Abstract
This research employs a critical approach and problematization method to examine the concept of political agency in Asef Bayat's problematic, particularly in the context of recent Middle Eastern developments. The primary objective is to elucidate the role of agency in explaining the protests and uprisings of marginalized groups, as conceptualized by Bayat. Focusing on Bayat's post-Arab Spring writings, this research seeks to determine whether his conceptualization of political agency, including concepts such as 'refolution,' 'non-movements,' and 'Quiet Encroachment,' adequately captures the complexities of contemporary social and political dynamics. By comparing Bayat's ideas with other theoretical perspectives, this research aims to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of his thought. By critically examining Bayat's theories and comparing them to other approaches, this research aims to refine and expand existing frameworks for analyzing political agency in societies under transition.
Keywords: Asef Bayat, Agency, Problematic, Subaltern, non-movement.
Introduction
Asef Bayat was one of the intellectuals who recognized the significance of the "Arab Spring" events, which brought about a significant shift in the balance of power in the Middle East on both a regional and extra-regional level. It is important to remember that Bayat's works have a significant impact on studies of Middle Eastern movements. In fact, it is difficult for a researcher who wants to conduct a serious investigation into the events of the so-called Arab Spring and its aftermath to ignore Bayat's works. As a result, one may argue that research on Middle Eastern movements can be separated into two categories: before and after Bayat's writings.
As a scholar, Bayat has firsthand knowledge of the everyday struggles faced by the Middle East's Subaltern population. For over thirty years, he has been researching and evaluating social categories and the problems associated with them. His early years were spent in a village in Iran's central plateau, not far from Tehran, which helped him to better comprehend sociological issues. The Marxist tendencies he had discovered led Bayat to become a political activist and critic of the Shah's rule in his adolescence. Prior to the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty and the founding of the Islamic Republic, he began studying social sciences in England. He went back to Iran after the revolution to finish his doctoral thesis, which was published in Iran under the title Workers and the 1979 Revolution.
When looking at his work, it is evident that Asef Bayat is a dynamic researcher who is still evolving. This point leads us to note that the critique and assessment of Bayat's writings, which is the purpose of this essay, is not just a critique of a thinker but also an assessment of an approach from a wider perspective. A strategy that presents both opportunities and challenges. In processing ideas like non-movement, revolution without revolutionaries, and refolution, Bayat attempts to think of the masses and subalterns of the Arab Spring—who lack a party, organization, and inclusive ideology—as having some form of political agency. This essay seeks to clarify this strategy and cast doubt on Asef Bayat's purported agency.
 
Materials & Methods
This essay aims to comprehend Bayat's theoretical formulations by applying the problematic idea. According to Althusser, "problematic" refers to a certain configuration of both visible and invisible components in a particular interaction with one another. Establishing notions that essentially differentiate a situation is necessary for theoretical problems. Notably, we are not always bound by the problematic environment in which an idea was developed just because we borrow it. We attempt to apply problematization in a more comprehensive sense than what is found in Foucault-Deleuze from a methodological standpoint. To demonstrate how much of what is taken for granted in the understanding of movements in the Middle East by this approach necessitates basic problems, we shall critique Bayat's concepts in respect to those of other researchers.
 
Discussion & Result
This study, through a critical examination of Asef Bayat’s theory of everyday politics and subaltern agency, demonstrates that while his framework significantly contributes to understanding social dynamics in the Middle East, it suffers from notable ambiguities in conceptualizing the relationship between agency and structure. The analysis reveals that Bayat’s strong emphasis on neoliberal structures as mechanisms of constraint tends to overlook the conscious, creative, and organizational capacities of subaltern actors. Moreover, his interpretation of “refo-lutions” lacks a clear definition of agency and fails to account for the historical and cultural diversity of Middle Eastern societies, leading to a certain degree of theoretical overgeneralization. The principal contribution of this article lies in highlighting the need for a rethinking of agency—one that simultaneously acknowledges the role of social structures, cultural contexts, and diverse modes of collective organization—in order to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of social movements and political transformations in the region.
 
Conclusion
This study’s findings, while contributing to a refined understanding of Bayat’s theoretical limits, also invite broader reflections on the risks of reducing agency to reactive resistance and prescriptive activism. Bayat´s problematic presents both opportunities and difficulties. Some criticisms of Bayat's writings include a posteriori analysis and retrospective reading. Bayat is a form of activism for people who are forced to perform various acts because of particular situations. A subordinate who acts in accordance with their own requirements—which are the same as the requirements—cannot be adequately explained by assuming a type of agency. Even though this kind of observation might have a promising and political component, it is very different from the research's explanatory purpose. In the same way that resistance might suggest agency, resistance also necessitates some level of imagination and action. A person has essentially engaged in reactive behavior if they steal specifically to survive or construct homes and slums out of need and as a result of the government's tardy management of oversight agencies. Relying on the prescriptive nature of every issue leads to a strategic error for political activists to deploy forces, and the idea of resistance from their action depletes these concepts instead of aiding in the explanation of the movements.