Open Letter To The United States President

Dear President Barack Obama, 

CC. Jeb Bush. Ben Carson. Chris Christie. Ted Cruz. Carly Fiorina. Jim Gilmore. Mike Huckabee. John Kasich. George Pataki. Rand Paul. Marco Rubio. Rick Santorum. Donald Trump., Hillary Clinton. Martin O'Malley. Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein

Following the new H.R. 158 bill that restricts Iranians and others from admission into the U.S. (which recently passed the House of Representatives with an overwhelming majority), I feel it not only necessary, but also obligatory for myself, as a targeted party of this movement, to write to you alerting you of some grave oversights that not only violate and negate, but also contradict the sheer Americanism that underlines the national constitution, before this goes any further.  

For those who don't know, the new bill proposes that people of certain ethnicities, namely those who hold dual citizenship with Iran, Iraq, Syria and Sudan, be restricted from United States entry. This means that as an Iranian who was born and raised in the UK, I would not be permitted to travel to the USA without applying and paying for a VISA, a luxury which my white, black, latino, chinese etc. peers are by default entitled to as citizens of Europe or the USA.

Yes, my parents are from Iran. Yes, I have dual-citizenship. Yes, I have visited Iran. Twice to be exact. This is because my father's family, for the most part, still reside in Iran. It would be a grave act of ignorance to assume this is compromised of an undercurrent of any political agenda, nor is it likely that any of these political theologies can have genetically rubbed off on me, simply because there was a one year window in which my parents lived in a country that was fundamentally islamic before I even existed. Outside of genetic premeditation, where one was born and how one was raised constitutes the biggest precursor to individual blueprint, sculpting mentality, behavioural patterns, political beliefs, savoir faire and cultural dynamic. Certainly not some mute and alien history which is only a fragment of one's ancestral genealogy, and runs millennia further back than it's current governmental disposition.

Yet, as I sit here justifying my story to you, a part of me is dispirited at the autocratic semblance of the country that compels me to explain away my race, creed or colour in order to be granted acceptance. A country that was once the spearhead of egalitarianism, that promised liberty and justice for all, now instead backdates it's disposition hundreds of years through imposing ethnic sanctions on it's clemency, totally and effectively nullifying amelioration.  

Since humans fear the unknown, let us try education over banishment to mollify fears. Iranian history teaches us a lot about how 'dangerous' and 'threatening' we truly are on this sphere of terror, that we have been clumsily thrust upon. Firstly, to go back a little, the widespread diaspora of the Iranian people all over the world is largely a result of the 1979 revolution, which vanquished the Pahlavi dynasty and the Monarchic administration under the Shah (King, backed by the USA). This was succeeded by a fundamentalist Islamic regime. Their polarised native support was largely rooted in the conservatives who felt the westernisation and secularisation of the country had gone too far under the Shah, who's ideals mirrored the liberality of the U.S. and the West. It had been, in fact, a time when Iranian democracy superseded it's governmental contemporaries in the West.

Prior to the revolution, Iran was a country of deistic autonomy. It was ripe with Mosques, Synagogs, Churches and Temples. Subsequently, the Islamic revolution drove out those who were not prepared to stay and live by the hardline ideals the new regime had adopted, resulting in the diaspora of hundreds and thousands of Iranians, seeking asylum in Europe and America. How, then, can those who have uprooted their entire existence to hotfoot the extremisms of a certain ideal, be not only bound by those beliefs, but also have their children punished for it? Further, let me remind you that no acts of terror in the United States or Europe have ever been linked to Iranian people. This demonstrates poor cognisance of our history and culture, and frankly lazy investigation ahead of a loaded mandate. Please do not treat recklessly such a delicate and convoluted thing as ethnicity. If you wish to act, act on understanding, scrutiny and knowledge.

As UK nationals with Iranian citizenship, our parents are children of the Shah. We are the children of the children of the Shah. Nobody can take liberty, compassion and democracy from the core of our being. No matter how much it is sullied by an egregious stigma. Yes, there are some people in Iran who agree with and comply with extremist ideals, just as there are members of the Westboro baptist Church in the USA who believe that "all fags should be killed", and Neo-Nazis in California who would burn a jew at the stake if given the opportunity. Neither of which, might I add, are having their citizenships challenged despite acts of terror within their community. Nor must either one acquire a surplus visa to be granted reentry.

To go ahead with the amended Visa Waiver program also constitutes a grave and flagrant miseducation of American citizens about the nature and intent of Iranians. The bill, entitled “Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015", will marginalise and defame an entire ethnicity through vocabulary alone. In such fragile constituents, we must be careful what we teach Americans about who foreign bodies are. To be branded under a terror prevention act has far reaching implications that mar the reputation of Iranian people and slaps a caveat on our once unequivocal citizenship. It ultimately forces us to move to a mental and cultural space that begrudges us the entitlements we were born with, and relegates us to second-class citizens. This will perpetuate a perception of Iranians as terrorists in the American eye and can lead to violence, expulsion, distrust, alienation and misinterpretation of a body of people who comprise a great deal of the American public, ultimately creating more problems than it solves. Further, outside of jeopardising merit and galvanising racial notoriety, it also gravely dampens morale and dissipates the union between ethnicities that constitute the charismatic and dynamic melting pot of the USA. We are vilified into the proverbial monster that not only are we not, but we, too, are running from. European and American Iranians are artists, doctors, lawyers, philosophers, scientists, pharmacists, humanitarians, politicians, comedians, actors, musicians, and have been elementary to advancements in the aforementioned fields. What we are not, is terrorists.  

Some might say that the visa 'improvement' act is "no big deal", since having to pay for a visa is seemingly only a minor setback but is a worthy solution to a universal problem. This is a dangerous standing to endorse because it instigates racial profiling and ethnic finger pointing. It permits us to accede that some races must be punished in order to protect others, an ideal that will foster a discordant society. The bill requires that we, as European and American Iranians, pay for a separate visa to even be considered entry. One that my black, white, chinese etc. compatriots are exempt from. I can not pay for who I am, nor where my parents were born. Doing so would injuriously compromise my integrity. This requires no lengthy explanation, since it is clear how discriminatory and unjust a thing it would be to prejudicially levy taxes on my race. 

I understand that Americans are afraid. I, too, am afraid. But one thing I have learnt is that edification is a far better pacifier than reprehension. So, perhaps the first step to mitigate fears is to re-educate the American public on who Iranian people are. Why not teach them of our history, why not show them through our works of art, science, philosophy and literature who we are, to muffle the misconception that introduces us before we have the opportunity to speak. A government that exists in our homeland can not account for the millennia of majestic and richly dynamic culture intrinsic to our history and being. Restricting entry does not banish fear, but promulgates fear. The only way to nullify fear is through education so that fear, if necessary, exists only where it is due.

All things being considered, I am of course in favour of finding methods to deter terrorism. I can't pretend that I hold the answer, but what I can say with a great degree of certainty is that banning and restricting people on the bases of their race or religion alone is not it. Not only is this ineffective, but it is also counterproductive, forging a moral fissure at a time where union is imperative. National and international disparity, at this time, engages the divide and conquer ploy that ultimately backslides us into the demise of Western democracy and the instigation of an anarchic renaissance. Fear and misunderstanding can be tolerated to a certain degree, but what can not be tolerated is the illusion that people can be categorized by race, gender, sexual orientation or religion. People are free-standing, dynamic and autonomous individuals, who can not be held accountable for the actions of their demographic counterparts. If we are to reprimand people on such a basis, it will not be long until all those who were formerly protected under civil rights are locked in a punitive chokehold. 

So in conclusion, Mr President, since at this point you must be wondering, who am I? I am a person who believes in unity. I am an advocate of humanitarianism, a proliferator of ubiquitous justice, an empath, and an egalitarian. Above all, my ultimate and final goal in this lifetime is to better the world, through the dissolution of divisive concepts and edification, evoking a sentiment of compassion, empathy and union. This is the British-Iranian that you are teaching your citizens to be afraid of, while the Caucasian male who shoots children in schools continues to be lauded for his superior ethnicity. What's wrong with this picture?

Finally, For all intents and purposes, I consider the United Kingdom to be my country, and I have explained myself in lengthy essay format for just a glimmer of hope at being permitted entry into yours. Please note that nobody is asking you to do the same in order to enter mine, because no matter where you are from, what you look like, what your peers have done in the past or where your parents were born, we, as children of diplomacy and liberty, accept you. I hope that my words will echo in your conscience and remind you what that means. 

Sincerely yours,

Ms. E. Le Bon.

My People, Your People

What happened on Friday 13th November 2015 shook the world. The city of Paris was desecrated by a series of terror attacks. Lives were lost and hearts were broken. The devastation that occurred was largely  incited by the stupor at the infiltration of the seemingly impregnable western blanket of safety. If ever there was an infrastructure of concrete cultural asylum, western democracy was undoubtedly nestled at the root of it. 

What followed shortly after the events was a slew of social media support, polarised by a juxtapositional force of backlash. Social media users immediately divided into two camps; 1 - Those who quickly aligned with Parisian turmoil and changed their profile pictures to a blue, red and white camouflage, a long with #prayforparis hashtags on instagram, and 2 -  People who were outraged by the seemingly disproportionate sympathy that was otherwise lacking in other worldly disturbances.  

The good news is, both camps are right. In part.

The bad news is, this doesn't help anybody. 

Firstly, lets consider Facebook's newly instated feature which allows users to show their Parisian support through a quick altercation of their profile picture, a sentiment that echoes the former gay pride movement. Here, we must beg the question, did the chicken come first or the egg? Because one can find grounds for indignation here, considering these are strongly Western grievances, which have yet to be mirrored for foreign damnation. But then, we must wonder if Facebook's feature is fundamentally rooted in the overwhelming social response for upheavals close to home, that are otherwise vacuous. If this is the case, it may be our personal delegation of empathy that requires closer inspection. 

What seems to be the underlying problem in this intercontinental imbroglio is the concept of "my people" and "their people". By this, I mean the conditioned mentality that draws an invisible divide between races, subraces and nationalities. Most of us will spend our lives growing up and becoming increasingly familiar with the culture we live in. We also develop strong emotional and cultural ties to our heritage and ancestors, thus forming a meritable camaraderie with people we consider at one with. These become 'our people.' From thereon out, the bulk of our empathy is largely skewed and limited to persons who fall under such a category. Take, for example, hallmark historical travesties that we choose to pronounce. Often, American's will take to social media to call for remembrance of 9/11, The Jews will make light of the holocaust, Armenians will remember the genocide and so on and so forth. Is this wrong? No. It is simply how the human psyche has been conditioned to evolve. Realistically, nationalism makes little sense. 'My country is better than yours because i was born in it.' However, it is a social device that is imprinted upon us at birth in order to bind social sects and protect and preserve our land - more than likely incited through pre-historic municipalities, where social groups required a strong, intimate identity for survival. We can not ignore these social nuances that are imbued in our genetic imprint. However, as man evolves, we must also progress beyond that which is limiting us. It is time for us to understand that there is no "my people". There are only people. And all people are comprised of the same things that hurt us and heal us, and a skewed empathic compass is no longer excusable through negligence. 

Every living creature on this earth has an equal right to life, and every loss is an equal travesty. The imagined hierarchal subdivisions of social value could be easily diffused if media and social outlets would not drive our focus so densely in one direction, to where we become conditioned to place less emphasis on lives that we do not so easily relate to.

Empathy, in itself, is usually derived from a point of understanding. If we can understand somebodies pain, we can feel it at their level. This is a beautiful mechanism, however, it is limited only to our understanding. It is easy to feel empathy in acts of barbarism that correlate with the daily lives we live. "That could've been me," is usually the catalyst for compassion. But empathy can not be relative. We become so ingrained in our idiosyncratic cultural strokes that it becomes difficult to understand the pain of a foreign body as pain in itself. This was largely the precursor to the acquiescence of slavery. The lack of cognisance and understanding of black people as people, but instead an alien body of beings, permitted a grave omission of empathy, which culminated in one of the most reprehensible acts in human history. 

Our sense of humanity seems to be distorted by proximity and familiarity, which has manifested an emotional diaspora. We forget that a child is a child. In pakistan, in Palestine, in Japan, in Syria, in France. Our lack of foreign alignment allows us to displace the empathy that we should justly feel.  

Are people upset that people are praying for Paris? No. People are upset by the disproportionality of social upheaval. Why is this the case? Two reasons. What the lack of support does do, and what the over-zealous support can do.

Firstly, it is worthwhile to recollect that some of the most notable calamities in social history are marred by nonchalance and social inertia. People often consider the holocaust to be the result of intensely anti-semitic Hitlerites. In actual fact, the impetus that materialised such a profound miscarriage of morality was largely apathy. Ian Kershaw notably remarked "The road to Auschwitz was built by hate, but paved with indifference."  

Apathy is single handedly the most powerful tool for the catalyst of evil. A tool that is designed by capitalism in order to consolidate the proliferation of that very evil. With that being said, I arrive at my second point, what support can do. 

It is difficult to accept how powerful a tool our voices are, and yet how dormant they remain for the bulk of worldly issues that require our attention. Moreover, the disproportionality of how and when we choose to use our voices. For example, let us recall when that majestic Lion was shot, and the world was riveted in acrimony. Following thousands of statuses, hashtags, pictures and petitions, major airline companies eventually called for the cessation of air-trafficking of endangered species. Elsewhere, the mass outrage of orca captivity that spiked the boycotting of sea-world culminated in the remission of orca whale hunting and captivity.        

This demonstrates how effectively the union of society can move towards more utopian ideals. So it is understandable that one might feel indignant about the lack of such unity in other pressing issues. Surely, equal vehemence for atrocities and barbarism not native to us could evoke the moral reconstruction that we are perilously starved for. 

In short, don't stop showing support. The overwhelming display of love, empathy and affinity is the dose of synthesis the world has long called for. However, don't spare it either. It is time to understand that there is no such thing as "my people" and "your people". There are only people. And all people have an equal right to life, and an equal entitlement to concern. 

If this concept of "their people" was eradicated, we would likely see a remission of warfare, since combat is entirely based on the prevalence of one body of people over another. This is funnelled by the illusory conceptualisation of disconnection and dissolution. As long as people are divided by 'us' and 'them', the force that wills each camp to prevail will triumph in evil-doings, in this continued state of dystopia. This is the realisation that, ultimately, we must ubiquitously arrive at. And this recognition, that all people are "our" people, begins within the individual. 

The Woman I Would Like To Be

I would like to be a person who is fundamentally happy. By being this, I am aware that I must constantly make sure I am making myself and others happy by giving generously with no expectations of returns. I would like to be extremely successful in my career, as I have worked many many many many years for it, and I believe my pay off is now due - I can feel it on the horizon and I know that it will be abundant in nature. I would like to be a calm and peaceful person, someone who is unfazed by anything negative, petty or childish in life. Even the things that are genuinely distressful, I would like to have a calm, quiet inner strength that is impervious to any penetration of negative vibrations. This is how I intend on becoming a happy person, by maintaining my core - even when my exterior world is vigorously shaking. I want to be kind in the face of anger, patient in the face of aggression, understanding in the presence of sorrow, and laugh at myself when I get it wrong. I would like to be a wonderful lover - to the man I end up with,  I want to be kind, gentle, faithful, devoted, enduring, loving and above all, I would like to give of myself all that I could possibly give, without the fear that it would or could be unrequited. I want him to know how deeply devoted I am to him, and to feel loved like he never has before. I want to devote myself to the betterment of other people, to my husband, to myself, to my future children, to people I know and love, and to strangers around the world. I want to contribute in the ending of suffering, I want to feed someone who is starving, clothe someone who is naked and help someone who is sick. I want to do that and then do it a million times over again. When the time comes, I want to be the best possible mother that I know I can be. I want to tell my children that I love them everyday and I want to do everything in my power to make sure that they know this, and to provide them the best possible life in this world of utter chaos. I want to be there for my children through every moment life throws at them, good and bad, and I want to be a rock for them, a mentor, a giver of love and a pillar of strength. I want to spend a lifetime inspiring people - as many people as I possibly can. I want to provide them something that changes their lives for the better, a song, a quote, anything that can reinforce their being and nourish their soul. Anything that speaks to them deeply. I want to be a voice for people who do not have a voice. I want to stand up for those who are too afraid to stand up for themselves. I want to be a person who understands all sides of every story and emotion, and respects all humans, all animals, all life, and this universe, in knowing that my very existence on this planet, the mere fact that I am breathing as I write this, is an utterly phenomenal blessing. Above all, when the time comes for me to leave this earth, I want to look back in quiet retrospection, smile, and say that I lived.