Among hard-liners, the response to the series has been gleeful. It fits their profile of the United States as the Great Satan. Mashregh, a Web site linked to the Revolutionary Guards, commented, “House of Cards has skillfully shown the deception in the complicated political sphere of liberal American civilization, as well as the treason, power-hungriness, promiscuities and crimes behind those ruling in the country.” [...]
In Tehran today, a Clinton Presidency is viewed as simultaneously reassuring and unnerving. She would represent continuity on the nuclear deal (“We have offered to negotiate directly with the government on nuclear issues,” she said at Georgetown), but she has also expressed “solidarity with those inside Iran struggling for democratic change,” which both frightens the regime and infuriates it. [...]
I asked Izadi to tell me what Iranians were concluding from the Presidential debates. “In general, U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, U.S. relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and so forth, affect people’s lives here,” he replied. “So seeing how U.S. elections are conducted, how American politicians behave toward each other, and what they think about Iran and the rest of the Middle East are of interest to Iranians.” As for “House of Cards,” he said, “for people who begin with a negative view of American politicians, the series reinforces those ideas. I guess people realize that the U.S. political process is at least as complicated as the Iranian political process.” Besides, he said, “ ‘House of Cards’ is also a good show.”
No comments:
Post a Comment