Cultural Lumpenism (2)

Not an exception, but a norm in Iran


Cultural Lumpenism (2)
by Azadeh Azad

Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 - Part 4 - Part 5 - Part 6

Today’s Iranian cultural scene continues to be tainted by the presence of some lumpen “intellectuals.” There are lumpen writers and poets, both inside and outside Iran, who create works using offensive and obscene terms and concepts, and publish them on the Internet. Inside Iran, there are lumpen writers who give reactionary political speeches and interviews in support of this or that faction of the Islamic regime and have lumpen personalities (behave and act and talk in vulgar manners) without reflecting them in their literary works, which are under scrutiny of the Islamic censors. As mentioned earlier, one such writer, who does not write obscenities, but whose statements, behaviours and actions are lumpenist, is Mahmoud Dowlat-Abadi, the well-known novelist.

However, before explaining Dowlat-Abadi’s lumpenist ways, we need to realize that the writer himself has been victim of cultural lumpenism, albeit of a totally different kind that he practices himself.

In a detailed interview with the reformist newspaper “Green Word”, entitled: “Mahmoud Dolatabadi: the slogan of Cultural Government, Non-Governmental Culture is a very important point”, the novelist complains of total lack of ethics among the intellectuals. He says:

“…they stole my scenarios. They made films with them and got awards as well. They stole from my books as much as they could. And all of this happened with the knowledge of the public administration. I frequently visited the TV Station and got no response. I went to the Ministry of the Islamic Guidance, to no avail. Once, Mr. Farid-zadeh invited the one who had stolen my scenario, and showed the film in a meeting that I attended. He showed the book as well and told the filmmaker: You took the story from that book, changed its setting and made the film. So, you must pay penalty to Dowlat-Abadi. And that man never paid the penalty. …”

Then he rightfully adds:

“In a society where traditional morality is destroyed and the law does not replace the traditional morality and anarchy prevails under the State management, well, my rights and those of people like me are obviously wasted.” (11)

Considering how well Dowlat-Abadi is aware of the corruption of the intellectuals of the regime and the regime itself, one wonders why he is so adamant to support this regime and remain one of its lumpen intellectuals who is occasionally used and abused by other lumpen intellectuals. (Here, I remember the story of a famous female filmmaker who used a female writer’s scenario without her permission to make a film, and was sued by her). It seems that in Iran, lumpenism among the artists and writers is not an exception, but a norm. And as we will see, Dowlat-Abadi does not realize that he himself, in his own way, is part of this lumpenist culture he is criticizing.

Who is Mahmoud Dowlat-Abadi?

Mahmoud Dowlat-Abadi is a famous Iranian novelist of rural life. His most important works are Missing Solouch (1979), “The Lives of the Old” (1991), and his monumental novel of 3,000 pages in 5 volumes and 10 books, “Kelidar”, an epic of rural decline that he wrote between 1977 and 1984. Dowlat-Abadi was born in a poor, rural family in the village of Dowlat-Abad, near the city of Sabzevār, and began farming, herding and doing other menial jobs since the age fourteen. However, he lived most of his life in Tehran and became a theatre actor for a short time before devoting his life to writing. Never having finished the high school, he is a self-taught man with a mostly traditional and male-centered outlook on life. He considers his father his “only teacher” and says “He taught my life, my mentality and will, my work and my future with the simplest of words: - Pull yourself; - Men do and don’t talk”. (12) Dowlat-Abadi is now 71 years old, married with three children and several grand-children.

Most Iranians put this writer on a pedestal. For instance, in 2009, a journalist from the reformist newspaper “Green Word” called him: “The greatest living writer since the Constitution Era, who has a prominent position both among people and among serious readers of literature.”(13)

I have read two of Dowlat-Abadi’s novels and a part of his “Kelidar”, and find him to be rather a “very good storyteller”, but not a “great” writer. In his two works, “The Days of the Old” and “Missing Solouch” which I have read in Persian, he often focuses on appearances, does not pay much attention to his characters’ inner world. His characters are rural people with outdated values living a rural lifestyle with which I cannot identify and using Sabzevāri vernacular, with which I am not familiar. All of these points make reading his otherwise well-written works a bit tedious after a while. However, in this article, I am not at all focusing on the quality of his body of writings, but about the lumpenist nature of his body of social and political statements, behaviours and actions.

Dowlat-Abadi and Cultural Lumpenism

The Iranian cultural lumpens have their own special characteristics, some of which are: being disinterested in politics out of their penchant for conformism, conservatism and opportunism; being attracted to reactionary and fascistic forces, thus being in favour of different degrees of repressive measures against people; being unstable and switching political sides and allegiances; being politically opportunistic and unreliable; being narcissistic and megalomaniac while exhibiting a façade of humility; having a despotic character and creating an atmosphere of fear and domination around themselves; encouraging mutual flattery with their fans; being misogynist; idealizing traditional values and obsolete lifestyles; being vestiges of the pre-capitalist era; being uprooted and displaced from their rural origin; and not having the capacity for theoretical thinking.

Throughout the present article, I am going to describe this range of lumpenist traits and present Dowlat-Abadi’s words, attitudes and actions as cases in point.

*1. Dowlat-Abadi’s being a pseudo- intellectual

Lumpen intellectuals are not interested in new ideas or having a fruitful exchange of ideas with the critics. They thrive on mutual flattery and encourage it. They expect to be flattered by their protégés or fans and flatter them in return, and their language is accompanied with flattery of others with the purpose of giving the impression of modesty: “I’m your servant, I die for you, and I’m the soil under your feet.” Because as he has no power and cannot gain power, he is essentially a eulogist of power, he is “like a dust.”

In the 1994 literary gathering, I personally observed this tendency in Dowlat-Abadi, that is, his enthusiasm in welcoming constant flattery from his fans and his hostility towards anyone who critiqued his works as described in my other article about him (14).

*2. Dowlat-Abadi’s narcissism and megalomania

Lumpens are narcissistic and suffer from inferiority complex and other emotional issues, which cause them a lot of pain.

In 1986, Dowlat-Abadi became a candidate for the Nobel Prize in literature for Kelidar. He complained that there was not enough publicity about his candidature in the Iranian media: “In the last 20 years that I have been a Nobel Prize candidate, only once this matter was reflected in our press.” (15)

In a 2007 Radio Zamaneh interview (16), we read the following dialogue about his candidature for the Nobel Prize.

*Radio Zamaneh: “Last year there were discussions about the globalization of the Persian literature and granting of the Nobel Prize to an Iranian writer or poet took place. Now, let’s judge it fairly. Does the present Iranian literature have a place that could instigate the selection of the Nobel Prize from this country?”

*Dowlat-Abadi: “I don’t judge; but personally I have accurate information

that in the year 1986 (1364-1365), the candidature of Mahmoud Dowlat-abadi

from Iran reached the media; and since that time, I went to the feet of Nobel one, two, three more times. However, it went to another. I personally claim that I am more of a writer than many writers who obtained the Nobel Prize.” This arrogance, narcissism and self-flattering is another aspect of Dowlat-Abadi’s lumpenism.

In the interview with the “Green Word” newspaper, Dowlat-Abadi was asked the following question.

“Green Word”: there are other issues concerning the governmental management of cultural affairs, and that is, we often witness that even this public administration is neither public nor regulated, but has become a personal management, which includes rather biases, personal perceptions and misunderstandings that sometimes exist between governmental managers and artists. What examples have you had in dealing with this problem?

Dowlat-Abadi: “I did not want to point out this issue, because nationalistic sentiment – not chauvinistic – truly still exist in me and I would not want to say that someone with the position of a Minister or Deputy Minister could be so low as to be, for instance, resentful of the writer; but it is actually so. … The type of behavior we see on the part of the authorities creates the illusion that as if the gentlemen are hurt by a masterpiece that is created in art and literature of the country ….Recently I heard, again from an unreliable source, that they have read “Colonel” and have said that Dowlat-Abadi’s masterpiece is not “Kelidar” or “Solouch” or “Days of the Old”. Dowlat-Abadi’s masterpiece is “Colonel” and we have put it into a trunk and closed its lid, because it is not possible to take out one word from it or to add one word to it. So they understand well. Events of the book “Colonel” refers to our history and the Revolution’s surgeries anyway and these are facts that are not covered.” (17)

The image of “perfection” that Dowlat-Abadi depicts of his own work by quoting some mysterious people having said “it is not possible to take out one word from it or to add one word to it”, as if it is the Bible or the Koran for the believers, is itself a masterpiece in self-advertisement.

*3. Dowlat-Abadi’s despotic character

Cultural lumpenists have also a tendency to create an atmosphere of fear and domination and despotism around themselves wherever they are, either in order to appear very important or because they are very authoritarian and think highly of oneself. I personally observed this pronounced tendency in Dowlat-Abadi’s manners and behavior during the 1994 literary gathering in Tehran (18).

*4. Dowlat-Abadi’s being a vestige of pre-capitalist era

Typically, lumpens are the remnants of the pre-industrial and pre-capitalist society.

Born in a rural family and in a rural community, Dowlat-Abadi’s jobs in the villages, towns and cities were working the land, shepherding, being a shoemaker footboy, and smoothing curved nails (a work that is still being done by Dowlat-Abad’s and other Sabzevār villages’ youth). And later, helping his father and brother as a gear twister of cotton shoe stretching couch workshop, being a bicycle-maker, a barber, etc. He travelled to Mashhad and then to Tehran and during this period assumed other jobs such as compositor printer, slaughterhouse barber, theatre programs claimant, prompter cinema usher, Keyhan newspaper salesman, etc.(19) Dowlat-Abadi has been a hard-working man, but his work experiences as well as his personal interests have been mostly related to pre-capitalist times.

*5. Dowlat-Abadi’s uprootedness and displacement from his rural past

In the 1994 literary meeting in Tehran, when I first observed Dowlat-Abadi’s unusual behavior of leaving his chair, during the break, to sit on the bare floor to have cheese and bread with tea, I assumed that he was trying to show off his humility, which is one of our cultural hypocrisy. But now, knowing more about the Iranian lumpenism, I have a different view of his behavior.

This writer had lived most of his life in Tehran, in the company of theatre actors, playwrights, filmmakers, poets and writers. Yet his manners still evoked those of the city-dwellers who were born and raised in rural areas, and were now but “uprooted individuals cut off from the economic and social class with which they might normally be identified” as the Merriam-Webster dictionary define them. Plus, the fact that most of Dowlat-Abadi’s novels are about rural lifestyle while he is living in the big city of Tehran, would be a stronger indication of where his mind and heart are.

*6. Dowlat-Abadi’s idealization of the traditional rural life

The flow of literature that deals with the issues of rural-living took shape in the 1960’s with the social and cultural transformations brought by the Shah’s “White Revolution”. Issues such as Land Reform – putting forward the ideas of “Westoxication” and return to traditional rural life, which were historically reactionary, became resources for the creation of new works by some lumpen writers.

Mahmoud Dowlat-Abadi is a prolific, realist writer of stories about rural people and rural life in decline, which he draws on his personal experiences. In his novels, he uses archaic and obsolete words, phrases, expressions and style of speech in order to re-create the mode of the past. He idealizes and glorifies the rural men and reveals nostalgia for a backward past. He does not seem to be happy, as he often talks about writing as a means of escaping his pains (20).

This is not surprising, as in general, since lumpens have roots in city margins or in rural areas, they prefer to live in the margins. When they enter the city civilization, life becomes harder for them.

In an article entitled “Mahmoud Dowlat-Abadi’s Plays”, we read that in the play “Impasse”, “although Dowlat-Abadi has a dignified and firm language and prose, he cannot achieve a strong and compelling prose in urban literature as much as he can in rural literature and its related prose. As he himself believes, rural and tribal and traditional themes dominate the urban themes in his works.” (21)

*7. Dowlat-Abadi’s lack of capacity for theoretical thinking.

One of the characteristics of lumpens is that they do not have capacity for theoretical thinking. In the case of Dowlat-Abadi, as mentioned earlier, in “Iran” newspaper of September 8, 2002, Dowlat-Abadi expresses a strange opinion about the social conflicts that prove his inability for theoretical thinking. He says:

“All elements must be present. From the beginning, the problem has been that some people say those in front of us should not be. Well, where should they go? Tajikistan? Africa? How could they not be?” (22)

What Dowlat-Abadi expresses simply doesn’t make sense. Who is saying other people should not be? He doesn’t seem to understand that the idea of “certain others should not be in a position power to repress people” is not the same as “certain others should not exist in the society or should not be alive.” He asks, “Where should they go?” Doesn’t he know that those opposed to the despotic rule of Khamenei, and those for a secular and democratic regime are in prison and not in Africa? Does he think that the opposition wishes the Islamic rulers not to exist as human beings? Can’t he think that these rulers could be in the society as ordinary citizens doing productive jobs instead? Or better, in prison after their trials for crimes against humanity.

For Dowlat-Abadi, the solution to the social conflicts is for all the Iranian people, from the reformists to those who are for democracy and freedom to live together under the Islamic constitution that he has voted for. Indeed, this opinion confirms that lumpens are politically ignorant, backward and opportunistic. How absurd and ignorant Dowlat-Abadi’s statement is and how more confused and volatile can anyone be?

In the same newspaper, to the question of “what is the duty of the elites and intellectuals in this space, especially to prevent the occurrence of gaps in the society”, Dowlat-Abadi replied:

“First they should be thankful. They should be thankful that they can speak their opinions. I too am thankful in the next step; in the next step if it is not considered interference, everyone can express their point of view of how the social fabric is being eroded.” (23)

I wonder if Dowlat-Abadi expects our political prisoners most of whom are intellectuals should be the first in thanking the Islamic Republic for this freedom of expression it has bestowed upon them.

*8. Dowlat-Abadi’s sexism

One of the major traits of lumpens is their misogyny. Dowlat-abadi has shown a strong dislike for feminism, an unstable and changing positions on Iranian women including indifference to their condition. As you may read in my other article about him he has publically said, in a 1994 Literature gathering in Tehran:

“Women’s patience and compliance and loyalty have been valuable in the olden times and it seems that in the modern times, for some, women’s loyalty has no longer the former value. But patience and compliance and loyalty are eternal values that will have their place in the new circumstances as well.

“… This “jittery issue” about women and men in America, which is a game and is called feminism, is wasting human energy. I do not think that in this novel (The Time of the Old) one should give oneself the opportunity to address this point. Human in general is so trampled that it is no more possible to pay attention to this matter that which one is more trampled, woman or man. And in any case, loyalty and adaptability and carrying the heavy load of life, even if it is more than that of man, are not bad.” (24)

To be continued.


(11) مه (خرداد) ۲۰۰۹. روزنامه کلمه سبز

محمود دولت‌آبادی: شعار دولت فرهنگی، فرهنگ غیر دولتی نکته بسیار مهمی است

This interview was published on “Sarv” website and reproduced on the “Third Wave:

//, which is Stored in this web cache :


(12). نوشتن نونِ . (۲۰۰۹)۱۳۸۸ مرضیه جعفری


(13). روزنامه کلمه سبز


(15)جایزه ادبی نوبل //

(16) رادیو زمانه . ۲۰۰۷

(17) سبز روزنامه کلمه



(19) //محمود_دولت‌آبادی

(20) هستم محمود دولت‌آبادی: فرزند نان و قناعت: ژوئیه ۳۱ ، ۲۰۱۱/۱۳۹۰ خبرگزاری مهر


(21) تنظیم برای تبیان : مسعود عجمی. .نمایشنامه‌های "محمود دولت‌آبادی .( ققنوس ۱۳۸۸( ۰۰۹ ۲


(22) ۲۰۰۲ سپتامبر/ايران. ۱۸ شهريور ۱۳۸۱ روزنامه (۲۲)*

(23) Ibid.



Dr. A. Azad is a sociologist and an independent scholar.


more from Azadeh Azad
Azadeh Azad


by Azadeh Azad on

I am so glad to see someone like you on this site. Your observation is quite accurate. Thanks.



Azadeh Azad

M. Ala

by Azadeh Azad on

Thank you, Mr. Ala, for your sympathy. And I appreciate what you are saying. I guess it is extremely frustrating to live in a part of Canada where even the street people and the homeless are so much politer than many of the Iranian men who are dominating this site. Avoiding any contact with them and  ignoring their antics would probably be the only way.

You are certainly a gentleman, and so are a few other men who contribute to this site.




Universality of thuggery!

by Arj on

"...and you'll see how identitcal the Oppostional Thugs in Diaspora are to the Rulling Thugs in Iran."

Dear Ms. Azad, IC's motto of "Nothing is Sacred" which is IMHO meant to challenge the sanctitude associated with religious/social norms and taboos, is often misconstrued to overrun the boundaries of human decency in this forum! The overwhelming truth however, is that such practices, which in some instances involve thinly veiled chauvenistic and misogynous tendencies, are celebrated as novelty sattire on here. Especially, when the concept of abject poverty and misery of our countrymen and women that are compelled to a life of procurement and prostitution for mere sustenance (which should bring tears to any human's eyes) is exploited by some as stories of fornication, and yet aplauded by some women commenters in this forum as "hilarious sattire!"

Ironically, the same lumpen crowd who write and cheer such benalities, claim a monopoly on opposition to IRI and not only engage in a competition to outdo one another in the use of vulgarity and advocy of violence, but create an atmosphere in which they feel righteous enough to dismiss and even attack those who refrain from adopting their language and demeanors in expressing their poltical views (albeit in opposition to IRI) as "supporters" and or "agents" of IRI!

Indeed, as the quote above suggests, these two groups of lumpens (both pro and anti-IRI) are essentially of the same psychological make up, only differing in trivial ideological differences. In other words, politics only provides this lumpen crowd a suitable pretext and outlet to release their otherwise repressed frustrations which can only be seen as a cheap form of group therapy!

Thank you for the essay

Mohammad Ala

Thanks for your efforts and research.

by Mohammad Ala on

I have been against personal attacks since day one.  I have received my share of personal attacks.

Please do not assume members such as myself do not care because (1) I do not have enough time to read everything, (2) sometimes I read but do not comment which should not mean I do not care.  Given limited time and resources, I do my share of changing Iran for better for all Iranians and non-Iranians who choose to live in it or visit it. 


Great you found it interesting

by Siavash300 on

Dear Azadeh,

I am happy to hear that you liked the link because I liked it very much and I tried to share it with my country men/women but it turned out to be disaster because of M.S translation. Please do so and try to translate it as soon as you can. I think everybody should know about it. It is accurate description of Lumpanism in Iran.

    S.Soltanpour mentioned so many names of lumpens during constitutional revolution and their impacts on Iran history. I only remembered Degerrmachi from all of them.  

Yes dear, You are right. I have noticed that there are a lot of vulgar languages on this site. I am surprised JJ (admin)  doesn't do anything about it. There should be some kind of block on those nasty comments. I agree those people are extension of thugs who put Nasrin Sotoudeh into Evin. But at the same time, we have a lot of decent Iranian men, so we have to be careful about generalization.



Azadeh Azad

Thanks Siavash

by Azadeh Azad on

The link you provided is most interesting and useful. I will translate that article later on, as it is closely related to mine.

It has been my observation of numerous Thugs on this website (who can only use vulgar and thuggish words against others instead of beating and raping them) that led me to be curious about this dominant aspect of the poor and misogynistic Iranian culture. I publish this article for those who might be influenced by the old thugs of, who wanted to be part of the Islamic regime, but didn't succeed and thus oppose it out of envy. Two of these thugs have repeatedly said, "We (Iranians) have been nothing, are nothing, and will be nothing." It is obvious that they are projecting their own nothingness upon other Iranians. But it also shows that they are not interested in changing a bit. Just read my comment to "Rouzbeh_Guilani" and his response (and his other comments against feminists here and there), and you'll see how identitcal the Oppostional Thugs in Diaspora are to the Rulling Thugs in Iran. The Ruling Thugs in Iran throw the feminists like Nasrin Sotoudeh into Evin dungeon and the Oppositional Thugs in Diaspora throw words like FemiNazi on them. These two groups of Iranian lumpens are “Birds of the Same Feathers.”

And when I see the silence (= collaboration) of the majority on this website, I truly feel ashamed to be a person of Iranian descent.

Thanks again,



Thugocracy versus theocracy

by Siavash300 on

Dear Azadeh,

I have read Soltanpour's books in Farsi back in 70's. No access to his books at this time. I was a teenager. I used his write ups from my memory (I have a sharp memory). My favor book was "Realism and anti realism" and my favor chapter was James Joyce. I was very much obssessed with his analysis of Charles Dickens and James Joyce in those days.

    Lupenism in Iranian culture has been addressed for the first time by Dr. Hooshang Kavooci right after the movie "Ghaysar". He fairly described the transition of our rural culture to urban and it's consequences. Later on Dr. Masood Noghrekar wrote an article highlighting Lumpenism and the role of thugs in Iran and what happened we are in current situation. You may read it here:


 - [ Translate this page ]

This is the most informative literature I have read these days. I have posted in English in but it was not my translation. I used M.S for English translation, so many people complained that they didn't understand a word. If you click on my name, it will comes up under "RulingThugs in Iran". 

U.S navy General Petrius rightly used the word :THUGOCRACY instead of theocracy for the current situation in Iran.  

I am very pleased to see an Iranian woman is doing research in this filed.



Azadeh Azad


by Azadeh Azad on

Thank you for your comment about Rezai et al. I am most interested in reading Saeed Soltanpour's work on Lumpenism. Please let us know how we can have access to it.

Regarding the term Lumpenism, I have NOT used it in its Marxian sense (which belongs to almost 2 centuries ago), but in its contemporary sociological sense. In the latter sense, lumpenism applies to ALL social classes and not only to the working class. It also includes Vulgarism of all types.



Azadeh Azad


by Azadeh Azad on

It is quite clear that this article is NOT about Dowlat-Abadi's literary style or merit, but about his social persona and political behaviours and actions. In one place I have simply mentioned that in my opinion he is a "good writer" and not a "great one", and that I cannot identify with his novels' characters. After all, I am an urban woman living in the 21st century and looking forward to our future. But the article as a whole is about Dowlat-Abadi's role as an Islamic tool in the hands of the IRI.



Azadeh Azad

Iraj Khan

by Azadeh Azad on

Yes, Dowlat-Abadi taught at U. of Tehran during the Shah's regime as well as the Islamic regime. I haven't read his book on "Art", but what he says about "literature" is really crude and unsound.

Lumpenism at your place of work? Sure, you can find it in many places. Just read some of the blogs on IC.

Thanks for reading my article.




Siavash and callmered

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

Thanks for your write ups. Very informative. Consider blogging them...

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."


Lumpenism in Iranian style

by Siavash300 on

In Marx abstruct thinking industrial societies has 2 major classes. A. Bourgeois characterised by ownership of capital. B. proletaria which comes from the latin word of "proless" means "children". proletaria charaterized by ownership of children. In ultimate polarization of society, there remains only these 2 classes. The conflict and struggle between these 2 classes leads to dictatorship of proletaria. Marx goes further and calls middle class as "Petty Bourgeois". Lowest class of society is "Lumpen". In Marx thinking in final stage of conflict between these 2 classes Lumpens and Petty Bourgeois absorb to either of these classes.

Iran is no exception from Marx classification. Our writer Saeed Soltanpoor did extensive research on Lumpenism in Iran since the time of Constitutional monarch back in 70's. His write ups were under assumed name Dr. Mitra. He fairly described Degarmachi who was one of the lumpens during constitutional revolution. Constitional revolution shaped Iran's social economy transformation from Feudalims during Qjar dynasty towrard industralization during Reza shah era. Soltanpoor was deeply under influence of Marx idea, so consequently he tried very hard to keep the original script of Marx to be complied with socia historical formation of Iran in his analysis. For example, he labled Shaboon Jafari as a tool in the hands of royal court versus Tayyeb as a tool in the hand of anti shah dissents. That was what exactly Marx mentioned that lupen either get attracted to ruling class or in final stage of struggle gets attracted to proletaria. Shaban was pro shah and Tayyeb was against shah.

In 1963, Khomaini had frequent contact with Tayyeb Rezai in Karamat cafe (tea shop). Tayyeb gang was the most notorious criminal gang in southern Tehran. All members were well paid and well organized. Members were earning money by extortion from small businesses in Maydon e Ghebleh (Ghebleh square),  southern Tehran.

   Tayyeb, Ramezan Yakhei and his prostititudes ( Neshandeh Tayyeb) played major role in uprising, riot and unrest in 2 cities of Qam and Tehran in 15 khordad 1942 (june 1963) which leaded to Khomaini's exile for 16 years. S.A.V.A.K put Tayyeb in silent.

In 1979 once Khomainie took power in Iran, there was a rumor in Tehran that head of revolutionary guard Mohsen Rezai was the son of Tayyeb Rezai. Khomainie assigned him to the  head of revolutionary guard as a sign of appreciation from his late father.

Ms. Azadeh widely used Lumpen in her write up which is not really what Marx indicated in his books. The movie Ghaysar also promoted lumpenism and it's culture, not the othe way around.

Saeed Soltanpoor was extecuted by firing squad in Evin prison according to death decree issued by Asadolah Lajevardi in 1980.  




تا به حال چندین مصاحبه ازآقای دولت آبادی دیدم و هیچوقت طرز صحبت و نظرات
ایشون به نظرم لمپنی- سکسیست یا بی ادبانه نیومده. آخرینش هم برنامه ای بود
درتلویزیون بی بی سی. متهم کردن آقای دولت آبادی به لمپنیسم و غیره و غیره
رو اولین باریه که می شنوم و کم مونده شاخ دربیارم. منابعی که شما فهرست
کرده بودید رو تاجایی که وقت کردم دیدم اما بازهم چیزی دستگیرم نشد

من اغلب کتابهای آقای دولت آبادی رو خوندم. سبک نگارش و قلم ایشون بی نظیره. به خصوص درکلیدر- این کتاب بی اغراق دررده ی ایلیاد و اودیسه هومرقرار می گیره. اتفاقا برام خیلی جالب بود که کاندید جایزه نوبل شده و ممنون که شما به این موضوع اشاره کردید! چون واقعا جایی نخونده بودم و نشنیده بودم و نمی دونستم. فکر می کنم که کاملا حق داشته که دراین مورد رنجیده باشه و درجاهایی هم به این نکته اشاره کرده. اصلا هم به نظرم متکبرانه نبود. حق داشت. خب معلومه که خیلی مهمه. خود شما بودید و کاندید جایزه نوبل می شدید دلخور نمی شدید اگر رسانه ها راجع بهش صحبت نمی کردند؟؟

شاید هم فکرمی کنید که اصلا لیاقت کاندید شدن برای جایزه نوبل را نداشته؟  

شما یک جلد ازین کتاب رو خوندید- برام جالبه که چطورتونستید اینطور قاطعانه درمورد این کتاب اظهار نظر کنید؟؟. 

شما جابه جا درمطلبتون با دلخوری خاصی به این موضوع اشاره می کنید که دولت آبادی راجع به روستا و روستاییان کتاب نوشته است.

دراینکه آقای دولت آبادی بیشتر راجع به روستاییان می نویسند اشکالی نمی بینم و با توجه به زمینه تربیتی ایشون جای تعجب نیست و اگر ایشون میخواست راجع به اشراف کتاب بنویسه خنده دار و عجیب بود. مسلمه که یک هنرمند یا نویسنده طرز تفکرو مطالبی رو که با هاشون آشنایی داره روی کاغذ میاره- اشکالی داشت که ماکسیم گورکی و شولوخف بیشتر درمورد کارگران و کشاورزان کتاب می نوشتند؟؟ یا چخوف بیشتر درمورد طبقه ی متوسط جامعه داستان می نوشت؟ نمی فهمم که چرا این موضوع باعث دلخوری شماست و ایراد ش چیست؟؟

اگر سبک نوشتن نویسنده یا موضوعاتی که به اونها میپردازه براتون جالب نیست حرف دیگه ایه. اما کل اظهار نظرات شما به نظرم بسیار تند و درمواردی مغرضانه آمد-به خصوص درمورد فرهنگ روستایی.  من ایشون رو به عنوان یک نویسنده ی قدر و ماهر بسیار قبول دارم و قضاوتم ازشخصیت ایشون هرگز اینهایی نبود که شما نوشته اید. اما چون ایشون یکی ازنویسنده های مورد علاقه ی من هستند حتما درمورد مطالبی که گفتید بیشتر تحقیق می کنم-حتما افراد دیگه ای هم هستند که به نتایجی مشابه شما رسیده باشند. - ..



iraj khan


by iraj khan on

didn't Dowlat Abadi teach in Tehran University for a while, during Shah's regime?

I believe he wrote a book about 'Art' and in that book he expanded his ideas about 'what  true Art' is.

You stated:

"Cultural lumpenists have also a tendency to create an atmosphere of fear and domination and despotism around themselves wherever they are, either in order to appear very important or because they are very authoritarian and think highly of oneself."

I have experienced the above characteristics of Lumpenism at my work place and it seems like the ones who are doing are completley OK with it.

Thanks for posting your observations about Lumpenism in Iranian culture. 


Dear Azadeh, I am glad you got all that anger off your chest.

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

You are a very angry person and obviously unable to provide a simple civilised answer to a simple civilsed question on the blog you posted, without launching into a personal attack.

You claim somewhere that you are a college lecturer?!! Some college indeed to hire an obtuse individual as you in any capacity, let alone  lecturship!

expect no further responses

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Azadeh Azad

You are one cultural lumpen, Roozbeh

by Azadeh Azad on

Lumpenism = Vulgarism!

Instead of speaking of the European fascism and other abstract and far-away ideas,  just look at your own lumpenistic behaviour on this website, which extends from calling me an "idiot" regarding my criticism of an ex-MEK by the name of "Hossein Bagher Zadeh", to welcoming the Ugly Head of the Lumpens on, "Shazde Asdola Mirza".


It seems that all the louts in diaspora, from anti-IRI to pro-IRI to the in-between, including you and your buddies, have seized and have turned it into a Chaaleh Meydaan, a Cultural Gutter!

Now, instead of becoming defensive or aggressive, just think about your nauseating behaviours and the disgusting blogs and blog-writers you cheer for. Think for an hour. Then try to modify your behaviour, try to be civilized. Half of the people who read this website are women, most of whom (not all) find your behaviours and those of your buddies repulsive and offensive.

There is absolutely no difference between Ahmadinejad and his vulgar opponents on this website. Both sides are lumpens and both represent the true "Persian" culture of our times.

Truly disgusted,



Iranian cultural lumpens special characteristics

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

You describe these characteristics as follows:

 "being disinterested in politics out of their penchant for conformism, conservatism and opportunism; being attracted to reactionary and fascistic forces, thus being in favour of different degrees of repressive measures against people; being unstable and switching political sides and allegiances; being politically opportunistic and unreliable; being narcissistic and megalomaniac while exhibiting a façade of humility; having a despotic character and creating an atmosphere of fear and domination around themselves; encouraging mutual flattery with their fans; being misogynist; idealizing traditional values and obsolete lifestyles; being vestiges of the pre-capitalist era; being uprooted and displaced from their rural origin; and not having the capacity for theoretical thinking."

But, the above characteristics are a perfect, word by word,  description of a European Fascist. Both of modern day, and "traditional". (e.g. Both Hitler and Mussolini started as Communists before becoming ardent anti communist fascists. Both idolised "rural life", rejecting "corrupt industrialised urban life style".  I could go on....)

Having established that, would you not agree that Lumpenism is in essence, a behaviour pattern associated with a Fascistic outlook on life, very much along the lines of Marx's general description (per part1 of your article)? By extension, would you not agree that what we have in Iran today, is nothing but the Rule of Lumpens, The Rule of Fascists, albeit of Islamic rather than christian type?

And good article. Thank you. 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."