UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Indeterminate Governmentality: Neoliberal Politics in Revolutionary Iran, 1968-1979 Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4fm253hw Author Davari, Arash Publication Date 2016 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Indeterminate Governmentality: Neoliberal Politics in Revolutionary Iran, 1968-1979 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Arash Davari 2016 ã Copyright by Arash Davari 2016 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Indeterminate Governmentality: Neoliberal Politics in Revolutionary Iran, 1968-1979 by Arash Davari Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Los Angeles, 2016 Professor Kirstie M. McClure, Co-Chair Professor Mark Q. Sawyer, Co-Chair This dissertation situates the emergence of revolutionary resistance in Pahlavi Iran in parallel with the emergence of neoliberal political rationality in the Middle East. In the process, it theorizes neoliberalism anew. Through an engagement with archives of social practice in Iran and its diaspora between 1968 and 1979, neoliberalism is presented as a political rationality that involves rhetorical disavowal at root ¾ what I refer to as indeterminate governmentality. The study employs parallelism as a theoretical construct reflecting the logic of the revolutionary transformation and periodic shift at hand. The disavowals considered include renderings of a collective on individualist terms; formations of solidarity through empathy; and orientations toward order in the production of disorder. The archival material considered includes state documents; activist records, ephemera, and publications; theoretical texts; literature; popular cinema; periodicals; and ethnographic interviews. In sum, I argue that an event variably labelled Iranian or Islamic may just as well be understood as the first neoliberal revolution. ii The dissertation of Arash Davari is approved. Ali Behdad Joshua F. Dienstag James L. Gelvin Mark Q. Sawyer, Committee Co-Chair Kirstie M. McClure, Committee Co-Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2016 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION | The Existence of Non-Existence…………………………………………….1 Introduction I. The First Neoliberal Revolution? II. An Outline of the Argument: Theorizing Neoliberalism as Emergence III. Scope and Method CHAPTER 1 | Iran ’68…………………………………………………………………………...25 Introduction I. Embedded State Power II. Neoliberal Resistance III. “Non-Political” Associational Activity IV. Islam and Politics in a Neoliberal Period CHAPTER 2 | A Return to Which Self?........................................................................................76 Introduction I. The Ummah and its Imam II. Bāzgasht, or Imagining the Universal as Particular III. Shahādat, or the Political Ethics of Action-Provoking Thought IV. Ummat, or the Articulation of an Indeterminate Collective Subject CHAPTER 3 | Neo-Individualism…………………………………………………………...…122 Introduction I. Neo-Individualism as Narrative Dissensus iv II. Qaysar and the Limits of Interpellation III. Qaysar and Narrative Dissensus CHAPTER 4 | Auto-Empathy………………………………………………………………......162 Introduction I. A Revolution’s Own Laws II. The “Non-Political” Politics of Fortieth-Day Commemorations III. Husayn, or the Uprising’s Political Subjects IV. Zaynab, or the Uprising’s Non-Political Subjects CHAPTER 5 | Narrative Revolts……………………………………………………………….217 Introduction I. Refiguring the Hedgehog: A Collective Will as Narrative Effect II. The End of Narrative? III. Revolutionary “Non-Politics” IV. Neo-Individualism in Narrative Care AFTERWORD………………………………………………………………………………….267 Introduction I. Creating Order II. Founding Indeterminacy III. Iran’s Constituent Moments? APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………………….287 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………...….295 v LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDICES Chapter 1 Table 1. Translation of list of religious associations. Originally published in ‘Alī Asadī and Hurmuz Mihrdād (eds.), Naqsh-i Rasanihā dar Pushtībānī-yi Tawsi‘a-yi Farhangī [The Role of Media in Cultural Development] (Tehran: Communications and Development Institute, 1976/1355), 161-63. Chapter 3 Figure 1. Screen shot from Qaysar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsMED4BWn68. Appendix A Poster proclaiming Gholāmrezā Takhti’s death a suicide. Reproduction of original copy. Author’s personal collection. Accompanied by translation. Appendix B Poster calling for a mourning commemoration of Gholāmrezā Takhti by youth from Khāni Ābād. Reproduction of original copy. Author’s personal collection. Translation included in Chapter 4. Appendix C Poster commemorating Gholāmrezā Takhti and lamenting his death, signed by “the personnel and workers of the Pirouz institute of printing and publishing.” Reproduction of original copy. Author’s personal collection. Accompanied by translation. Appendix D Kayhān, Special Supplement, no. 10047, 1 Dey 2535/22 December 1976, pp. 1. Accompanied by translation. vi A NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION AND TRANSLATION I have used two systems of transliteration throughout. For all proper nouns, I have used the system employed in common spellings of popular names: Pahlavi, Khomeini, Tehran, Qom, Shi‘a, Shi‘ism, Shari‘ati, Golesorkhi, Qaysar, Ashura, etc. I have amended this system to include a hatted “a” (ā) for less common names when and where necessary in order to account for long vowels: Hedāyat, Tāsu‘ā, Tāleqāni, etc. For words that are not proper nouns and/or when I have transliterated directly from Persian, I have used the system found in the International Journal of Middle East Studies (IJMES). These words are presented in italics. When presenting direct quotes from interviews, I have included transcriptions in Persian alongside English translations so that, in cases where readers do not have access to original texts, they may nevertheless make an informed judgment with respect to my translations. All translations are mine unless otherwise noted. vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is the culmination of a process that is a story unto itself. Despite some early misguided hubris, for some time now I’ve known that arriving at this point was no guarantee and that doing so would mean more than just a professional accomplishment. I am deeply grateful for the teachers, colleagues, friends, and family who cared enough to help me grow, kept me steady, and opened my perspective as I made my way. Kirstie McClure has reminded me more than once not to thank her for doing her job. I like to think I can thank her for what went above and beyond: staying with the project in its uncertain stages, believing (even if and when she didn’t), and investing in that belief. Editor and advisor extraordinaire; I am indebted. Mark Sawyer treated me like my own scholar from the get go, taught me how to build a foundation, then let me build it. I’m grateful for his mentorship. This project surely wouldn’t have existed in this form without James Gelvin’s inspiration, example, and feedback. He set a high standard for rigorous engagement with Middle East history. I hope I can meet it someday. Joshua Dienstag pushed me to grow as a teacher, scholar, and professional. The work benefitted greatly from his insights. I wrote an undergraduate thesis under Ali Behdad’s supervision in 2003; in a sense, here we are again. Both projects went against conventional wisdom in Iranian Studies. I take the blame for inaccuracies and shortcomings, but I give Ali credit for supporting work that takes risks. A number of individuals acted as interlocutors over the years, generously investing time and consideration in my work beyond their professional obligations. Amirhassan Boozari, Sohail Daulatzai, Kaveh Ehsani, Nasser Mohajer, and Anupama Rao. Each in their own way shaped my thinking, my opportunities for research, and the writing of this project. For all that it lacks, this dissertation would not have developed with nearly as much depth without their engagement at viii crucial stages. Nasser Mohajer in particular gave considerable time, energy, and insight during the dissertation’s final stretch, even when we disagreed. This research and my growth would not have been possible without the truly generous contributions of UCLA faculty who were not on my formal committee: Raymond Rocco, Melvin Rogers, Davide Panagia, Anthony Pagden, Giulia Sissa, Latifeh Hagigi, Kevan Harris, Lorrie Frasure-Yokley, Frederick Erickson, Leonard Binder, and Christopher Kelty. A number of (then) graduate students at UCLA imparted wisdom accrued through personal experience, read drafts, and/or showed solidarity: Ziad Abu-Rish, Jesse Acevedo, Jason Ball, Reem Bailony, Libby Barringer, Anuja Bose, Raul Moreno Campos, Parissa Majdi Clark, Jonathan Collins, Megan Gallagher, Nathan Gonzalez, Cory Charles Gooding, Alma Heckman, Lizeth Hernandez, Hazem Kandil, Mzilikazi Koné, Ayobami Laniyonu, Fred Lee, Paasha Mahdavi, Peyman Malaz, Amy Malek, Naveed Mansoori, Angela Ocampo, Lucio Oliveira, Albert Ponce, Amanda Rizkallah, Althea Sircar, Monideepa Talukdar, Mauricio Velazquez, and Murat Yildiz. I thrived off the camaraderie of students affiliated with the Political Theory and Race, Ethnicity, and Politics subfields in UCLA’s Department of Political Science. There are too many to name; know that I see you. Joseph Brown showed unwavering support; Teresa Barnett shared the craft of oral history; David Hirsch went