Michel Foucault’s engagement with the Iranian Revolution has often been critiqued as naïve, particularly by Janet Afary, who argues that he romanticized political spirituality and failed to recognize the authoritarian potential of the Islamist movement. However, this interpretation profoundly oversimplifies both Foucault’s intellectual project and the revolution itself. Foucault’s interest in Iran stemmed not from an endorsement of theocracy but from his broader critique of Western modernity, particularly its disciplinary power, surveillance regimes, and capitalist alienation. He saw in the revolution a challenge to dominant paradigms of revolution, one that mobilized collective political will outside the frameworks of Marxist class struggle or liberal democracy.
Moreover, Afary’s portrayal of the revolution as an Islamist takeover neglects the diverse ideological coalitions that initially shaped the movement. The revolution of 1979 was not a monolithic Islamist project but a broad-based uprising that included Marxists, secular nationalists, and liberals. Throughout 1978, labor strikes, economic grievances, and anti-authoritarian demands played a central role in mobilization, and early post-revolutionary governance reflected this plurality. Figures like Mehdi Bazargan and Abolhassan Banisadr, as well as leftist and secular parties like the Tudeh, temporarily held influence before being marginalized by Khomeini’s consolidation of power.
This paper is an attempt toward a critical reinterpretation of Foucault’s engagement with the Iranian Revolution. Without subscribing to pro-Western narratives that equate political democracy with liberalism or that demonize the revolution as an instance of religious fanaticism, I seek to situate Foucault’s reflections within their historical context. Rather than dismissing his analysis as an ideological misstep, I argue that his writings on Iran should be understood as part of his broader, radical intellectual trajectory—one that explored alternative forms of resistance, the limits of Western modernity, and the role of political spirituality in revolutionary movements. By reconsidering Foucault’s visit to Iran in light of the revolution’s complex ideological landscape, this paper offers a more nuanced account of both his intervention and the historical moment in which it occurred.
This paper critically reinterprets Michel Foucault’s engagement with the Iranian Revolution, challenging Janet Afary’s claim that he naively romanticized political spirituality and overlooked the rise of authoritarianism. Instead, it argues that Foucault’s interest in Iran stemmed from his broader critique of Western modernity, particularly its disciplinary power and capitalist alienation, rather than an endorsement of theocracy. The revolution was not a monolithic Islamist project but a diverse coalition that included Marxists, secular nationalists, and liberals, a complexity Afary underemphasizes. Without subscribing to pro-Western narratives that equate democracy with liberalism or demonize the revolution as religious fanaticism, this paper situates Foucault’s reflections within their historical context. By exploring his writings as part of his larger intellectual trajectory—examining resistance, alternative political subjectivities, and the role of spirituality in revolutionary movements—the paper offers a more nuanced understanding of both Foucault’s intervention and the revolution itself.