#Kashan - day 2 #Iran

Yeah, it’s a really old structure. It’s part of what’s usually called Persian‑Islamic architecture. What I find interesting about it is how much culture is built into the design itself. The shapes, the proportions, the wall details, even how the spaces connect to each other all reflect cultural ideas about privacy, climate, family life, and aesthetics. It’s not just construction — it’s architecture that carries a lot of cultural meaning. For instance, many traditional houses had two different door knockers: one for men and one for women. They make different sounds, so the people inside could tell who was at the door and decide who should answer it. Another interesting design detail is the height of the entrance. Often the doorway is intentionally a bit low, so when a visitor enters they naturally have to bend their head slightly. In a way, the visitor arrives already bowed before the host.

I think what you’re noticing about those Lego-style videos being light on cruelty or cynicism is actually a fair point. A lot of political content online today is designed to feel easier and more watchable. Using animation, humor, or a toy-like style can make heavy topics feel lighter and less harsh. But at the same time, I think there’s another trend happening too that makes me a bit uneasy. In some political messaging—especially around the military—there’s a tendency to talk about weapons in almost admiring terms. You sometimes hear officials or commentators describe them as powerful, precise, or even “beautiful.” When the focus shifts to how impressive the technology is, it can push the human cost of war into the background. So it feels like two different styles exist at the same time. One style makes politics look clean, simple, and almost playful, like the Lego-style videos you mentioned. The other style highlights strength, dominance, and the spectacle of military power. Both shape how people emotionally see war and politics. I’m not saying this means there’s some new ideology built around destruction. But I do think the way violence and military power are presented in media has changed. Sometimes it’s softened to make it easier to consume, and sometimes it’s dramatized to look impressive. Either way, the messy reality of war—the suffering and long-term consequences—can end up getting pushed out of view. That’s basically the point I was trying to make.

Kashan day 1 - fabulous place #grownostr #kashan #nowrooz

Modi #dogstr

#iran #war By Mana Neyestani

بهار دلکش رسید و دل به‌جا نباشد. نوروز پیروز. ۲۵۸۵ Light finds its way back. #Nowruz Pirooz.

Right now, the country feels like it’s being held hostage by the IRGC—closer to a mafia network than a normal state. That network has taken heavy hits: key figures are gone, many militia-linked sites have been destroyed, and the chain of command and protest-suppression infrastructure look seriously disrupted. With many people seemingly expecting—and in some cases supporting—these US and Israeli strikes, it’s unlikely this ends quietly. The next uprising will almost certainly be bigger, and with the regime already weakened, it’s hard to see the crackdown forces responding like they used to. If the recent drone strikes continue or intensify, that pressure will only grow once people are back on the streets. Airstrikes alone probably won’t bring the regime down—but by weakening its military and security apparatus, they may have created the conditions for people themselves to finally topple the corrupt mullahs.

I was never really a fan of Trump. During his first term, I honestly thought he might end up messing things up globally, especially when it came to #Iran and the risk of war. When Biden took office, I felt relieved. But after four years, I found myself pretty disappointed with that choice. At some point, my perspective shifted. Watching how things played out—especially around Iran and the growing risk of conflict—I started to feel like it’s one of those situations where you’re stuck choosing between bad options. Kind of like what some Iranians might be facing right now: choosing between war and the current regime staying in power. And in that kind of scenario, I’d choose war over the regime a hundred times. In the same way, I’ve reached a point where I’d pick Trump over left-leaning alternatives every time. And now there’s this almost surreal phenomenon coming out of Iran. With every strike against the mullah regime, you see reports of people actually celebrating. Even during protests by the Iranian diaspora, the Israeli flag has been a constant presence. There’s a noticeable shift in sentiment—some people would rather see the country’s oil tied to the US and Israel than flowing toward China or Russia. To put that into perspective, this is a country where naming streets after international figures—controversial or otherwise—has never really been off the table. You’ve got places like Nelson Mandela Boulevard and Argentina Square, alongside roads named after figures like Khalid al-Islambouli and even Henry Corbin. So in that context, a bit of rebranding almost feels overdue. Swap out a few names, modernize the theme—why not? Khomeini Square becomes “Trump Square,” maybe a polished “Bibi Alley,” a “Lindsey Graham Road,” and for a more symbolic touch, something like “Abraham Lincoln Carrier” to really capture the spirit of freedom delivered, quite literally, offshore. At that point, it’s not even satire anymore—it’s just urban planning catching up with the times. From where I stand, it looks like the future of the Middle East could involve a strong alignment between Iran, the US, and Israel. That’s something many Muslim-majority countries—especially in the Gulf, as well as Turkey—might view with concern. A secular, democratic Iran could pose a real challenge to their economies in particular.