Description:

Review

There is something disorienting about holding a book called Capitalism Wakes Up! — a title that suggests a punchy polemic — and finding that the lecture advertised on the cover occupies barely a fifth of the volume’s pages. The rest is an elaborate scholarly scaffold erected by the editor, Laleh Bakhtiar: a Foreword in Islamic-artistic key, a biographical timeline, ten endnotes, and over a hundred pages of guides and indices to Shariati’s thirty-five-volume Persian Collected Works. The disproportion is not a failure of editing but a statement about the work’s intended afterlife. This is a book designed less to be read straight through than to be accessed — a portal into a thinker whose fifteen-thousand-page corpus, Bakhtiar reminds us, remains largely untranslated. The lecture at its heart, delivered on October 27, 1972 at Tehran’s Husayniyah Irshad, ten days before SAVAK shut the lecture hall down, is a concentrated burst of dialectical argument that does something genuinely distinctive: it grafts a proto-dependency theory onto Marxist class analysis to explain why the Western proletarian revolution never arrived, arguing that the deferral is financed by the deepening poverty of Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Shariati’s core claim is that capitalism has become self-aware. The nineteenth-century hoarder of money has been replaced by a system that reads its own Marxist obituary and countermobilizes the very forces that were supposed to kill it. The capitalist “can now employ sociologists, philosophers, scientists and even the most renown socialists and Marxist experts,” Shariati writes, and with that intelligence he does not merely react to crises — he anticipates and absorbs them. The lecture walks through the classical Marxist chain of fatal contradictions — worker concentration breeding class consciousness, overproduction breeding crisis, immiseration breeding revolt — and then, in a series of brisk sections, shows how twentieth-century capitalism has dismantled each link. The result is what Shariati, borrowing from the French socialist Schwartz, calls “the self-rationalization of capitalism,” a phrase that gives the lecture its title and its analytic spine.

The argument turns on a single insight that Shariati sharpens into a blade. Class consciousness — the vijegān that dialecticians treat as the precondition of revolution — does not arise from absolute poverty. It arises from the visible gap in consumption. “It is consumption that creates complexity and deprivation,” Shariati insists. “What makes me realize my under consumption is the consumption of others.” He illustrates this with a characteristically vivid contrast: the old bazaari merchant who dresses in cheap cloth and eats bread and yogurt beside a better-dressed employee provokes no resentment, because the difference in consumption is invisible. The modern consumer, by contrast, flaunts his car, his house, his clothing, and in doing so awakens the deprived class to its own position. The logic is elegant: if class feeling is triggered by the spectacle of inequality, then the system can preserve itself by granting the appearance of consumption while leaving the underlying relations of production and ownership untouched. Capitalism, Shariati argues, has grasped this logic and acts on it deliberately.

What follows is a catalogue of tactics that, read today, feels both dated in its specifics and unsettling in its recognition of a playbook that has only been refined. Capital scatters workers’ housing into discrete conglomerates separated by “a Sahara, a desert, or unnecessary parks and open spaces,” breaking the concentration that in a Lancashire mill town once produced a common life of clubs, cinemas, and political debate. It grants the worker symbolic entry to aristocratic spaces — one-franc Thursday cinema tickets on the Champs-Élysées, two-franc nights at the Paris Opera, the beach on the weekend — so that “he has succeeded in reaching the symbolic places and café’s which were always closed to the people of his class.” It extends credit to put a coin-slot television, a refrigerator, a car into the worker’s home, not as purchasing power — “If we give them purchasing power, then we would abolish class differences” — but as a managed illusion of ownership that preserves the structure of class while dissolving the envy that might attack it. Insurance, social security, child allowances, and pension schemes are recast not as welfare-state benevolence but as profit-sacrificing investments: a small percentage of surplus value surrendered “in favor of his enemy in order to delay the revolution to 20 years, 30 years, 1000 years or even to completely destroy it.” Syndicates, too, are exposed as a safety valve, channeling the worker’s militancy into narrow bargaining over hours and wages rather than ideological struggle against the system itself.

All of this is sharp, but it remains an internal critique of Western capitalism — an answer to why Marx’s prediction failed inside Europe. The lecture’s most original move is to step outside that frame and ask a question Shariati considers scandalously absent from classical Marxism: where did the surplus come from that makes all these concessions possible? The answer, delivered with a controlled fury that builds across the final pages, is the plunder of the Third World. Marx, Shariati charges, was “so sensitive and observant about the exploitative relationship between the proletariat and his employer” and yet somehow never followed the capital upstream to the slave trade, the destruction of colonized economies between 1850 and 1870, and the ongoing unequal exchange that, as Shariati insists citing Yves Lacoste’s The Geography of Hunger, has kept raw-material prices from Africa, Asia, and Latin America flat or falling for decades while manufactured imports to those same regions rose three hundred to six hundred percent. “It is astonishing and unbelievable,” he writes, with the air of a man who has been waiting a long time to say it aloud. The relative embourgeoisement of the European worker is, in this account, a transfer payment from the colonized world. The closing line lands like a stone: “the only thing we can pay them with in order to guarantee their exports, is our poverty.”

The lecture is, in form, a single sustained oral performance, and it bears the marks of its origin. Transitions are abrupt; evidence is often anecdotal. A bazaar merchant, a worker rushing from Tehran to the Caspian beach, a man grateful not to be ill, the coin-slot television — these illustrations carry rhetorical force but no systematic weight. The statistics drawn from Lacoste are attributed rather than independently verified, and the claims about the slave trade appear in an endnote with a qualification attached. The lecture’s strength is as a synthetic vision, not as a piece of original empirical research, and it asks to be judged as such. What it sacrifices in rigour it gains in the capacity to reorganise a reader’s perception of the whole post-war settlement. The endnotes, brief as they are, add important texture: they source the Schwartz group’s break with the French Communist Party over Algeria and Hungary, clarify the distinction between capitalism’s objective and subjective self-awareness, and qualify the slave-trade figure with a parenthetical note. They suggest a mind at home in the French Marxist debates of the 1960s and unafraid to name the compromises of European socialist parties.

Bakhtiar’s editorial architecture is both a service and a complication. The Foreword frames Shariati’s “committed artist” through the Quranic primordial covenant of alast (7:174) and the unity-in-multiplicity of tawḥīd, a theological key that sits uneasily with the lecture’s resolutely secular Marxist vocabulary. The Preface positions Shariati as a “contemporary Muslim social activist” and deploys a Jean-Paul Sartre quote — “I have no religion, but if I were to choose one, it would be that of Shariati’s” — that works as a badge of intellectual legitimacy for a Western-facing edition. The biographical sketch traces Shariati’s path from Mazinan through Mashhad, a National Resistance arrest in 1957, doctoral study in France, a 1961 Paris arrest for Algerian Liberation Movement activities, the explosive 1967–1973 lecturing period, eighteen months of solitary confinement in the Komiteh prison, and his 1977 death in Europe and burial beside Zaynab’s tomb in Damascus. All of this is useful, but the lecture itself contains virtually no Islamic content, and the reader who comes to the volume expecting an “Islamic Renaissance” argument will find instead a Marxist-inflected anti-imperialist polemic whose religious framing is largely external to the text. This is not a flaw in the lecture; it is a tension in the volume’s self-presentation that the editor does not quite resolve.

The bulk of the book’s physical mass is taken up by the appendices — a Guide to the Volume Titles, a Detailed Guide to the contents of the thirty-five Persian volumes (with dates, venues, page numbers, and notes on prior English translations), and a set of five indices offering translated and transliterated lecture titles alongside a day-by-day chronology of lectures from fall 1968 to fall 1972. For a researcher trying to navigate Shariati’s scattered Collected Works, this apparatus is a gift. It maps the intellectual geography of a prolific decade and makes visible the rhythm of Shariati’s output at the Husayniyah, Mashhad University, Firdausi University, and the hajj sites. But the same apparatus also makes Capitalism Wakes Up! an odd artefact. It is less a self-contained book than a research tool wrapped around a single lecture, and the effect is to subordinate the lecture’s own argument to the larger project of canonising the author. One reads the lecture, then spends the next hundred pages in an archival catalogue, and the two reading experiences never fully integrate.

Placed in its intellectual tradition, the lecture occupies a precise and productive fault line. It takes its bearings from the Marxist categories it critiques — dialectical materialism, the transformation of quantity into quality, surplus value — yet it refuses to confine its analysis to the European factory floor. In doing so, it aligns with the anti-imperialist and decolonial currents that were reshaping radical thought in the 1960s and 1970s: Fanon’s insistence that Europe is literally the creation of the Third World, the dependency theorists’ modelling of unequal exchange, the broader Third Worldist rejection of European socialism’s complacency. Shariati’s explicit debts to Schwartz’s “Le Capitalisme se Rationalize” and Lacoste’s Geography of Hunger place him in a French intellectual milieu that had already broken with the Communist Party over Algeria. His reproach to Marx is, in effect, a reproach to the entire tradition of Western Marxism that failed to see colonialism as constitutive of capitalism rather than incidental to it. This is not a new argument in the 1970s — Fanon had been dead a decade, and the Bandung generation had been making related claims since the 1950s — but Shariati gives it a dialectical crispness that makes it sting. He is not merely saying that imperialism is bad; he is showing, step by step, that the very mechanisms Marx identified as revolutionary inside Europe were being neutralised by wealth extracted from outside it, and that the true contradiction had migrated to the colonised world. The European worker had become, in Shariati’s unspoken implication, a minor shareholder in the imperial project.

The tensions the lecture names are real. Shariati’s indictment of the Catholic Church as the nineteenth century’s “biggest investor in the world” and ideological enforcer of quiescence is polemical but not baseless; his charge that European socialist parties, including the French Communist Party, had effectively merged with the capitalists by compromising on Algeria and Hungary is a specific, verifiable intra-left dispute recorded in the endnotes. The Schwartz group’s break with the PCF provides the intellectual infrastructure for the entire lecture, and Shariati’s adoption of their language is an act of political alignment as much as theoretical borrowing. Yet the lecture’s own blind spots are worth naming. Its vision of capitalism as a unitary, almost conspiratorial agent — “the capitalist” who “employs” experts and “spends a little” to “destroy the revolution” — flattens the systemic, contradictory character of capital into something too personal, too strategic. The claim that capitalism deliberately scatters worker housing with “unnecessary” buffer zones to prevent class formation attributes a level of intentional coordination that is hard to square with the chaotic histories of urban planning and real-estate development. The treatment of credit and pricing as instruments of deliberate imperial control, while gesturing toward real dynamics, relies on a model of agency — “they give us loans… to guarantee their exports” — that risks replacing a structural account of unequal exchange with a morality tale about clever villains. And the lecture never quite reckons with the fact that, even in 1972, the Western working class had secured real material gains — gains that were funded partly by colonial extraction, yes, but also by productivity growth, labour militancy, and political organisation. To treat every welfare provision as a strategic bribe is to underestimate the agency of workers who fought for those provisions.

Then there is the Islamic question. Shariati was, by biography and later reputation, a figure who sought to fuse revolutionary Shi’ism with anti-imperialist politics, and the volume’s title page announces “The Islamic Renaissance Series.” Yet the lecture contains no Quranic citation, no hadith, no appeal to Islamic tradition — only the passing mention of the church as a capitalist instrument, with no parallel discussion of Muslim institutions. Bakhtiar’s Foreword does the work of supplying an Islamic frame, but it does so by analogy rather than by integration: the committed artist as a mirror of divine unity, the lecture as an act of testimony. This is a legitimate editorial choice, but it also signals that the Islamic dimension of Shariati’s thought lives elsewhere in the thirty-five volumes, not in this particular text. The reader who comes looking for an Islamic critique of capitalism will find instead a Marxist lecture with an Islamic bookmark tucked into its pages. That is not a dismissal; it is a clarification of what this volume actually contains.

For all its limitations, Capitalism Wakes Up! performs an argument that remains unnervingly relevant. The claim that visible consumption, not absolute deprivation, drives class feeling has only grown in explanatory power in an age of aspirational credit and social-media spectacle. The insight that capitalism learns — that it absorbs critique to defer its own crisis — has been vindicated far beyond the welfare-state concessions of the 1970s, extending into corporate social responsibility, greenwashing, diversity initiatives, and the whole apparatus of managed dissent. And the central charge — that the prosperity of the global North is structurally dependent on the impoverishment of the global South — remains an open question in the political economy of climate debt, resource extraction, and labour arbitrage, even if the mechanisms have mutated. Shariati’s lecture does not settle these questions, but it poses them with a polemical clarity that few texts of its brevity achieve. The appendices, meanwhile, ensure that any reader who finds the argument compelling knows exactly where to go next in Shariati’s vast and under-translated body of work. That is a genuine service, even if it means the book is more map than territory.

Who should read it? Anyone tracing the intellectual genealogy of Third Worldist anti-capitalism; anyone puzzling over why the Western working class, against Marx’s prediction, did not make a revolution; anyone interested in the Iranian revolutionary milieu of the 1970s beyond the clerical figures who ultimately captured it. And anyone who wants to watch a single lecture, delivered in a Tehran hall on the eve of its closure by the Shah’s secret police, take aim at the whole architecture of post-war compromise and argue, with genuine analytical force, that the bill was being paid elsewhere. The book does not provide a fully furnished alternative. It is a provocation and a pointer, not a programme. But that is what a lecture of this kind is for: to unsettle the ground beneath a settled question. On those terms, it earns its keep.