一个原因是经济问题。 正如你所知，伊朗不仅仅是一个宗教独裁政权。它是一个中央控制的、国家主导的经济体，在那里市场被扼杀、私营企业被刑事化或被收编，经济生存取决于与政治权力的接近度。几十年的价格控制、补贴、国营化和官僚微观管理已经消灭了中产阶级，并将腐败根深蒂固地作为唯一运转的系统。结果不是平等或正义，而是贫困、停滞和对政府空洞承诺的黑暗虚空的依赖。 诚实地报道伊朗将需要承认这些政策是有害的。它们已经被尝试过。它们已经失败了。灾难性地失败了。 这对西方媒体机构来说极其不便，因为这些机构经常将扩张的国家控制、中央经济规划和技术官僚治理宣传为道德上开明的替代自由资本主义。伊朗展示了当这些系统免于问责并由意识形态强制执行时，会走向何方。它表明，当国家控制生计时，非顺从就会变得存在危险。这个教训无法被承认，除非破坏那些用更柔和语言倡导类似想法的人的道德权威。 西方自由媒体宁愿不听到这个。承认它将需要放弃主导现代话语的懒惰道德范畴：压迫者和被压迫者、殖民者和被殖民者、白人和非白人。伊朗抗议者不符合这些范畴。他们展示了威权主义不是西方从外部强加的发明，而是许多社会正在积极试图逃脱的东西。 这就是让西方自由媒体感到恐惧的原因。这也是为什么伊朗人民被忽略的原因。 因此，沉默继续着。

————————————————————

Tahmineh Dehbozorgi

@DeTahmineh

The Western liberal media is ignoring the Iranian uprising because explaining it would force an admission it is desperate to avoid: the Iranian people are rebelling against Islam itself, and that fact shatters the moral framework through which these institutions understand the world. Ideally, to cover an uprising is not just to show crowds and slogans. It requires answering a basic question: why are people risking death? In Iran, the answer is simple and unavoidable. The people are rising up because the Islamic Republic of Iran has spent decades suffocating every aspect of life—speech, work, family, art, women, and economic survival—under a clerical system that treats liberty as a crime. There is no way to tell that story without confronting the nature of the regime. Western media refuses to do so because it has fundamentally misunderstood Islam. Or worse, it has chosen not to understand it. Islam, in Western progressive discourse, has been racialized. It is treated not as a belief system or a political ideology, but as a stand-in for race or ethnicity. Criticizing Islam is framed as an attack on “brown people,” Arabs, or “the Middle East,” as if Islam were a skin color rather than a doctrine. This confusion is rooted in historical illiteracy. Western liberal media routinely collapses entire civilizations into a single stereotype: “all Middle Easterners are Arabs,” “all Arabs are Muslim,” and “all Muslims are a monolithic, oppressed identity group by white European colonizers.” Iranians disappear entirely in this framework. Their language, history, and culture—Persian, not Arab; ancient, not colonial; distinct, not interchangeable—are erased. By treating Islam as a racial identity rather than an ideology, Western media strips millions of people of their ability to reject it. Iranian protesters become unintelligible. Their rebellion cannot be processed without breaking the rule that Islam must not be criticized. So instead of listening to Iranians, the media speaks over them—or ignores them entirely. There is another reason the Iranian uprising is so threatening to Western media is economic issues. As you know, Iran is not only a religious dictatorship. It is a centrally controlled, state-dominated economy where markets are strangled, private enterprise is criminalized or co-opted, and economic survival depends on proximity to political power. Decades of price controls, subsidies, nationalization, and bureaucratic micromanagement have obliterated the middle class and entrenched corruption as the only functional system. The result is not equality or justice. It is poverty, stagnation, and dependence on government’s dark void of empty promises. Covering Iran honestly would require acknowledging that these policies are harmful. They have been tried. They have failed. Catastrophically. This is deeply inconvenient for Western media institutions that routinely promote expansive state control, centralized economic planning, and technocratic governance as morally enlightened alternatives to liberal capitalism. Iran demonstrates where such systems lead when insulated from accountability and enforced by ideology. It shows that when the state controls livelihoods, non-conformity becomes existentially dangerous. That lesson cannot be acknowledged without undermining the moral authority of those who advocate similar ideas in softer language. Western liberal media prefers not to hear this. Acknowledging it would require abandoning the lazy moral categories that dominate modern discourse: oppressor and oppressed, colonizer and colonized, white and non-white. Iranian protesters do not fit. They show that authoritarianism is not a Western invention imposed from outside, but something many societies are actively trying to escape. That is what terrifies Western liberal media. And that is why the Iranian people are being ignored. So the silence continues.