The lecture opened with introductory remarks: One of the central characteristics of the Marxist movement as a whole is the ability to learn from failures and see them as setbacks in a long struggle.
Therefore, a Marxist analysis of wars must include that revolutionary horizon. Some of the greatest achievements of the world communist movement have been achieved against the backdrop of murderous wars that often emerged from crises. Wars are a kind of crisis management strategy of capitalism. Thus, war can be an opportunity for the communist movement or an existential threat to it.
Iranian Marxism must be examined in conjunction with anticipation of the future. According to N., in a rough division, Iranian Marxism had four main historical stages: from the October Revolution of 1917 to the end of World War II; from the end of World War II to the coup and overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953; from the 1960s to the 1979 revolution; and from the early 1980s to the present day.
Iranian revolutionaries in the Bolshevik movement
After the October Revolution, the Iranian Marxist movement was an organic part of the revolution. Parts of Iran were then under the control of Russian imperialism, and Iranian Marxists integrated into the Bolshevik movement in the Caucasus and Central Asian parts of the Russian Empire. Around the oil fields of Baku, the first political and intellectual leaders of the Iranian Marxist movement emerged, most of whom were workers.
At this stage, Iranian Marxists were preoccupied with two fundamental questions: one – the question of alliances with the national bourgeoisie. While the horizon remained revolutionary, the question was what kind of revolution was necessary in Iran for the advancement to socialism: national or social. A second central question, under whose auspices Marxist politics largely entered Iran, was the national question. This was expressed, among other things, in the establishment of short-lived republics of national minorities such as the republics of Gilan and Azerbaijan, which aspired to approach the Soviet Union or even unite with it.
The second period began with a sort of compromise between the superpowers at the beginning of the Cold War, in which the Soviet Union withdrew its forces from Azerbaijan and Mahabad, and the Shah's forces retook control of them. The most important development during this period and up until the 1953 coup was the rise of a pro-Soviet mass party – the Tudeh Party, which gained widespread support among the workers, and even among parts of the bureaucracy and petty bourgeoisie. This was the first time that a Marxist party had organized significantly at the national level and gained widespread support in Iran. The party promoted an approach of gradual progress towards socialism through a broad social and political front.
After the military coup in 1953 and the anti-communist repression that followed, Iran played a central role in American imperialist policy in the region. In the early 1960s, under American pressure, the Shah carried out the "White Revolution" that included land reform and industrialization measures. During this period, a new generation of Iranian Marxists criticized the Tudeh Party's approach of gradual progress toward socialism. A new generation of Marxists emerged who distanced themselves from Tudeh and established independent organizations, guerrilla movements, and study groups. Another source of inspiration for them was the Palestinian national struggle. Iranian Marxists expressed support for the armed liberation struggle.
Inspired by Third World Marxism and especially dependency theory, this period was characterized by a tendency to see the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed peoples as the central contradiction in the Middle East. This tendency led to support for an armed struggle against the monarchy and aspired to the establishment of a people's republic that would pave the way to socialism. The organizations that advocated this approach made an important contribution to the 1979 revolution.
Under the Islamic Republic
Immediately following the 1979 revolution, the Marxist left debated whether the Islamic Republic represented a national and anti-imperialist bourgeoisie that should be critically supported, or whether it was a reactionary regime that was an obstacle to socialism. At this point, the importance of the national question rose for Iranian Marxists, in light of national uprisings led by left-wing organizations in the post-revolutionary period in various parts of the country. According to N., during this period, Iranian Marxists made serious mistakes that ultimately led to the collapse of the Iranian left. The most serious mistake, he said, was adopting the theory of dependency to the point of blindness towards the internal contradictions in Iranian society. This ideological failure pushed many Marxists in Iran to adopt a wrong political strategy.
According to N., the fourth period in the history of Iranian Marxism, after the dissolution of the parties in the early 1980s, is characterized by the exile of those who were part of the organized Marxist left and the transition of Iranian Marxism mainly to analytical and academic frameworks. In these frameworks, Iranian Marxists were struck down for their sin of focusing on external contradictions and the struggle against imperialism, which prevented them from seizing power following the revolution. At this stage, the discussion shifted to dealing mainly with the internal contradictions in Iranian society and the analysis of the theocratic regime.
Political change has been evident in recent years following two significant events: the hijab protests, in which the central slogan was "Jin, Jian, Azadi" (Woman, Life, Freedom), a Kurdish slogan; and the war and genocide in Gaza, which also brought the question of imperialism and the Palestinian issue back into the discussion in the Middle East.
One of the central questions today on the Iranian left is how to support Palestine without supporting the regime. Similar questions also arise regarding Hamas and the role it plays.
In conclusion, N. said, Iranian Marxism must re-establish itself on the fundamental concept that there is no revolutionary movement without a revolutionary theory. Iranian Marxists must overcome one of the problems that characterized Marxism in the Middle East, in Iran and other countries – its fragmentation and systematic separation from the struggles taking place in the region.
