Sam Harris suggests the suspicious lack of media coverage for Iranian uprisings may be politically motivated. A successful regime change could be seen as a foreign policy victory for Donald Trump, an inconvenient narrative for his many detractors in the media and on the left.
Related Insights
The chaotic nature of major foreign policy moves, such as the Venezuelan operation, could be strategic. By creating an overwhelming and confusing news cycle, the administration can deliberately divert media and public attention away from damaging domestic issues like the Epstein files.
Protests in Iran, if they disrupt the regime, could halt cheap oil flows to China. This would force China to buy from more expensive, US-friendly markets, strengthening the US dollar's global dominance and isolating anti-Western powers without direct US intervention.
Contrary to his hawkish reputation, Benjamin Netanyahu is deliberately lowering Israel's profile regarding Iran's internal protests. This strategic silence aims to prevent the embattled Iranian regime from feeling cornered and launching a preemptive attack out of paranoia.
Unlike past administrations that used pretexts like 'democracy,' the Trump administration openly states its transactional goals, such as seizing oil. This 'criming in plain sight' approach is merely an overt version of historical covert US actions in regions like Latin America.
A clean, external removal of Iran's leadership, similar to what occurred in Venezuela, is unlikely. Iran's population is nearly four times larger, it is geographically distant, and the American political psyche associates the Middle East with costly military entanglements, creating a much higher barrier to intervention.
Rather than surgical strikes, which have a poor historical track record, the most effective foreign support for Iranian protesters is restoring their internet connectivity. The regime kills in the dark; offensive cyber operations that tear down its 'digital iron wall' directly empower citizens and expose atrocities.
When a government cuts off internet and phone lines during massive protests, as seen in Iran, it's a clear indicator they are trying to conceal the severity of their response from the world. This tactic undermines their own claims of control and reveals a deep fear of international scrutiny.
The hosts argue that progressive media and activists are morally paralyzed, failing to adequately cover human rights abuses in places like Iran. This happens because the oppressors are not white, leading to a disproportionately muted response.
The current Iranian protests are uniquely potent because the regime is at its weakest geopolitically. The loss of regional proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas, coupled with key ally Russia's preoccupation with Ukraine, has left the Iranian government more isolated and vulnerable than during any previous wave of unrest.
Unlike nascent revolutionary states that rally against foreign attacks, late-stage dictatorships are weakened by military defeats. Iran's recent humiliations by Israel and the US have exposed incompetence and eroded the public's perception of strength, fueling protests and accelerating the regime's demise.