The People on the Road to Power

FOREWORD

Susurluk was the final straw that broke the camel’s back. On November 3, 1996 a Mercedes collided with a lorry near Susurluk, and the real situation of Turkey was exposed as never before. The Mercedes contained a member of the Turkish par-

liament, a beauty queen, a police chief and a murderer and organised crime boss who was wanted by Interpol. Since then, not a day has passed without new facts coming to light about the intertwining of organised crime, the state and contra-guerrillas into one unitary mafia-contra-guerrilla state.The people are beginning to organise against this contra-guerrilla state. People know

they have no prospect of anything from this state other than blows from clubs, bullets and prison sentences, than more exploitation and oppression. On the initiative of the Party-Front, the people are beginning to organise in their own structures, the People’s Councils. The objective: establishing revolutionary people’s power.This book contains various texts shedding light on the origin and work of the People’s

Councils. Further texts offer background as well as the perspective with which the Peo-ple’s Councils were set up. Some of these texts describes the most important events of the past few years in Turkey. The others supply information on the perspectives and struggle of the Party-Front, which made and is making the development of the People’s Councils possible and is seeking to put them into practice everywhere and increase their influence.

ITHE PEOPLE’S COUNCILS

THE PEOPLE’S COUNCILS

THE HISTORY OF PEOPLE’S COMMITTEES

Kurtulus no. 6, August 19, 1995

The terror and the massacres committed by the state, which spread everywhere from the streets and the city squares to the city slums, houses and apartments of working people, have come up against the resistance and violence of the people.

The resistance has radicalised under these conditions and despite all attempts at distor-tion, it directed itself straight at the source of the terror. This showed itself to be the case in Gazi, but not just there. There was also Nurtepe, Umraniye, Elbistan and Okmeydani, and the popular anger which broke out against the police station in Kastamonu are ex-amples of this process.There are two elements which influence this process.Firstly: the fascist attacks in the country and in the cities were consciously stepped up.Secondly: the people express their discontent with attacks and other indignities inflict-

ed by the system by engaging in uprisings, despite the people’s apparently varied political tendencies.So our struggle and organisational strategies are directed on the one hand towards or-

ganising the defence of the people against attacks, and on the other hand to unite the various struggles, to expand the struggle and bring about the revolution.The organisational forms for that are the People’s Councils, People’s Committees and

Committees of Struggle and Defence against Fascism.Setting them up is indispensable. They are suited to the current conditions and are a

part of the revolutionary process. In the course of this process they could have different names and functions, to drive forward the revolution.To put it more simply, the revolution is the work of the masses. This is not simply a

matter of the most recent phase, for without the appropriate people’s organisations the revolution can never be achieved. On every day the revolution takes place, these organi-sational forms must be spread further and oriented towards the masses.The revolutionary movement does not have enough of these organisations whose crea-

tion ýs urgently necessary to push the revolution forward.

THE PEOPLE’S COMMITTEES ARE STREAMS BY WHICH THE PEOPLE FLOW INTO THE RIVER OF REVOLUTION

Every stage of the class struggle has different forms of organisation corresponding to the situation of the masses, the counterrevolution and its different forms of attack.Why does the struggle against the oligarchy today require such committees?

Because the economic policy, the chains of oppression and the terror practised by the oligarchy against the people drive them into poverty and rob them of their basic rights and abilities.Together with the people oppressed by the oligarchy we want to solve the problems of

life based upon the people’s own strength, solidarity and capacity for mutual aid.But this is not the only reason.Because if this was the case it would only have an economic character and could neither

protect against fascist attacks nor deal with the causes of problems.We also want this PEOPLE’S ORGANISATION to build a barricade against the attacks

of the state and the civil fascists and their attempts at intimidation.But this is not the only reason.Such an organisation would be limited by the system and be unsuccessful if it restricted

itself to defence.If must unite the various forms of resistance in different places and at different times,

while it solves the everyday economic problems of the people and organises their de-fence.We want to seek out all places where the people are, all neighbourhoods and villag-

es and build up organisations that go beyond the regional level and combat fascism throughout the country and are capable of spreading the struggle.The committees that are formed will take part in all the people’s problems and experi-

ence the weaknesses the system suffers. They will discover that the system is the cause of their problems and they will follow a revolutionary line. The oligarchy recognises their potential and tries to neutralise it with terror and demagogy. We will for our part try to increase their potential, make them more organised and make them conscious of their strength and power. For this is the only way to direct them against the real target, to turn them towards revolution and build up the strength to seize power.To give the Committees and Councils the necessary conditions and provide them with

an adequate long-term perspective, we must pose the question differently.Why will the failings and inadequacies of the People’s Committees harm the develop-

ment of the revolution?Many reasons can be given for this.The people’s creativity is not harnessed, the revolution is not sufficiently anchored

among the people, the revolutionary units become alienated from the people, obstacles appear in the mass organisations...But these are secondary reasons...The most important is:If for any reason the People’s Committees are dispensed with, if they are not taken se-

riously, then the people will become mere observers of the revolutionary struggle and will expect the revolutionaries to solve their problems. Such an attitude will prevent the people’s participation in the revolutionary struggle. That is what fascism wants.

In almost every section of the people there is deep recognition of revolutionary actions and heroism.The oligarchy uses demagogy at all mass actions today, saying that “among you are trou-

blemakers and provocateurs”. This is done to try and hide from the people the legitimacy of mass actions and to separate the people from the revolutionaries.At present the oligarchy, seeing that the people are more and more discontented, is try-

ing to neutralise the masses with propaganda and oppression and stop the class struggle short of revolutionary struggle. They know that amid growing crisis the masses cannot be tied to the established order and mainstream parties. They still try to shore them up, but their main strategy is still the neutralisation and separation of the revolution from the class struggle.The most powerful answer of the Revolutionary Front and the People’s Front is the Peo-

ple’s Councils and Committees.The stronger they are in organisation and distribution, the less effective the propaganda

of the oligarchy will be and accordingly the less room it will have to manoeuvre.Another reason is that through the lack of forms of organisation which in practical and

theoretical terms tie the Party and Front to the people, the recognition and sympathy which the people have for our heroism and readiness for sacrifice is not being politically organised.Those who are outraged by the state’s cruelty, who are humiliated and long for a more

human life, are deeply moved by every action in the name of people’s justice, every act of resistance to the death. The more our actions and struggle express their anger and demands, the more their respect turns into sympathy. It is a fact that with the struggle we conduct today, with our Death Fast, with our resistance in besieged bases and our guerrilla struggle in the cities and countryside, we have given the people motivation.How can we turn this recognition and sympathy into support?The masses can have respect, trust and sympathy for the revolutionary struggle even

if they are not tied to it organisationally. But strong and more widespread support can be achieved only through such organisational connections. Otherwise there will be no permanent support and the potential will remain potential, the sympathy will remain only sympathy.The People’s Committees and People’s Committees are to turn the trust and sympathy

into support and the potential into a revolutionary, organised force.By spreading this organisation, the people’s potential and sympathy for the revolution

and the Party will be felt and the fascist attacks will be confronted and the potential will be turned into a force that builds the revolution.We are fighting for the people. That is the political expression of our revolutionary mis-

sion. In practice this expresses a large part of our struggle. But what is essential is that the people are united and take part in the struggle. Under present conditions we must fight and have the people fight as well. That is the current task.

WHICH FORM SHOULD THE BROOKS TAKE WHICH FLOW IN THE DIRECTION OF REVOLUTION? THE COMMITTEES AS THE BASIS OF ACHIEVING THE UNITY OF THE PEOPLE

The oligarchy knows the power of armoured vehicles, artillery guns and military air-craft, and in spite of its economic weakness it invests a large part of its budget in such weapons.But the oligarchy also knows the power and the rage of thousands, tens of thousands,

hundreds of thousands and millions of people. So it tries to split the impoverished work-ing people.The splits are between Kurds, Turks and Arabs, Alevis and Sunnis, workers and civil

servants, secular and religious, young and old, even between social clubs based on a particular locality and football clubs. Using terror, threats and official corruption it tries to make sure the workers don’t support strikes in other factories, the millions of inhab-itants of shantytowns do not back the resistance in another shantytown district, and neighbours of an arrested family do not stand up for them.Splits in society cannot be avoided. But they are between exploiters and the exploited,

the oppressors and the oppressed, fascists and anti-fascists.Working people, who number among them Turks, Kurds, Cherkess, Laz, Alevis, Sunnis,

workers, civil servants, peasants, small businessmen and the unemployed, their football clubs supporting Besiktas, Galatasaray, Fenerbahce and Trabzon, their young and old, women and men are all on the same side in this split. They form a complete unit. Our national, religious, professional and cultural identity are only meaningful if we are on the same side.Everything else supports the divide-and-rule policy of the oligarchy.So the people’s councils and committees will unite individuals against the oligarchy so

they become strong and develop into a force that can challenge the enemy in an organ-ised fashion.The committees and councils already express, in the places were they have been set up,

the solidarity of the working people and consciousness of unity in the common struggle. Unity and solidarity are values the people know, and which they long for when oppres-sion rears its head.Above all, the committees will give the people the possibility of realising this.The aim of creating these committees and councils must be the unity of all the forces

of the working class and of organised and unorganised anti-fascist sections of society.So it is important that people who say “I am an organisation” and only want decisions

that make them happy are not allowed room for manoeuvre, but also that decisions are not permitted which work against the unity and participation of the people.Only under conditions of anti-fascism and willingness to adapt oneself to the decisions

of the councils can different nationalities, ideas and beliefs, professional groups and even regional and sports associations find their place in the committees.

Different ideas and organisations should take part in the councils and committees with the aim of achieving unity and a common struggle, as long as they do not abuse it.In the beginning, nothing will be simple.In order to achieve more exact understanding, even more developed unity and an even

stronger struggle, it must be possible to unite on the basis of common aims and carry out discussions which pave the way we want to go. Of course, good-for-nothings in these alliances will consciously try to sabotage unity. There will also be people who, motivated by careerism, will try to promote special groups. Other problems will arise because of the distorted morals and culture arising from capitalism.We must predict that all this will arise and prepare for the need to struggle against all

these negative phenomena.We may not permit ourselves to fear bad experiences. Negative things are the product of

bourgeois ideology. Revolutionary understanding and socialism are sufficiently superior to overcome them.In this sense the committees and councils are schools in which the popular masses are

educated to tell the difference between the true and false in life. Even if problems arise we must persist with achieving the people’s organisation and education.Then these disturbing thoughts and false conceptions will be driven out by correct

thoughts and practices.The people will learn with the help of the councils and committees how to stand up for

their own rights, how to defend their life and honour, and later will accept that an attack in an area, village or workplace against an individual is an attack directed at the people themselves. Then they will see, experience and comprehend the necessity of acting in a united manner against attacks on a city quarter.This development and this experience will present for the popular masses a process in

which they become conscious of their power, they get to know the policies of the fascist government against the people and to know the fascist structure, and they recognise what has to be done.The development of this consciousness and of organisations in the localities will pro-

ceed in the cities and regions. While centralised, decentralised and mixed people’s or-ganisations arise, the people will draw away from the influence and demagogy of the parties which support the system and will begin to orient themselves against fascism. Of course, despite the committees’ autonomy and their own fund of experience, we cannot leave them to themselves. As long as we are the vanguard of the people and show the people the right way, the people will learn the truth and understand what has to be done, only on the basis of the experience that has already been accumulated.When the popular masses comprehend the jointly organised struggle and then achieve

successes with this understanding, the unity, solidarity and extent of the struggle will broaden. Among the people we count the workers, civil servants, peasant men and women, small businessmen, shantytown inhabitants, workers in crafts and so on, and those who understand the importance of organisation, mutual protection, solidarity and

a common struggle. Great movements of the people, great revolutionary events cannot come about without people’s organisation and people’s unity. In the present struggle of working people the conditions for achieving these aims can be found. The step towards realising them is not a difficult one to take.

THE COMMITTEES AS A MEANS OF CREATING THE UNI-TY OF ALL THE LEFT’S ANTI-FASCIST FORCES

The task of our Party and Front is to create the unity of all anti-fascist organisations, groups and trustworthy, consistent, revolutionary and democratic people. So it is a duty and necessity under current conditions to organise the defence of the people and extend the struggle.In this regard, the people’s committees are the soil in whch to grow the unity of anti-fas-

cist forces. The primary aim of the committees is the unity of the people, the unity of the left must serve this aim. The committees are the organisation of broad anti-fascist, anti-imperialist and progressive people’s groups. They are not organisations which are resticted to being meeting places for representatives of the left. If that was the case, the people and the unorganised masses would only become bystanders in the committees. The unity of the left, which up to now could never really be brought about and whose elements engaged in constant competition with each other, is quite slight, but it is nev-ertheless very important to put an end to bad impressions, demoralisation and mistrust the people may feel.Despite its “literature on the masses”, the left created only groups who lacked self-con-

fidence in transmitting the correct viewpoints to the masss in the common struggle. These groups fled from alliances among the people, misled those parts of the masses over which they had any control and walled them off from other people. Thus they pre-vented the struggle from developing and ensured that the right way could not be found.This left does not trust the masses, despite its literature on the subject. They won’t abide

by decisions of committees founded by the people so as to prevent the masses from recognising the mistakes made by the left. They invent excuses to conceal the truth, and they even try to use blockades to prevent revolutionary thought and revolutionary practice.We must insist that the left takes its place inside the people’s committees so the people

can see which of them will do something, the ways they want the popular masses to struggle and how the different models can be realised in practice. The opportunist left, out of habit and lack of self-confidence, will not take up places in the committees which do not follow their views and whose decisions they cannot influence. Instead, they think of founding committees, people’s organisations, organisations in which the most varied groups and politics can be found but which lack the participation of the broad masses. But these kinds of organisations are not people’s commitees but simply organisations of the left.Of course, we consider persons in organisations to belong to the people, and the people

will also want to elect such people as their representatives. We must be able to guarantee this. It is natural that every organisation will try to transmit the opinions it considers correct to the people and choose representatives to do this.In general the left will only take part in such gatherings where they have freedom to

make propaganda. However, despite this freedom, when they sense they cannot have sufficient influence over the decision-making mechanisms, they will find some reason or other to leave the committees and destroy them. But for us this is no obstacle to the left taking part in them.It is a revolutionary task to correct the mistakes of the left and if this is not possible,

to keep them away from the people. The people will not understand the facts and the different arguments put forward by the left if they do not observe and experience them themselves.The organisation of the people must be the chief aim, so that the problems which arise

from left groups can be solved and larger organisations can be created. If we do not build up the people, if we do not explain to them why the people’s committees have to be formed and what their function is, the people’s committees will not be able to carry out their task properly and neither will the disruptive, overly competitive and sectarian behaviour of the left in such organisations disappear. The people and the left groups must not be opposed to each other, the left and the unity and organisation of the people must supplement each other.Left groups flee from organising the people’s committees. While many left organisations

on the one hand talk a lot about organising the people, of coordinating them, of unity and the readiness to rise up, on the other hand they express their competitive, suspi-cious, tribal and sectarian mentality in their rejection of our call for an analysis of the Gazi Uprising.This mentality has the result that in areas with a lot of revolutionary potential the organ-

isation of the people is proceeding too slowly. Only the enemy is helped by this. We must strive to build people’s committees from all anti-fascist forces. But if left groups continue to stay away from these organisations, we will not hesitate to draw this to the attention of the masses. It will not prevent us from building up the people’s organisations. Through the committees the creatviity and abilities of the people will be won for revolution.Today, almost every political group, whatever different levels they operate on and what-

ever their needs are, are forced to fight concepts like “There isn’t any”, “It won’t work”, and “the possibilities are lacking”.A reason for that is that they have not worked hard enough to create organisations.With the committees and through the committees with the broad masses of working

people, by connecting the people and the revolution together, we will turn concepts like “There isn’t any”, and “it won’t work” into “There is”, and “it’ll work”. The people will not hold back from offering us what they have at their disposal, we only have to know what we want and how to demand it. Everything we need for resisting fascism and spreading our struggle can be achieved with committees of poor working people.

Winning what working people can offer is not simply meant in a material sense.The people themselves are the greatest force and with the creativity of the people any

problem can be resolved. Through their living conditions the people have learned to think in a practical manner and to find solutions that inventors would envy. With their creativeness they can add power to the struggle, whether it is legal or illegal, agitational, propagandist, organisational, a matter of spreading information, to do with weapons or other things. This support and creativity will not arise of its own accord. We must make the people aware of problems and needs. Those who don’t know the problem cannot find a solution. The committees will leave the struggle and the organisational work regarding all economic, military and technical problems to the people.We say we must be the teachers and pupils of the masses. Without such organisations

this is not possible. In the people’s councils and committees teaching and learning will be accomplished. We must not make ourselves the main objects of attention but must strive to enrich our own theoretical and practical knowledge and our consciousness with the values, skills, experience, feelings and instincts of the people. In the people’s committes and councils we will teach and also learn. For the many revolutionaries who come from a petty bourgeois background, these organisations will serve as a barricade against po-tential alienation from the people and will also serve as a means of access to the people. In the committees the people will learn self-confidence and how to administer them-selves: the best school for the masses is the struggle itself, because they learn best from their own experiences. Of their own accord and their own free will, working people will learn, from countless forms of protest and methods of waging the struggle as part of its resistance, to recognise its own strength and understand how to win and what this entails. Through these expereinces it will gain the strength for further steps forward. The meaning of Yenibosna and Gazi is clear here.The more the people’s committees, people’s councils the committees for struggling

against fascism and defence committees become established, the more consciousness working people will have of their own power. The self-confidence which the system takes from the people, both individually and collectively, will be regained through the strug-gle.A people can only embark on the road to power through consciousness of its own

strength, with a vanguard party and with a front which it unconditionally trusts. With this aim all developments, great and small, all the organisations of the petty bourgeoisie, whether small or broad-based, must be covered by us. The people’s committees are or-ganisations that must be formed with the perspective of seizing power.Working people in the councils, committees and through their own practice will pick

up experience in running their own affairs. The more the committees and the organisa-tions subordinate to them develop, the greater this experience will become. It must not be forgotten that the possibilities for running their own affairs are restricted by the fact that these organisations were founded and work under fascist conditions.The essential thing in regard to learning self-management is to convince millions of

working people that they do not need the help of bourgeois politicians, institutions,

bureaucrats and diplomats.All military, political and economic organisations of the Party-Front take as gospel that

the people need no bourgeois institutions and government laws, but rather they need love for their land and people, knowledge, revolutionary initiative and decisiveness, cad-re capable of leadership and an organisation. Bourgeois culture, which has established itself in the minds of the people as a distorted form of authority, will be driven out by revolutionary authority.A revolutionary party which has the people learn to administer themselves but then

does not create the necessary structures will not be able to push the revolutionary pro-cess forward, even if it gains power. The people’s committees and councils are in this manner building-blocks of revolutionary authority, the expression of a Party-Front which leads the revolution and millions of people.

WE MUST ORGANISE THE COMMITTEES ACCORDING TO CUR-RENT CONDITIONS, BEARING IN MIND PAST EXPERIENCES.

The setting up of people’s committees is not a new suggestion, they have already had a place in our history of struggle.First of all they existed before the military coup of September 12, 1980 in areas where

anti-fascists were in the majority. In villages and small towns the committees took on tasks such as organising defences against fascist attacks, solving problems like obtaining water and repairing roads, and founding cooperatives.September 12 destroyed this process along with these committees. But in places where

there had been such organisations, certain values remained, such as consciousness of how to set up forms of popular organisation, and patterns of organised behaviour.Cayan District (called Nurtepe by the state) which was founded by people’s committees

under the leadership of Devrimci Sol, is an important example of this. One of the most important results is that the people in Cayan District have preserved their revolutionary potential and support the struggle that is developing, in spite of the massive repression and terror carried out by fascism and the junta. There are also other results we should examine more closely:The plan of the area, the houses, the parking places, which factories are to be founded

and where, who builds a house and who does not, what rules have to be followed by those who build houses and the punishments if they are broken, all these were decided on by the committees, under the leadership of the revolutionary movement.In this framework, decisions were taken that cafes which were a threat to youth and any

form of bar were forbidden. The people’s committees beat off attacks by the fascist mafia state, as well as some left organisations which were against the building of gecekondus (shantytowns) and opposed people’s unity.They stood up for the people’s work and life. Until the 1980 coup, all these decisions

were strictly and closely controlled. Even after the organisations of the revolutionary movement had been destroyed, no workplaces were permitted which were a danger to

youth. No force existed preventing such places from coming into existence, yet nonethe-less the authority of the revolutionaries and the people still held sway...In the middle of the district, the people’s committee had reserved a large space for a

park. Neither the mafia specialising in selling real estate nor the city council were able to encroach on this land, even during the disorganised years under the junta. In 1992, exactly 12 years after the coup, this square was turned into a park by working people who were once again under Devrimci Sol leadership, and the park was named after Huseyin Aksoy, a Devrimci Sol martyr.These two small examples show the persistence of the revolutionary tradition, authority

and organisational forms created by the people’s committees. The examples are small but they provide major lessons.In 1990 and 1991 the most varied committees were set up - to solve water and transport

problems, to organise boycotts in the universities and strikes in the factories, for collec-tive bargaining, to fight privatisation and oppose the imperialist war in the Gulf. More experience was gained from these committees.Of course every committee had different successes and made different mistakes, and

analysing them would be an entire study by itself. But they all had common factors: the most important is that these forms of organisation were not restricted to people who were organised. They had success when they reached sections of the people who are sen-sitive and ready to wage a struggle. However, when they did not go beyond their bound-aries they could not spread the organisation further. They could not reach new sections of the people, could only resolve everyday tasks and soon collapsed. The committees for November 6 (university boycotts) are positive examples because they set in motion and attracted broad sections of the people.Committees against privatisation were also set up at the right time, formed correctly

and in many factories got a lot of support. There are examples from the most varied places where previously there was no revolutionary workers’ movement in existence, in which bodies similar to councils were set up. However, they had no stable coordination, no centralisation and they were not persistent enough. So they were not up to meeting the needs of the working class.However, our subject here is not the economic organisations, cultural associations and

cooperatives, but organisations that are a part of the people’s struggle. An example of these are the committees of defence and struggle against fascism and the people’s com-mittees, which jontly see to it that the whole people take part in the fight against fascism, the solution of problems of life and the organisation of defences. This involves building a people’s organisation for struggle which has to be formed in a serious and responsi-ble manner. In doing this we might show persistence in fighting against disruptions, we must win the people with our truth and our practical behaviour, we must raise the banner of the Party-Front even higher and build up revolutionary authority. Of course other organisations will make the same claim for themselves, but the true and the false will show itself in the struggle.Nobody has the right to use the Party-Front’s authority falsely. The Party-Front gains its

authority from its correct politics, its correct decisions, from the struggle and from the organisation of the people. Its politics are the result of the exemplary nature of its cadres and fighters. We do not see authority as an end in itself. Only people of the Party-Front who have directed their lives and behaviour according to the struggle can use this au-thority. As a result the people can be won and its organisation strengthened.Inside the people’s councils and committees we will lead an ideological struggle against

bourgeois ideology, opportunism and revisionism and try to reduce the influence of op-portunism and revisionism. To achieve this and to make legitimate the front’s authority, the people must be educated and organised. Nobody should think that in weighing up intentions and functions we assign a special, exaggerated role to the committees. The aspects we have cited are different sides of an aim. The longer the committees exist, the more they become a part of the people’s resistance and everyday life, the bigger they will become. In the course of this development they will take on new and different functions and strengthen themselves even more.It should not be forgotten that the mass organisations and the success of their cam-

paigns will not be of lasting character and lead to victory if the development of the com-mittees, strongholds and guerrilla organisations of the Party is not secured. So while all the tasks we have listed above are being fulfilled, we must also ensure that the founding of Party organisations is not neglected. Organising the people must strengthen the Party organisations.Today we must build people’s committees, people’s councils and committees of defence

and struggle against fascism to strengthen the resistance to economic, cultural and po-litical terror and fascist attacks, to spread the struggle and bring about people’s power.The more there are who are new and from different sections of the people who are given

the opportunity to fulfil their ideas and creativity, the more people will see the organi-sation as their own.In the past, this form of organisation enriched popular culture and gave us experience

of working with the masses. A culture of organisation was admittedly propagated well enough, but the committees, which did not keep in mind the reason they were founded (revolution) were unable to create anything new for the long term.Compared with the period before 1980, the people’s councils and committees must

overcome the amateurishness, the lack of trust in the people and the narrow horizons they showed back then. They must make use of the broad, dynamic masses, the anger and richness of the people, and their organisational forms and functions must be clearly obvious.

THE ORGANISATION OF THE PEOPLE’S COM-MITTEES AND THEIR FUNCTION

The first problem is not forming the councils and committees but determining their function. The form of the committees will only be determined with the requirements they are to fulfil being first determined.

In the beginning we must be bold enough to approach the people and call upon the broad masses to engage with the committees and councils. Just as we are sure we correct-ly recognise the nature of the people and the struggle, we can also be sure that the people will greet our appeal in a positive manner. By making our appeal we will strengthen the clarity and certainty of the people. The fear, doubt and demagogy the oligarchy seeks to use against us and which it has planted in the minds of the people must be removed by our certainty and openness.The most important criterion for determining the forms of organisation of the commit-

tees is that they support revolutionaries in the struggle against fascism, are elected by the people and their activities have the people’s stamp of approval.So in organising the committees and councils we must make sure they are connected to

each other. We must achieve this in a way that corresponds to regional needs and con-ditions and make efforts to do this even if the conditions for it are unfavourable. If we can do this, the committees will derive their strength and legitimacy from the people’s councils.The people’councils must follow the objective of representing all the people who live in

a particular area. This is not always possible in practice, of course. All residential areas and districtives have their peculiarities. The organisation of the councils must take these into account, as well as the methods used by the counterrevolutionaries.The people’s councils, their work and functions are not restricted to city districts. By

organising committees in the villages, in the working class, among civil servants, youth, small businessmen... among the whole people participation in the struggle must be achieved. What is important is not the name of an organisation, but its methods of work and functioning.To found people’s committees and councils, first of all anti-fascist forces and progressive

people must be won to working in the committees. Even if our attempts to bring about unity with these forces do not succeed, we must take it seriously and ensure that the people see the efforts we make. Problems must be explained to the broad masses.We must use all opportunities and our entire creativity to organise the largest possible

gatherings of people, so as to explain the necessity and possibility of getting organised and to create conditions for the people to elect their representatives.Depending on local peculiarities, the assemblies to elect committees and councils could

consist of many people or a few. The form of the committees is not important. What is important is that only people are elected who have the legitimacy of the people, and that the people determine their politics.If we do not develop popular participation and ensure that this lasts, the committees wil

sooner or later degenerate into committees consisting of different political groups and after conflicts between them will fall apart or fail to function. To secure the committees’ permanence, they must be built on the basis of the people. In the people’s everyday life itself there are countless opportunities to hold meetings which are not under the control of the oligarchy.

Work in committees in areas with great anti-fascist potential is different from work in areas where fascists, democrats and revolutionaries are mixed and fascist organisations dominate. While in the first case, council and committee meetings take place with heavy participation from the masses, in the second case the meetings take place on a small scale and under secret conditions.Nevertheless, in these areas we cannot dispense with organisation or wait for more fa-

vourable times. Waiting will not improve the situation. So we must first work in the peo-ple’s committees with the participation of members of the Party and Front together with sympathisers and the revolutionary and democratic groups that can be reached. How we work is determined by the characteristics of the people’s committee, the ground for the committee to be laid on the basis of the amount of access to the people.

THE SECOND PROBLEM IS STABILISING THE COMMITTEES

The decisions of the committees must reflect the certainty and openness referred to earlier. So that the initiatives of the committees are visible to the people and the commit-tees continue to exist, it is important for their decisions to be carried out. It may be that the decisions are not always the best and may even be mistakes. We must abide by these decisions unless they are directed against the people and the revolution. It may also be that decisions of committees are rejected by left groups out of a thirst to compete with us. This would mean that they do not respect the function and importance of the peo-ple’s organisation and see them as temporary. Without dispensing with criticism, patient explanation, teaching through practical work and attempts at persuasion, we must take care to develop the commitees’ own dynamic.The committees must not be suffocated in discussion about statutes and work methods,

even if some on the left are very interested in that. They must themselves find ways of working that reflect general rules and traditions.The committees are neither sub-organisations of any group which can try to strengthen

itself through them, nor are they toys in the hands of some people.What we intend with the people’s committees and councils is obvious: to secure the

participation of the people, to organise the people, to have them struggle and win for the revolution. We will stand in the way of anything which prevents us from fulfilling our intentions, for whatever reason and without caring in whose name it is done.

THE PEOPLE’S COMMITTEES AND PEOPLE’S COUNCILS

Kurtulus no. 17, June 3, 1995M. Ali Baran

For years one of our themes has been organising the people, who are victims of attacks, massacres and torture and who must resolve the problems of everyday life. This work of organisation has caused us to consider it necessary to form peo-

ple’s committees, as we explain in the text. Prior to the September 12, 1980 military coup, when the fascists had considerable potential and their attacks were increasing in number, such committees came into being to a certain extent, but after the coup they disappeared as a result of pressure from the military regime.Through these committees the people had formed a structure which they could use

to solve their own problems by using their own strength. This is the basic function of a people’s committee. This kind of organisation is indispensable to ensure that wherever the people are, their problems can be solved. With the passage of time, these commit-tees can form the basis of a system of self-government. If this is not done, if this is not worked for, the people will form the opinion that they are to be mere bystanders in the revolutionary struggle and will expect the revolutionaries to solve their problems. Such an outlook would mean that the people do not take part in the revolutionary struggle, and they will see their problems being resolved by forces other than themselves. This is a situation the fascists could exploit for their own purposes. This could create a base for fascism, could split the people from the revolution and grant the fascists the possibility of using demagogy and pressure to neutralise the democratic and revolutionary forces among the people and, in addition, succeed in implementing policies which draw the people into the fascist and national chauvinist camp.The experiences of the people’s committees in the period before the September 12, 1980

coup were very wide-ranging and these committees scored important successes. These committees were formed in order to develop and implement concrete solutions to prob-lems regarding security, accommodation, roads, drinking water, electricity and so on. They created conditions for politicising the people. In the areas where these committees were formed and carried out concrete work, they managed to ward off attacks by the fascists and successfully resolved many problems. The masses saw their own strength and accordingly became stronger. For example, the area now known as Nurtepe was set up under the leadership of the Revolutionary Left. Cases where the people laid claim to land, the fight against the mafia and the state, the drawing up of plans to build apart-ments as well as issues concerning to whom and how the apartments were to be given, all this was planned down to the smallest detail and carried out at all stages with the people’s participation, will and powers of decision-making. We can say, with pride, that the founding of Nurtepe was a unique example among our country’s shantytowns of how the revolutionary leadership and the people’s committees had the initiative, and the various groups in society which were hungry for profit were not given a chance. In order

to destroy the area which was being administered by the people, the city administration, official state structures, the mafia and also some left groups, who thought only of their own needs, attacked the people on several occasions, sometimes using weapons, and sometimes resorting to ideological and psychological means. Each time they came up against the people’s barricades and they were warded off. Nurtepe received the name Cayan district from the local people and those in the surrounding area (in honour of Mahir Cayan, a revolutionary whose memory lived on in the people’s consciousness). This was so normal that everyone, the drivers of small buses, children and elderly peo-ple, spoke of Cayan district as though it had had no other name. However, this develop-ment was partly interrupted by the September 12, 1980 military coup. The morale of the people suffered. Those who were greedy for profit used their opportunities and became active. In Istanbul’s First of May district, in many towns and villages in Anatolia, every-where that revolutionaries had resisted the fascists, the organisation and involvement of the people led to the blunting of fascism’s attacks and the failure of the oligarchy’s plans. The oligarchy was forced to develop new tactics.1

As in the years before September 12, 1980, the task of organising the different classes and layers in society concerns us now, as does the task of fighting off fascist attacks and solving the problems posed by the revolutionary struggle. Since this task had not been carried out before September 12, 1980, the people’s potential was shattered. No uni-ty could be displayed against the enemy, because the people could not be united. Our Achilles’ heel was exploited by fascism. Its attacks weakened organisations individually and used force to make the people immobile and to confront them with the problems of survival, to make them mere onlookers in relation to the revolutionary struggle, and even tried to mobilise them against that struggle. Although the oligarchy did not fully succeed in realising its aims despite its many ways of applying pressure, it managed to create a situation in which it could implement its policies for years without being dis-turbed.Before September 12, 1980 the different organisations which called themselves Marx-

ist-Leninist and communist paid no attention to the policies of fascism. They closed their eyes to reality, they waged a struggle in which they paid no heed to anything other than themselves. In hindsight they failed to realise why they did not analyse this period correctly. They were brought to a standstill by the system and made compromises with it, today they have undertaken to support the oligarchy by erecting barricades against the revolutionaries. The answer to the question “why?” is easy to see: because they feel no responsibility in relation to the popular masses and the revolution, and have taken on the attitudes of petty bourgeois property-owners, attitudes which push people towards both consensus and competitiveness directed towards the world around them; they are 1The First of May district was also one of the organised districts. However, the found-

ing and development of organisation there proceeded in a slightly different and more complicated way. In this context it is merely important to note that the people were organised.

conceited and instead of gains for the revolution, think in terms of gains for themselves.At present, the consequences of the September 12 coup have been overcome. The pop-

ular masses are showing their anger against the oppression and exploitation of the past few years through actions involving thousands of people, and this is frightening the oligarchy. What we could not bring about before September 12, 1980, must be brought about now. All political organisations and groupings in our country which claim to be against fascism and for the revolution, are duty-bound to carry out this task. Those who do not see this as their top priority task and who do not work for common goals, are in reality no more than a part of the petty bourgeoisie, who strive for more proper-ty for themselves and are not a part of the revolution. Major popular movements and major revolutionary acts are not possible without setting up people’s organisations and associations. The united revolutionary struggle of the people will not yield any results if unification is simply talked about but organisations are not built up in practice. This must be insisted upon. Dangers which are already clearly recognisable today are, that competition between revolutionary organisations will develop, attempts to derive small advantages from minor occurrences will arise, and developments similar to those that happened before September 12, 1980 will be repeated, when hundreds of revolutionary democrats were massacred by the left. It is no secret what would happen if the coarse and primitive threats that can be found in newspapers today were to be responded to in the same manner. Just so we are not misunderstood, we are not saying to anyone, “Don’t conduct an ideological struggle, don’t look at the mistakes of others, let’s all think and act the same way.” We do not imagine naively and simplistically that our differences can be removed. We are of the view that ideological disputes as the result of the conflict be-tween “the correct” and “the incorrect” will always be carried on, and “the correct” will triumph in the end.The various “unions of left forces” which come to light, and the various “appeals to form

fronts” which are announced accompanied by splendid programmes by various leftists and petty bourgeois nationalists at various times, disappear again almost before they have been announced to the public. This has degenerated into a game. Whoever wants to continue this game will reap the same harvest. Those who take part in the revolutionary struggle and feel the effects of the activities of the contra-guerrillas, all those who love their country and people, will not chase after dreams but will pursue what can be real-ised, namely, that what must be done must be placed firmly on the agenda, stubbornly insisted upon and every effort made to put it into practice.What is to be done? What must be done is for the obstacles which currently exist in the

struggle to be recognised and for it to be known with what means and how these can be overcome, and then to go to work accordingly. The people’s movement is developing amid increasing radicalism. So our primary task is to spread the people’s movement throughout the entire country, to develop it and channel it in the direction of political supremacy. How will we carry out this task?We cannot do it while many leftist political organisations split hairs, engage in competi-

tiveness and keep trying to gain small advantages for themselves. This tendency will lead to splits and ineffectiveness if it goes on, and the current high morale and enthusiasm

of the people will suffer a setback. The oligarchy will exploit this and look for ways to appease the people and engage in provocations against us.We must learn how to take small steps before we attempt bigger ones. Today these steps

can be taken in areas where there is considerable potential in the people as a conse-quence of fascist attacks. Organisations must be developed to prevent the great potential of the people from subsiding, with the result that the great dynamic popular uprisings, which point the way to revolution, do not develop.In particular, the multi-faceted attacks by the state must be prevented and the solution

of problems in the everyday life of the people in the localities must be organised.The people’s committees will play a basic role in achieving these aims. We must set these

committees up in the shantytown areas of cities, in the cities, in the provincial towns, in the villages, in short, everywhere. It is obvious that in areas where fascist attacks have de-clined in strength and in which the fascists are unable to move freely, these committees must not be organised in the same way as in areas where fascist assaults are effective and revolutionary potential has not developed. The committees will take on different forms depending on the characteristics of the area where they are set up.The people’s committees will be confronted with many tasks in their aim of fighting

fascism. They must resolve problems connected with living and with waging war under siege from fascism. Since these are the problems of the people, these organisations can-not function without the participation of the people, and no proper decisions can be tak-en. So the people’s committees must have methods of work and organisation which are supported and authorised by the people and whose decisions are accepted by the people.Above all, the people’s committees can, in areas where they gain their authority from

people’s councils, in which the people’s struggle has made progress and/or in areas where revolutionary consciousness is high, be formed democratically and achieve results, in that popular participation has been guaranteed. This path, this method of organisation, naturally cannot survive on its own. A precondition is that parallel to these organisa-tions, revolutionary organisations take on more highly developed forms and the revo-lutionary struggle must be further developed. However, we cannot achieve the desired result if we confine ourselves to fulfilling the preconditions. To achieve what we desire, we must take small steps in the initial phase and then go through complicated, even diffi-cult and painful intermediate stages. We are not dreamers. The negative effects of recent years will not disappear immediately. The ideology of the bourgeoisie and its saboteurs will appear in various forms and try to throttle our struggle. Despite all obstacles set in our path by the enemy, now and in the future, we must insist on pursuing the war in a persistent and radical manner.The people’s committees and the people’s councils are, at the same time, concrete bodies

in which left organisations, groups and all those who are against fascism can unite. If efforts are not made on behalf of these organisations, the people’s organisations will not be stable. Nobody should try to take over the leadership role and claim that without him, nothing can happen. He who trusts himself, he who trusts in the rightness of his ideas and deeds, should prove this rightness in the struggle to the people, by waging the strug-

gle collectively through an organisation and through a collective struggle. All assertions that do not contain this, do not contain the truth. Can the claims of a political organi-sation to head all the people’s organisations in the country, correspond to the truth, if under legal conditions it can only muster a few hundred people? Of course these claims cannot be taken seriously. The people’s organisations and their activities will in time be able to lay bare, halt and place such highfalutin’ claims in their proper light.THE PEOPLE’S COMMITTEES, THE PEOPLE’S COUNCILS THE COMMITTEES

OF RESISTANCE AND THE FIGHT AGAINST FASCISM will, under current condi-tions, be the most important instrument for developing the organisation of the people, uniting the people and developing and spreading the struggle. All Marxist-Leninists, revolutionaries, progressives and anti-fascist forces must carry out this task and mobi-lise...We must achieve this...

THE FOUNDING OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL IN GAZI AND THE ZÜBEYDE HANIM NEIGHBOURHOOD

On March 12, 1995, Gazi became a city neighbourhood in Istanbul which ap-peared on the front pages of all of Turkey’s newspapers, as a result of a massacre carried out there by contra-guerrillas and the popular uprising which was the

response.Today, the people of Gazi have the honour of having taken the people’s initiative which

bears the name of People’s Council. Despite certain difficulties at the beginning which were overcome, the People’s Councils found means to make it possible for the people to solve their own problems and organise the future of the neighbourhood themselves. Only a united and joint exercise of power can put up resistance to the enemy. The Gazi People’s Council provides us with such an example.

WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBOURHOOD IS GAZI?

It is a neighbourhood one will hear a lot about. It is a neighbourhood in which the first People’s Council was founded, and accordingly it is setting the agenda. Gazi Neigh-bourhood began to be settled in as a gecekondu (slum area) back in 1970, next to the Alibeyköy dam. In the years when people were fleeing from the land in Anatolia, when poor peasants were heading towards the cities to scrape a living, Gazi grew steadily. From various provinces, from Tokat, Dersum, Erzurum and so on, Kurds, Laz, Alevis and Sunnis settled in Gazi. In Gazi, just as the number of people grew, so did the prob-lems of working people. The state left people there to sink or swim rather than helping them to solve their problems. With the help of people from revolutionary organisations, organised crime, which put up the price of land and then sold it several times over, was driven out of Gazi. From then on trust between the people and the revolutionaries grew. From 1970 to 1980, Gazi, which was located next to a dam, was without electrical power, and until 1987 it did not have a water supply.Until 1988, no city buses came to the area. It was the people of Gazi who lost their

children to torture in the police stations, and they were also the target of bands of civil fascists as well as of police terror.Everything they experienced taught them that they must become organised. With this

knowledge and this anger they went onto the streets to put up barricades following the contra-guerrilla attack. They demanded a reckoning from fascism. After the March 12, 1995 massacre the state has still been thirsting for revenge. That is why it is still seeking to terrorise the people of Gazi.Using the lack of organisation among the people, the state began operations on a daily

basis. Investigative detention, torture and imprisonment were the order of the day. In addition, the problems of water and electricty supply remained.The people realised that it was impossible to solve problems without organisation. In

this way, the discussion about the People’s Councils arose. Appeals were made to unite

the old, the young, Kurds, Turks, Alevis and Sunnis under one roof.Every phase, every article, every statute was discussed in detail, and with broad par-

ticipation from the people the People’s Council for Gazi and the neaighbouring area of Zübeyde Hanim was formed. The people’s will and initiative found detailed expression. In general the tasks of the People’s Councils are to work on the problems and concerns of the people, whether of a political, economic or social nature. The People’s Council is the basic organisation for the various compartments of life. The People’s Council of Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim’s foundation was formally announced after three months of meetings, and was marked by a circumcision ceremony.The People’s Council, which tries to solve the problems of the people jointly and under

one roof, which pursues the aim of uniting the people who streamed out onto the streets on March 12, 1995, so they can pursue the struggle with the Turkish state, was warmly welcomed by the people of Gazi. More than 1,000 people were present in the hall for the ceremony, which was full to overflowing.Many initatives, institutions, intellectuals and artists declared their support. At noon on

October 5, 1996, the celebrations started in the Sultan ceremonial hall. Then the children were circumcised. An imam from the mosque and an Alevi dede both read a prayer.The prayer by both representatives of the different branches of Islam (Sunnis and Alevis)

was a declaration of the unity and togetherness of the people of Gazi, who had collected together under the roof of the People’s Council. After the circumcision ritual, carried out by volunteers from the health body SES, celebrations began amid scenes of enthusiasm.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL

Ali Ekber Emre, who made the speech opening the People’s Council of Gazi and Zübey-de Hanim, declared the reason for setting up the People’s Council. He indicated that for some considerable time the state had not concerned itself with the problems of Gazi, and had left the people to face their infrastructure problems alone.Since March 12, 1995, according to A.E. Emre, the state has regarded Gazi as an enemy.A symbolic trial has been opened against the police who shared responsibility for these

cruelties on that and following days. The trial has been taking place thousands of kilo-metres from Istanbul. The problems of Gazi remain unresolved, while the state’s terror has been stepped up.“We have learned a lesson from everything that has happened. We have seen that as

individuals we can do nothing. We have seen that we can only achieve anything with united forces acting in solidarity. Solidarity is the answer to those would divide and rule us,” A.E. Emre said in his speech. He added that they had started their work before the founding of the People’s Council and had carried out some actions.As an example, he mentioned the free medical check-ups given to people in Gazi by

medical specialists. They gave check-ups on three occasions and donated 300 million liras’ worth of medicines to the population there.After that, they began dealing with the electricity problem. After they had tackled the

causes, a committee was formed consisting of local shopkeepers. This committee has already started work. At the same time a sgnature campaign was started, which had already received more than a thousand signatures.All this, A.E. Emre said, should spur us on to do more and give us more courage.He ended his speech with the sentence,”We declare that from this point on the people of

Gazi are indivisible, whether from the point of view of politics, religion or ethics.”The people of Gazi have built their People’s Council on the basis of unity and together-

ness... This People’s Council is the common will of our neighbourhood.”It was announced that the People’s Council at the time consisted of 130 people, who

were shopkeepers, housewives, pensioners, workers and young people.

THE INAUGURATION OF THE PEOPLE’S COUN-CIL ATTRACTED A LOT OF ATTENTION.

Many musicians and music groups took part in the inaugural ceremony, and their songs filled the people with enthusiasm. Representatives of various parties such as the CHP (Republican People’s Party, one of the main social democratic parties in Turkey), HA-DEP (People’s Democracy Party, a legal pro-Kurdish party much harassed by the state) and the ÖDP (Freedom and Solidarity Party, a left-reformist party), leading members of various organisations in Gaziosmanpasa District and of many other associations and trade unions took part. Besides the district chairman of Gazi and other leading people from the area, the following people also took part: the director of the Genel-Is trade union, Erol Ekici; the chairman of the second region of the Genel-Is union in Istanbul, Mehmet Karagöz,; the third chairman of the Genel-Is, Mersim Güvenlik; the depart-ment head in Thrace (European Turkey) Arif Kutan, the sixth chairman, Hasan Kaya; the CHP member of parliament, Ercan Karakas, the chairman of the CHD (Contempo-rary Jurists’ Association), Murat Inceoglu, the chairmen of the Cemevler (Alevi com-munity centres), the chairman of the Migrants’ Association, Sabahatin Celik, lawyers of the People’s Law Bureau and the speaker of the Platform for Rights and Freedom, Oya Gökbayrak.Moreover, there were solidarity messages from various organisations and associa-

tions and from the socialist newspapers Kurtulus, Atilim, Özgür Gelecek, Isci Hareketi, Kervan and Partizan Sesi.At the celebration the programme was livened up by the childrens’ chorus of the Meso-

potamian Culture Centre, the Gaziosmanpasa people’s dance group affiliated to HADEP, and the music groups Özgürlük Türküsü and Grup Yorum. The messages from Nurtepe and Alibeyköy (other Istanbul neighbourhoods) were very expressive and received the most applause. The celebration lasted until 1800. It ended with the wish being expressed that the enthusiasm of the People’s Council would be transmitted to all working-class areas.

WHY A PEOPLE’S COUNCIL?

On March 12, 1995, civil fascists shot up some cafes in Gazi in order to sow conflict and hostility among the various nationalities and religious confessions who live there. While the people expected justice, the murderers were allowed to escape. Then the people gave expression to their growing anger in protests that lasted for days. The people who want-ed justice were fired on by the police and a number were killed while hundreds were injured, arrested and tortured.After this attack, no hostility arose between Alevis and Sunnis or between Turks and

Kurds. Anger was instead expressed against those responsible for the killings. But since then a certain distance and even tension can be observed between groups.In this situation, the government has been using constant repression, arrests, torture

and other forms of terror against the people in Gazi.Gazi needs unity, team spirit and solidarity,.because the majority are poor in economic

terms. The infrastructure here is not sufficient. Also, educational opportunities are in-sufficient, there is no healthcare provision and no social security or safety net.We, the people of Gazi, have come to the conclusion that founding a People’s Council

is indispensible, to create a culture of solidarity and be able to solve the problems here1. Our aim is to establish solidarity among people, without making distinctions based

on national or religious grounds. Our people are to be enlightened so as to prevent attacks like the one on March 12, 1995.

2. We want to form an alliance against the presence of police and armoured cars and their continual arbitrariness and arrests, an alliance which will use the principles of a state based on the rule of law. Another aim is to bring about a long-term solution to the urgent problems that uneven income distribution poses in relation to infra-structure, education, social security, health, accommodation and food.

3. To tackle social and cultural problems of people such as drugs, gambling, alco-holism and other illnesses, which come about through the system’s influence. As a basis for this we will put forward positive people’s values.

4. Women’s problems are to be taken up. A women’s organisation is to be set up to deal with the problems of housewives, working women, mothers, and women seen as sex objects, all viewed in the context of social conditions.

5. In the sphere of production and consumption, organisations are to be formed which develop a culture of solidarity. These organisations are cooperatives which are not intended to make a profit but aim to reduce unemployment. A culture of solidarity will be set up in opposition to the hunger for profit encouraged by this system.

6. All problems such as parks, marketplaces, state hospitals and so on which are con-ditioned by unequal income distribution are to be tackled and serious steps taken to deal with them.

7. As much as possible, sporting activities will be encouraged in the neighbourhood

and people will be encouraged to engage in forms of sport which promote health. Sport will not be something to merely watch, but active participation will be en-couraged, including by women and children.

8. Families and associations will be active in seeking to improve education in primary and middle schools, to open new schools and to improve quantity as well as quality of teaching materials and take steps against high education fees.

9. For the time being, the health question will be solved as much as financial possi-bilities allow, by giving people medical check-ups for no charge. Later this will be done on a permanent basis.

10. Our neighbourhood will determine days and months on which to hold circumci-sion ceremonies and marriages. Problems are to be solved with as little financial outlay as possible. We decided to set up a People’s Council to resolve these and many other problems which we have not mentioned. Our aim is to solve these problems together and create a collective culture of solidarity. One of our most important rules is the participation of the people in the leadership. Participation is voluntary.

CONCLUSION

1. It will seek to tackle all problems which affect people in the neighbourhood, and come up with solutions.

2. A culture of solidarity and unity of people in our neighbourhood is developed, while bad cultural influences will be abolished.

3. All incidents that do not concern the justice system, for example disputes between families and among the people in Gazi, are to be peacefully settled.

These are the criteria for friendship and solidarity. The People’s Council was set up within these criteria. With the agreement of all participants, these rules were adopted.

THE REGULATIONS OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL

1. GOAL AND PURPOSE. The People’s Council is a civilian institution which discusses all the people’s affairs, takes decisions and puts these decisions into practice. It makes no differ-ences on the basis of nationality, religion, beliefs and political views. The People’s Council is a democratic institution, open to all segments of the population.

2. TASKS The People’s Council deals with the economical, social, cultu-al, political and neighbourhood problems of the people.

3. BODIES OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL The People’s Council consists of the general people’s meeting, the council’s committee, the spokesperson, the secretariat and specific committees.

A. The general people’s meeting is the highest decision mak-ing and controlling body. The members take part voluntary.

B. The council committee is elected by the general people’s meet-ing. The number of members is limited. The council commit-tee takes decisions which do not concern the general meeting.

C. The spokesperson is the one who makes the coun-cil’s statements and decisions public.

D. The secretariat is subordinated to the directives of the general meeting and the council committee. It organises and co-ordinates the meetings.

E. Specific committees are council bodies, consisting of a limit-ed number of competent people. They deal directly with ques-tions and problems, addressed by the council.

4. DIRECT AND INDIRECT VOTING RIGHTS, MEMBER-SHIP OF THE GENERAL PEOPLE’S MEETING

A. All inhabitants of the neighbourhood who have be-come 18 years old and who have not committed a crime against the people, have direct and indirect voting rights.

B. All persons as mentioned above are natural mem-bers of the general people’s meeting.

C. The council committee is elected by the general people’s meet-ing. The council’s bodies are appointed by the council itself.

5. ELECTIONS

A. The general people’s meeting meets regularly once a year to elect a council committee and twice a year to control the council’s activities. The general people’s

meeting can be convened by the council or the people for extra-ordinary meetings.B. The council committee is elected in secret or open elections, according to the

will of the general people’s meeting. The committee exists of at least 25 persons. According to the will of the people’s meeting , this number can be increased. The council meets every first week of the month. If needed, the secretariat can call for a special council meeting, consisting of at least 1/5 of its members. In these circumstances, the secretariat has to call for a council meeting in at least 5 days.

C. The spokesperson is elected by the general meeting or the coun-cil committee. The length of the term is determined by the council.

D. The secretariat is appointed by the people’s meeting or the council committee. It consists of at least 3 persons, if needed the council can change the secretariat.

E. The council appoints specific committees, according to the need. These com-mittees consist of volunteers. The number of members and the length of term depends of the tasks. These questions are decided when the task is formulated.

6. PROCEDURE OF ELECTIONS AND DECISION MAKING

All council bodies are elected by a simple majority of votes. Decisions are taken by a majority of votes as well. In case of very important decisions, such as the dissolvement of the council or decisions which concern the general public, a simple majority of votes is not considered as sufficient for the beginning.

7. EXPULSION FROM THE BODIES

Council members can be expelled because of indecent behaviour or lack of discipline which hinder the activities of the council. The council has the right to discharge a mem-ber temporarily from his task in such cases. The council has to convene the appropriate body to vote about the membership of the member in question. A member can be ex-pelled with a majority of ¾ of the votes.In case a member steps down, he has to explain his reasons to the council. Leaving the

council can be refused in case the member in question has been given a task because of his abilities or social position and the fulfilment of this task does not endanger his life and his task can not be taken over by somebody else in time. In all other cases, leaving the council will be granted.

8. FINAL REGULATIONS

All members or persons who implement the decisions and carry out tasks and partici-pate in the activities as elected persons or volunteers accept the regulations of the peo-ple’s council. The regulations, drawn up before the official announcement of the council on October 5, 1996, were confirmed by the following general meeting of the People’s Council. The regulations and the council were confirmed after several open meetings at a meeting of 1.500 members of the general people’s council on October 5, 1996.

THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

“The people must be shown how to take a position of leadership”

“The Gazi People’s Council concerns itself with the problems of people”

FEVZI KURTULUS (Folk singer and songwriter)

I have a very positive view of the founding of the People’s Council, because peo-ple are able to determine their own future; the state’s authorities are unable to satisfy the demands of the people. In the beginning we thought that people with their varying mentalities would be incapable of uniting. It is very important for people with the same aims to unite. By organising they can see that their liberation depends on themselves. Revolutionaries should take on representation in such organisations. It is very important that one does not behave in a sectarian fashion.People of every religious belief and political viewpoint should be able to take part (apart

from enemies of the people). Such people’s councils, which are founded in various areas, should be united in a central committee. We should accelerate this work and strengthen the power of these structures.At this time, the counter-revolutionary side holds the most important positions in the

state. I think that it is very important that democratic areas and efforts at unification are made use of. If the People’s Council determines what the problems of the neighbour-hood are, one must think that the problems on the spot are being resolved. A concrete example of that is the activity of the Gazi People’s Council. As far as I know, that is what is being experienced in Gazi. I heard from a friend who said there had been very positive experiences at a circumcision ceremony. There was solidarity between people of differ-ent religious convictions. In short, the people have lost any hope they might have had in the state authorities. The work of the People’s Council, which is guided by revolutionar-ies, is a first step towards democratic people’s power. I support it.

ESAT KORKMAZ (NEFES MAGAZINE)

I have a positive view of it and think it appropriate that a People’s Council is being formed. Something like it should be spread to other areas. It should come to the public’s attention because it offers a good role model. One should report on the necessity for and the initiatives of the Council and suggest their establishment in other neighbourhoods. When one sees that People’s Councils have been formed in such a heavily populated neighbourhood and people have won the right to a say, one understands the necessity for such councils.By setting up democratic mass organisations from below, other organisations are shown

what can and must be done. This is effective activity. It must be discussed with them,

because it is important to reach people with thoughts and with speeches. The People’s Council is an organ in which concrete democracy can be practised. Everyone has the right to express their opinion and take decisions that are realisable. It is a task to remind people how to act when up against the state or a local board of directors.

IBRAHIM KARACA (POET)

In the People’s Committees I see that people try not to remain passive and alone. It is a community in which one meets daily to unite in the face of common problems. If we look at villages, we can see that these thoughts have been turned into action in village associations and neighbourhood committees.If we look back into the past, we will see that geographical conditions and natural

disasters have united people. Organisations located in the cities develop following the structure of villages, although the difficulties of villages often do not exist in the cities. Perhaps it must be that way. That is how the natural course of events looks.People have the ability to organise their own lives.They must develop counterbalances to make life easier for themselves. These structures

should be pressure points operating on problems which the state is incapable of solving.It is the people who will take thedecisions on setting up the People’s Council, since they

are the ones confronted by the problems on a daily basis. The people themselves can be sovereign. In and of itself it is a sign of political awakening when one speaks of day-to-day problems. Here it is very significant that politics in life which flow from above to below do not fall into oblivion.People’s Committees are steps towards democracy. The necessity of a People’s Council

should be demonstrated on the basis of cultural, health and social problems.

METIN CELIK: (MEDITERRANEAN AREA REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ISTANBUL HUMAN RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, IHD)

The People’s Councils are seen as a solution in many countries in which there is an undemocratic system. People try to create initiatives aimed at solving their problems. In our country they have just been talking about it. The point is that people have adopted such organisations and supported their foundation. We should not pay heed to the le-gality of such structures, but rather their legitimacy. It is a way of forming a democratic culture, if people can form good ties with one another. A person should not have the thought that it is about his or her own interests, but should look outwards and embrace the people. That is a very important gain for the future which should be strengthened and developed further.

ÖNER YAGCI (WRITER)

The people are trying to save a rotten system by using their own initiative. We see this as a concrete example that poltics has become divorced from the people and people must

take their future into their own hands. The most important is the political vanguard. It is a hopeful model in our chaotic country if our peoples can build their future under correct guidance.

ATAOL BEHRAMOGLU (POET)

It is a necessity and a cornerstone of a democracy if the people take their problems into their own hands. If they did not do that, they would merely be onlookers and voting fodder. The real and genuine development of democracy depends on whether human beings of different nationalities and confessions can organise. I saw another example like the Gazi People’s Committee in Fehiye. There the representatives of the various as-socations, parties and also official commissions gathered and founded an independent neighbourhood committee. The representatives of the various partliamentary parties claim to be on the side of the people but they are utterly divorced from the people. I as-sess the organising of the people as a positive thing, because the parties must be induced to work for the people.

AYDIN ILGAZ (CINAR PUBLICATIONS)

In Turkey, civil organisations must be founded so people can express their differing views openly. Up until now, the rulers have not permitted such organisations. The de-sired freedom and democracy begins with the free expression of opinion. The word “de-mocracy” was already being uttered in the time of the Romans, and it is still being talked about today.However, I must sadly confess that we are in the 20th century and in our land there is

no democracy. Since 1940 they have talked about it here, but it is obvious that many artists and intellectuals have spent their lives in prison or have been driven out of the country. The rulers will only permit views that are congenial to them. Peace will come about when the “thought criminals” are let out of the prisons. I understand the People’s Committee to be something which allows people to be supported by organisations in order to shape politics. The only way to democracy is to start with education and culture, and it can only be developed if there is freedom of expression.

SERDAR CETIN (HEAD OF A BUSINESS IN THE ADA-NA ZIYAPASA NEIGHBOURHOOD)

At the moment in Turkey there is a split between the people and the government. The government dioes not see its own tasks, it forms coalitions to protect its position and cover its dirty dealings. From this observation it can be concluded that the people must themselves fulfil their needs. So the people in the People’s Committees of Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim are coming together to solve the problems of health, education, social and cultural problems by acting in solidarity. Such People’s Committees shozuld be seen as a model and be set up in other parts of Turkey also. With the unity and solidarity of the masses a People’s Parliament as an alternative to the Turkish parliament should be

founded. I think that such civic organisations would have a positive effect on our coun-try.

FERUDUN ÖZKAN (WORKER)

It is very nice that no distinctions are being made among our people. We want there to be People’s Committees throughout the land.I want the people to live in freedom and I do not believe that the government can solve

the problems of our neighbourhood. But I very much believe that the people, working in solidariy and unity, can solve the problems inside the People’s Councils. I want all oppressed people to have a positive assessment of such People’s Councils. The forming of People’s Councils should be reported in the press and on TV, because a lot of people have not heard about them. It is very good that the People’s Council was founded. We believe that people csn solve their problems after the model of Gazi, if they unite and act together. The people of Gazi have autonomy. I want campaigns of support to take place throughout the country. I wish the People’s Council every success.

RUHAN MAVRUK

If a problem arises, a solution can be found. The people can solve problems through their own dynamics.Gazi is a neighbourhood in which the Alevis are oppressed and people live under police

repression. So this area requires renewal through its people. The most important point is to draw people together. It is a very important rapprochement for left groups, to regroup under an alternative front. And it is a positive development of solidarity because it is an urgent need of the people of Gazi to form a People’s Committee. People of different cultures collect in a People’s Council, and that will give them strength in the fight with the capitalists.People must be further educated in the People’s Council, and care must be taken that

they can live from their labour. My wish is that People’s Council can also be formed in the other neighbourhoods. I call upon all artists to aid the cultural development in these areas.

PEMBE DENIZ (HOUSEWIFE FROM THE YURT NEIGHBOURHOOD)

If problems can really be solved by the People’s Councils like they say, they should also be set up in other cities of Turkey. If they are truly open to everybody, it is indeed an advantageous development.If the problems of the neighbourhood are solved through it and the councils are all open

to everyone, then the people of Gazi have achieved a meaningful task. The government is not looking after us. But they are eating one another up. The government can’t solve our problems. I wish the People’s Council much success.

WE WILL KEEP PURSUING THE ELECTRICI-TY PROBLEM UNTIL IT IS SOLVED!

Q: You, as the electricity commission in the People’s Council, have been working for some time. First of all, what kinds of power supply problems are there in the neighbour-hood?A: The electricity supply to us is constantly being interrupted. The transformer is not

adequate for the number of inhabitants of our neighbourhood that it serves. The con-ductors, like the high-tension cables, are not sufficient. So there are often disruptions and our power is interrupted, which damages the small businessmen and people who do work by hand from their homes. Employers cannot give so many tasks to workers that they can pay them for. Customer orders cannot be filled in good time. This does us a lot of damage. Electrical equipment at home does not work. Low-income families cannot afford new equipment. Power cuts are more and more frequent, and people are reacting and want these problems solved. Q: What kind of work has your commission carried out?A: First of all, we summoned small businessmen to a meeting. About 200 came. We

talked about resolving these problems. After forming a committee we decided to go and visit the area director of the TEK (Turkish Electrical Institute). We went there as a com-mittee and spoke to the relevant people. We reported on our own desperate plight and familiarised ourselves with their work. Afterwards, this visit was assessed at a meeting of the People’s Council. We began a petition and decided to visit them a second time. In a short time we had 2,000 signatures. We went to the director again. Also, individuals raised the problem. But since we went as a committee we were able to show that it was a serious and necessary business. The director realises that we will not give up. He invited employers to his room and told them that people must work. He promised to build a new transformer for us as quickly as possible. We set a deadline of four weeks. Q: Were there results after your visit?A: Yes, we got a result. The transformer for Zübeyde Hanim, which we had been await-

ing for over a year, was finally made ready. The preparation of another two for Gazi is still continuing, but the power cuts in Gazi are happening less frequently. Q: What must you still do to solve the electricity problem?A: We will feel very relieved when the two transformers are ready. But we should still

have other transformers built because the neighbourhood is constantly growing. Elec-tricity conductors should be put in the ground or isolated because they are not protected from the rain. That does them a lot of damage. The high-tension cable between Davut-pasa and Yesilpinar should be brought together. Davutpasa is a big area and an old one, and there are a lot of disturbances. We want to prevent that. As the commission, we will continue our work with ther inhabitants of the neighbourhood. We will work as long as it takes to get a result. Q: What will you concern yourselves with after the power problem is solved?

A: We haven’t decided. We will discuss it at a meeting of the People’s Council and then decide. For example, the sewage channel at Kazim Bekir Street 1268 is blocked. 500 me-tres further on there are the drainage ditches for sewage. It stinks there. This problem has been going on for three and a half years and it must be rectified. There are a lot of serious problems like this. When our report is ready we will take it to the community council.

A MEMBER OF THE SPORTS COMMISSION IN GAZI, ME-HMET KARAGÖZ, INFORMS US ABOUT HIS WORK

“We are taking on sport with a new spirit”

Q: What have you done as the Sports Commission of the People’s Council, and what will you be doing?A: There are a lot of young people in the neighbourhood. We don’t have sports facilities

or associations, young people play in the streets. In the winter there are no sports because there are no indoor facilities. There are more and more pool halls and Gameboy halls. So we have decided to set up a sports club to propagate a new spirit. We decided that in the People’s Committee and met with various associations in the neighbourhood. We met representatives from Büyükköy, Igdeliköy, Cavdarköy Dogu Spor and youth sporting clubs and decided that we wanted to found a strong sporting club which represents our neighbourhood. Every sports club has decided on a representative. We will turn to the Ministry of Sport and the community so that existing obstacles can be removed. Q: You spoke of a “new spirit”. What do you understand this to be?A: When we talk of sport, we generally think of football. We want to organise other

types of sport, for example athletics, table tennis, basketball, volleyball and others. And moreover we want to destroy the attitude that only men can take part, because women can do it too. We want everybody to take part. There should be tournaments organised that old and young can take part in. This will increase the number of people taking part. Our people should not be mere observers but active participants. We engage in sport for our health, solidarity and dignity. We want to keep sport away from alcohol, gambling, drugs and other negative influences. These are the rules we have adopted.

AN OPINION OF THE GAZI PEOPLE’S COUNCIL:

“It is quite normal that Gazi should provide the first example”

DENIZ TEZTEL (CUMHURIYET NEWSPAPER)

Our population has a fear of organisation. Probably we are afraid that political organi-sations will dominate them. Education by our families and the government pushes us in this direction, towards fearing organisations. Moreover, since the September 1980 mili-tary coup, it is enough to be a member of an organisation for one to be punished in some way. When we uttered the word “organisation”, the following was said to us: “This is not

among the legal organisations.” DISK (the Revolutionary Trade Union Confederation) for example was designated an illegal organisation after the coup, even though it was a significant trade union organisation at that time. Political parties were classed as illegal organisations. Although 16 years have passed since the military coup, we are still afraid to express our viewpoint, even from the speaker’s podium in parliament. Under these conditions we naturally are afraid of organisation. But justice and freedom can only be achieved through organisation. A doctor, student, journalist, worker or inhabitant of a neighbourhood cannot win his or her rights alone. The People’s Council is a step for-ward in upholding the rights of people in Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim. The people of this area have acheved the most difficult steps. But they still have a hard furrow to plough. Some call the People’s Committee an illegal organisation. Some say: “We don’t need it.” Of course there are those who know the strength of the organisation and are afraid of it. These are their words. In attempting to remove such thoughts about political matters, the People’s Committees have a difficult task. The first paragraph of the People’s Council statutes shows how difficult this task will be. In that, it is said that any matters can be discussed and decisions taken, and that the People’s Council is an assembly which does not draw any distinctions over religion, belief or origin.It is a democratic assembly. I hope the People’s Council will not make the same mistakes

as other democratic organisations. I hope it will not set up commissions to deal with minor things and hold discussions for days without achieving a result. I also hope that those who notice that they are not making a contribution to it will pull out. Decisions should be taken which put pressure on the state. I hope all associations which stand for freedom and what is right will support the People’s Council and not oppose it.

HALUK GERGER (JOURNALIST AND WRITER)

It is up to people to organise those who cannot do it themselves or who do not want to be organised. In Turkey at the moment, the ruling classes are in the midst of a crisis of organisation. But no initiatives were created by revolutionaries to deal with the problems of people. Every structure which creates initiatives for people is revolutionary.Gazi is a neighbourhood in which a People’s Council is being formed, in which the

expressions “a free Istanbul” or “a free Turkey” can be used. It is quite normal that Gazi should be the first example of this.

MUNZUR PEKGÜLEC (PRESIDENT OF THE LEATH-ERWORKERS’ BRANCH OF DISK)

We want to express the idea that the people unorganised are slaves and ought to be a strong organised force. This organisation should be directed against serious oppression, for we know that the rulers use violence to defend their position. We should form such organisations everywhere. I supoort the Gazi People’s Council, because it was formed on the basis of the problems found there. I believe its efforts will be useful to people, if these are applied in a careful and conscious way.

“The most important function of the People’s Councils is to be a school”

DR FIKRET BASKAYA (LECTURER)

First of all, the People’s Councils should not be seen as an alternative to the “existing parliament”. It is already clear that the founders do not envisage them like that. One should build an alternative on the same ground, but on a different part of the same ground. The Councils have already had to find their place on different ground and come up with a radical difference. The task is not one of creating again what already exists, but overcoming it.In my view, the most important task of the People’s Council is to be a school. Of course

that does not mean the denial of the existing school system. It is quite normal and even necessary for the Councils to work in the light of the practical problems that come up every day. People will always come together to solve their practical problems. But only in such organisations can the people recognise that they cannot solve their problems inside the system. With the help of practical matters, they will realise that problems are the re-sult of the existing exploitative and oppressive system. In the near future they will realise at least in an indirect way why their problems cannot be solved inside the system. These are the reasons why I talk of a school. It is a school that gives us the possibility of getting to know the world in which we live, society and people, and it will clear the way towards overcoming all that currently exists... It is already known that “knowledge is power”.The most important condition for the success of the People’s Councils is that they are

not influenced by existing organisational models. Whatever the pro-system organisa-tions may say, they “in the final analysis are merely developing the system” anew. So as much as possible we should distance ourselves from a system of delegates. In a place dominated by “credentials”, degeneration and bureaucracy will set in and new hierar-chical conditions will arise. Consequently people need a form of organisation in which neither oppression nor hierarchy exist. A new organisation and form of understanding is required. People must be attentive that the delegate system leads to degeneration and alienation... As much as possible there should be “direct democracy” and the contact between the decision-makers and executors should be re-established. Instead of perma-nent organisations, temporary ones for special problems could be formed, which can later be dissolved. This is a measure to combat bureaucratic degeneration.Even more important:The intervention of “revolutionaries” who claim to have a recipe for all problems in

their pockets and who try to give “advice” from outside must be prevented. Those who suffer from the problems must also be the ones who deal with them. Does this comment mean underestimating the solidarity of revolutionaries? If external interventions are not prevented, the People’s Councils will become empty. The Councils must be increased in number and scope, on condition that they develop in a positive manner...

ECONOMIST ARSLAN BASER KAFAOGLU

“It is a very important fact that the people of Gazi are coming together and discussing the problems together.”It is very important that the people of Gazi Neighbourhood are examining problems

collectively and organising accordingly. Nobody has the right to overlook or underes-timate the importance of this fact. When people begin to look on their problems in a way that is not individual, but rather to see them in neighbourhood terms, according to the pattern of Gazi Neighbourhood to see them as social problems, then the true facts of the situation can be discovered. There are some facts, some social formations which cannot be recognised as a real problem unless they are seen as a whole. So it is an im-portant fact that the people of Gazi are coming together and discussing their problems together. But it would be too optimistic to imagine that all neighbourhoods could be like Gazi. The people of Gazi feel completely shut out from society. And this feeling is not unfounded. Various city and state services are denied to them. Naturally this causes a sense of solidarity and a united mentality among them. But presumably there is nothing like this neighbourhood elsewhere in Turkey. Then one must creat such units and ac-tions as there are in Gazi in other neighbourhoods of Turkey. And one should not just talk about organisation of neighbourhoods but of classes. For example, are the people of Gazi telling workers of the neighbourhood that they must be organised in trade unions? For without class organisation it is impossible for neighbourhoods to make their voices heard. But then they remain ineffective. Then, do the people of Gazi make sure every-body of voting age is on the electoral register? Do the people of Gazi know wehre their tax money goes? Or does the local executive committee check this? Does the population of Gazi know anything about this? Ansd if it does know, what does it do about it? The crux is that this is not a local or even a national problem of Turkey, and since Gazi is a part of Turkey, this is a big problem for me as well. What does it think about inflation? Can the people organise their own markets? What would happen if they did? Do they keep contact with their villages and towns of origin after moving to the big city? These contacts should be taken seriously, intensified and these places organised in their turn.Today the words of the masters spoken 100-150 years ago still resound: “It is a misfor-

tune that a country is governed under the rule of capitalists. The working people are exploited.” But the country has remained under the capitalist order, so it is in even more unfeeling hands than before.For the economic and industrial institutions of Turkey turn out too many products and

are then unable to come up with anything new. To offset this, the state demands more taxes from people. And then it spends two lira out of every three it extracts. Now the firms of Sabanci and Koc are provided with state rates of interest. Do the people of Gazi know this? If they do, what will they do about it? Can your newspaers tell the people this? When I open your newspaper, I see only the surplus investments in defence and expend-iture on debts and interest. Today, seven billion dollars a year is invested in defence. Even if there was no Kurdish movement, this would still not be less than four billion. Even if no military operations were carried out in these regions, nevertheless one would still be spending four billion dollars in northern Iraq and southern Kurdistan. for Turkey, this means three billion. It is said that this is what causes inflation, but on the contrary, one

does not want a peaceful solution in Kurdistan precisely to keep inflation at a high level. For if one kills people and destroys villages, all attention is directed to that.That means the most painful thing is that capitalism does not even work in Turkey.

Compared to that, the Susurluk scandal is likea flea on a camel. They are trying to keep this secret. Will the people of Gazi become conscious of this? This would be such a con-sciousness that even if only the population of this one neighbourhood knew it, it would be able to change many things in Turkey.

INTERVIEWS WITH MEMBERS OF THE GAZI PEOPLE’S COUNCIL

The People’s Council was formed amid great participation from the population, because it corresponds to the needs of the people there. At the inaugural meet-ing, a secretariat and representatives of the People’s Council were elected.

The founding of the People’s Council was announced in the course of a circumcision ceremony. The public learned of its foundation from the press and television. We would like to hear from you about developments from its foundation to the present. What needs and thoughts were the cause of the People’s Council’s foundation?

SÜLEYMAN SENGÜL

I have lived in Gazi for 30 years. I will first tell you what kind of neighbourhood it is. Our neighbourhood is a mosaic, composed of people from all over the country. And my impression of Gazi is that here every kind of belief has been respected up to the present. We had no religious problems until the massacre on March 12, 1995 was carried out. And I assume it was done because they could not bear the fraternal, peaceful and affec-tionate co-existence of people in Gazi and wanted to split the people. But I have seen that the massacre produced the opposite effect in Gazi. That means that the people of Gazi saw through the manoeuvre.In the government’s view, Gazi is not a part of Turkey but is a kind of backward valley

between two countries. Gazi was given no help to deal with its problems. The govern-ment only took tax money from us regularly. We were told we would get the taxes back in the form of services, but none of these have materialised. The people realise they will have to solve their problems themselves.Our people decided this when it was clear that the problems could not be solved just

through commissions working autonomously, or on an individual basis. I can give an example of this from the experience of small traders:Even before we set up the People’s Council, I and a couple of friends went to the electric-

ity administration. Our electricity problems were escalating so much at that point that we had a choice between pulling out or closing our workplaces. When we were in the electricity administration, the director told us that the rich suburb of Ataköy also had its power cut off. These words hit us hard, the people of Gazi were being treated as second or third class. The director rued his words, but that was what he had said.After this we decided that neither a commission nor individuals could solve the prob-

lems. As the people, together we could make things move. When we told other people of our thoughts, w saw that all our friends, the people who sat in the coffeehouses, the small traders and other people who lived here were sympathetic and thought all this was necessary. When we held our first meeting, there were 30 people present, and the result was that the project went forward.From the beginning, we had to be active because of the growing number of problems

coming to light every day. We saw that the number of people taking part increased stead-ily. Of course, in Gazi there are not just structural and economic problems, there are also political ones. For example, when we get into a taxi and say we want to go to Gazi, we are not accepted as passengers. That means Gazi has a negative reputation. People coming up to the approach road to Gazi are checked up on by the police and harassed.We should show solidarity, we should find a way to realise something in a joint fashion.

This thing we are achieving jointly is called the People’s Council. We could have called it something else, but the name sounded good to us. In some newspapers it was said that our initative was an alternative to parliament. It cannot be that. We have united here to be able to express our problems and find a solution for them. We told each other that we had to teach each other democracy. Democracy is not mutual imploring, democracy means giving problems a name, explaining them and then finding a solution. We have taken on the task of learning these things. So we then set up the People’s Council.Who did you go to with the suggestion of founding the People’s Council? Did you talk

to associations and political parties, or just the ordinary people?

HALIL TELEK:

We went to all people, regardless of their political viewpoints or membership of a party. The determining factor was that they lived in Gazi. We asked people their opinions of our work and 90% of the people had a positive view of it. Some people were concerned about what was involved in building a People’s Council or had reservations that it might become a political organisation. Despite these objections, people took part in it. When people began to join it, our work increased in depth. Many people took part in our meet-ings. From 60 to 70 people, it quickly grew. We had reason to hope. The decisive factor was our confidence that the People’s Council would be successful, since the majority of people had given a positive assessment of it. And also because we had no limits on po-litical expression. We had chosen those who showed themselves sensitive to problems. Our friends knew that in our appeal that we excluded nobody, and they offered us their support. The people took part in the foundation because they believe that the problems of the neighbourhood can only be solved through joint action.

NAZAR ASKERAN:

We representatives do not want people representing political organisations in the Peo-ple’s Council, they should all be personal representatives. The people we include can be members of the CHP, REFAHYOL, ÖDP or the ANAP. They can be from different par-ties or political outlooks, but we want our People’s Council to be independent. We want to incorporate all inhabitants of Gazi in our circle. This does not mean that a person gives up his political views, he can continue his political work. We have elected them be-cause we are interested in the problems of Gazi, because they also live and work in Gazi, and thus experience the problems as well. Nobody here has the right to represent the line of any party. We are here as people, we are here as the inhabitants of Gazi.

HALIL TELEK:

When we went to small traders, friends and people, we planned things so that people who participate in the People’s Council or support it cannot be representatives of any party. But if they take part as Gazi inhabitants, we cordially invite them in. The friends who are members of a party have brought along their own personal opinions. They have supported us personally. Nobody mentions his or her membership in a political party or organisation. And this created a pleasant atmosphere for the preople. Those who did not feel well about it before experienced a sense of relief. Nobody propagated his political ideas to influence others. Everybody took it on as a task to work here. For this reason our people supported this work.As is known, there have also been difficulties in the work of the People’s Councils. You

have already mentioned the difficulties. It was said that there was reluctance, prejudice or fears. How have you gone about your work, to remove these doubts. How have the people reacted to it?

HALIL TELEK:

Before we went to the people, we wrote a report about our aims and our views. We dis-cussed the problems of Gazi in it. And with this report we went to the people.There should be no differences between Alevis and Sunnis, earlier there had not been

any in Gazi. There were a certain number of insults on March 12, 1996. To get rid of these insults, we spoke to people quite openly about them. We listened to their problems and the things that disturb them. The people we went to knew us already, and they saw that as positive.We were attentive towards their problems. All people who hoped for a solution to the

problems of Gazi Neighbourhood welcomed our efforts at organisation. They declared to us they would support us in all matters. We listened to the various political viewpoints attentively and said we favoured openness about them if they were put forward con-structively and contributed to solving problems.

AZAN ASKERAN:

At this time there were also some negative things. People generally had some fear of rapprochement. They had been through some immoral things in the neighbourhood, and there are people who are afraid. If you talk to people in our area, you will find that a lot of them have children in jail. That has two effects: they are angry, but they are also afraid. and the families who don’t now have children in jail say that this could happen at any time. People say that there might be another barricade action or the police could come again, and that scares them. Earlier there had been attempts to bring about co-operation but these did not go any further since some people had taken on political missions. There is still some disquiet now. Today people look positively on our People’s Council, but there are still reservations. Some people say: “We should still wait a bit

longer.” But we will remove this tendency. We have made a lot of progress on this road. I told everyone who came into my chemist’s shop about this project. Some said they would first examine it, and others said rather more frankly, “We have been through such things before and nothing came of it. Hopefully you will do something.” There were some people who were ready and others who were afraid and showed indecision. We went to people who went from their houses to go to work and then went from their work back to their houses. There were people who lived in the neighbourhood and had seri-ous problems. Moreover we had some nice experiences, for example with a family who were afraid to begin with and were unsettled and apathetic, but who now take part in the People’s Council. That pleases me. But we came up against some real prejudices, for they asked us what party we were from. My friend said, “I am from party A, I said “I am from party B” and another said, “I am from party C.” We did not talk about our parties there, simply about being Gazi inhabitants, but at the beginning people didn’t believe us.What road did you take when you saw it was difficult to bring about rapprochement,

and what did you do to remove prejudices?

SÜLEYMAN SENGÜL

We did not simply have meetings and discussions on this subject. For example, we also had free medical examinations arranged, as a practical project. We saw that people had more trust in us after the medical examinations were carried out.

NAZAN ASKERAN:

We went through the phase in which discussions took place. Again and again we had meetings to encourage participation in the People’s Council. At the start there were a lot of us. Then the discussions went on and we saw that later fewer people took part in them. So we said that the people wanted to see some concrete results. We were a little agitated before we set up the People’s Council, people wanted to know who we were. But then we reached a point where the discussions started to drag out. If we did not do something concrete, we would lose the people’s confidence. Therefore we could not wait for the People’s Council to arise of its own accord. We spoke of founding a commission. The commissions were only a transitional step, we founded an administrative commis-ion. And over the administrative commission we placed specialised commissions. These commissions worked independently.We had to arouse the people’s consciousness. In our neighbourhood there are very big

health problems. People have no money, so they cannot go to the doctor and also cannot obtain medicine. So we made agreements with enterprises, we collected medicine and involved people. They brought medicine from their homes, we collected a lot of medi-cine. We also spoke to our doctors and for three weeks, always on Sundays, they carried out health controls. On these days about 200-300 people were examined and given med-icine. We did not say that we could examine everybody in the Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim areas, which have 90,000 people. Even the government cannot do that. No, that was not what we had in mind. Our aim was to start the work of the People’s Council and build

trust. We were successful. People who had not heard of us began to notice us. Many women and children heard us. Up to that time the overwhelming majority of people we had got to had been men. But it was mainly women who came to the health check-ups. What we achieved was very important for us. Those who had not been listening claimed the government had organised the check-ups. But we also ensured that the truth got through. We distributed our leaflets and saw the positive results at meetings. The people who had come to the first meetings but later stopped because the discussions put them off started coming back again.What other steps were taken in this direction?

HALIL TELEK:

After the health examinations, there were constant power cuts. There were days when this happened three or four times. Then the small businessmen active in the People’s Council called a meeting among themselves to solve the power supply problem. Two hundred took part. A commission was founded. This concerned itself with the power supply administration, and the workers there took the demands of the people seriously, because they did not represent a party but spoke in the name of the people. Then the power was cut off less frequently. Then the small businessmen deepened their work in the People’s Council and began to tackle other tasks.Before you founded the People’s Council, you held a lot of meetings. What did you

watch out for at these meetings and where did they take place?

NAZAN ASKERAN:

We were careful to ensure that the people did not see us connected to any political par-ties. So that meant we could not meet in the CHP building or in the DSP one. Moreover, as inhabitants of Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim we had to hold the meeting in the neighbour-hood. At this point we had not set up the People’s Council, and so we had no definite place fixed up. There also had to be a place in our neighbourhood where people would feel at home. The place where we had our meetings should also make it possible for the people to get to know us, we wanted to draw them in. We saw that in our neighbourhood there were many village associations. The people who came to the meetings were often people who belonged to these associations. We thought we might be able to hold the meetings in their buildings, so we spoke to them and they agreed. So we got good results here. Before we arranged the health check-ups we had a lot of difficulty finding a place to meet. But at the moment we do not have such problems. We have meetings everywhere we can find a place, but our first principle is that they take place in our neighbourhood. Our second principle is to say nothing negative about any party but instead to draw them to us. At the moment we are looking for a place we can own now we have formed the People’s Council. And very soon we will find such a place.

HALIL TELEK:

I want to say something on this subject. In our work we did not think of going into a Cemevi (Alevi community centre). Because our People’s Council makes no distinction between political views and religious affiliations. Our work should be carried out in a joint fashion. We have not permitted distinctions to be made.

NAZAN AKERAN:

We can hold any meeting in the Cemevi, but that does not mean we always have to meet there. Our neighbourhood is mixed. The people there are a very beautiful mosaic. It would be wrong to make a religious distinction. That would exclude people.During your work, wide-ranging meeting were held. Discussions in offices, houses and

village associations reached a high level and were widely recognised. Officialdom and the government also heard about what you were doing. What is the government’s atti-tude to you?

HALIL TELEK:

The authorities got to know of us early on. They looked askance at us. Policemen came to some of our meetings and said. “Aren’t we of the people?”And we said that if it is nec-essary we will call them in future. They also came to observe our circumcision ceremony. Up to now there have been no attacks.

NAZAN ASKERAN:

There have been no attacks but they made a demand on us. They wanted a list of People’s Council members. We went to the local director and said they could have the list because everyone on it had taken a quite voluntary part in the People’s Council and it included almost the entire neighbourhood. But other things came up, for example during the Death Fast (summer of 1996) there was a barricade action and people were arrested. One of those arrested was the local director of Gazi. They asked him some questions. And one of these was whether he had been one of the people who founded the People’s Council. The police and ourselves know one another and one could say that they are playing a waiting game.Who can be a member of the People’s Council, what are the requirements?

SÜLEYMAN SENGÜL:

He or she must not be under 18 and must live or work here and must not have commit-ted any crime against the people.You told us that the founding of the People’s Council was marked by a circumcision

ceremony. Would you like to tell us about it?

HALIL TELEK:

When the People’s Council had taken shape, people were informed about it and were invited. We decided to celebrate the opening with a circumcision ceremony. The cere-mony should be an expression of solidarity that the whole population should be able to take part in. About 80 children were circumcised.How was the circumcision ceremony organised?

NAZAN ASKERAN:

The question was how we could finance it. For example there were families who could not afford the clothes. We had to organise food for so many people. The tasks were taken on voluntarily, many people helped us. For example, they brought clothes. We, the Peo-ple’s Council, were able to obtain 55 suits of clothes. This was a great work of solidarity. Some people provided buttons, material and so on. Some sewed the clothes. Some very beautiful collective work was organised. That was the most beautiful part of the work. At this point we also received donations. We did not tell people with financial difficulties to keep their distance, we tried to take on the costs. Tasks were allotted but nobody was forced into anything. Everyone said, I can do this, or this, or this. Work was taken on voluntarily and given out to people to do. That was the best thing about the work.

SÜLEYMAN SENGÜL:

In addition, we were supported by health workers, doctors and so on. And nobody de-manded anything in return. All friends who came brought things that could be used. In this way, financial difficulties were overcome.

NAZAN ASKERAN:

The doctors and health workers came voluntarily. They were specialists and there were also general practitioners. Our nurses worked from morning until evening. It was very nice, and the health workers and doctors who came in from outside went away again content. They did so because they had done something good. We also had artists to thank. Many artists came. We were beginners and had no experience. But everyone left the area contented, and could enjoy the finished work.

HALIL TELEK:

And there was something else. In Turkey, parties, communities and presidents organise circumcisions. But never in anyone’s experience had a doctor examined the children before the ceremony. We did it differently, we had them checked because we did not know if there might be some medical problem if they were circumcised. In this way we proceeded scientifically.

NAZAN ASKERAN:

We had no experience but we picked up some at the festival. The first thing we learned was that we should hold the circumcision cermony during the holidays rather than dur-ing the school term. Secondly, we should get more people to provide clothes. Not for fi-nancial reasons but to bring the families closer. We should have the children circumcised in the morning so they can take part in the ceremony, after the pain has subsided. And we should hold the ceremony in a bigger hall, because the room was too small here. The people of the neighbourhood want a bigger hall for such ceremonies. If we do it in the summer, people will have more room.In your sittings there is no chairman and no presidium. What is the reason, how are

decisions taken and implemented?

ALI EKBER EMRE:

We must work on the unity of the people of Gazi. We are seeking to achieve collective solutions for the people of this area. We want to solve health, education and other prob-lems. We want to develop a culture of solidarity. There are people who want to sow con-flict between Alevis and Sunnis. We don’t have that but attempts are being made to cause conflicts. As Alevis, Sunnis, Kurds, Cherkess, Laz, Arabs and Turks, we seek to ensure that everyone can practice their customs. and despite all differences we will live together peacefully. Everyone is accepted as he or she is and we will achieve unity in spite of this diversity. In the future we are planning to found some cooperatives.Does the People’s Council also concern itself with problems outside the neighbour-

hood? How does it behave in relation to the oppression of other areas and indeed repres-sion in the whole of Turkey?

ALI EKBER EMRE:

We have already mentioned that ww will not stand idly by in the face of all Turkey’s problems, indeed those of the entire world. For example, when there are injustices some-where in our country, we will not remain silent. We will at least make our views felt in public. We will offer the oppressed our solidarity. We will not be insensitive. In any case, in this neighbourhood it is quite characteristic of our people to feel that way. I firmly believe that people show sensitivity. It is not just the case with our own problems but also with those of the whole country and indeed abroad. Our wish is that such People’s Councils will spread throughout the land. That means the consciousness of the people will grow and people will take on their own problems. If the people of Turkey take prob-lems into their own hands they will find solutions. If that is not done, no solutions will be found.

WE SPOKE WITH THE WOMEN IN GAZI

“WE WILL SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS WITH OUR PEOPLE’s COMMITTEES”

BEDRIYE CAVUS (HOUSEWIFE)

On September 22, 1996, there was a meeting of the women’s commissions. Our wom-en experience severe oppression. So they take great interest in these commissions. Our meetings go very well. We all inform the women in the neighbourhood about them. Our circumcision ceremony was very beautiful and very effective. The women in Gazi esteem the People’s Council highly. There was no difference between the work of the committees. We went to both the mosques and the Alevi community centres. At meet-ings, the women talked about their problems and sought solutions. Our women have health troubles. At the last meeting that was on the agenda. Some women did not want us to hold meetings in the evening, but we must solve this problem. We have women who work. We must think of them. I think that our numbers will grow. I will personally try to make sure they do.

ADALET BUDAK (COMPUTER EXPERT)

We have founded commissions in the areas in which there are the greatest problems. For example, there is a health commission, a sports commission, a women’s commission and others. They are responsible for different areas but they work together. A woman has special problems. Those are both education problems as well as health ones. We in the women’s commission want health check-ups for women implemented. Our women should learn something about family planning. Women have many infectious diseases. They have education problems, many are unable to read. Some women’s hand-crafted work carried out at home does not even pay them enough to settle a bill. We want to hold an exhibition. The women can organise that themselves. Men who will not allow their women to attend meetings are hereby warned. Our women can solve their own problems. They can find the strength to do that on our committee.

ZEYNEP ERTÜRK (SECRETARY)

Although we live in the 20th century, our women cannot read and write. This problem must be taken in hand. We as committee members want to offer reading and writing classes for our women. We must concern ourselves with our women who are unable to read and write. When our committee started to work, there were only a very few of us. But when we realised that we could do something, our numbers grew. A constant poblem of the area was the power supply. We feel better since the power supply problem was partly resolved. Problems like a lack of power, running water and streets hit the women hardest.

SAADET ERDOGAN (HOUSEWIFE)

We have a lot of problems in our neighbourhood. Health, electricity, water and others. We want the Peoples’s Council and the committees to interest themselves in those. These problems make the lives of women very difficult. In our neighbourhood there would be

no power supply for long periods. Now we have a women’s commission. Our work is going very well. Our women are getting closer to each other. I am pleased about that. I tell this to the people I know and call people. At the start, few women took part in the meetings of the women’s commission. At the last meeting of it, 20 people were present. This meeting took place in the house of a friend. We ae together but we also sought to achieve a solution to our problems. We talked about health problems. All the women took part in the discussion. Next week our doctor is coming. In future meetings even more women will participate. After the meeting everybody undertook to talk to all the women in the area. Before, many were rather withdrawn, but after the meeting they were happy to have taken part in it. Some women had problems with their men, since the meetings had happened in the evening. We told them they ought not to feel guilty about it. The men should try to adapt a little bit.

HANIM KARTAL (HOUSEWIFE)

I esteem the people’s committees highly. My son is in prison. We experience severe repression. There are a lot of prisoners. We must take care of our essential needs, they are in jail for us. I can only express and resolve this problem in our people’s committees. Previously I was striving alone to get help from people, but now there are hundreds of us and only collectively can such problems be solved. If we unite we can also defend our-selves. Up until now I haven’t gone to the meetings of the commission but I will do so. It is very good that there is a women’s commission and it defends the interests of women.

KISMET KILIC (DENTAL TECHNICIAN)

We expect the People’s Council to solve the problems of our neighbourhood, because the problems of Gazi are the problems of women. Our women are very interested in these activities and their participation will continue to grow. If we look at our People’s Council at the moment, we will see that of 130 members, 21 are women and the rest are men. At the start the number of women was even smaller, there were just five of six women. But we are seeing that the number of women is growing daily and that indicates that they have a positive view of the work and have recognised that it defends their dignity. We women will not find solutions to our problems through receiving support, but rather through our dignity. We have a lot of health and economic problems. Many women cannot sell the work they have made with their own hands, they receive little money for the small-scale work they do at home. They want to support their families, but each month they receive only 3 million lira, which is barely 100 DM (about 40 pounds sterling). The women work a great deal, besides housework they do other forms of work, but this is very poorly paid.

GÜLSEREN ATES (HOUSEWIFE)

I am a member of the women’s commission. We discuss the education, health, electric-ity and water supply problems. At our most recent meeting we talked about health. In

the next week we will all go to a check-up. I tell people about the people’s committees. Some are scared, they keep their distance. But when they see our work, they approve. There people who have thanked us although they never come to us. They too will come to us, sooner or later. If our power was cut off, it was cut off for as long as 24 hours. This kind of problem does not exist any more, thanks to the People’s Council, and the people know that. Everywhere I go, I tell people about the people’s committees and the People’s Council. The week before last I brought two women to a meeting. They were very glad to have gone, and this week I will bring two more. I love working for my people’s com-mittee. We must tell people about our work, in a little while more women will be taking part. It is good that no distinction is made between Alevis and Sunnis, and even better that suggestions can be made by everybody.

SERPIL YETER (CLOTHING WORKER)

I took part in the last meeting, it was the meeting of the women’s commission. I went with my mother. I thought it was very good. I see it as very positive that people’s com-mittees have been set up in our area. I am proud of them. The circumcision ceremony was very good. I talked to people about it beforehand and invited them. People have a positive outlook. We have a lot of problems in our area, for example with the tele-phones. Many people have no telephones at home. For a long time our phones were not connected up. And then electricity, water and health problems. The biggest problem is education. I have great hopes in our People’s Council. It groups people together because the situation in Gazi is very difficult.

FATMA ITMEC (WORKER)

The inhabitants of Gazi have a great many problems. I am a member of the People’s Council. We formed this council ourselves, and we will take it further. We should smooth the path to spread the councils. People should work with one another and make no distinctions. We went through March 12. Since that day, the government has seen us as terrorists. That is very difficult for us. It is very good that we live in peace and de-mand our rights. We must become even more successful. In the women’s commission, the women have expressed their demands. We are housewives and workers, that is very difficult. We are discussing our problems in the commission. Our women feel very good about it. We have gathered in a house with cakes and tea but we have not gossiped, rather we have discussed our problems seriously. Our aim is a very lofty one, we want to build a great sense of solidarity among people, that is a necessity. I speak to every one I meet in the neighbourhood. It is true that the inhabitants of Gazi are more severely oppressed than people in other neighbourhoods. We can solve all our problems with the People’s Council. At our last meeting it was about women’s health. Our women know nothing about their own health. It will take a while before our women acquire knowledge, but we will do it. We must work very hard, we may be very tired but I am ready. I will try to bring everybody to the meetings.

THE PEOPLE IN OKMEYDANI ARE DE-FENDING THEIR DIGNITY

“WE WILL NOT TOLERATE SCUM AND THE MAFIA”

Kurtulus November 30, 1996

After the Susurluk accident, one can see the fascist mafia’s true complexion much more easily. All this led to an explosion of anger among the people. Now it is known that the government in Turkey consists of the mafia. The mafia chiefs

are parliament deputies, senators and civil fascists known for their torture methods. Through these people, domination of our country’s fate is given into the hands of im-perialism. Our people are robbed of their honour. The population of Okmeydani which knows state terror very well, is now founding its own People’s Council, following the model of Gazi and Zübeyde Hanim. The solution of problems and the creation of order and security in Okmeydani are achieved through cooperation and collective thinking. The aim of the People’s Council founded in Okmeydani is that everyone, irrespective of religion or nationality, is able to find a solution to his or her problems under its auspices.One of their first actions was to lead a campaign against the more than 30 bars, all-night

establishments and pavilions. Now the people of Okmeydani have a People’s Council which considerably strengthens them in their struggle. Among their first activities was the collection of signatures from all inhabitants of the neighbourhood. Then a press conference and a protest meeting were organised.And it went on. After the dissolution of the press conference on November 25, they de-

clared at the meeting that they would not remain silent in the face of the mafia state. The entire population, old and young, took part in the protest action. Young and old people divided the work among themselves. The “Children of Hope” were to the forefront.At the press conference itself, which was held in front of the Anadolu cafe, an appeal

was made to the people not to be silent in the face of the dishonesty, corruption and dirty dealings of the government. The local inhabitants were disturbed by the bars and pavilions which had become a meeting point for drug addicts. The representatives of the committee tasked with founding the Okmeydani People’s Council emphasised that they were not prepared to share the neighbourhood with drug dealers.Slogans and banners underlined this determination of the people of Okmeydani in

the face of the bars, all-night establishments and the mafia network. The route of their demonstration took them past numerous bars like these. The artists of the Okmeydani Culture Centre also participated, with their slogans. At every bar and establishment where the demonstration halted, the owners were called upon to leave the area.The demonstration, which started with about 1,000 people, grew to about 1,500 as

people came in from the surrounding areas. The population of Okmeydani was itself surprised by the scale of the participation when it saw the crowds. The members of the committee who had gone from house to house to mobilise people for the demonstration,

awakened the people’s anger by telling them about the responsibility of the state for all the problems in the land and how Susurluk had caused its mask to fall. This anger was increased by the fact that the mafia chiefs were parliament deputies and senior politi-cians who betrayed the people and handed over the land to imperialism.The population of Okmeydani declared that they would not permit their values to be

trampled underfoot. They knew that if they were 1,500 today, tomorrow they would be 5,000. Through their decisiveness in the struggle against cultural and social exploitation, the committee to found the Okmeydani People’s Council showed courage and cheerful-ness in demonstrating the strength and power of the People’s Council.

THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL INITIATIVE IN SARI-GAZI WENT ONTO THE BARRICADES IN PRO-TEST AT THE TEARING DOWN OF HOUSES

THOSE WHO ARE UP TO THEIR NECKS IN FILTH HAVE NO RIGHT TO TOUCH OUR HOUSES

Kurtulus Dezember 28, 1996

“They are up to their necks in filth, but they still have policemen guarding their vil-las. We who earn our money honestly are having our houses torn down. God damn such a system of justice and such a state. Hopefully they will collide with another

lorry,” (a reference to the Susurluk scandal of 1996) a woman at the fire who carried her child on her lap called out. Everybody on the street said, “Even if we have to die, we will not let our houses be torn down.” “If they dare to come, let’s see if they have the courage to tear down Bucak’s house.” (Sedat Bucak, a member of the Turkish parliament and head of an armed militia was one of those involved in the Susurluk car crash.) The peo-ple behind the barricades are waiting and bring bits of shrubbery and twigs to the fire: “We could live here in a tent and wait, but we will not let our houses which are standing empty be torn down.”“Yenidogan”, a suburb of Sarigazi (neighbourhood towards the eastern edge of Istanbul’s

Anatolian side)... In truth, it is more like a village than a city neighbourhood. On the morning of December 23, after the Refah (Islamist) Party local administration had 38 houses destroyed, it was announced that another 300 lining the Pasaköy stream were to be torn down after their inhabitants had been removed. Twelve people who had hurled stones at the soldiers and officials executing the order to tear buildings down were tak-en into investigative detention. (There is a military base near Sarigazi, and the military police gendarmes execute many of the repressive functions in Sarigazi normally carried out by the civil police in other parts of Istanbul.) The reason given for tearing down the houses was the condition of the stream’s basin. Those who took no heed of this before and were quite free about having peoples’ houses officially registered (that is, treated as legal houses and not as illegal ones liable to destruction) when they wanted people to vote for them, were now supposedly going to destroy them for the sake of the people’s health. ISKI (Istanbul Waterworks) decided to tear down all houses within 100 metres of the stream’s basin, both to its left and right. The committee founded on the initiative of the People’s Council of Sarigazi decided, together with the people of the neighbourhood, to oppose the destruction of the houses and put up barricades. Barricades went up at entrances to the left and right of Atatürk Street. People took everything they could carry to the barricades.An ISKI lorry which attempted to get close to a barricade was met by a hail of stones.

The entire population was called out to defend the barricade. In the evening at about

2200 a meeting took place at which about 250 people were present and in the course of which decisions were taken about the barricades. At 2300, when the meeting was still going on, a party of gendarmes attempted to chase people from the barricade. Thereup-on the meeting was dissolved and its participants began to rain stones at the gendarmes.After the gendarmes had been forced to retreat, the people’s enthusiasm grew and songs

by the music groups Özgürlük Türküsü and Grup Yorum were sung. Until the next morning, people stayed at the barricades. Shopkeepers and small traders provided them with food. The district administrator who showed up at the barricades with some gen-darmes that morning, called on people to disperse. The answer from the populace was that “the people who are responsible should come and we will talk to them. Our houses ought to be officially registered. We will not allow our houses to be torn down.” The district administrator said that in this matter he had no competence and the problem could only be solved by ISKI. The people repeated that they wanted an assurance that the homes would not be torn down, otherwise they would not leave their barricades.About midday the people issued a press statement outside their barricades. In it they

said that the planned construction of an industrial site whose waste would flow into the stream near where they lived was the supposed reason for destroying their houses. The real reason, however, was to remove working people living in the Samandra, Ömer-li, Pasaköy, Yenidogan, Sarigazi, Sultan Ciftligi and Cekmeköy areas from their homes. Again they added in the press statement that under no circumstances would they allow their homes to be torn down.The most beautiful sight at the barricades was the women who moved from one place

to another in a body and said in unison: “It is all the same whether we sit on the street with our children on a winter day or whether we die. Is there a difference? The author-ities ought to look after their own dirt first.” The women said that the Refah Party had made nice promises before the elections, and they now regretted having voted for them. “When they officially registered our houses and accepted money from us, they never told us that because of the basin it was impossible to build a house here,” the women said, and another pointed out: “If they destroy our places, they should then knock down Bucak’s. All that filth is right in the centre of Ankara. They ought to instal sewage fa-cilities there.” Another said, “You are wrong. They can’t knock down his place. Who is Bucak? The state. And we are asking what the state is doing when it knocks down our houses.” “Well, what will we do if they come? There are stones, we can take them and hurl them at their heads if they bring the demolition vehicles. But the vehicles aren’t coming, instead they send us gendarmes. The women are enraged. They forget about us and have an argument: “Everybody should take a spade in their hand and stand in front of their door.,” “Let’s wait here on the barricades, but look how they ran when they saw the stones!” “And we were dumb enough to vote for Refah! God damn them to hell.” “Oh, stop swearing!” “Why should I? Why can’t they take care of their own rubbish? We can’t stand the smell of their dirty doings. I hope they collide with some more lorries and die like dogs,” they continue cursing.“Why do you keep going back to your house? You won’t go under if your house is dirty

for a day, why do you keep cleaning it, when they’re going to destroy it?” “I am freezing,”

said another. “Here is a fire,” said another, “Go and warm yourself.” “If they are going to tear our houses down because of the basin, why didn’t start right in the middle?” the women ask. “If they have to knock down something, why not the gendarmerie station? We are asking right after the Susurluk accident. We want to know what dirt they have uncovered there.” “Ah ilahi,” they say,.”Give a lorry the strength to be the second Susur-luk lorry. Everything is uncovered but nothing is done, because the whole justice system doesn’t work, it has been the journalists who have uncovered things, otherwise the state could have hushed up everything. The Catlis, the Bucaks, they all are murderers but they are the state’s people.” The last words of the women are unequivocal. “For us and our children, these houses will be cemeteries if they try to come and knock them down.”

CHILDREN ON THE BARRICADES AGAIN

Even if the children turn it into a game,they try to keep the fire going. They are the children of working people. Each of them is a worker, and none of them have a coat, their shoes have holes in them, and they were exploited even in their mothers’ wombs. They know the barricade of Gazi. They know that the Gazi people are like them. “Rich people don’t build barricades!” When they are asked what they will do, they reply, “We will protect our houses...”Waiting behind the barricades goes on until evening, during which gendarmerie men

come and talk to the people.The gendarmerie are saying that houses won’t be demolished and demand that the bar-

ricades be taken down. Two officers come later and want to hold talks with the people from the committee in the city administration. The committee sends two people off. The committee members who come back an hour after the talks note that the officer had as-sured them the houses would not be destroyed and that even if the district administrator insisted on it, the gendarmes would not support him. The officers also want the people to take their barricades down.Despite everything the barricades are not removed. The people demand to see the

mayor but are told that at present he is in Ankara. Towards evening military vehicles come up and approach the barricades, halting a certain distance away. The major who climbed out of a vehicle and went towards the people, declared that there would be no demolitions and therefore the barricades should be removed. He mentioned that at the moment, the relevant people from ISKI and the city administration could not come to the barricade but that the people could meet their representatives the next day and find a solution.After a long dispute, the gendarmerie commander assured the people on the barricades

that there would be no demolition and that they themselves would bear the responsi-bility if there were any attacks. During the argument a gendarme started dismantling a barricade from its front side, and repeated that there would be no attacks and the people should disperse. A mother speaks casually to a gendarme armed with a club, “What is that in your hand? Are you going to beat us? Have you no mother or father? Are you from a rich family, do you live in some villa or other? Are you not children of the people?

What would you do if somebody wanted to knock down your house?” The soldiers bow their heads one after another and she says, “Give it up, my sons, you aren’t protecting your country this way.” It was decided after a meeting of thre people and the committee to dismantle the barricades and the next day speak with the responsible officials.

A WORKING WOMAN WAITS BEHIND THE BAR-RICADES, HOLDING A CLUB

“Our only possessions are these houses. What will become of us if they are destroyed?”

Aysehan Sariyildiz is a 70-year-old mother. She knows everybody in the locality of Yenidogan, young or old. She calls on women near her to go and talk to the journalists, they should not be afraid, they are not thieves, they are not immoral people, the whole people should know of their suffering. They are not the ones who should be ashamed, they would not do anything shameful.Aysehan comes from Mus, a city in Anatolia. When her husband died, she was 40.“On our heads bullets were coming down like hail. We could not leave our houses. So

I came here with my children because I was afraid something would happen to them. I sold everything I had. I had a small house built here, one room for seven people. My widowed stepdaughter, my grandson, my son, my daughter, we all live in the same room. I am the ‘man of the house’. I earn the money. I have worked for years. Those I have served for years want to tear my house down.”For years Aysehan Sariyildiz was exploited by the state and she was always afraid of the

state, she respected politicians and thought one should never contradict them.She asked about the accident at Susurluk, she can neither read nor write, but she heard

other people talking about it.“The state’s people are supposed to have taken part in that, the state is not doing any-

thing against it, but they want to wipe out my tiny house, is that justice? Have they no fear of God? I cleaned up their rubbish for years, we pay taxes, electricity and water and money to have our refuse taken away, but they want to destroy my house in front of my children.”In answer to the question what she will do, she smiles: “What can I do, I am the man in

the house. All day I have been with my family on the barricades. If I must die, I will die this way, because I will only be taking a shroud to the grave with me.”

THE PEOPLE OF SARIGAZI INSIST THAT THEIR HOUSES WILL NOT BE DEMOLISHED

“We will spend the night on the barricades”

We have spoken with the people who have been on the barricades for two days to pro-tect their homes. The reaction of the people to the still quite real danger to their homes

is unequivocal: “Even if blood is spilled,they will not touch our homes.”

HASAN ALI CEVIK:

We should work together...My flat is right in the area they want demolished. Actually there are no homes that are

not in the affected area. The state gave me the extract from the land register, if it is the case that my place is in the ISKI (Istanbul Waterworks) area, then why did they give us the land register documents, what were they thinking? I have put everything I have into this flat. It would be better if the state killed me and my family, rather than tearing my house down. Tearing it down is death to us. Lately we have been spending the night on the barricades, we can do it again. We are always having meetings, we the people should work together.

MEHMET CIPLAKOGLU:

“We are erecting barricades just now”

Our flat can be demolished at any moment but we will not permit it. If necessary we can build new barricades. Now we are doing it. Our work is about preventing the destruction of the homes. In the meantime a committee to prepare the ground for a People’s Council has been formed. These are important developments.

NURETTIN BASILCAN:

“Now they are declaring quite shamelessly that our property is illegal in spite of the land registry documents”

They said that our 100 m2 apartment is in the water basin area and that the water of the Ömerli barrier is polluted. If that is so, is the problem solved by tearing our houses down? Where will the refuse of Yenidogan, Samandira and even the military barracks there go? This all means that they want to knock down everything there and empty the place of people. OK, let them. But they should then pay us for our property which is entered in the land registry documents. Then we will go. They rejected this offer. The rea-son they give is that our homes are illegal, the homes already entered in the land registry. All they say is just excuses. Why did they not warn us earlier if it was so? Why have they already offered us plots of land that have been sold? When someone asks them they say, “That doesn’t concern us.” If the flats are to be torn down, two experts should first come in to rule on the rights of the property owners. But they won’t talk about that at all. We insist that the homes are not torn down. I have 11 children and am 66 years old. Where can I go with them? We are the same people but we are being treated in an inhuman way.

FEVZI KARA:

“The initiative of the People’s Council has been founded”

We are carrying out actions in line with People’s Council decisions. We are going from door and door and speaking to people. We will not allow our homes to be demolished. As soon as they come they will be confronted with barricades. The flats are all we have, and that is not much to them. I know the People’s Councils of Gazi and Okmeydani and I am taking these as a model. It is very good and important to construct something like those in Sarigazi. We expect nothing from the system and its institutions.

DURSUN YORULMAZ:

“The People’s Council is very important”

I have eight children. On the day they come to destroy the homes, I will be with them. Then they will have to shoot every single one of my children. At the first demolition, we were at the barricades very early. Now meetings are held constantly and decisions taken, and in the end there is nothing to demolish. Where should poor people go, if their one-room apartments are destroyed? That is not so simple. The People’s Council is very im-portant, it should function like it does in Gazi. If necessary, one whould go as high as the President, but I can’t do that alone, as I have no money. But problems are solved easier if it is done jointly. We should always work together. But we should not leave everything to the young people, because older people can solve problems calmly.

SERPIL SARIYILDIZ:

“We will always erect our barricades”

When they came the first time, we built barricades, so this time they were not able to knock down our homes. We will always build our barricades. Now the People’s Council is holding meetings in the neighbourhood and making preparations which are going very well. They are tearing our houses down out of greed, there is no other reason for it. We built these dwellings with our own hands, we cannot say, “Please tear them down.”

AYSUN SARIYILDIZ:

“They can’t tear the homes down, they will have to kill us first”

At the last attempt to knock them down, an old aunt with a stick in her hand shouted, “For God’s sake, let’s stop those machines.” So people put up resistance. We have to do it too because all our work went into those houses. If the barricades are put up again, we will help. At the moment we are holding meetings in flats. Committees are being formed all over the place and the councils are making decisions. Of course they will achieve a result. This problem will not solve itself, and waiting won’t solve it.

THE POPULATION OF SAMANDIRA HOLDS AC-COUNTABLE: “IN CASE YOU TEAR OUR HOUSES DOWN, WE WILL TEAR DOWN YOUR ORDER!”

Kurtulus January 4, 1997

The people’s anger knows no limits. The people’s anger demands justice and the sentences are spoken out on the streets. Our people condemns the system and it expects nothing from the murderous Mafia-state which has been sucking it dry

for years, which has cruelly exploited and enslaved it. The people take to the streets with its anger.After the uprisings of Sarigazi-Yenidogan, the population of Samandira took to the

streets in masses. Shouting slogans, the people went to the doors of those who came to its doors before with their eviction machines.The working masses, which can no longer stand the filth of the system, are realising

their own councils on all levels as an alternative to the system. The people experience how their organised strength is growing, they feel what they can accomplish and how they can take power. The people’s councils, started in Gazi, are now rapidly spreading to all working areas.After a decision by the initiative for a people’s council in Samandira, founded by the

people to solve their own problems, 300 people gathered on December 30, 1996, in front of the community centre to protest against the demolition of the gececondus. They would never allow that their houses were going to be destroyed and they accused the Refah Party and its mayor of deceiving them with false promises. The people gathered in front of the community centre, clapping their hands and shouting slogans and holding speeches as well against the Mafia. There were many promises made to the people, but neither when the people had a look at the property book when the housing taxes had to be paid, nor during the elections did the people hear of the plan to tear down their houses. But one day the demolition machines stood in front of the gececondus. With the slogan “They spoke of a system of justice, but they ate Samandira”, the population protested against the Refah Party and they called upon all the people to join the protest. The people of Samandira summoned the mayor to come down and they accused him and the authorities of always talking about the Islam on the one side, using the Islamists for their own purposes, but tearing down the houses of the poor in the winter on the other side, without any scruples. The Refah Party came to power with the slogan of a “system of justice”, but now there is nothing left of it, the promised “system of justice” has become a “system of injustice”. The protesters demanded the stepping down of the mayor of Istanbul, R. Tayyip Erdogan. Their was no reaction from the city authorities when the people summoned the mayor to make a statement with the slogan “the mayor must come down”. Thereupon the people took to the streets with their loudspeakers and the blocked the traffic. Their slogans were: “We are the people. we are right, we will win”, “Samandira belongs to us, and it will always be ours”, “In case you tear down our houses,

we will tear down your system” and “Do not remain silent, because you’ll be next”. The people who looked down from their windows, or who stood by, were invited to join the demonstration: “When they come to you to tear down your houses, it will be too late”.The demonstration went on for a while and then returned to the administration office

where the mayor had called for armed soldiers. The people yelled: “Let him send away the soldiers and try to stop us himself ”. The people wrote down their demands and feel-ings on paper, which they found on the street, expressing the strength of their conviction to be right, their legitimacy and their power.After the demonstration, a speech was held in front of the administration building: “We

are ending our action for now. Those who want to tear down own houses are not even capable of showing their faces to justify themselves”. The protesters told the press: “Look, he did not show up, he sent his gendarmes” and they stated that bigger actions would fol-low in case the demolition would go on. After the final speech, smaller groups continued the protest, they told the representatives of the press about their problems, how big the authorities had felt when they destroyed their houses with their demolition machines, but that they did not even have the courage now to look out of the window, calling for the gendarmes to protect them. When the gendarmes tried to dissolve the meeting, the population answered: “Is there a rule which states that it is forbidden for ten people to stand together? Although the action is finished, we want to have a talk”. This successful action, and the cowardice of the mayor who did not even find the courage to appear for his own people, has strengthened the faith of the people in their own strength.The barricades of Yenidogan and the actions of the people in Samandira have, once

again, shown the fear of the bourgeoisie for the inhabitants of the gececondus. People who gave their votes to the Refah Party only yesterday, even supporting its propaganda, are now taking to the streets with bricks and sticks. The people lost their faith in the state, a state which has become considerably weaker after Susurluk. When the people take to the street, demanding justice, they will see that those who behave unjust and malicious towards an individual, lose their courage when they are confronted with an united people, they will see that their own confidence and courage will grow.

WHILE THE STRUGGLE CONTINUES, IT EMBRACES CHILDREN AND WOMEN AND IN THE END IT WILL EMBRACE ALL WORKERS

The sign with the slogan “We are the people, we are right, and we will win” was carried by the 12 year old Ümit in the front row of the demonstration. He kept it dry with a piece of plastic. When we asked him why they were right and why did were going to win, Ümit answered: “We will not give them the opportunity to tear down our houses, because otherwise there would be no gececondus left in Istanbul”. He stated that the houses were being demolished because the inhabitants were poor, and he continued: “Abdullah Bay-ram (the mayor) has a house over there, they will tear down that as well”. Will it really be destroyed as well? “How should I know, I don’t care what happens to their houses but we will not allow them to tear down our houses”. Ümit speaks with a conviction which one would not expect at his age. The demagogy of Abdullah Bayram doesn’t have any effect

on him. Whether the mayor will tear down his house or not, it doesn’t matter to Ümit at all, but he will not allow them to destroy his own house. The children of Samandira have grown up, another child suddenly speaks: “He’s lying sister, do you really believe that he is going to tear down his own house. He will first tear down our houses, then he will sell the land to the rich and become rich himself. Ümit thinks that the demonstrations and protests will stop the demolition of the houses: “They destroyed a lot of houses in Sarigazi, the people there had to live on the streets in the winter. But after the barricades they were not able to destroy the houses anymore.” The children have faith in the barri-cades, the demonstrations and in resistance. We asked them a classical question: “What will you do when you grow up?” The children gave the right answer: “We will become revolutionaries”. Even after the action was ended, Ümit was holding up the sign in front of the gendarmes. His friends are participating as well, they continue to march and they are shouting the slogan: “We are the people, we are right and we will win”. The children are not willing to leave, they are not afraid, neither for the gendarmes, nor for the police.And then the women. At last they stand in the front rows, next to their husbands and

children. Sometimes they guard the barricades, sometimes they express their anger, shouting. The women demand justice and in front of the administration building, they shout: “In case you are men, come down you unworthy people” and “What have you done with our tax money?”

IMPERIALISM’S GAME IS BEING DESTROYED IN BERGAMA

Kurtulus January 25, 1997

Bergama (Pergamon) is a village one and a half hours from Izmir, and with its natural beaty it is one of the tourist sights of Turkey. Without regard for man or nature, a for-eign firm is now trying to exploit the natural resources of Bergama through methods of extracting gold which are destructive of the environment (using highly poisonous potassium cyanide) and thus liable to destroy the local population’s basis for existence.

IMPERIALISM IS THE ENEMY OF NATURE AND MAN

Imperialism is the enemy of all human values and destroys nature in its drive to ac-cumulate capital. Bergama has made this clear once again. The Eurogold firm and its collaborators are unscrupulously threatening life. However, the people of Bergama are not remaining silent about this massacre of nature. Since 1990, the population has been fighting with all its strength against the sale of its land and the basis for its existence to foreign capitalists.The people say: “We are being sold cheaply for dollars.” The relevant people in the state

apparatus knew perfectly well that,at the point that gold extraction using the cyanide process would be started, people would be poisoned by the chemical waste and gases which would enter the water and the air. The life of humans and animals in the region is under serious threat. Potassium cyanide is getting into the water in the soil and harvests, and thereby the livelihood of the population, are being poisoned.The people who have fought for years against the Eurogold firm which collaborates with

imperialism, is shouting the slogan, “We are the people, we will win.”The people of Bergama have resolved that it is right to drive Eurogold out of the area. To

give expression to this and to make their cries for justice heard everywhere, they are or-ganising press conferences and panel discussions.They are not just protesting against the destructive machinations of Eurogold but have organised mass actions over the past six months. To coordinate the different mass actions and organise them better, committees of action were formed. To do this, a People’s Council was set up according to the wishes of the villagers, to take part in the struggle against Eurogold.The People’s Council is the true organisation of the people. Here, word and deed are the

same. The People’s Council is the organisation where all problems and attempts at solu-tion can be discussed by the people, and everybody has the right to express themselves, where decisions are made and those who make the decisions also exert themselves to carry them out.The united people are throwing their entire weight into the struggle against the murder-

ous efforts of Eurogold to extract gold using cyanide.Different parties and organisations (HÖP, DSP, CHP, ÖDP, KESK, SES, Atatürkcu

Düsünce Dernegi) are helping to spread the village council to other villages. At the meet-

ing in the village of Pinar, inhabitants of four or five other villages also took part. The People’s Council, founded by the freely expressed will of the people, consists of villagers. To make the work of the People’s Council easier, individual tasks have been allotted to villagers. After discussion with the population, actions were carried out, for example street blockades. In the meantime there are now People’s Councils in 17 villages which in a disciplined fashion defend the rights of the people, are saying a resolute “NO” and are putting up resistance to the exploitation of nature, the destruction of their environment and livelihood and threat to their lives from Eurogold.Everyone who claims to be human should pay heed to the cry of the people of Bergama,

who are defending the future of their villages, and help them to resist imperialism and its collaborators. The problem is not just one of saving nature but also one of human survival.The people of Bergama will not sell their land to the imperialists.

“THE ONLY THING WE HAVE LEFT IS TO FIGHT”

Hamza Kural (peasant, 32, from Narlica village)

Gold extraction using cyanide will have a serious effect on our lives. We live off the land: it is our only means of sustaining our existence. The damage gold extraction is doing here is undisputed. It is a matter of human survival. If gold is mined here, we have no choice but to fight against it. Either we die from potassium cyanide or we die fighting it.

“WE CANNOT FAIL TO STRUGGLE”

Hüseyin Ozyali (peasant, 46, from Cam village)

We seek democratic solutions. But the state does not hear our voice. We are ignored. We will not leave our land even if it costs us our life. We are ready to do anything so that this firm which threatens our life disappears from here, and we will not give up without a fight.

“THE PEOPLE WILL FIGHT FOR JUSTICE”

Süleyman Bektas (peasant, 50, from Cam)

The fate of our people cannot rest in the hands of those who work for the state. We will try all democratic methods, and if necessary the people will fight for justice.4cdb v254

II POLITICAL SITUATION OF

TURKEY and

THE DHKP-C ON THE STRUGGLE FOR

THE PEOPLE’S FRONT

BUILDING THE PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT

THE PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT WILL GROW IN STRENGTH, THE REVOLUTION-ARY PEOPLE’S LIBERATION FRONT WILL TAKE ITS PLACE IN IT AND AT THE

FOREFRONT! WE WILL ALL WITNESS IT!

NOBODY WILL HAVE THE STRENGTH TO PREVENT THIS!

Kurtulus no. 19, March 1, 1997

A sensational headline: “The DHKP-C is behind the action ̀ One minute darkness for eternal light’”.This action is a protest action which has grown to become a people’s move-

ment, and the fact that the DHKP-C represents a force within it is only natural. The DHKP-C has been part of the struggle for 30 years, not as a mere witness but as an active player. This force, beginning at the end of the 1960s as the THKP-C (People’s Liberation Party and Front of Turkey), stretching to the present day DHKP-C (Revolutionary Peo-ple’s Liberation Party-Front), is of a magnitude which cannot be neglected in the class struggle in our country.The Party-Front was established on June 15-16, 1970. It was present at every May Day

celebration from 1977 to 1997. It was present at the miners’ strike in Zonguldak and at the large strikes in the companies of Maga and Pasabahce. Its banners were waving in the protest marches for the murdered Muammer Aksoy1, its name is connected with every punishment of the people’s enemies.The Party-Front marches in the front rows of the demonstrations by the civil servants.

A major part of the relatives of the prisoners and the disappeared are its sympathisers.It’s only natural for the DHKP-C to be a thriving part of the forces behind the action,

“One minute of darkness for eternal light”. According to journalistic criteria, this fact is hardly newsworthy, it would be sensational to be able to report that this was not the case. Didn’t the oligarchy and its papers know that the DHKP-C would take its place in this people’s movement, just like in other areas? Didn’t they know that the DHKP-C would lead this action? Of course they knew.So why was this self-evident fact presented as a sensation? Why did some parts of the

bourgeoisie feel uneasy when they had to read this? We can find the answers to this question when we look at what the different interest groups within the state want to do against the increasing crisis.The monopoly bourgeoisie which “dims the light” wants to bring down the Refah Party.The influence of the opposition parts of the bourgeoisie on the people is declining every

day. Their proposals are met with rejection. But the calculations of the government and

1 A democratic professor, murdered by the contra-guerrillas in revenge for the punish-ment of an enemy of the people by DEVRIMCI SOL in 1990.

the oligarchy don’t succeed. Despite their governing majority, they are unable to end the crisis. On the contrary, their policies and their measures are only sharpening the crisis. And also the ANAP and the CHP, who were able to use this protest as part of the bourgeois opposition, had to withdraw when the protest started to become more radical and anti-system.From then on, ANAP became silent, although it made a lot of fuss about Susurluk be-

fore. They are afraid of being crushed under the avalanche of protest. Before, they had tried to steer the protests against Susurluk into mere opposition to the government in power at the time. Well, were they successful?To find out in what shape the present government is in, it’s enough to look at the latest

statements of two government representatives:Yalim Erez opens his statement with the words “We can no longer withstand the growth

of the social opposition”, and he continues: “the social opposition has put itself in the place of the political opposition. A point will come at which there can be no more con-sensus. Where it would be necessary to stop the social opposition, we are moving in the wrong places. We must try to achieve a compromise, instead we are living according to the slogan ‘we’ve paid our debts for today, may Allah help us tomorrow’. We should blame ourselves in part. Instead of putting ourselves at the head of the protests with lit candles, we have put ourselves outside it and we are denouncing it. We cannot make policy by fighting everything and everybody. The party leaders are sticking to each other like burrs. When one of them becomes less popular, the others lose influence as well. But they are unable to recognise this.”Avyaz Gokdemir, another representative of the government coalition goes on: “It can-

not go on like this. What can the coalition do to hold on to power? The lights are going out and the tanks start rolling. More and more lights are going out and the tanks are becoming more and more necessary.” (Hurriyet, February 23, 1997)A growing fear of the people’s movement can be sensed in these lines. They are afraid

and that’s why they attack. The influential role of the DHKP-C in this people’s movement is a reason for them to attack. Another reason for their fear becomes clear in the words of Yakin Erez: “If one falls, this does not automatically mean gain for the others.”This is the essence of the democracy game of the oligarchy. When one of the establish-

ment parties is used up, another one is built up as a new messenger of hope. But they can no longer play this game. And so their fear of the people’s movement is growing on all levels.The bourgeoisie is powerless against the growing people’s movement, but they are try-

ing to take over the political lead. The “Democratisation Report” of the monopoly as-sociation TUSIAD and the dimmed lights in the Sabanci Centre (owned by one of the wealthiest families in Turkey) are attempts to hold on to the helm.The monopoly bourgeoisie tries to use the people’s movement with slogans calling for a

clean society to bring down the Refah Party.The “Rally of the Millions” is a result of these attempts. ANAP, Turk-Is, DISK, KESK

and the “Association for the Thought of Ataturk” called for this rally to bring down the government coalition. That’s their only goal. It’s not about clearing up the events around Susurluk, or even holding those responsible accountable, they think all is achieved by bringing down the government.That’s why they are all singing the same song about the imminent end of secularism.

And the general staff acts as the lead singer. That’s how they want to cover up the filth which emerged after Susurluk, covering it under the carpet of “the crisis of secularism”. The entire discussion is based on artificially created themes. Secularism lost its impor-tance for the system back in the 1970s.A second important point in present politics is how the unions are used in the power

struggle of the rulers of TUSIAD and the general staff. The intellectuals in particular should think about that.The report “the DHKP-C is behind the candle-action” is part of the manoeuvres of the

oligarchy. The intellectuals and the democrats should think about that too. The attack against the front is an attack against its legitimacy and the legitimacy of the entire people.What’s the logic behind this attack? What does the oligarchy hope to gain with this

demagogy? The intellectuals and the democratic associations should pose these ques-tions in the first place. For years, there have been extra-judicial executions in this coun-try, and how did you act? The oligarchy always legitimised these executions by claiming the executed belonged to the DHKP-C, and you gave your consent by keeping silent. And now they are attacking the actions in which you participate, using the same pretext.Those who are against the mafia gangs should be aware of this. Those who are convinced

of the legitimacy of the fight against the mafia gangs, should be convinced of the legiti-macy of the Front as well.It’s understandable for the oligarchy to fear the politics and the analyses of the Front, but

there is no reason for the intellectuals to feel uneasy.The intellectuals and all democratic institutions which support this action should at

least ask themselves, considering the statements and the analyses of the Front, whether they are right to do so, or not. Is the Front not a product of this land? Are its people not citizens of this land? Do they not have the right, like everybody else, to think about the future of this country? Of course they have, and they are using this right. They do not see this as a mere right, they see it as a duty which they take more seriously than many would like to believe. It is the duty of responsibility towards the people of this land, to-wards the future of this country, which they take seriously.The demagogy of the oligarchy is saying: “Well, you’re participating in this action, led

by the Front, you’re becoming accomplices of the Front”. Yes, the Front initiated this action. But do you therefore have to distance yourself from this action, an action you’ve defended till yesterday? Is this sincere conduct? The slogan “Do not remain silent, if you remain silent, you’ll be next,” originated with the Front. It stems from April 1993, when the IYO-DER students Ugur and Sengul were murdered by the contra-guerrillas. The slogan has spread since then. And now? Is it wrong because it’s from the Front? Millions of people are shouting it every night.

Or the slogan “We are right, we will win”. This one was initiated by the Front as well. Nowadays it can be heard at every demonstration of workers and civil servants. And now it’s wrong?The question whether a slogan originated from the Front or not is not important. It’s

important whether it’s right or wrong. Is it humiliating the intellectuals when a slogan of the Front proves to be right? Then why this conduct? But that’s the logic of the intel-lectuals: when the state denounces the Front as a terrorist organisation, they withdraw.The legitimacy of the TUSIAD is inside your heads, not the legitimacy of the Front.

How can this be? What has the Front done to you, what has it done against the people? What’s to be said against the goals, the ideals of the Front for the people?

WHO ARE THE PROVOCATEURS?

It’s obvious, nobody must avoid this issue. There are those who try to mislead the peo-ple.Despite the demagogy of the oligarchy, large parts of the people could be influenced. On

the other hand, many intellectuals and artists could be made insecure, especially because of the campaigns in the media like “be on your guard, the revolutionaries are involved”. The goal of this campaign is to push the revolutionaries aside. Many intellectuals could be heard saying, “we do not want any provocations”. Of course, you’re right not to want provocations. But what do you know about provocations anyway? How should you? What kind of provocations have you been confronted with? We know quite well what provocations are. We’ve always been confronted with them.Who are the provocateurs in this country? Look at the provocateurs from the massacres

at the University of Beyazit on March 16, 1978, or the provocateurs from Gazi, known from pictures now. When have you ever seen a provocation from our side? You cannot give one example. Because our struggle is an open one. Our actions are directed against torture, against the enemies of the people, and we have claimed every action which was carried out by us. There are no hidden or secret actions in our history. Our mass actions are open.The goal of all our actions is to achieve freedom and rights. The security of the people

has been the first priority in our actions in the past 30 years.There are no provocations from our side. We have no need for provocations.Do not listen to the statements of the minister, listen to the Front.If you had listened to the Front as carefully as you’ve listened to the minister of the

interior, Meral Aksener, or the press of the contra-guerrillas, you would not make such mistakes. What has the Front done? It tried to develop the people’s movement in differ-ent ways. The characteristics of the people’s movement, stemming from the light action, were a reason for the Front to halt military actions for the time being. Perhaps you’ve missed it, but a statement from the Front on January 26 declared: “...The contra-guerrilla regime is going through its deepest crisis since Susurluk. They are panicking and they desperately try to cover up their plots and murders, the filth they are in. This panic can

clearly be seen in the speech of Tansu Ciller to her party on January 25, 1997. Ciller did not restrain herself from trying to connect the opposition leader and voice of the bour-geoisie, Mesut Yilmaz, who is well known to want to stabilise the system, with the DH-KP-C and the PKK. She even denounced the journalists who write for the bourgeoisie as communists. She denounced all mafia gangs as communists and traitors, except her own. Based on an intelligence report, Ciller stated to her party on November 28, 1996, that the DHKP-C was preparing new actions...”Of course, we hunt these gangs of criminals to expose the true face of the criminals to

the public. This is our task as the vanguard of our people. The contra-guerrilla regime, to which Ciller and Mehmet Agar also belong, always wants new provocations. Their main interest is in intimidating the revolutionaries, the opposition and the democrats, in legit-imising the mafia gangs. The public should watch the attacks against the revolutionaries, and especially against the mass movements. The regime of the mafia gangs has shown it will use all means to destroy the people’s opposition. The media should not have allowed themselves to be a tool of the rulers in these provocations...Is this brief explanation sufficient to explain the events? The enemy accuses the chair-

man of ANAP, Mesut Yilmaz, of having fallen for the tactics of the DHKP-C and the PKK. The rulers are denouncing democratic writers as “communists”. They openly ad-mit their intention to “intimidate the opposition, to whitewash the gangs”. Intellectuals should be able to see through this. All democratic forces can express their opposition against the government by choosing the side of the DHKP-C in the “one minute of dark-ness” action.What is the strategy of the Front? Before everything else, we want to further develop

the mass movement. In this task, it acts very carefully and conscientiously. It has really become time for the intellectuals to overcome the decades-old demagogy against the revolutionaries like “terrorists” and “directed from abroad”. Those who claim that the revolutionaries are directed from abroad should have a look at TUSIAD. TUSIAD is an association with strong ties to the imperialists and which shapes its policy according to the strategies of the USA and the European imperialists.We will not allow the people’s movements to be suffocated by such cheap demagogy. As

long as the intellectuals and the forces of the people are aware in this regard, the influ-ence of the demagogy can be curtailed.

THE FRONT REPRESENTS AN ORGANISED PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT IT DEFENDS THE INTERESTS OF THE PEO-PLE, NOT THOSE OF THE MONOPOLY CAPITALISTS

Organising the people must be supported by all democrats, intellectuals and revolution-aries, by all those who oppose the mafia gangs. Only an organised people can change the policy successfully. As long as the people’s movement is not organised, it will remain in its infancy and fail miserably. A non-organised force cannot prevent exploitation by

other forces. At the same time, these forces are on the one hand afraid of the people’s movement, on the other they try to exploit it.All people, from the trade unions, the democratic initiatives, from intellectuals to the

democratic people’s forces, should be aware that the oligarchy attacks the revolutionaries because they represent the only alternative to the system. Those who deny the legitimacy of the revolutionaries, who don’t recognise the legitimacy of the Front, legitimise the gangs and their deeds. Why was this country governed by several military juntas? Why were new laws passed? When these questions are answered, one of the reasons will al-ways be the THKP-C, DEVRIMCI SOL or the DHKP-C. Why were these gangs formed? Against whom are there “operations” directed? In whose name is justice trampled upon? The massacres and executions are being ignored. This cannot be. Ignoring the massacres and executions means covering up the gangs. Those who oppose the mafia gangs cannot allow this. Otherwise new Agars would take his place.

THE REFORMISTS AND THE OPPORTUNIST LEFT HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR NOT LISTENING TO THE FRONT

Although the reformist and opportunist groups do not have the same ideology as the in-tellectuals, they too closed their eyes and ears to the proposals of the Front. They judged the proposals by the Front without understanding them, or without wanting to do so.Of course, from the perspective of the bourgeoisie and the reformists there is no pro-

posal by the Front which could have been followed. Their goal was obvious throughout the entire action and it was described in a DHKP-C statement of March 18, 1997:“The bourgeois parties and some circles around them try to channel the mass protests,

they try to use them for their own purposes, to bring their own party to power. The reformists cherished the hope of winning the race for parliament seats against the bour-geois parties which are stuck in a quagmire. They all didn’t want to see the true reasons for the misery, they wanted to deny the fact that only revolutionary people’s power offers a solution.”The statement furthermore contains a programme of the Front with 61 points. In these

61 points, the Front describes how the masses can be politicised and how the people’s movement can be developed. They describe how to break the influence of the bourgeoi-sie, how to further the initiatives of the people. All these analyses and proposals proved right in the end. Those who reject even discussion of our proposals now have to account for this. What was there to be afraid of, what was wrong with our proposals?Now it can be clearly seen that all these proposals could have been realised under the

leadership of the revolutionaries. The revolutionaries could have taken over the leader-ship together in this phase. The political influence and the organising could have been broadened. The media would have followed us. Nobody would have had a chance against this people’s movement.All this did not happen. The reason is that some organisations did not pay attention

to our predictions and our proposals. They intentionally ignored them, and when they

were confronted with them directly, they pushed them aside...And so it happened that the TUSIAD proposal could be adopted. The opportunist left’s

belief in its own strength, weak to start with, dwindled even further when TUSIAD be-gan to take action into its own hands. It is obvious that those in power will always try to play their own game, the only question is how we handle this.The left should carefully think about why they rejected the proposals and analyses of

the 61-point programme of the Front. The opportunists really failed this test badly. The union Turk-Is, for example, greatly valued the demonstration they held to show their op-positional stance. But when one looks more carefully, it can clearly be seen that they ac-tually stood behind the system. In all their proposals, they used the “ideas for a solution” of the ANAP and the CHP. So what stand are those people taking whose line is identical with the Turk-Is line? Where do they stand in practice? What are they opposed to?They constantly talk about the politics of the working class. But what policy are they

pursuing, and why? Without an answer to these questions, clarity cannot be achieved. The left claim that every policy is right as long as it comes from the workers. This is non-sense, something does not necessarily have to be right just because it is from a certain class. It would be something different if they could say, “we, as communist workers, do it like this.”When we proposed to have a joint demonstration, it was said we had to address the plat-

form of the different groups, and they were making up their minds about the proposals. So we addressed the platform. There we had to conclude that there was nothing coming out of this platform, except the statement about Susurluk which was a familiar one by this time. Do the workers have nothing to say about Susurluk, do they not want to do anything about it? Susurluk is a turning point in this phase. Susurluk is the basis for the demand by the people to hold those responsible for crimes accountable. Susurluk is the expression of years of dissatisfaction and the need to get even with the rulers.A revolutionary policy, and the task of the revolutionaries, consists of presenting a pro-

gramme, organising the masses to fulfil the people’s demands.The views of the DHKP-C, as well as those of the other leftists must be judged from this

perspective.

WE CAN DEVELOP THE PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE FRONT

Without the perspective and the activities of the Front, the goal of gaining power is not realistic. The other leftists lack this perspective, resulting in their incomprehension and their lack of sensitivity concerning the proposals by the Front and the needs of the people. Their democratic demands, their conventional analyses do not fit the “determi-nation of communists”. The ODP and other reformists are looking for the benevolence of the bourgeoisie. That’s why they do not dare to break through the barriers to political activity set by the system.A front with the perspective of taking over power, acts accordingly.

Although the opportunists have been talking for years about general strikes and overall resistance, they aren’t doing anything concrete to realise this. They neither have concrete views nor plans.The conditions for a general strike or for a resistance which is carried out by the broad

masses exist. One only has to lead the people into this resistance. But to achieve this, one needs a perspective and understanding of the needs of this phase. The left does not have either.We publish our analyses, we make proposals, they reject them. Later they pick up some

of our proposals and they present them as their own. That’s no problem for us when they “steal” our proposals, what is important is the realisation of the right policy.We must destroy impotence, despair and disorganisation. That’s our task, we represent

hope, we are the alternative. Everybody has to see the events, the consciousness and the worries of the people. It’s obvious to every democrat, every ordinary human being what’s going to happen when the government is changed. It’s clear to all, it needs no more words, the system of the bourgeois parties tramples upon the people. Despair starts at this point.What to do? What tasks do the revolutionaries have? There are not that many answers.

All proposals within the framework of the system only increase the people’s despair. Of-fering new elections to the people in this phase only means offering them more despair, it only means increasing their feeling of impotence.But the left is far from recognising the hope of the revolution. Some cannot even handle

the term. Others constantly talk about it, just to profit from only talking about this hope.The four decisive tasks nowadays are to give the people’s movement roots among the

broadest sections of the people, giving this movement a concrete goal, strengthening or-ganisation in the masses, establishing the people’s movement in this way and spreading the voice of the revolution. Those who cannot understand this, who turn their backs to these tasks, are condemned to remain bystanders in this phase, without any influence on the development.The Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front will fulfil these tasks and take its place

within the people’s movement. Notwithstanding all the problems, it will fulfil these tasks with its legitimacy, ist determination, its belief in the people and its capabilities. This also includes the task of uniting all the forces of the people, the intellectuals, democrats, patriots and progressive people in this people’s movement. No demagogy and no attack by the oligarchy will be able to prevent the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front from doing so.The military is trying to make the state apparatus, which became incapable after Su-

surluk, function again by intervening. It is preparing new attacks against the people’s opposition while it attempts to strengthen the morale of the state forces again. Several members of the MIT and the military are looking to “clean up” the system, or at least make a pretense of doing so. It’s their goal to make fascism socially acceptable by this

pretended self-cleansing and they want to push through even harsher repression. The bourgeois parties, the media, the Turkish secret service MIT, parts of the army and sim-ilar forces which pretend to demand “clean politics” and a “clean society” are not on the side of the people’s front, they belong to the fascist front.Because the military cannot create the necessary conditions to legitimise its interven-

tions, the general staff started to build up a “Islamic danger” in cooperation with the media. And surprise surprise: when the military did not succeed in coming out clean after Susurluk, when they did not succeed in covering up the whole filth, suddenly the media came up with the “Islamic danger” and the Refah Party became the target. While the bourgeois parties only wanted to bring down Refah, it was clear to the military that new elections or a new government coalition were not going to stabilise the system. They wanted to discipline all bourgeois parties. By taking over control of the government, they wanted to destroy the people’s movement, presenting themselves at the same time as the only clean force. And so they conveyed the message to all the forces of the state, waging the war against the people, that the state controls itself, that it is stable and that the war against the people will continue. In a situation where the state was paralysed, and where the military had to ask itself who it was fighting for and why, the military presented itself as the real force in the state.Contrary to all their statements, it became clear that the economic and political rulers

do not have the possibility and the strength to stay in power against the people’s move-ment. The fact that the bourgeois parties are not able to govern, and that the military has the possibility to intervene but cannot stage another coup, is an expression of the weak-ness, the lack of orientation and the lack of solutions of the system. This lack of orienta-tion and these cracks in the system will increase, while the people’s movement will grow.It has become obvious that the interventions do not have the strength the prevent the

spreading of the movement. The fascists are not the deciding force, the revolutionaries are. The ideology, the psychology, the ethics etc. of the fascist state forces are used up. It is shown that the strength of the mobsters and the gangsters can’t possibly stop the people’s movement. That’s not to say that the oppression and the violence do not have an effect. Until final defeat, the violence against the revolutionaries will continue, but this will also accelerate the decline of the system. This is the phase we are in now. Fear is growing because of the massacres, the disappearances and the torture, but the strength of the people’s movement, which will defeat fear, is growing at the same time. And now they are attacking each other because of their fear of what they have created. Contrary to their announcement of a “social and political solution”, they have neither the strength for social nor for political changes. The oppression and the violence against the revolution-aries continue. Under these circumstances, there is only one way: destroying the enemy’s morale by showing the true face of the state to the people even better than before and by increasing the struggle. The people got to know the reality of the revolutionaries and they are more interested than ever. It’s impossible for the supporters of civil society and the reformists, despite all their attempts, to steer the people’s movement into another direction. It can be said that these revolutionary dynamics have brought many disillu-sioned and despairing people closer to the revolutionary reality. These people want to

become revolutionaries because they understand that no other kind of life is better than the life of a revolutionary.

WE MUST UNITE THE DEMOCRATIC OPPOSITION

Kurtulus no. 32, February 17, 1996M. Ali Baran

One of the most urgent questions nowadays is organising the democratic struggle and its central leadership. Here we mean the democratic struggle of the trade unions, the democratic mass organisations, civil servants, students, inhabitants

of shanty towns, youth, poor peasants, professional associations, representatives of all confessions and minorities. This struggle cannot be confined within either the limits of the bourgeois parliament or some press statements and protest actions. Organisations are necessary which can express the democratic-opposition potential of all popular forc-es, join them together and lead them to take action. Fascism can lay its own internal differences aside, unite, use every kind of repression and bring this to bear from one con-trolling centre, directing it against the revolutionary, democratic and socialist struggle of the people. While the oligarchy practises this repression, the internal contradictions and contradictions with imperialism remain. But its attitude towards the growing revo-lutionary movement is principally based upon its need to defend its own class.Even though at present the economic, political and military, indeed all institutions of

the fascist state are in the midst of massive conflict with one another, all, from the em-ployers’ association TUSIAD to the bourgeois parties, the army, police and media, all are united and directing their entire strength against the revolutionary people’s movement.The revolutionaries confront the task of exploiting the contradictions which exist

among the rulers and using them in the interests of the people. But the revolutionaries may not take up the task of making and forming their strategy for the path to revolu-tion depend upon the contradictions within the oligarchy. To formulate strategy based on these contradictions would mean only working within the limits of the system and possibly even improving the system itself instead of overthrowing the regime. Whoever represents such an opposition restricts himself to being just a protest movement and has no conception of driving the revolutionary-democratic opposition forward, halting the exploitation and repression of fascism, to drive forward the struggle for the rights and freedoms of the people and to make this struggle a part of the political struggle for power.Inside the Turkish left there are many negative forms of behaviour which have almost

become a tradition and must be combated. Even though there are disputes day after day among the leading forces within the oligarchy, they still are able to work together, so as to unite against the growing opposition of the people and maintain their own power. The left, which claims to want to relegate capitalism to the dustbin of history, has developed neither a programme nor a tactic for uniting on various levels so as to work construc-tively to thwart just about every centralised attack by the rulers against resistance to their regime. That is not so easy to explain with merely superficial observations.The left which seeks to overthrow the bourgeoisie and set up the working class in power, has never

succeeded in organising the united democratic people’s opposition. This is an expression of the fact that only the interests of the group are being represented, an expression of backwardness and of not wanting to take power.This is done by those who want to find a place in the opposition sanctioned by the

oligarchy, to frame their reactions in an appropriate manner and to take a liquidationist position towards revolutionary movements. We often hear words like unity, bloc and front, but when we ask the question “what is the aim of them, whom are they meant to serve”, there is no satisfactory answer. In a phase in which the struggle is broadening, the aim of units, blocks and fronts is not to erect a barricade against the policies of fascism but striving to achieve reforms within the system. After they had understood that im-perialism and TUSIAD did not want to continue their existence using old policies, they want to dissolve the potential for revolution in the melting pot of the bourgeoisie under the pretext offered by bourgeois democracy.The Kurdish national movement has only sought a purely Kurdish solution acceptable

to imperialism and TUSIAD and have framed their own strategy and tactics appro-priately. With such a tactic the revolutionary people’s opposition is incapable of func-tioning, it is forced to give up the revolution in exchange for bourgeois democracy, the self-determination of nations and certain cultural rights within the capitalist system and under imperialist control. As long as imperialism and capitalism rule, the freedom of the nations and the fraternal living together of the peoples is not possible.The solutions of the imperialists and TUSIAD, their striving for democracy and their

defence of human rights are pretenses. It is the revolutionary people’s opposition that will solve the questions of the people and the struggle, combat the fascist regime and finally overcome it.If attempts to spread the people’s opposition throughout the country are not successful,

the bourgeoisie, which is in an immense crisis, will manage to crush the people’s oppo-sition and remain in power.Nowadays many trade unionists, democratic organisations, individual progressives and

also legal left-wing parties talk about an intensification of the struggle by the masses and make appeals to the people. The result, however, is not the one expected.Why? Fascism executes people in public and practices a good deal of torture and cruelty.

The response to it is restricted to a few declarations and small-scale protest movements. The military ruthlessly drives people out of their villages and again and again makes people disappear. Oppression and exploitation continue with undiminished severity. Some people try to survive on rubbish dumps, others commit suicide because of the terrible poverty. The trade unions, democratic organisations and parties either remain silent or report again and again on a situation that is obvious to everybody.After about 3,000 villages had been emptied in Kurdistan, people in Sivas were then

forced to leave their villages. Although for a long time there has been no discernable revolutionary development there to cause the enemy concern, aggressive tactics are an innate part of fascism and so it started to empty the villages. The enemy, who takes de-cisions centrally and conducts its attacks in a professional manner, is trying to destroy

the revolutionary struggle at its very roots. Although recent experiences have scarcely lost their impact, the left has learned almost nothing from them and trundles along in the same old way. It announces its indignation in some press statements, in a few pro-tests which scarcely make a dent in public consciousness and most recently it complains to the European Commission on Human Rights, a tactic which has become somewhat fashionable. The regime took the weak and barely noticeable protests into account in its planning and chose a suitable moment to attack the democratic and progressive villages of Sivas. Those who do not recognise the fascist character of the state, who fail to see the unified character of the various parts of the oligarchy as witnessed in the central plan-ning of their attacks, think that they can deal with the situation by voicing complaints. Those who do not understand fascism can hardly have the destruction of fascism as their aim. Their mentality is such that they focus their energies on combating the special police units, which are merely an auxiliary force in the fascist order of battle. The regime then pulls these special units back and carries out new attacks using the gendarmerie and the military. The mentality of some people today tries to target the special units, tomorrow a bourgeois party, the day after a person or institution in the state. However, the real culprit, the state as a whole, is not blamed and never treated as something to be destroyed. To achieve the abolition of the fascist state involves fundamentally changing one’s own mentality and method of struggle. Demanding reformist changes has its place in the revolutionary struggle but is not the aim and is only a tool to help achieve that aim. The left conceals reformist and bourgeois ideas behind apparently left-wing masks. Without shame or scruple, they seem to regard everyone as intellectually backward by putting demands which are necessary on a daily basis (the closure of the anti-terror department, the security service the MIT, for example) into their party programme. In such a way they seem to think they are proving their own convictions to the people and promising them liberation.Of course, fascism has no trouble getting along with people who hold this mentality.

When a bourgeois party working in the name of the system ceases to function properly, another party with a different name is simply dispatched into the political arena instead. If an institution ceases to lose its value for the rulers, it is closed down and another one founded. The reformists, whose aim is not the conquest of state power, turn themselves and the people into pieces in a game played by the oligarchy. Imperialism and TUSIAD decide the rules, which are about repression and terror, but democracy is promised as a way of deceiving the people.The revolutionary war must be illegal, legal, armed, democratic and ideological in all

areas, in all the forms the struggle takes. The obstruction of the revolutionary struggle is in direct proportion to the sprad of nationalism, reformism, every kind of confused thinking and pacification. The attacks of imperialism and the oligarchy on all revolu-tionary forces and the granting of various possibiliites to those who try to work within the system means the continued existence of the state.If the revolutionary struggle contains no perspective (the “revolutionary front”) to car-

ry a united struggle forward, or no clear results come to light, the oligarchy, imperialism, TUSIAD and also the reformists will be able to continue their games with the system

and slowly dissolve the people’s revolutionary potential. The crisis the oligarchy is in is a chance to find a way for the revolution, to develop the revolutionary front in illegal, armed, unarmed and legal ways, using every possibility the struggle affords and and in this way to deal the enemy one blow after another. Admittedly, nobody is claiming that with the appearance of the revolutionary front, everything will be perfect. It is possible to found several organisations which aid the people, who actually conduct a struggle with the oligarchy, whether through armed, unarmed or other means, in order to, step by step, approach nearer the revolutionary goal. The functions of different organisations can be very limited, or very broad, but their common basis must be the abolition of the currently dominant system. All classes, layers of society and communities, whether national or religious, which are oppressed and exploited by the system, all those whose right to life is withheld, together could form a mighty force. The answer to the question, “how do we do that?” is contained in the answer to the question why we cannot unite against the oppression and exploitation of fascism, why we have not been able to link our protests and jointly direct much greater power against the rulers, but a correct and honest answer to the question is necessary.For all revolutionary, progressive, democratic institutions, such as trade unions, var-

ious professional associations, legal left-wing parties,human rights associations, revo-lutionary journals, all those in the left-wing spectrum which is against the oppressive and exploitative politics of fascism and believe in fighting this politics, the problem is how one can actually fight and how to conduct the struggle. Nobody can force a demo-cratic institution, democratic groups or democratic persons into actions which are not compatible with their wishes and are unbearable to them. A democratic institutin can have the wish to conduct the struggle within the system. This is understandable. It is possible to find a basis for revolutionary and democratic forces which are within these boundaries and which helps to discuss diverse themes and find common paths. There is no insoluble problem if we intensify our striving and our thoughts and think how we can be even stronger against the enemy and push the oligarchy even more deeply into crisis. The problem is whether the will is strong enough. Today all classes and layers of society, the population as a whole, long for joint actions and a centrally directed revo-lutionary democratic opposition. Not satisfying these expectations would mean leaving the people’s forces at the mercy of the bourgeoisie and under its ideological hegemony and would prevent an even greater and stronger people’s opposition from arising, thus allowing the system to hang on for a bit longer.In some regions, a some levels, the desire of the grassroots in revolutionary organisa-

tions for a joint struggle is very strong. In areas in which this unity is achieved, a growing sense of enthusiasm is attained and the trust of the people in the revolutionaries grows, and then the enemy tries various tactics to destroy this unity. Despite these examples of positive rapprochement at grassroots level, the leadership of various organisations is stubbornly struggling against such moves, though they cannot explain why they are doing this.It is not clear why many are not taking part in the actions of young people against

executions and disappearances. Thoughts like “If we took part, we would have in effect

accepted your initiative and joined your organisation” are childish. They are worthy of those who are not thinking of the revolution and the struggle of the popular masses. In the same way there were some who following massacres did not even take part in the funeral ceremonies for fallen revolutionaries, or who talk a lot but do nothing. They send various messages to the oligarchy in this way and then pretend to be revolutionaries. In order to actually be revolutionaries, they will have to adjust their behaviour. It only helps the oligarchy if one is an obstacle to striving for a united struggle by the people’s forces.By coming together, the different political structures, persons, groups, democratic or-

ganisations can form platforms for discussion and an answer can be found to the ques-tions, “with whom, what, and how”. While almost all sections of the oligarchy are car-rying out a joint struggle against the revolutionaries and the people, the revolutionaries are not even able to work together against the oligarchy at the most basic level, and that shows that they have an even more backward culture than the oligarchy has.So as not to deliver the people’s resistance bound and gagged to the bourgeoisie, to

prevent imperialism and TUSIAD from taking decisions about the freedom of the peo-ple, in every area of struggle we must come together in platforms, because the arena of struggle is everywhere the people are. This process of organisation must be quite open and legitimate.Everyone who is against imperialism and fascism, whether they are revolutionaries,

democrats, patriots, progressives, Kurds, Turks, Arabs, Laz, Cherkess and so on, should form democratic opposition parliaments or democratic opposition fronts, whose aim is to represent the demands of the people and combat exploitation and injustice. Such a parliament, such a front can consist of representatives of democratic organisations, trade unions and professional groups covering the whole country.They discuss the platforms that are formed and who takes part in them. Only when this

basis is determined can it start to function. Of course, there will be many problems in organising such a thing. The platform must discuss these details. If the platform takes its task seriously and is able to fulfil its mission, it will create the people’s opposition against the represion and exploitation of the state and spread the struggle for justice and fredom throughout the land. Those who remain silent or do not join the platform should explain why. If their convictions lie elsewhre, they should seek to explain to us why. To remain silent and flee from unity means not believing in oneself and fleeing the revolution. This parliament will be a higher form than disorganised cooperation and struggle limited to individual units and localities. It will if necessary be a coming together of hundreds of organisations or groups whose legitimacy will come from the unifying of the democratic people’s opposition. In this People’s Council all kinds of problems can be discussed. It will make judgements and have them carried out. It will be artery through which the people’s lifeblood flows.

THE FRONT WILL BE DEVELOPED FURTHER

Kurtulus no. 31, May 24, 1997

The oligarchy has closed the May Day file for its part. Because firstly, the crisis it is in has become so big that it has become necessary for them to keep the rev-olutionaries out of the public’s eyes for as much as possible, and secondly, the

oligarchy did not achieve any success on May Day.From the leadership of Türk-Is, the governor of Istanbul to the columnists in the pa-

pers - like Mehmet Ali Birand - all of them spoke about a “successful” May Day. They expressed their wish and that’s all they got. They made themselves ridiculous. The masks of the collaborators fell and the situation of the popular masses was obvious. Türk-Is, DISK and all chambers of commerce came together to emphasise, as always, that they represent 6.5 million people. No, they do not represent 6.5 million people. The situation there became obvious on the May Day squares.On the other hand they were unable to prevent the march of the revolutionaries. The

revolutionaries approached the enemy with their banners, their flags and their “militias”. It was shown to the people in Turkey that the revolutionaries are not people’s forces which can be pushed into the background in one way or the other, and that the revolu-tion cannot be prevented. Despite all the threats and the demagogic statements before May Day, despite the arrests and the relatively small participation of the masses, the oligarchy was unable to achieve real success. The May Day celebrations have maintained a consistency of mass participation and have happened nationwide. The failure of the oligarchy becomes obvious when the Front is looked at.For the revolutionaries, the reduced participation of the masses is something to be

looked at carefully. More precisely, from the viewpoint of the developments since Su-surluk, the number of people should have increased, but the participation of the masses was more or less equal to the previous year. That’s the present situation. Seen from the viewpoint of the mass movement, the problem is not a general decline, it is a decline which is specific for May Day. This must be seen clearly. On March 12 and on March 16, for example, the masses did come despite many obstacles. Twice as many people partic-ipated at these commemorations compared to 1996.The demagogy of the enemy regarding May Day has not been eradicated completely.

The marks which were left behind by May Day 1977 and 1996 have not been removed, the masses have not been given enough confidence. On the contrary, opportunism pur-sued a road which established this mistrust. The year-long policy of liquidations, mas-sacres and disappearances, and the consequences for the consciousness of the masses, constitute the material basis for the effect of terror and the demagogy of provocation. In such circumstances, the behaviour of the left (i.e. opportunism) did not succeed in drawing a clear line from its front against the demagogy, it did not succeed in leading the masses, giving them confidence. Despite the decreasing participation, the reality of the revolution ruled on the squares and in the streets. In contrast to the capitulation of

the trade unions of the MGK (National Security Council), tens of thousands marched among the ranks of the revolutionaries. This is the essence of May Day. Despite the dis-advantages and the deficiencies, the Front presented itself as a force. And the Front, with its strength, will go on to organise and develop the people’s movement.The crisis of the oligarchy will continue and increase. They act as if the causes for this

crisis must be looked for among sections of bourgeois politics. The search for new gov-ernments, early elections, petitions and threats of a coup will remain on the agenda. But none of this will provide a clear and obvious solution and escape from crisis.The policy of massacres by the state, which became apparent in Susurluk, will continue,

and so will the gang wars. While this situation limits the room for manoeuvre of the oligarchy, it is imperative for the revolutionaries to organise the people’s masses against the state which revealed itself in Susurluk, in a struggle with clear demands. The room for manoeuvre for the oligarchy is limited. Neither the proposals of TÜSIAD, which are needed for the system, nor the proposed economical and social measures of the MGK regarding Kurdistan, can be implemented because of the present economic and political desperation. The system does not even consider itself strong enough to introduce re-forms, to take tactical steps to strengthen the reformists.At such a point, the policy of the revolutionaries, the democrats and revolutionary

democratic institutions and organisations plays a major role. It’s obvious, peace or early elections are not on the agenda in this country. This can only be temporary tactics of the ruling classes.The end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s were a period in which the call

for “peace” found an echo. Now, at the end of the 1990s, the shroud has fallen from this peace which was enforced by imperialism. To offer such a “peace” to the people once again is an attempt to throw back the revolution.The function of earlier elections was even openly described in the bourgeois press: “cur-

tailing the pressure”. That early elections, with no other function than diverting the anger and dissatisfaction of the people through the polling boxes, have nothing to do with revolutionary politics and tactics is obvious.Neither reformist, legal, tactics like early elections and “peace”, nor the propaganda of

opportunism - far remote from the needs, the demands and the fears of the masses - can prove themselves. Apart from coincidental similarities, these demands are so old and far from any chance of being effective, that they cannot even achieve short-term effects. The Front will continue to develop, it will stay away from the tactics and the policy of opportunism and reformism, basing itself on the revolutionary mass line, never losing the perspective of winning power. The only line which can develop further, the only way the revolution in Turkey can be achieved, is this one.Day by day, it is becoming more clear that the People’s Councils and the proposals

for a people’s constitution constitute a policy which fulfils the needs of this age. While opportunism and reformism try to copy these proposals in part, they continue their pseudo-criticism, essentially aiming at rendering these proposals ineffective. They will continue this policy.

The policy and the tactics of the Front are causing confusion in a lot of minds. They have difficulties comprehending the originality of the Front’s line, its growing roots with the reality of the country and the people. Some talk about red headbands, some talk about the masses in the mosque. We do not concern ourselves with these things. We are talking about a front. About a people’s movement. We are aware of the fact that there will be no revolution without a front and the people’s movement. This is our task and we will pur-sue it and we will continue our development along this line.Our present proposals and the policy we pursue will find an echo when they fulfil the

present needs. We could come with new proposals tomorrow. While we develop these proposals, come up with a new policy, we do not care what they call us. We care about developing the revolution, about organising the masses for the revolution, about enlarg-ing the Front and leading the struggle. Our policy and our proposals are right as long as they serve these aims.As is shown concretely, for example from organising in the trade unions DISK, KESK

and the unions of the MGK, this will not be an easy process. During this phase, there will be an ideological struggle with opportunism, reformism, but also with those forces within the system, or seeking integration in the system, which call themselves “left” or “revolutionary”. It will be the actual objective of our policy to enlarge the people’s front, to restrict the enemy’s front. There are two sides to this. One side is to unite all people’s forces, all democratic institutions and mass organisations which strive for democracy, which want freedom and justice. We will be adamant in this. On the other hand, it will be inevitable to deal with those who call themselves “left” and “democratic mass organi-sations” but who essentially try to prevent the revolution and are on the side of the MGK and the oligarchy. For example, in the struggle within the working class it is inevitable that we will have to fight against a union policy which is favourable to the MGK. Such a process will be seen in the struggle in the gecekondular (shantytowns) as well. The same will occur among the workers in the public service. We will deal with them in all areas.In this process, the reformists will be forced to a adopt a clear line, they will be forced

to choose. The intellectuals will have to give up their vague position, the KESK will have to give up its vacillation between a democratic position within the system and a revolutionary one, they will have to take a clear position. This is a quite natural need and a result of progress. While we work on the one hand to unite the people’s forces, the people’s movement, on the other we will force this on an ideological basis. Regarding this, the Front takes a quite clear and open line. The intellectuals, the public servants, the reformists and the opportunists will be drawn into the masses. There they will have to show their true colours. Depending on how we organise the people, create organisations in which the broad people’s masses will be able to use its rights to decide for itself, all will be forced to either join these, or they will be separated from the people. The struggle demands the same decision: depending on how it will develop - armed or unarmed - in different ways, all will either have to seek their compromise with the system, or they will have to take their place among the people.The task of the Front has become even bigger now, its mission clearer. Our main task

is establishing our organisation in such a manner that we will be able to fulfil this task,

succeeding in this mission. It’s obvious, the oligarchy will try to block the Front con-stantly and massively. It especially seeks to prevent the emergence of cadres in the Front organisations, the democratic organisations and organisations of the people who would be able to take upon themselves a leadership position. It seeks to eliminate the existing cadres. We have to take great care at training the cadres to crush the attempts by the en-emy. When the oligarchy eliminates something, we will build, when it destroys, we will reorganise, when it annihilates, we will have to re-emerge at the same place even strong-er, more experienced. This side of the struggle will continue without a break, without interruption. There is no room for daydreaming about “democratisation”, “peace” and “early elections” in this struggle.The enemy has been destroying for decades. But the line of the Front regarding the

masses has proven its value by staying upright, despite destruction, by continuing the struggle and developing the people’s movement. The essence of this line, clearly visible at May Day 1996 and 1997 is: believing in the people, the roots with the reality of the country and the people, political clarity, productivity and determination in its policy.Based upon this, the Front has now become politically the most productive, the most

vivid among the masses, the most constant and determined organisation in the struggle for the revolution. Yes, we are self-confident. This confidence must be carried to all our activities, from the smallest to the biggest, it has to be carried into all our contacts, all ac-tions. When we act confident, we will certainly achieve even greater and quicker results.The militias of the Front are marching.... The Front says.... The Front acts.... The Front

fights.... The martyrs of the Front.... The pamphlets of the Front.... Under the leadership of the Front.... Yes, everybody will talk about the Front. The Front will be present in the nightmares of the enemy, its name will be uttered by the people, and it will march shoul-der to shoulder with its friends. This claim is not unrealistic. It’s a normal requirement in the setting of our mission, the aims of the revolution and the determination to win power. Those who do not achieve this, who cannot realise this work, will be unable to organise and achieve the revolution. With this determination and this confidence, we will march on. Nobody will be able to stop the Front. Obstacles can only be temporary ones. And we will not be deterred by these difficulties. Our history, our present reality, the situation in our country and of our people, they all show the conditions for the devel-opment of the Front. The Front will develop further, because of political necessity, and it will show itself worthy of our history, our present existence, our country and our people.

FASCISM CAN ONLY BE BEATEN BY REVOLUTION

Kurtulus no. 20, 25. November 1995M. Ali Baran

The coalition between the DYP (True Path Party - rightists) and the CHP (Re-publican People’s Party -social democrats) has failed. The attempt by the DYP to govern on its own failed; they didn’t get the confidence of parliament, despite

the support of the MHP (Nationalist Action Party - fascists). Thereupon the old coa-lition between the DYP and CHP was restored. This government decided, although it was hard for them, to call for new elections in December. The crisis of the oligarchy is continuing. The decision to hold new elections has deepened the conflicts between the parties. Resignations and expulsions from the parties have aggravated this conflict into a war. Between the old and new coalitions of the bourgeoisie, polarisation has become more pronounced.This crisis is not new. It started in the 1950s and could not even be overcome by the

military coups of 1960, 1971 and 1980. On the contrary: the problems became bigger, the crisis has taken new dimensions, especially since the coup d’etat of September 1980. The oligarchy did not succeed in mastering the crisis, despite several “pacifications”. Their economic and political measures only caused further dependence on the imperi-alist states and greater poverty among the masses. At the same time the resistance of the people against the regime developed. Although the state uses all its institutions and par-ties against the revolutionary struggle and relies on paramilitary forces, the government with its instruments of oppression was unable to destroy the revolutionary struggle against injustice. On the contrary, together with the oppression, resistance grew as well.For decades the oligarchy betrayed the masses of the people using new parties, new

images and new promises by successive governments. But none of these governments succeeded, with every new government the oligarchy lost a little more prestige.After the coup d’etat of September 12, 1980, the bourgeois parties, founded with the

consent of the generals and controlled by them, literally shunned responsibility for building a government. All state institutions were governed and controlled by the Na-tional Security Council (MGK). The bourgeois parties were subjected to this supervision as well and could not, and did not want to, free themselves from it. The old depend-ence on imperialist policies and national monopolies led, logically, to dependence on the generals. In this way the contradiction grew between the parties and the demands of the people. And this caused the masses of the people to become alienated from the bourgeois parties as never before.The parties, completely estranged from the people, openly abused elections, govern-

ment and parliament, for their own goals. They did not hide embezzlement and immo-rality, on the contrary: they tried to legitimise it. They presented themselves, again and again, to the normal people as immoral, corrupt parliamentarians who were completely bought and sold. And more and more the people rejected them. During this phase many

bourgeois parties became insignificant, and on the other hand radical Islamists (RP - Re-fah or Welfare Party) and fascists (MHP) got more support on account of their apparent opposition to the bourgeois system.The Islamists of the RP linked the demands of the masses with religious motifs. They

decorated their capitalist and pro-imperialist ideology with social rhetoric and they ver-bally adopted some of the demands of the masses. By doing so they won influence.On the other hand, the fascists of the MHP sought refuge in Turkish nationalism as

Kurdish nationalism developed. When the oligarchy showed itself to be powerless against the national and revolutionary struggle, the MHP went out of its way to organise in the armed institutions of the state. They became the leaders and executioners in the struggle against the revolutionaries and patriots. And while the bourgeois parties be-came weaker and weaker, the strength of the MHP grew. Almost no party objected to the MHP organising in state bodies, on the contrary, they even supported it. The MHP has always been the secret partner in government, in many cases it directed state policy. No single party has ever really been against the policy of the MHP, albeit they did not want to give it formal governing power. They all need the MHP when the conflict sharpens between them and the people. The MHP uses this dependence to gather strength and gain power.At the moment there are parties who once more want to revise the left slogan from the

time of the September 1980 coup: “Fascism is growing, do not give it an inch”. This line is particularly followed by the Communist Party of Turkey (TKP). It does not accept that the state system in our country is fascist, it restricts fascism to being merely a matter of dealing with the MHP and in this way draws its conclusions. With this viewpoint the TKP supports the bourgeois parties, and especially the social democrats (CHP), against the MHP. And in fact the TKP has of its own free will framed its policy according to the wishes of the CHP.Fascism is the form of rule in Turkey. It cannot be reduced to the MHP. The state appa-

ratus obeys the laws of fascism. No party is able to refute these laws. During its history the MHP has always been used by imperialism, the bourgeois parties and the monopo-lies. And when it had finished their dirty work, it was dropped.When one puts the MHP on a par with fascism and calls for stopping “the fascist path

of development”, one leads the people to cling on to the bourgeois parties. This policy leads to reducing the conflict to a fight between the parties and struggling on the level of legalism and parliamentarism. The social democrats of the CHP have until now been the most important pillar of support for the fascist state. On the one hand they gave themself a social democratic image for world opinion and the people, on the other hand they shared responsibility for the fascist policy of the state by supporting all decisions of the National Security Council and the MHP. In underdeveloped and poor countries like Turkey, one cannot make policy with fairy-tales about a social state. This policy leads parties like the CHP to splits and the loss of its base. Neither the CHP leadership nor its following are able to develop in the growing crisis. Of all bourgeois parties, the CHP went through the greatest conflicts over collaborating with the fascists against the

people, or choosing the side of the people. In this conflict it quickly looked for a solution on the side of the fascists. While the people looked for new strategies, the bureaucrats of the CHP pulled further and further to the right, until they formed a common front with the fascists.The True Path Party (DYP) of former Prime Minister Tansu Ciller has always been a

faithful servant of the oligarchy and trustworthy to imperialist states. But because of the fact that the DYP cannot offer solutions in the sharpening crisis and cannot prevent the revolutionary struggle, thus falling down as an ally of imperialism, it is continuously los-ing influence. Not capable of freeing itself from this situation through its own strength, it relies on the MHP. The closer this bond becomes, the more the DYP and MHP resemble each other. And struggles between the different wings and splits within the DYP were not able to prevent this development. The members of the DYP who recently resigned or were expelled also bear responsibility. Their separation from the party is a separation from Tansu Ciller. In the past they all supported the pro-fascist policy of the party and its subjection to the decisions of the National Security Council. Perhaps they are now joining other parties. But none of these parties will be very different from the DYP.The Motherland Party (ANAP) is a child of the September coup and the USA. The

history of the ANAP started with the cooperation between Turgut Özal (a former pre-mier of the 1980s, now dead) and the USA. When Özal was unable to lead Turkey out of crisis, ANAP lost power in the elections. But through the support of the USA and the oligarchy it was kept alive until now. Strictly speaking there is no big difference between the ANAP and the DYP. The only difference lies in the timing of pushing through the US imperialist interests in Turkey: where the DYP did not succeed, the ANAP has to carry on the same process.Now, before the elections, the ANAP went into a coalition with those who left the DYP

and the New Democratic Movement (YDH), led by Cem Boyner. It pretends to work for the “democratisation” of Turkey. But despite this new image, it will continue the old policy, a policy which supports the fascist system.The YDH was supposed to be an alternative to the existing parties. In its advertising it

pretended to be a source of hope. But despite all the propaganda, which the YDH used to attract the votes of Kurds in particular, it was quickly exposed as a champion of US-backed capitalism and a supporter of the ruling fascist system.The Democratic Left Party (DSP) was already collaborating with fascism before the

CHP did. Party leader Bulent Ecevit verbally put himself on the side of the people before the September coup and he claimed to be against the military junta. Nowadays he fol-lows all the decisions of the National Security Council and he is starting to be a carbon copy of the veteran fascist MHP leader Alparslan Türkes (died 1997). This change not only concerns Ecevit but the DSP as a whole. With this attitude the DSP is in reality more powerful than the CHP which has to defend its social base. But the DSP is losing all its influence among the people because it lacks a clear line of demarcation from the fascist parties.Besides these, there are several more or less insignificant bourgeois and fascist parties.

We do not have to speak about all of them now. They all have in common the character-istic that they support the ruling fascist system in its main directions.The collapse of the socialist system concerned the Marxist-Leninist liberation move-

ments in the whole world as well. Only the left organisations in Turkey seemed to be largely spared from the “cleansing process” which set in everywhere. However, this only seemed to be the case. The “cleansing” of many aspects of the socialist world view and the ideas of the “New World Order” found a resonance with many left organisations and resulted in a new strategy of going legal. And while the socialist revolutionary struggle is on the rise again in the whole world, legalism and petit-bourgeois nationalism are gaining more and more ground in the left organisations in Turkey.The strategy of legalism involves giving the decrepit parliament a refurbished appear-

ance to make it look like a way to liberation in the eyes of the people. And so some left organisations form legal parties, and the Kurdish nationalist Kurdistan Workers’ Par-ty (PKK) tries to talk into existence the possibility of a parliamentary solution for the “Kurdish question” with the motto “compromises and a political solution”.For decades we have heard slogans from the Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) like

“peace”, “democracy”, “compromises” and “prevent the rise of fascism”. With these slo-gans, the TKP has always made policy for the CHP. The TKP did not shape its policy to bring about a people’s revolution. They rejected calling the ruling regime in Turkey a fascist one and in doing so they strengthened the bourgeois parties who do not confront fascism. The policy of the TKP was also influenced by the position of the ruling govern-ments towards the socialist mother party in the Soviet Union.The officials of the PKK try to gain seats in the Turkish parliament with the help of some

left organisations. They call this cooperation “the front for work, peace and democracy”. Thereformist strategy of the Kurdish movement is not a new one. The DEP, a Kurdish party which was legal for a while, worked together with the SHP, the predecessor of the present-day CHP. Members of the DEP were candidates on the lists of the SHP and some became members of parliament. In the name of democracy, the DEP even supported the DYP-CHP government. However, this did not prevent them going from parliament to prison because of engaging in “separatist propaganda”. Apparently, the members of their successor party, the HADEP, have already forgotten these events, busy as they are with trying to become parliamentarians in the same way. Likewise they must have forgotten that it was particularly the DYP-CHP coalition who, in the service of the fascist regime, put pressure on the Kurdish people.From their narrow point of view, with their Kurdish state as the only goal, the Kurdish

nationalists try to get to the negotiating table, together with the oligarchy in Turkey and the imperialist “protecting powers”, no matter what the costs are. Notions like peace and democracy only have meaning for the Kurdish nationalists when they can be used for this purpose. In this policy there is no place for a revolutionary people’s government which consists of all the people who live in Turkey. Bringing down fascism in Turkey is not their goal. They merely fight for a Kurdish national state. Not the infertility of these national ideas, but the reaction to them has made them so blind as to take part

in a coalition with the SHP, which massacred the Kurdish people, just so they can get a few seats in parliament. This ideology and this policy is nationalistic. Everything which serves their own nationalist purposes is right. In this sense, one can understand the petit-bourgeois nationalists. Out of this pragmatism they hang on to the veteran new reformists in these elections and try to get into the parliament with this “front for work, peace and democracy”.The TKP, like the DEP, ignored fascism. Indeed, only the TKP denies the fact that the re-

gime in Turkey is a fascist one. By supporting the parties who support fascism and with their coalition with the reformist TKP, the DEP is also taking part in denying fascism, although they do speak of a fascist regime. When one does not take the view that there is a fascist regime in Turkey, it is possible to believe the struggle for democratisation can also be fought in parliament. When even the imperialist states speak of “peace” and “democracy”, negotiations should not be a problem.Fascism is the form the state takes in our country. Without defeating fascism, without

building the revolutionary people’s power, neither peace nor democracy can be intro-duced. Liberation can only come from revolution. As for the defenders of parliamentary road, it is questionable what kind of peace and democracy they are speaking of. The Kurdish national movement means granting some rights to the Kurdish people. The United Socialist Party (BSP) and the platform “Let’s build the future together”, who are opposed to any form of revolutionary violence, only defend socialism and democracy in the framework of the “New World Order”. They left the road of bringing down fascism by the people’s revolution a long time ago. Nowadays they totally reject underground organisation and the armed struggle. With “peace and democracy” they mean the end of the armed struggle and parlemantarian discussions within a framework set by the oligarchy. That’s why they are all united in this “front for work, peace and democracy”. The Kurdish nationalists don’t care about the means and the compromises, as long as it serves their purposes. The reformists agree to anything, as long as it gives them the opportunity to participate in politics on legal platforms.That the nationalists want peace is understandable. But when they speak of themselves

as Marxist-Leninists, one has to contradict them. Peace and democracy can only be achieved by revolution, without bringing down fascism they cannot be achieved. Parlia-ment cannot be the place for this struggle. Against the parliamentarian struggle in itself, nothing can be said. That’s not the problem. However, when a front is formed to take part in the elections and to get into parliament, then the opposition to ruling-class pol-itics has no meaning any more. A front against fascism can, with cooperation from the workers, peasants, the people in the slums, small business etc., be built in the mountains and the slums.Nowaday imperialist states and a part of the oligarchy in Turkey want to give certain

cultural rights to the Kurdish people under the slogans of “peace and democracy”. In this way they want to destroy the revolutionary potential of the Kurdish people and guarantee the stability once more of the monopolies. The Marxist-Leninists do not see the liberation of the Kurdish people as the recognition of certain cultural rights. The lib-eration of the Kurdish and the Turkish people is only possible by a struggle which is led

from a socialist perspective. This struggle will lead to the fall of fascism and the building of revolutionary people’s power. Any movement which tries to talk the people out of this struggle, harms the people in Turkey.Replacing today the military and political struggle with slogans of peace and democra-

cy, and moving the struggle to parliament and imparting the people with new trust in parliament by creating a “front so-and-so” is a reformist path which cannot lead to the goal.A revolutionary front against fascism is necessary, without any doubt. But it should be

a front which, armed and unarmed, wages every kind of struggle, and its goal should be the destruction of the fascist system. All other fronts are doomed to act within the limits set by the “New World Order” and doomed to suffocate within those limits.Although the members of the People’s Democratic Party (HADEP) come from sev-

eral classes, it is strictly speaking a party of the Kurdish lower and middle classes. It represents the Kurdish national interests and therefore directs its policy of “peace and democracy”according to these interests. It puts nationalist interests before the interests of the Kurdish and Turkish people and develops its policy accordingly. The DEP, its pre-decessor worked together with the SHP. It supported the coalition of the DYP and CHP. After its search for coalition partners among other bourgeois parties failed, it formed the “front for work, peace and democracy”, together with the legalist reformist parties who support the bourgeoisie from the left. Neither this front, nor its notions of peace and de-mocracy, represent the interests of the people. Rather, they want to “reform” the Kurdish revolutionary potential and the revolutionary movement. Therefore Marxist-Leninists cannot support this position, which rejects the notion that the Turkish system is fascist and thus distorts the consciousness of the masses and directs their hopes towards the parliamentary road. This position does not want to achieve the joint liberation of the people and joint people’s power. On the contrary, it makes compromises with the bour-geoisie based on national interests.That’s why we will not support this coalition with HADEP in the front. We will speak

out against the notions of “peace and democracy” and the opinions of this coalition about parliament. When the DEP was not allowed to take part in the elections, it was the duty of the revolutionaries to take sides with the DEP and to protest against the injustice of not being allowed to take part in the elections. And now HADEP takes part in the elections, despite all the anti-democratic conditions placed on it.We will not wage special propaganda against the candidates of the HADEP in Kurdis-

tan, because they represent national Kurdish interests. We will support Kurdish national rights, the right of self-determination. However, we turn against these “peace policies”. We will not support the candidates of legal parties. We will fight against the distortion of the consciousness of the masses with the demagogy of parliament and “peace and democracy”. We will expose the reformism of these defenders of the “New World Order”.Without any doubt, there are valuable people in this forementioned coalition. But they

have chosen the wrong way. They will see their mistake in a short while.All bourgeois parties are enemies of the people and therefore targets of our movement.

We will act against these groups with the slogan “No votes for the enemies of the people who oppress the people!” and we will fight them by all means.In these elections it will be the basic policy to oppose people voting, to expose the

bourgeois parties, to involve the people in revolutionary movements and to make the revolutionary front of the Turkish and Kurdish people better known.It is now our duty not to make people believe the decrepit and depraved parliament is a

new hope, but to increase the struggle to bring down fascism. The base to do this is not the parliament or elections, it is the unity of revolutionary forces in action.It is our primary task to unify our people in revolutionary organisations and to make it

possible for them to solve their problems in People’s Committees and People’s Councils.It is not a coalition which contains “peace and compromises” that is on the agenda of the

revolutionaries and the people, but the building of a revolutionary front which wages the struggle for power. It will be this revolutionary front which will bring down fascism and bring the people to liberation. Any coalition or front which does not have the bringing down of fascism as its goal, is, in the end, doomed to dissolve or adjust itself to fascism.

Liberation is in the hands of the Revolutionary People’s Front.Neither the bourgeois parties, nor the “peace parties”.For independence, against imperialism.For democracy, against fascism.For socialism, against capitalism.

LET’S UNITE IN THE REVOLUTIONARY PEOPLE’S FRONT!INCREASE THE STRUGGLE AGAINST FASCISM!THE ONLY ROAD TO PEACE, DEMOCRACY AND LIBERATION OF THE WORK-

ERS IS THE REVOLUTION!THE ELECTIONS ARE NO SOLUTION!THE REVOLUTION IS LIBERATION!

OUR PRESENT TASK: WE MUST EN-LARGE THE OPPOSITION FRONT

Kurtulus no. 6, November 16, 1996M. Ali Baran

There is almost no field left in which the fascist power is able to determine policy. The Refah (Islamist) Party was not tested yet, it was still an unknown quantity. At the same time its force was based on a dynamic and steadily increasing share

of the vote in elections. While the imperialists, the monopolists and the state didn’t want the Refah Party to become a decisive factor, they believed it could succeed, together with Tansu Ciller’s True Path Party, in solving some problems. The Refah Party inspired confidence before the formation of the new government, by making promises to the oligarchy, but it did not succeed in solving even a part of the regime’s problems which are inherent in the system, and it was unable to weaken the peoples’s protest reactions. This system is becoming more and more isolated, at home and abroad. The promises to the imperialists are not kept, and repression - as a fundamental function of state policy - has been increased. Former Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan gave up his chosen role as arbitrator of the contra-guerrillas, their more human face in other words, without raising any objections, and put himself completely at their service. How the system is upheld, to whom services are rendered, the mafia, the cooperation with the police and the civil fascists, corruption and abuse of power: it’s all known to the people, just as the fact that the Refah Party is behind all kinds of murders, does not obey its own laws, and has its fingers in all kinds of dirty business is also known. The masses know the state demagogy about “the fight against terrorism”, which in fact is a cover for every kind of immorality and conceals every kind of crime. With their immoral conduct in the fight against the revolutionaries, they even caused aversion within the liberal and bourgeois spectrum, and this is being expressed quite vocally.It was a huge shock for the masses when the true intentions and methods of the state be-

came so public. Who governs, and how? In a totally different way, the people were shown quite a large slice of this state’s reality, the manner of the war against the people, as the revolutionaries had been showing them for decades. Never before had the cooperation between the state, the mafia, the contra-guerrillas and the civil fascists been shown so clearly and so specifically. This is a victory for the revolutionaries. In this manner, the masses learnt what the revolutionaries were not able to teach them over many years, despite all efforts. One could say that the decades of struggle by the revolutionaries and their propaganda, which opens the eyes of the people about the system, had shaped all state institutions, in line with the economic and revolutionary struggle. In this process, continuing to this day, the state decays more and more on a daily basis, its own laws are violated, all kinds of lawlessness and every murder are given legitimacy, and among the people the yearning for justice increases.Today, no bourgeois party can defend this injustice, this process of decay. They have no

possibility any more of embarking on another road. The facts are obvious and shock-ing. The system is collapsing. The stench of decay and the filth which cover the whole country, the reactions which are shown by all people in Turkey - except for a handful of collaborating monopolists, major landowners and usurers, in short: the oligarchy - these create the most beneficial conditions for leading and guiding the people’s reactions. Jus-tice, democracy, equality, freedom, self-determination by the peoples, the desire to live in dignity: these are not the demands of a few, millions of people are longing for them.Of course, some sections, classes and political tendencies not on the side of justice and

freedom do not want to change the capitalist system. And we know some bourgeois pol-iticians will adopt the demands and the conflicts of the people to use them as a means to come to power. No doubt, if they take over power, they will oppress the people in the same way. It’s only natural: some will - while the opposition forces grow and become stronger - use the abilities of the imperialists or the existing contradictions to develop an even more radical policy, or they will try to make themselves more conspicuous to the people, in order not to get isolated from the popular masses. But in the present situ-ation of the powers that be, not a single one of their forces has a chance to shape policy according to their ideas. This is because all of them, from the state president to the most minor official, shaped their ideas about justice, culture and moral values according to the instructions of the contra-guerrillas. These moral values and this culture do not contain the justice and the values of the people, that’s obvious. These people, of whom history gives many examples, theoretically and by intuition know their efforts will remain fruit-less. Every day they manage to keep alive is seen as a gain, and they have a craving to extend their life. They theorise their own enmity against the people and try, standing on the side of the people’s enemies, to grab as much as they can, ruining everything they touch. This structure cannot be kept intact without fighting against the people, without carrying out murders, without applying mafia methods, without violating their own laws: they cannot refuse any task, however dirty it may be, if they want to survive. Not a single bourgeois force can save them from this. Those who see their future in the fight on the side of the contra-guerrillas are accomplices in all its crimes. These events show the people the fascist and mafia-type character of the state and the regime, like a mirror, and therefore no new government and no political party can hold on. This phase of contra-guerrilla rule can only be ended by revolution.Perhaps the popular masses and the different opposition forces have not yet character-

ised the fascist features of the state in a loud voice and with mass actions, instead, they might have claimed this force is just a isolated focal point inside the state. But in compar-ison to the predominant opinions of the past years, major steps forward have been taken. The people’s consciousness is clearly developing rapidly. It’s certain, the people will soon fully recognise the fascist character of the state, and it will continue its search for justice, rights and freedom. After the people have discovered a lot about the character of the system and after they have seen what the state is like and what it is not, the most urgent question is now how to obtain rights and freedoms in the struggle against this state and this system, how we can achieve the organisation and the liberation of the people.While the people’s opposition is slowly growing each day, making progress, the left, not

excluding us - with our fruitless propaganda and waging the struggle with inadequate methods - were unable to unify the whole opposition among the people, all classes and sections against the minority of the oligarchy, showing the people our abilities to lead. Many are still living in their small fantasy world. The demands of the masses, the dis-cussions and the desires of the people, all this did not concern them very much. Con-sciously, or unconsciously, they do not want to achieve organisation, securing the rights of free speech and determination, they do not want to participate more effectively in the struggle, learn to govern themselves and achieve self-confidence, uniting the frag-mented struggles of the people. Faction forming and competition are their fundamen-tal problems. They spend their time in their self-built fantasy world, using a style and methods which nobody understands and which solve nothing. They are isolated from the people, they do not do anything to build up the growing opposition, and they do not want to advance unity. The people organise themselves, take decisions and worry about their living conditions.Marxist-Leninists can only show leadership qualities in organising the people and in

the struggle. We have to organise the people. However, the basic way to the organisation of the people lies in looking at the daily events, the actual living circumstances of the people, seeing one’s own prejudices, taking unification and the struggle as a principle. In this way we have to find ways and means to incite broad sections of the people against those who are in power. Our consciousness of power must constantly become stronger. Being conscious of our power means restraining the enemy’s front, which always aims to kill us, delivering major and minor blows regardless, aiming at our destruction, it means enlarging the people’s front, strengthening it, learning to fight with a perspective and with tactics.In general we have to find out in all regions of the country, and on all fields, who is to

be considered a friend, and who an enemy, we have to find out who has to be neutralised and who can be won to our side, we have to push back the enemy’s front as far back as possible and weaken it. The bourgeoisie tries to hide its filth, influencing the people with lies and demagogy. But the reality, the withdrawal of the system, the beginning of its collapse can be seen better each day. The bourgeois parties, the Islamic sects and other tendencies cannot survive without the support of the people. When these groups see the reality of the people, they start to dissolve and try to regroup. We will accelerate this process of formation and reorganisation, but at the same time the revolutionary front will further develop, and with cunningly applied methods it will advance the opposition front, developing it into a major force. Because the oligarchy, with its reality of stench and filth, with all kinds of murders and dirt, has no other choice but to continue on its road, fleeing from the people’s justice, and it will not be able to draw anybody to its side, except for this group of enemies of the people. But if we, the revolutionaries, do not wage this struggle with a genuine policy, if we do not direct and channel the people’s masses, different liberal, democratic and reformist forces, in other words: all forces which want to change the system or which support bourgeois democratic demands, into the people’s opposition, the war by the enemies against the people will continue, and the enemy’s front - although unstable - will survive and hold on to power, using different and chang-

ing supporters.It’s not a contradiction to want a socialist system, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and

in the end the classless society, free of exploitation and to unite, organise and lead the people of all nations, creeds and religions in the revolutionary front, all those at the side of justice, equality, freedom and democracy, all the opponents of the dictatorship and the oligarchy, and leaving only a few collaborators with the oligarchy outside of . On the contrary, if one neglects the task of building a people’s front, as broad as possible, when the circumstances allow this, one does not take seriously the demands and the psycholo-gy of the masses. If one neglects the demands and the psyche of the masses, one will not achieve the full potential the masses have. Those who satisfy themselves with a call to the workers and the toilers are restrict the scope of the opposition’s front. This necessity has been proven many times in long years of struggle, and now we have to overcome habits which have become pointless. We have to distance ourselves from ineffective and restrictive propaganda, agitation and tactics which are misunderstood by the people and which alienate the revolutionaries from the people, almost suggesting that “they don’t have a clue what’s going on in this country”. We can’t be communists by emphasising in every speech, in every paragraph, that we are communists. Only if we understand reality correctly, organise the people’s masses, and fight with the correct tactics, can we seize power and establish the classless society of revolutionary people’s power. We fight on this soil, this earth. On this soil, with this people, we will complete the revolution. Our life, our style, our tactics, and the forms of our struggle must adapt to this. Everything else would be a deviation and would inevitably hinder the development of the revolution.The methods of the oligarchy against the development of the people’s opposition are

even more destruction, even more mass arrests, more disappearances and more cruel-ties. They have no other answer, no alternative. We cannot say that this cruelty doesn’t cause fear among the masses. The masses have, despite the intense conflicts, despite their desire for justice and freedom, no self-confidence because of their captivity, they live in fear, they are weak and try to escape. The main target is to change this, to strengthen the characteristics of the people, making them a material force in actions. This means organ-ising the people. One has to unite all opposition forces and lead them into the struggle. The united and fighting forces recognise their strength, and they realise they are not as weak as they have thought. The people realise they are a force which cannot be defeated.Turkey is pregnant with revolution. Raising objections to this reality with some the-

oretical conditions or other, being haughty, that’s the work of those who do not know the masses and do not recognise the present situation. It depends on us to remove the obstacles to the revolution and we have to accelerate this process. The solution is or-ganising the people. Realising the people’s organisation, led by the people themselves, will secure the freedom of speech and self-determination of the people. If we do not see the psychological and mental situation of the people clearly, if we do not realise these political tactics soon, it will be impossible to realise a bond with the people, impossible to teach them and to lead them. The developments, the situation of those in power, the situation and the condition of the people, is changing so quickly, we would negate the reactions of the bourgeois opposition forces, we would make them ineffective if we don’t

adapt to the rapid changes, if we don’t produce and apply new tactics quickly. Of course, the ineffectiveness will not persist, but it would work like a brake, slowing the rapid de-velopment of the revolution. For example, the cooperation between the mafia, the police and the contra-guerrilla has become clear now, has come out into the open. Sections of the people and the bourgeois parties are discussing it openly, they consider the system to be rotten. If we do not take over this discussion and do not use all our strength to move the people’s movement in this direction, we wouldn’t be fighting with effective tactics, we wouldn’t be mobilising. We must get the masses moving by quickly aiming all economi-cal, democratic and political demands by all people’s classes and sections at holding the fascist mafia and contra-guerrilla state accountable. The struggle of the workers and civil servants for economic rights, the problems of the gecekondu (shantytown) inhabitants, denouncing murder and torture, the oppression of the small businessmen by the rising inflation which is itself caused by the pressure of the monopolies, the expropriation of the harvests of the peasants, unemployment, all those who are oppressed because they demand national rights, the oppressed Kurdish people, all oppressed minorities, the anti-imperialists who demand independence and democracy, all religions which seek religious freedom, all those who are oppressed for other reasons, the y all can contribute to building a basis for bringing the fascist mafia- and contra-guerrilla state to justice.It has never been as realistic as now, in these circumstances, to get all of these catego-

ries of people moving with campaigns, all those who want to call the fascist mafia- and contra-guerrilla state to account. It cannot be that hard with such campaigns to bring together broad masses of the people and to unite many opposition groups. We will use the present situation and create a living bond with broad parts of the opposition and the popular masses. Organising and struggle cannot be realised without developing actual policies, propaganda and agitation, without the capacity to adapt. Without this road and these methods, we can only achieve meagre results. Therefore, the people of the Par-ty-Front have to internalise this tactic of uniting all those who are in opposition, in the revolutionary front, except for the handful of traitors and collaborators.The Party-Front is the best and the most sincere defender of the united people’s oppo-

sition, the revolutionary people’s front, in our country. Only the Party-Front possesses a realistic programme of unity which is concrete, based on the facts. Objections to our programme of unity lack realism and concreteness in all points. They only attempt to flee from unity, trying hard to find a reason even they do not believe themselves. Relying on our own strength, increasing it, without negligence for one moment, we gave life and impetus to the talks about unity among the left. There is no way any more for almost all of them to escape this. We know a false alliance is trying to destroy this atmosphere with provocations, incitement and insults. But they only harm themselves, they cannot stop the organising of the people’s unity, the work of the revolutionary front. The “realists” who are against this will not contribute anything productive to developing the struggle, they will get into internal fights, sapping each other’s strength.We will continue to fight those who hinder unity, we will continue to show the reality of

society to the people. But we have to address the people with sincerity. Without using la-bels like “opportunists”, “reformists”, “radicals”, “passivity”, we can successfully unify the

broad masses of the people, seize all points in common without being negligent, and we can unite the strength of all groups in opposition in one centre, with one common goal.

THE ARMY, THE PARTIES AND THE SEPTEMBER 12 COUP

Kurtulus no. 20, March 8, 1997M. Ali Baran

The discussions about a military coup will go on for quite a while. There have been such discussions before, whenever the oligarchy was in a serious crisis. The threat with a coup is aimed at freeing the oligarchy from such crises. But for an

actual coup, the external and internal conditions have to be right, support is needed from the imperialists and monopolists. Only then can a military coup fulfil its rescue mission. Otherwise the imperialists and the collaborating economic monopolies would get into an ever deeper crisis because of a military coup. Instead of a military coup, they try to contain the growing revolutionary wave of the people’s masses by reforms within the oligarchy, building a front against the revolution.The oligarchy and the imperialists fear revolution They know they cannot defeat the

revolution by a coup. The contradictions within the ruling forces have increased because of Susurluk, the fear among the oligarchy of revolution increased. Broad sections of the population are discussing the state and the system. Fear is compelling the powers that be to take hasty actions. After Susurluk, the state definitely lost any legitimacy in the eyes of the masses, its situation has become unstable. The efforts to present a clean state and the “democratisation plans” from TUSIAD, the media and the military did not show the desired effect. Campaigns and the propaganda to “clean up the state” and replacing several figures weren’t able to get rid of the filth, it could not be covered up. Everybody sees that the ruling circles are stuck in this quagmire.The state is shaking. TUSIAD and the military are trying all they can to save the system

and to stop the people’s demand for accountability. The ruling forces know that neither a coup, nor new elections nor a new government can soften the crisis and stabilise the sys-tem. To discipline the parties, discussions were launched in the media about the danger of “Islamisation” and a threat to secularism. Although a new government of “national consensus” will not be able to realise a new policy, it could serve to soften the crisis by selecting the Islamist Refah Party as a scapegoat, thus disciplining the other parties. To do this, the military will have to strengthen its hegemony over the quarrelling bourgeois parties, which are stuck in this filth up to their necks, and demonstrate its power by a intervention policy. No other force is capable of showing the strength that is needed for such an operation. But the military cannot take refuge in staging a coup along classic lines. Unlike 1980, the conditions are not present.In September 1980, the power of the military was laid down in law. According to the

putchists, measures were to be taken to make military intervention possible, to prevent a new “accident of democracy”. Therefore the military was guaranteed to right to inter-vene politically and economically at all times. Of course, an army which possesses such a guarantee will not feel the need for a coup. It will rather make use of its right to inter-vene if the system loses stability. And this is exactly what is happening now. The right to

intervene, laid down in the constitution, is still valid. It was strengthened and expanded by other laws, institutions and practices. Therefore the National Security Council is not an instrument for making a coup, it’s an instrument which expresses the army’s known right of intervention. The democracy game, which started on September 12, 1980, goes on. The pieces in this game are TUSIAD, the media, the bourgeois parties, the organ-isations of civil society, parliament, the government and institutions such as elections.The military and the state president play the role of king in this game of chess. At the

time it can be seen once again that the bourgeois parties do not have the intention at all to defend their identity against interventions by the military. Instead they compete to show themselves as willing servants of the system. And despite all the propaganda against the junta, the bourgeois parties once again bowed without any resistance. Not a single party resisted the open threat of the military - “when you do not do as we want, we will use pressure” - by claiming to be a force, elected by the people. This means they have surrendered to the ideology, the politics and the morals of the September 12 jun-ta, continuing its “democracy”. The “democracy” of the junta is fascism. The form of fascism, characteristic of our country, is colonial fascism. The conditions for this were created by the junta.In a situation where there are no more means available to the junta, a fake democracy is

presented by holding elections and establishing new governments. But in reality nothing changes, oppression and violence continue. Because the government is hindering the ex-istence of the system and because the strength of the bourgeois parties is weakening and they can thus not offer a solution, the military uses quite openly its right to intervene to protect the system and state. This reality is part of colonial fascism in our country. Today the classic conditions for a coup are not present. The right to intervene of the military of September 12 opens the possibility of far-reaching and lasting intervention on all levels. Colonial fascism secures these possibilities. The military openly carries out its interven-tions, they want the bourgeois parties in particular to see them clearly. The bourgeois parties can resist these interventions, or they have to surrender. Their attitude of slav-ishness is proof of the continuing dominance of the military over future governments.The discussions about the “Islamists” or the “enemies of progress”, whose representa-

tives are supposedly preparing an armed rebellion, were recognised for what they were: they were meant to prepare and legitimise the intervention by the military. The small Is-lamist groups which propagate armed struggle are not capable of gathering large groups of supporters and are therefore ineffective. The real purpose of the intervention by the military is to restore the stability of the rule of the oligarchy, delivering blows to the rev-olutionary struggle and destroying the growing people’s movement.Thefact that the state believes in the propaganda of a Islamist threat shows the system is col-

lapsing, that the rulers are not capable of governing the state. None of the Islamist groups is really against the system. Apart from a few exceptions, they denied the facts which were revealed by Susurluk and they even took sides with the state, defending the burned-out system against the revolutionaries. The imperialists support the Islamist tendencies as well, using them against the revolutionaries. Even the forces of the contra-guerrillas consist of Islamists, in addition to the fascists of the MHP.

These tendencies are supported by the imperialists and their collaborators, they are in-tegrated into the system and used to defend the ruling powers. The “progressive forces” among them are in no way dangerous to the system. The oligarchy has only one fear, the revolution, and all its interventions, all its plans are directed against the revolution. All its institutions, its measures, the founding of parties, elections etc. are valued according the criteria whether they offer protection against the revolution, whether they defend the system, or not. Not only oppression, cruelty and the violation of law are applied for that. They also initiate reforms, political and social measures, in case these promise a stabilisation of the system. That’s why the military is talking about not using the meth-ods of the anti-terrorism struggle, but using social and political reforms instead. The military thus puts its stamp on the policy of the bourgeois parties and the government programme. The real inventors of this policy are the imperialists. The open interventions by the military cannot be seen as separate from the policy of the imperialists.Under the present circumstances, it’s impossible for the bourgeois parties to free them-

selves from these dogfights, they are not capable of realising policy. In this situation, the interventions are carried out in cooperation between the imperialists, President Demirel and the military. That the interventions will not offer a solution for the crisis, that they deepen the crisis instead - that’s no secret now. Under the circumstances in which a state apparatus is not fulfilling its functions to a large degree, in which the dogfights among the rulers are becoming unbearable, the military, with the aid of the media, tries to pres-ent itself without success as a clean force which offers a solution. But the military is stuck in the filth itself. No force can deny this situation in the end. The interventions are only deepening the contradictions within the oligarchy and even the military cannot save itself from being dragged into this and getting affected.

FROM THKP-C TO DEVRIMCI SOL TO DHKP-C

THE PROCESS, PRACTICE, AND THE REVOLUTIONARY LINE

We live in a country where the tactics of the oligarchy, the situation of the peo-ples’ masses, the international conditions and our own struggle, can develop and change radically at any moment. In such a country, we drive the revolu-

tion forward and we lead on the strategy of the revolution. Neither for the counter-rev-olution, nor for the revolution, is a new day like the one before, there are no repetitions. That’s why our work, our energy and our attention must always be directed to orientat-ing on the vision of the Party and Front to achieve further progress. It is obvious that we cannot achieve anything by repeating the past, if we approach the changing conditions merely with the forms of struggle, tactics, and forms of organisation of the past.The history of the revolutionary movement starts at the end of the 1960s. In those years

the THKP-C began to take shape. This history of adapting the Marxist-Leninist theory to the concrete conditions in our country is a rich history. Until today the work on this is being carried out from different directions. And of course, the different forms of organ-ising and struggle were no repetitions of the past. Without understanding these process-es, the tactics we proposed and used, the forms of organisations we used, it is impossible to comprehend our history and the characteristics of our revolutionary movement. It is important to know them.But not to repeat them in a clumsy manner which does not adapt to the changing con-

ditions. It is not possible to use ready-made templates in a revolutionary strategy, not even in the most common matters. This is the case in regional work, the work in the neighbourhoods, as well as in actual tactics. A responsible person who tries to use tactics and politics in his unit as if it were a recipe is doomed to failure. From this viewpoint, learning from our history, comprehending its richness and evaluating the differences between past and present are still important tasks.Furthermore, we have to pay attention to concrete things. We should always ask what

it needed at present, and we should develop new forms, ways and methods to meet the needs of the actual situation. This process, going from the THKP-C to DEVRIMCI SOL (Revolutionary Left), and from there to the DHKP-C, is an ideal base for this strategy and a rich source of experience.The founding date of our Party is March 30, 1994. But our Party is not “new” in the

political arena. It is the continuation of the struggle and the follow-up to the tradition of 16 years of DEVRIMCI SOL. In it, the traditions and experiences of DEVRIMCI SOL are carried to a new level. The history of DEVRIMCI SOL, founded in 1978, is in itself the heritage of the Party- Front and the struggle for the re-creation of the Party.Of course, at the beginning of this process was the THKP-C. Despite organisational

interruptions this process stretches from MAHIR CAYAN, from the THKP-C until the present in political continuity. In this history there is continuity, but no repetition. Our history was not written in the abstract, divorced from life, on the contrary, it was the

result of a theory which was discussed in practice and measured by this practice.That’s why every ideological, organisational and military step which was taken in our

country made the road to revolution clearer and pushed the revolution forward. One of the most important conclusions of MAHIR CAYAN in describing our road to revolution is the assessment that Marxism-Leninism is not a dogma, but a strategy. This is one of the most important points to distinguish our road from revisionist traditions. In 1973 the followers of MAHIR, the followers of the THKP-C, also followed this line. They tried to apply Marxism-Leninism and the ideology and strategy of the THKP-C for the benefit of the revolution, learning in the revolution. Our line has since 1973 always orientated itself to practice, measured itself by it and planned it. That’s our difference with other leftists.What the THKP-C is, what it is not, how it must be defended and how it must be inter-

preted, that is one of the basic points in the ideological dispute in the process between 1974 and 1980. From the different views in this dispute, a great number of groups result-ed which claimed for themselves the mantle of representing the THKP-C. Nowadays, this large number no longer exists.Apart from the revolutionary movement, there is almost no group left which claims to

represent the THKP-C, and the groups that are left have no relation with practice. Some of them have subjected themselves to the existing system to such an extent that they have removed the name of the THKP-C from their history, and many have ceased to exist in the course of the years. The way in which they interpreted the history of the THKP-C his played a big role in their failure. The interpreters of the THKP-C who have to be judged rightists tried to adapt the ideology of the THKP-C in view of their ideology and they tried to take over the strategy of the THKP-C schematically.The interpreters who can be classed as left deviationists reduced the THKP-C to an

abstract ideology of struggle on the level of the word and they caricatured its proper strategies. These interpretations are not revolutionary practice, not only seen from the perspective of the ideology and strategy of the THKP-C, but also from the perspective of Marxism-Leninism. In fact they are really the destruction of the theory. As a result, these groups have destroyed themselves more and more in destroying the theory of the THKP-C, until they have ceased to exist.One cannot assess the THKP-C by subjective calculations, nor is it possible to do so by

literally copying it. The only way to accept the heritage from the THKP-C is by develop-ing the revolution. That’s why the young cadres of what was to become DEVRIMCI SOL did not have any problems discovering the core of the ideology of the THKP-C.This core has, seen from the perspective of DEVRIMCI SOL, always been the existing

struggle and its continuation and development.This is the fundamental difference with the interpreters of the THKP-C on the left and

the right. The connection between the THKP-C and DEVRIMCI SOL can not be ex-plained as a simple fact of similarities in ideology and theory. The union of DEVRIMCI SOL and the THKP-C is expressed in its ideology, its practice, its politics. And it is es-pecially visible in the taking of the responsibility towards our people, toward the people

in the world, in its willingness to sacrifice, its determination, the consciousness of its own strength and the will, when necessary, to give one’s own life. (DURSUN KARATAS, “Congress Report of the DHKP-C, page 3”)

WHAT IS THE THKP-C? OUR ANSWER: IT IS THE LINE WHICH MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHERS

The answer to this question on what the THKP-C is is our first characteristic. Our par-ticipation in the political arena in 1973-74, the founding and leading of DEVRIMCI SOL in those days was based on the defence and connection with the THKP- C. Our cadres were inexperienced and they were insufficient, but in their innermost being they were connected with the tradition of the THKP-C. In fact a general process of denial dominated the political arena after the defeat in 1972. In the forefront were those who had attacked the ideology and practice of the THKP-C most strongly, those who were left from the organisation of the THKP-C. This denial was connected to their fear and discouragement. But the situation within the people and especially among the youth was not as they thought it was. While in the eyes of the old cadres the THKP-C was buried with the massacre in Kizildere, it lived on in the hearts of the people. When this became visible, the statements of the older ones changed. The more open the potential became, the larger became the number of heirs and interpreters of the THKP-C.There were two kind of representative of the THKP-C. One part represented the Par-

ty-Front but more or less attempted compulsory to bind the existing potential. They stated their views indirectly and waited for a more favourable point of time. The other part consisted of the young militant cadres who represented the THKP-C on the basis of the struggle. In between those groups, there were many “old cadres”, many “authorities”. But the standards of the youth were simple. One the one hand they looked at the struggle of MAHIR, and on the other hand they watched the statements and the practice of the “old celebrities” and their new deeds. The young learned from the conduct of those who denied the THKP-C. How the relation should be between theory and practice. From this moment on, they would disentangle the relation between theory and life in their own practice. Seen from this perspective, the first question was not a question of whether or not one was defending the Party-Front. The question was how the ideology of the Par-ty-Front should be realized in practice in the Turkey of 1974.The first split after 1974 occurred over the question of whether or not to represent the

THKP-C. The second factual split however, occurred with the question of how the strug-gle was to be continued with the perspective of the THKP-C. This was the question for the real representatives of the THKP-C. Since 1974 the revolutionary movement was anchored in this question. Out of this question it developed. They worked in practice, they worked on all kind of developments and the needs of the situation were seen and evaluated. This was the defence of the Party-Front in the struggle.At this point their road and the road of those who denied the tradition of the THKP-C

for themselves were already separate. But also among those who saw themselves on the side of the Front, there were differences in judging the past, the defeat of the THKP-C,

and in assessing the actual situation. In this situation every small or big step in the framework of the Party-Front meant a new discussion and a new split.The real potential of the THKP-C lay within the youth and this youth was unorganized.

This disorganisation was problematic, in view of the rise in organised fascist attacks. The organising of the youth, there answer and the quality of their answer to the fascist attacks developed within the process of defending the THKP-C and within these splits.The young representatives of the Party-Front were no “theorists”, no “Marxologists”,

they were neither the “old” from the THKP-C, nor its “specialists”. But through their bond with the people and the revolution, with their enthusiasm and their militant prac-tice, they have shown that the legacy and the ideology of the THKP-C were not lost. They were the barricades against the denial of the traditions of the THKP-C, discour-agement and distraction. This was their first task in their organising and they performed this in a highly successful manner. The basis of this successful performance was their bond with the people, their enthusiasm and their militant practice, despite the “authori-ty” of the deniers and the waverers. This was surely what brought them closer and closer to the ideology of the THKP-C.In time, the developments became clear and it became obvious what and how many

the representatives of the THKP-C from different circles defended. The most important however, was that the young cadres and leaders gathered experience in the struggle. The re-foundation of the Party was the common dream of the THKP-C sympathisers and they all declared this to be the goal.

HOW SHOULD THE PROCESS OF THE FOUNDING OF THE PARTY DEVELOP, AND WHAT KIND OF PARTY SHOULD BE FOUNDED?

In the developing process, the THKP-C was mostly judged regarding these two ques-tions. In the most answers the Marxist method, the dialectical view of history, was ap-plied in a twisted way. The different factions of negators tried to twist the history of the Party-Front, its practice, its political results caused by the struggle, in order to justify their own actions. It was not their intention to learn from the reality of the THKP-C or to draw conclusions from its historical experience.The interpreters of the THKP-C on the right didn’t see their task in the armed struggle,

but they criticised the THKP-C’s isolation from the masses. Thus they tried to justify their demand to build up a mass organisation which should work for changes within the framework of the system.Because they saw the reason for defeat in the assumed lack of roots in the masses, it was

in their view only logical to regard “mass organising” as the most urgent task. This line, materialised in Devrimci Yol (Revolutionary Path), didn’t actually see the THKP-C as a party. And it is not really clear if they wanted to make it a party. Therefore the process of becoming a party was never a concrete aim for Devrimci Yol.The interpreters of the Party-Front on the left used the same method in evaluating the

past. In their opinion the mistake which led to the defeat of the THKP-C lay in the fact

that its structures were exposed. This military failure should be cured by abstaining from all mass work and concentrating fully on the training of military cadres. And so arose the “Apartment Revolutionaries”. They, of course, didn’t see the problem of founding a party. In their opinion the struggle was to be continued where it had stopped.The interpreters on the right and the left agreed in their rejection of a party-forming

process. We should look at the tradition of the THKP-C and the present process. In fact the process of party-building of the THKP-C was the clarification of the revolutionary path in Turkey. The practical militant attacks on the fascists should coincide with the ideological forming of theory. And practice showed that the main point of the struggle at that time was in legal work.We could not go through the process of party building in the same way. Particularly

since our actual problem was no longer the clarification of the revolutionary path in Tur-key. Practice had broadened and the process had become more complex. In all aspects of life, fascist terror threatened the lives of the people. The task of building a party could not be seen apart from the anti-fascist struggle. The process of building a party could not take place outside the class struggle and practice.The main problem in this process, going to the years 1976-77, was the attempt to get

the problem of becoming a party out of its indefiniteness. The aim of building a party should be freed from its spontaneity, it should become a clearly defined intention. The revolutionary cadres, who carried almost the whole burden of the process in this direc-tion anyway, started to push several circles in this direction in a intensified manner. The whole process couldn’t wait any longer, in their view there was no more time...Different forms of organisation were established and new relations, political attitudes,

forms of struggle and action, materialised. For example: in that time the tradition of commemorating the fallen in the massacre of Kizildere on March 30, 1972 arose. This was an important step in clarifying the way ahead of the revolution. Everywhere there was struggle against the fascists and a level of organisation was achieved which enabled revolutionary militant actions against the fascists. In that time there was the resistance in Kocamustafapasa/Istanbul and with this the street fights and the revolutionary struggle got a gradual foothold in the cities.The old had no part in any of these developments, most developments even had to be

carried through against their wishes. The new cadres who defended the THKP-C, who started to gather experience, didn’t repeat the old practices in almost all of what they did. The practice and the theory of the Party-Front showed them the way for their own materialisation in which they used all their creative energy.

THE WORDS AND THE HEART OF THE THEORY

From a certain point onwards, it became obvious that the aim of building the party could not be achieved with the different circles with which there had be a cooperation. The “secret” deniers were not the leaders of those who went on the way to the party; rather, they were their chains. A new split was inevitable. The revolutionary leading cad-res were now certain of how the THKP-C was to be re-founded and how this perspective

had to be realized in practice. The centre of the line of the THKP-C was formed by the “Political-Military Strategy of Struggle” (PASS - theory developed by MAHIR CAYAN). This meant that an organisation which represents the THKP-C and which wanted to rebuild the party, had to organize the armed struggle and had to view the struggle in the process of founding the party from the perspective of the PASS.With the founding of DEVRIMCI SOL in 1978, the aim of the Party-Front took a

new form and the armed struggle grew. Now the process started to which the name DEVRIMCI SOL is attached. It will add many pages to our revolution and it makes the weapon of the Party-Front available again to our people.The process which developed since the 1970s has been an unchanged strategy of rev-

olution. The social and economic circumstances in our country did not change in such a way that a change in strategy would have been justified. But within this strategy the tactics changed. This was necessary.Since 1974 the civil fascist terror has been an undeniable fact. This was one of the main

obstacles to achieve the organizing of the masses... And so it was obvious what had to be done. The task of becoming a party and building cadres can only be fulfilled in this practice.With the founding of DEVRIMCI SOL, we formed the “Armed Fighting Teams against

the Fascist Terror” (FTKSME). This didn’t exist with MAHIR and the THKP-C. But should we fail to defend ourselves against the fascist terror, should we not develop the necessary means, simply because MAHIR didn’t speak about this? Surely the answer to this question lay between the extremes. The left, however, was so single-minded in their interpretation of the THKP-C and its theory that even on this question differences of opinion appeared.That’s why we emphasized, when we came up with our concept of the FTKSME, that we

were sure that we were going to be accused of deviation by the “hard-line” representa-tives of the THKP-C. And in fact we heard: “Look, their masks have fallen, such a form of organising didn’t exist with MAHIR CAYAN”. (“The THKP-C and the two deviations”, page 68)A revolutionary movement must be very open and clear on this point. Of course, the

road of the revolution in our country is lit up by the universal theory of Marxism-Len-inism, the experiences of the revolutions throughout the world and the strategies and tactics of the leaders of these revolutions. But at the point when all of this is not sufficient to conquer a concrete obstacle which appears before us, it is idle to try to adapt life to the theory. A political movement which wants to advance a revolution at this point will deal with these new conditions and will develop and realise tactics which are needed in this process.There is no other way. And the question is whether or not the new tactics and forms of

organizing are adapted to the actual needs, whether they advance the revolution or not. The question is not whether or not they were used by one or the other leadership in one or the other revolution. We could also try to use one or the other way which was used by any leader in a revolution in whatever country.

But if this chosen method is not according to the actual circumstances in the country and the conditions of its revolution, it will fail.

THE STRATEGIES, TACTICS, THE FORMS OF ORGANISING AND STRUGGLE: EVERYTHING FOR THE REVOLUTION!

“We have gone on our way to carry out a revolution in Turkey for the whole world.” These simple words of MAHIR are the true axis of a revolutionary course. When this axis is changed, it will not be known what has to be done and how to do it.We have witnessed very impressive examples of this. The legal party discussions of cer-

tain circles are an example. We watch and we see that they write dozens of pages ana-lysing the struggle in Russia in 1905 and 1912 to justify and explain the rightness of a legal party. And if there had not been the prefaces and conclusions, it would not be easy to find out whether this party was working in Russia or in Turkey. When one reads one of their texts about the tactics of guerrilla struggle, it is not clear wether this struggle is fought in their country or in Peru. The tactics, the slogans, all is copied from Peru. But whatever the brilliance of their presentation, neither their slogans nor their tactics are according to the actual practice.When one reads the analysis and proposals of another circle of legal party founders,

one reads that one should adopt the masses, strengthening the left against the right. All very well, but they do not answer the question why they want to strengthen the masses against the right, which line should be drawn between left and right. They do not give an answer, because they do not want to answer the real question, which is whether they are revolutionaries or reformists.The obstacles, put in the way of the revolution by the oligarchy, and the political and

military manoeuvres which they employ, differ very much. The task is to develop forms of tactic, struggle and organisation which neutralise these political and military obsta-cles. The target is making the revolution. In this there is no compulsion to apply the one or other model. On the contrary, every revolution follows its own course and creates its own model. This is what we meant when we said that the struggle cannot be fought with recipes.“The problems of the revolution and the struggle are so extensive and variable that they-

don’t fit in a scheme, in no programme, and no single tactic. Programmes, organisations, statutes, tactics, new ways of working, new politics, almost everything serves for the speeding of the revolution, serves the conquering of obstacles, serves the pushing on of the revolution. An organisation which will lead the masses of the people and bring them to the revolution should be able to renew itself. It should, when necessary, be able to put aside a form of organisation as obsolete when it sees that it cannot develop new ways out of dead ends with it, that it cannot lift the struggle of the masses with it. The basis of existence for the forms of organisation, programmes, statutes and political tactics are the needs of the struggle and the war”. (DURSUN KARATAS, page 140)Because we approached the problem in this manner, the left could not denounce the

revolutionary movement with the usual labels, although they wanted to. The revolution-ary movement confronted them with a theory and a practice which they couldn’t call either clandestine or reformist. They could not present us as people who were detached from the masses, they could not denounce us as the ones who tailed the masses. Right-wing deviators, left-wing deviators: no name fits our theory and our practice.Of course they tried to hang different names on us in the course of time. But always in

connection with a certain event, with one or other action. But in these points they could not attack our line. Because our line could not be defined within their parameters.We participate in the economic-democratic struggle, as well as in the armed struggle.

In legality as well as in illegality. In the slums, in the youth, in the working class. The forms of organisation and struggle in these areas changed according to the conditions, from the economic-democratic forms of action to the military actions and organisa-tions, they show a big variety. The levels which the Armed Revolutionary Units (SDB) went through, the spine of our military organisation in the course of the process since 1979, are an example of the richness of this theory and practice, of the ability for renewal without becoming rigid in theory and practice.The first SDBs were organized in a very limited way. The required qualities were those

of “cadres who are familiar with all fields of work and who work directly in one of these fields”. In short, basically they should be formed of leading cadres of existing units. They became organizers of a practice which oriented on the central political aims, independ-ent from their fields of work. And with these qualities, they fulfilled important functions in 1979-80.In the years between 1987 and 1990, after the long years of the junta, the SDBs were

restructured when a assault was being prepared which mainly based on the achieved progress in the legal field. In this time not only were “first cadres” put in, as before, but also supporters and members who had certain qualities. According to the requirements, the conditions of the time, they were not given a defined area of work.With the founding of the DHKP-C, the SDBs were transformed into SPBs (Armed

Propaganda Units), based on the gained experiences, on the experience of the armed struggle and the materialisation of the perspective of building a popular army, and based on the actual situation of the struggle. The FTKSME’s carried the anti-fascist struggle in the years of 1979 and 1980. They were the organisation of several fields of work who “wanted to steer and solve the economic-democratic, political, ideological and military problems on the basis of revolutionary violence”. Despite the building of different forms of organisation after 1980, we did not use this form of organisation any more. In the 1990s, the militias formed the basis of the military organisation of the areas of work. In many respects they resemble the militias of the FTKSMEs, but in many other respects they differ as well.In short, the actual goal is the creation of the guerrilla army, the people’s army. All future

military organisations are to be measured at two criteria. The first is the adaptation to the actual needs of the struggle.The second is the taking over of functions which benefit the struggle for the people’s

army and people’s power. All forms of organisation are possible which change the situa-tion of the masses according to these criteria. A revolutionary movement and its people tasked with responsibilities, its cadres and fighters have to develop the many forms of organisation which reflect the conditions of all areas of work, the different parts of the people. When this does not succeed, development will slow down or be stopped.

THE HEART OF THE THEORY OF CREATIVITY IS THE RE-ALITY IN OUR COUNTRY AND OF OUR PEOPLE

Looking at the whole process it becomes clear that a lot, from the founding of the party and the process of becoming a party to the tactics used and forms of organisation and struggle, are different in the THKP-C as they are in DEVRIMCI SOL, and different in DEVRIMCI SOL as they are in the DHKP-C. Changes and differences will also occur in the future.But the differences have a common core. All the different tactics, forms of organisation

and struggle are always according to the needs and demands of the relevant present situation. Within the concrete situation, they have brought us closer to the aim in the short and long term.The conditions in a country do not make a difference for the use of ready-made solu-

tions. Those who use them do not stick their heads out in the street from within the un-ions under the circumstances of a growing fascist terror, for instance. Or when the state terror starts moving with all its horror, they still dream of street fights of which nobody knows who benefits from this and how. However, they do not take the slightest step to organise the barricades, they only repeat their slogans, indefatigably.Those who take the one or the other strategy of revolution, tactic or form of struggle in

another country as a model do not want to see that their “model” is in fact an example of creativity, a perfect example of adapting Marxism-Leninism to the conditions of a country.The revolution of the Soviets, the revolution in China, in Cuba, Bulgaria, Albania and

Peru are used as models. But none of these revolutions is the same. They all developed under their own circumstances, have their own peculiarities. They all succeeded by us-ing Marxism-Leninism in a proper and creative way in their relative countries. In reality the use of models blunts the weapon of Marxism-Leninism.About one of the revolutions which are used as a model, the Chinese revolution, its

leader MAO says: “The greatness of the strength of Marxism-Leninism arises from the unification of the concrete revolutionary practice in all countries. The problem of the Communist Party of China is to apply the experience, the theory of Marxism-Leninism to the concrete circumstances in China... For the Chinese, talk about Marxism without looking at the circumstances in China will be an abstract Marxism, a Marxism which will lead into a vacuum. Mimicking should be abolished, the hollow singing of melodies should be abandoned and dogmatism should be rejected. In its place there should be a vivid Chinese way, the way of the plain people in China.” (MAO, Selected Works, volume

2, page 217)MAO also states: “As soon as the universal reality of Marxism-Leninism united with the

concrete practice of the Chinese Revolution, the Chinese Revolution obtained a totally new look.” (MAO, ibid, pag 21)This is the heart of all the discussions about this point. This is also the case, seen from

the perspective of the revolution in Turkey. Especially at this point, the THKP-C opened a new epoch. In the THKP-C, Marxism-Leninism united with the concrete reality in Turkey and a new period of the revolution began in Turkey.

DOGMATISM AND CREATIVITY

The FTKSMEs, the SDBs, the militias, the committee of struggle and defence against fascism, the people’s councils, the people’s committees, the party cells... The unions, the workers’ committees, the workers’ councils, the revolutionary workers’ movement... The student associations, the regional and central associations, the revolutionary youth... The organisations of civil servants, the families, the manual workers, the lawyers, architects, engineers... let’s change the category... The hunger strikes, the protests by ironically clap-ping hands, by forming human chains, occupations, barricades, press statements, rev-olutionary violence, punishments, boycotts... Another category... Legal, illegal, semi-le-gal, in the masses, with cadres... And yet another category... The struggle for economic, academic and democratic rights, the fights for reforms, the struggle for revolution, the fight against fascism, defence, revenge, the destruction of fascist centres.... This list is the expression of the richness of forms of organisation and struggle and a lot of other forms could be added to it.Opposite to the one-sided left which operates in legality, but not underground, which

favours the mass movement but not revolutionary violence, which looks down on ironic hand-clapping but keeps away from the barricades as well, which separates the illegal struggle from the masses and doesn’t organise it either... One of the characteristics of the revolutionary movement is to unify all these different forms, in contrast to this left. In unifying these forms, there is a problem: to protect the movement against deviations, to prevent a confusion of the target, the prevention of splits. This must be done by not los-ing from sight what is the main issue and what is of secondary importance in all forms of struggle and organisation.When the main issue is lost out to sight, this richness will lose its value, the situation will

turn over, so one will no longer know what is done for what reason.We should insist on the main issue, and in this we should insist on our line. In all tactics

and forms of struggle and organisation, we should point at the richness which drives our creativity to the extreme. And we should find out the methods which separate the main from the secondary. When the difference between the main and the secondary is lost to view, theory and practice get mixed up. Presently there are dozens of leftist groups in Turkey who, while they choose a new centre for their strategy every day, do not get tired of reproaching us for being dogmatic. It’s right, one should not be dogmatic. What we mean with “not dogmatic” is to not let Marxist-Leninist theory become rigid, it is the

application of Marxist-Leninist theory to the concrete conditions in our country: an initiative which evaluates the developments with the view of the actual and periodical needs of the struggle.But from numerous examples we know that behind every attempt from them to tell us

we should not be dogmatic, there is not an example of applying Marxism-Leninism to the concrete situation, but rather a step towards receding from Marxism-Leninism.No, in this point we are dogmatic. In defending the interests of the people and the rev-

olution, the universal thesis of Marxism-Leninism and the values of socialism, we have to be dogmatic. When we are not “dogmatic” in these points, what struggle should the forms of struggle and organisation, the different tactics, serve? For example, the line of denial of the members of Devrimci Yol was from the beginning also built with the ar-gument: “We should not be dogmatic”. Ultimately they made their denial into theory by saying: that Devrimci Yol had “surpassed” the THKP-C. Where they have ended up with this surpassing and their lack of dogmaticism is well known!As we have said in the beginning: No organisation can develop by copying another

organisation. Also when they copy themselves, they will inevitably come to a standstill. And with this view it is impossible for us to carry the form of founding and organisation of the THKP-C in the 1970s to the 1980s and 1990s of Turkey, and when we would do this, this party in the 1990s in Turkey would not fulfil the functions of the THKP-C in the 1970s. For sure, a party founded in the 1980s or 1990s, would surpass the THKP-C.At this point, the opportunism, reformism, the right-wing orientation, shows its face.

With “surpassing”, they mean denial, contradiction. “Surpassing” the THKP-C in a revo-lutionary meaning however, means to take its revolutionary core, the principal elements of its ideology and to enrich them under the circumstances of the developing process in its theory and practice. At such a point the DHKP-C was founded as a party.The THKP-C is the bond with the people, the revolution. DEVRIMCI SOL identified

itself with this. The THKP-C was the continuity in the armed struggle. DEVRIMCI SOL would became the name and continuity of the anti-fascist struggle in the 1980s until the rise in the 1990s, till today. The THKP-C was the resistance against the junta. DEVRIM-CI SOL became the symbol of the struggle and resistance against the junta. And in the course of its development into the DHKP-C, it enlarged this struggle and broadened it. It added new traditions to the ones of the THKP-C. It added new tactics to the numerous tactics of the THKP-C in its short period of struggle which it could not realise, and so enriched the revolution. It enlarged the struggle of the THKP-C against opportunism, revisionism and the bourgeoisie. This is what we mean when we talk about “surpassing”, and the DHKP-C took its place with these characteristics as a party which “surpassed” the THKP-C.The adapting of Marxism-Leninism to the concrete circumstances of the country is the

key to success for a revolutionary movement of driving on concrete aims in a certain country which make the aim of revolution attainable.Those who could not do this have, because of their wavering tactics, turned away from

the aims of the revolution and people’s power. In the struggle for revolution and people’s

power, the ready-made models, strategically speaking, and the recipes, tactically speak-ing, have no place.

WHAT KIND OF A WORLD DO WE LIVE IN?

After having successfully plotted the collapse of the socialist system (which had been rotting and breaking up for over 10 years), new conflicts arose between imperialism and the newly exploited countries, which had supposedly gained

their independence, and again with these countries at regional level and with the other collaborating imperialist countries.Prior to the collapse of the socialist system, competition and a fight within the market

existed among the imperialists in relation to the new exploitation. As well as this contin-uing among these countries, today the main competition and fight for control exists in the untouched virgin territory - the countries that have broken away from the socialist bloc and are now open to the market. The hungry-eyed imperialists are doing everything to compete and to fight in these areas.In order to control these areas, the imperialists are above all encouraging nationalism

in order to create a bourgeoisie which will develop dependent on imperialism from the start, and on this basis, by creating regional wars on the one hand whilst ensuring that the bourgeoisie take responsibility for the development of their own class, on the other hand they are making the peoples fight each other, thus ruining themselves financially and making them economically and practically dependent upon imperialism.Today the wars that are taking place in the former USSR have come about through

the provocation of the imperialists, directed at securing the rule of the bourgeoisie and dividing the peoples in order to be able to exploit them more easily. Attempts are still being made to wipe out any dynamics that may still exist in the old socialist system and prevent any form of socialist development that might be created, the intention be-ing for the bourgeoisie to rapidly reorganise and for the imperialist market economy to be formed. The war in the Balkans should be looked at within this context. The impe-rialists are, either directly or through collaborators, continuing the war economically and politically in this region. In the countries where war is continuing, imperialism is supporting the development of the bourgeoisie in every way, whilst trying to establish the capitalist market economy on a firm basis. The people who hoped to find a more comfortable life have had to face the vast poverty that has been bought about by the imperialist market economy and its policies of war. They have found themselves in the midst of an unexpected vista of impoverishment in which all cultural values and morals have been eroded. It would not be incorrect to say that the people who had lived through actually-existing socialism and have now been shown capitalism and been subjected to its barbarism, are starting to re-evaluate socialism and to search for it, even if it had made mistakes and had a negative record in some respects. Within this search for it, the conflict between the developing bourgeoisie, businessmen, the intermediate bureaucrats and the people has deepened.Resulting from the people’s search and pressure from below, the newly developed bour-

geoisie of these countries, who continue their collaboration with imperialism, are trying to be more careful with their relationship with the imperialists and are applying policies

which will not show too much of these relations to the people.At this point it is important to mention the conflicts that exist between the imperialists

and the bourgeoisie of these countries. Despite the imperialists wiping out the socialist system and aiming for new and bigger market areas, it has became clear that they do not have the finance to integrate the markets of these countries quickly within the imperi-alist system. And they are unable to freely use the finance they do have. The reason for this being that the capitalist system, despite all the deficiencies of the socialist system, has not been able to develop, has been unable to free itself from economic depression. In addition to this, the competition between the imperialists goes on both economically and politically. The fact that even their own markets have became a target for the inter-national monopolies, the increasing economic crisis, unemployment, the decline in the health of society and increasingly more right-wing parties coming into power in these countries and the fact that they are not giving up the “social state” factor, which actually stems from the remnants of socialism and which is being used in order to neutralise the people’s relations, are all amongst the reasons for this. Under these conditions, the regions which bring large profits to imperialism with their war politics will take a while longer before they come under its hegemony.We can see the impact that the deepening of crisis is having on the imperialist coun-

tries with the increase in unemployment, the rise in inflation and, resulting from this, the masses moving towards the social democratic parties which are making numerous promises to the people, and also in the mass actions that are taking place, although these are economically rather than politically based. In the countries in which socialism has broken down, the masses have rapidly, at a rate unexpected even by imperialism, de-manded rights, justice, equality, a better living standard, and are semi-consciously acting as an opposition to the system. Also it is interesting how various communist and social-ist organisations in these countries, after getting over the initial shock, have reorganised and have started to act as leaders of popular opposition. The old revisionist parties who had taken part in the imperialist plot, and those who collaborated with imperialism, are forming parties called “socialist” in order to neutralise the people’s backlash and be able to move less painfully towards capitalism. They want to melt down the leftist potential of the people and keep this under their control. Those parties are gaining strength in many countries. These parties aim to serve the imperialists, despite their claims to stand for socialism. It is as a result of the people’s search for socialism that those parties are being supported. These false socialists cannot continue to fool the people for longer. Instead of the heaven that they promised the people, they have given them a form of hell. Without a doubt, either within these parties or outside of these parties, there are organisations who will not collaborate with the imperialists, who are not with the revisionists, but are in genuine search of and defenders of socialism. It is certain that they will become influential.After bringing about the collapse of the socialist system, imperialism has sought to

undermine the national and social liberation struggle which had depended on the re-visionist systems for support. In fact various organisations were buried by or at least influenced by the demagogy of the “New World Order”. They propagated cease-fires and

started signing peace agreements with imperialism. However, during the same period it was seen that there was no objective change in the imperialists. This was shown by the barbaric attacks that were made by imperialism upon the collapsed socialist countries, by the regional wars and against the organisations that had put down their weapons.With the collapse of the socialist countries a huge reformist wind began which in one

moment covered the whole world. Along with the political attitude of imperialism in the Gulf Crisis, this had a big influence upon all the revolutionaries in the world and on the left organisations, and for the people it was an important step in disclosing the falseness of the “New World Order” and peace. In the collapsed socialist countries the increased exploitation by capitalism, which has brought about an explosion of crime, has meant that the organisations calling on people to disarm themselves have become non-existent. Imperialism’s politics of getting the people to kill each other, its politics of murdering and getting rid of movements and socialism are still continuing unchanged, the increas-ing crises in imperialist and capitalist countries etc. - such developments have served to show that the alternative to capitalism is socialism. Since the capitalist system has been in existence, imperialism has shown that there is no alternative. Today, without doubt they have not been able to define this. Those who believe in Marxism-Leninism have not abandoned their ideas despite all the negativeness and collapse of the so-called socialist system, which was actually the collapse of revisionism. It was first and foremost the revisionist system which collapsed. Marxist-Leninists, knowing that socialism will be born within capitalism and that it will rise from ist dust, entered into this fight. With this understanding, it is not possible for socialism to be formed and go on to communism from today to tomorrow without problems, pains and ups and downs. Those who cannot see the ideological consolidation of hundreds of years, the strength of the culture of self-ishness, cannot develop a country and a general world revolutionary politics against this selfish bourgeois culture which united with the strength of imperialism. Even if these are small, every day the imperialists are making new gains, thus without narrowing the capitalist sphere, without hitting out at this enemy front, the socialist system will not be able to have a long-term future in the face of the attacks by the bourgeois ideology and imperialism.This reformist wave which aimed to take all anti-imperialist and socialist forces under

the rule of imperialism and to wipe them out has reshaped today. We are living in a period where national and social liberation is slowly emerging from the influence of imperialism and reformism and there is a development towards a radical new struggle. Imperialism has encouraged nationalist politics and actively supported them in some places, but it has got rid of the politics of the national and social liberation movements and these are suffering ideological, political and military bankruptcy, Marxist-Leninist thoughts and organising are developing again and this development will continue in a way that cannot be obstructed.It is assumed that imperialism has secured hegemony all over the world but despite this,

it is unable to move. The collapse of the revisionist system in particular strengthened their hegemony. The revisionist countries, in accordance with the pragmatism they had developed with imperialism and with their own politics of peaceful co-existence, were

taking up the attitude of supporting or not supporting liberation movements, depending on the national self-interest of the revisionist countries. They did not show any inhibi-tions about acting together with the imperialists against revolutionary movements if their national interests put this first. The fact that socialism was formed on a revolution-ary level, that despite peaceful co-existence with imperialism, the national and social forces, they developed politics within the stalemate between imperialism and the revi-sionist system, and this gave national and social liberation movements an advantage. To-day, national and social liberation movements and those still resisting imperialism, and various rulers that refuse to surrender to imperialism, are left exposed since the collapse of revisionism a force that they were dependent upon as a bulwark against imperialism. At the start this support which was a big advantage turned into a big disadvantage it was withdrawn, and it opened the way to surrendering to the imperialists. Revisionism was not able to develop true revolutions or to form a lower and an upper base which would secure revolutions based on Marxism-Leninism and in accordance with the dynamics which develop differently depending on the conditions of each country. The Soviet Un-ion in particular thought of everything only in relation to its own centre, and when it collapsed it was not difficult for the other systems connected to it to collapse also.The Soviet revisionists and imperialists, after having brought about the downfall of

the Soviet Union, inflicted upon all Marxist-Leninists dishonour, denial and treachery. Those who did not accept dishonour and treachery were going to be suppressed as part of the necessity of the big conspiracy. In Romania, as Ceausescu refused betrayal and defended his honour, they murdered him and brought an end to socialism. As for Cuba, China, Vietnam and North Korea, the big conspiracies that were organised were not successful, but now these countries are under pressure. They are waiting for them to surrender or, failing that, new plots will be attempted.Many countries who are not under the control of imperialism and do not want to be are

on the one hand continuing to resist surrender and on the other hand they have given way to some extent but are struggling not to lose all control. When Saddam saw that the “New World Order” was a system which would wipe out his own rule he stood up against it in the name of the Arab peoples and using nationalist dynamics and, depend-ing upon the strength of the people to be able to organise a force against imperialism, he thus hoped to resist imperialism’s efforts at annihilation. However, as a result of the divide and rule policy it has always applied, imperialism crushed this uprising and to a great extent resistance was wiped out. But through the period of history that we have lived through, all of the people, organisations, persons and even states that have to an extent been able to secure their anti-imperialist policy and it has been shown that peo-ples’ liberation will not be secured by imperialism.Saddam was not a Marxist-Leninist. In the long run he was a supporter of bourgeois

ideology, and did not genuinely believe in the power of the people. He had taken a stand upon the basis of Arab nationalism against imperialism. As was the case with the enemy and every other power which does not believe in the people, he could have done nothing but submit when faced with a greater power, nothing but find ways of collaborating with it. Those who are really anti-imperialist and who trust the people, regain their strength

among the people and continue their uprising despite temporary losses or their coun-tries being under total occupation. This is a long-term fight. If one does not have this kind of belief one enters into collaborating with the bourgeoisie, because their mentality is to act in such a way as to suffer the least harm. This is exactly what imperialism wants to create. After entering into this path, new acts of collaboration will follow previous acts of collaboration. Today, these countries are living through such a situation. In one sense imperialism has not only hit out at Saddam, objectively it has hit out at everyone and has put everyone through the stage of surrender.The Palestinian movement, knowing that the “New World Order” of imperialism was

going to also stop the Palestinian people’s freedom struggle, knowing that they would be forced to follow the politics of surrender in order to make up for losses they had sustained from the revisionist system’s collapse, supported Saddam’s uprising with great enthusiasm, they had regained hope from it. With the crushing of the uprising, the pet-it-bourgeois understanding, which relied upon external forces, thoughts of liberation became tied up with the “New World Order”, and they did not waste time in strangling the Palestinian people’s struggle. The final steps taken in relation to this were Arafat’s surrender agreement. However, neither the “New World Order’s” bloody attacks nor be-trayal are sufficient to wipe out the people’s desire for freedom. When the external forces that the people could lean upon were wiped out, the stage of learning and thinking of how they could achieve freedom without them began. Learning this has resulted in the Palestinian people recreating unity in the face of Arafat’s betrayal and has secured the raising of the flag of freedom.Without relying upon external forces, relying upon their own strength, they are think-

ing, learning and wanting a revolution and the thought of defending the revolution and redeveloping socialism in a healthier way and in ways which will not bring about a col-lapse. All over the world, we have entered a period of not accepting imperialist surren-der. There is belief in the power of the people and the struggles of the organisations are increasing. In the Middle East, the Palestinian people’s struggle, despite there being many different ideologies within it, has united against imperialism and surrender and the continuing fight for freedom is an important step in the rise of revolution.In the Middle East some Kurdish national movements, seeing the Kurdish people’s lib-

eration within the context of the “New World Order” and making agreements with im-perialism, and despite the fact that some sections have not yet collaborated with imperi-alism at this level but are seeking to manoeuvre without harming imperialism, without being anti-imperialist and not going outside of the boundaries drawn up by imperialism, has resulted in the strategic stagnation of the Kurdish national movements.The masses will see through the painful experience that these nationalist organisations

have made them live through that liberation is not possible that way. With such an un-derstanding, nationalism grew as a result of the green light that imperialism gave it. When the true face of nationalism was disclosed, its downfall will be just as quick. Rev-olutionary movements, which have a nation but are not nationalist, who stand up to imperialism, will see that there cannot be national liberation without anti-imperialism, will benefit and will develop. The period is now going rapidly from a slump in the level

of struggle to a rise.There has been no objective change in the imperialist-capitalist relations of produc-

tion or the relationship of imperialism and imperialism’s new form of exploitative rela-tions. Only the new exploitative relations have became more systemised. The relations and conflicts amongst the imperialists are continuing to develop at an increasing level through the international monopoly. Along with the collapse of the socialist system, incredible competition has started amongst the imperialists for the monopolies to gain control of the remarkable markets that have opened up. German imperialism after de-veloping rapid superiority in Europe after recovering from the Second World War, has started to build its own military attack forces. It has come to the stage of being able to compete with the USA and Japan, economically, technically and at all levels. It has in particular increased its entry into the Middle East, the Balkans and the countries which are in the USA’s immediate sphere of influence. Supported by other European countries which are weak against the USA, it is attempting to compete against the latter. Whilst German and Japanese imperialism mainly seeks to secure developments in the world on a economic and technical basis, the USA is not able to compete at the same level. Howev-er, with its military existence and continuing to act as a gendarme to the world, the USA is able to make up for that situation and is continuing to play the lead for imperialism.Since the 1970s, the revisionist countries took the attitude of entering into collaboration

with imperialism. They mainly looked to not rocking the boat between with imperial-ism and took joint action over areas of conflict and liberation movements which have tried to rock its balance, they had given up on world revolution. It is for this reason that they were no danger to imperialism but were only countries whose markets needed to be taken over and had to collapse so that they could secure the superiority of bourgeois ideology. Within this understanding of the imperialists, it was not these countries that were a danger and it was not their developments that it was necessary to obstruct, it was the liberation movements and the socialist movements that had surrounded all corners of the world that had to be stopped. As for the relations amongst the imperialists, despite intense competition, as a result of becoming monopolies, numerous imperialist unions and associations had been established, and they were reshaped in accordance with their power. They had developed a new form of exploitation, and continued without resorting to military action and are continuing in this way.The imperialists, despite having internal conflict that they face in the countries which are

being exploited anew, are applying the decisions that they are taking through their own particular establishments and monopolies, without resorting to military intervention. It is necessary to include the United Nations among the international establishments of the imperialists. Within the UN, permission is almost never given for a decision to be taken in favour of the people. The imperialists, supporting the new forms of exploitation, are suppressing any kind of movement which is involved in uprisings or moves that are in conflict with imperialism. In a situation where it cannot do this or it is necessary not to do this, it condemns the people to hunger and poverty through economic, technical and military embargoes, thus giving itself security by compelling resisters to surrender.Recently, the Israeli occupation of Lebanon, the bombing of Libya and the imposition

of an embargo, the occupation of Panama, the arrest of the prime minister and his being taken to the USA, the attack on Iraq and the massacre of its people in order to give a warning to the Arabs and to the rest of the world, the occupation of Somalia etc., almost all of these passed through the control and review of the UN and they were an operation accomplished jointly by all of the imperialists.At the point that has been arrived at, those who wait for the UN to make a decision in

favour of the people, those who want the people’s problems to be resolved there cannot escape the demands and plots of imperialism. The UN is being used against the people. We can say that the UN has became the decision-making body, the military and eco-nomic force of the imperialists and collaborators.Today there are many conflicts between the new countries which are newly opening

out into the imperialist market and the imperialists, despite the fact that they want the new countries to be a part of the imperialist system, because of their own internal con-flicts, the capitalists not being ready to cope etc. and at this stage Russia has no chance of appearing important within this competition. In the long run with its economic and political development, the international monopolies, the establishment and the UN will take sides with imperialism as they do today against the people. The conditions to carry out a military struggle in order to take over imperialist markets do not exist.The fact that nuclear weapons are in the hands of this country or that country cannot

be looked upon on as a basis for whether or this would or would not prevent war. In the past, in the event of war between the socialist system and the imperialist system, the fact that there were nuclear weapons in the hands of the socialist system was a deterrent, to-day the fact that many imperialist countries have nuclear weapons does not make it the decisive factor, although it may be an assisting factor.Today the imperialists are showing the ability to suppress, while showing great unity

among themselves, any form of initiative that is going to damage imperialist hegemony. This situation does not mean that there is no conflict amongst themselves. On the con-trary, in order to increase the rate of exploitation they are in violent competition over economic and political plans, and indeed they are fighting each other.However, when they turn this fight into a military one, knowing that this carries the

danger of losing existing markets and triggering new revolutions, and in fact can result in self-destruction, they have turned to economic and political wars. At most, they are encouraging regional wars, on the basis of getting the people to kill each other. They are continuing wars on a regional level.In today’s world, revolutionary strategy cannot be made by evaluating whether war will

break out amongst the imperialists. All of the imperialists and collaborators have united against the danger of revolution, they are acting in unity against any form of opposi-tion movement that will spoil the rule of imperialism. In revolutionary strategy, all pro-grammes must be shaped in accordance with this situation. Every revolutionary organ-isation that exists or is formed must be able to correctly diagnose the conflicts amongst the imperialists and the conflicts between their own countries and imperialist countries. They must show the ability to benefit from this analysis. However, this absolutely does

not mean that revolutionary strategy should be made in accordance with these conflicts. Such an approach is one which means leaving revolution at the mercy of spontaneity, de-laying it, moving towards an opportunist understanding of rejecting armed struggle. We must preserve our long-term People’s War Strategy and its correctness, which we have ascertained and put into practice. This line is the general line for all countries which have recently been subjected to exploitation, even if the various new forms of exploitation in the world and the underdeveloped countries may have differences according to class and their historical and social peculiarities.

TURKEY’S POSITION IN THE WORLD TODAY

In our country, everything is under the management and control of imperialism. A distorted form of capitalism is developing in every area, for in the neocolonial rela-tions of imperialism that arise from this development, no areas are left where the lo-

cal collaborationist monopolies and bourgeois parties are free to use their initiative. The politics of terror and oppression aimed at implementing cruel exploitation also come from this neocolonialism and distorted capitalism, and it cannot provide stability for imperialism and the oligarchy. Crisis has deepened and continues to worsen wherever the capitalist system cannot find a solution.Turkey could not successfully perform the role of gendarme it was given by imperi-

alism. To have done so it would have needed to stop the revolutionary struggle from rising, and guaranteed economic and political stability for imperialist hegemony in the Middle East. It tried to suppress the revolutionary people’s opposition by force and vio-lence, but after a temporary defeat this opposition raised its head again, in a more firmly established way, having benefited from past experience. The artificiality of the oligarchy’s stability and equilibrium, imposed by force, were revealed, and it was clearly seen that what was presented as stability and equilibrium was in fact its opposite.The collaborationist monopoly capitalists in Turkey believed that they were becoming

more powerful during the period of silence in the country provided by the September 12 junta, and they thought of developing rapidly by acting as a Trojan horse for imperialism and concentrating on the Middle East and the countries where capitalism was undevel-oped and where instability caused obstacles to development. The monopoly capitalists of Turkey could freely enter neither the Middle East nor the Turkic republics that were formed after the collapse of revisionism in the USSR, and could not even succeed in the role of a Trojan horse.By relying on the claims of the junta of September 12 that it would develop monopoly

capital, and by discounting social opposition and the revolutionaries, certain brain-dam-aged economists exaggerated the mission of the monopolist capital of Turkey, ignored the revolutionary struggle and announced that Turkey had changed its structural sta-tus, and some others - the most quick-witted among the brain-damaged - came out with theories of “sub-imperialism”, thus deviating from waging struggle and insisting on spontaneity and conservatism.In neocolonial countries like ours, where distorted capitalism is developing, and espe-

cially in the most turbulent area of the world, the Middle East, ignoring revolutionary struggle cannot be a correct analysis and can offer no solution. Therefore, the first and main target of the pro-USA fascist junta was to suppress the revolutionary struggle. The revolution in Turkey is not of the kind which can be carried out in any country in the Middle East. The revolution in Turkey has the influence and power to carry the revolu-tion from the Middle East to the Balkans and to Asia, with its geopolitics and strategic importance, the level of development of its capitalism, its dependency on imperialism,

its substructure and human resources and its status as a mosaic of peoples. Also with this influence and power it has the ability to guide and transmit dynamism to all the revolutionary movements and the peoples in the region. That is why almost everyone including imperialism, oligarchy and the revisionists were trying to maintain stability in the world before the collapse of the revisionist system, and were united in not wanting to develop the revolution of Turkey. While the pro-USA fascist junta of September 12, massacred and imprisoned the revolutionaries of Turkey, oppressing the revolutionary opposition in a most bloody way, the Soviet Communist Party, the Chinese Commu-nist Party and the Party of Labour of Albania - the ones who called themselves “social-ists”- hurried to establish relations with the junta and supported them. This is the result of their mentality. Without declaring war on all these powers that tried to prevent the revolution in Turkey, there was no chance of succeeding. Without opposing all these powers, or understanding the economic and political situation of Turkey - the juntas, the administrative methods, the formation of fascism, the democracy game, the pretended stability achieved with a great deal of propaganda and bragging about “unbeatable pow-er and an invincible state” - and behind all these, instability, rot and decomposition. The monopoly capital of Turkey is capital grown and developed by imperialism and it lacks self-confidence. Therefore, it cannot create and apply independent politics. Without the ideological and technical support of imperialism it cannot take even a step forward. This capital became dependent on imperialism in every respect and must determine eco-nomic and political policies according to the interests of imperialism in the Middle East and throughout the world. Despite the fact that these policies of imperialism in most cases are contrary to the interests of collaborationist monopoly capital, as a consequence of its dependency it has not got the physical capability of changing these policies.The contradictions that are created by the calculations different imperialist countries

make about the advantages they can derive from Turkey, the contradictions created by the relations of the oligarchy with each of those countries, the internal contradictions of the oligarchy and the neocolonialist policies of exploitation and oppression result in it not having a structure in which governments in Turkey will be able to establish contin-uous stability, ease the contradictions among the people or stop them reacting against the regime.Within the oligarchy, monopoly capital, the commercial bourgeoisie and feudal rem-

nants are continuing to fight to become powerful at every level and state intitution to grab a larger piece of the pie of exploitation. So that the bourgeois parties that are found-ed in the interests of these exploiters, divide society up like plots of land and for the sake of the oligarchy’s own power, are pitted against each other in a remorseless struggle. By receiving the support of European and US imperialism - if the quarrel is on an interna-tional level - and on religious grounds, the support of countries like Iran and Saudi Ara-bia and with their directives, the dimensions of the quarrel deepen and Turkey becomes the tool of these countries in the struggle for hegemony. On the other hand, the broad masses of people who have no real idea whom they serve and fight for are subjected to the demagogic promises by the collaborators of the imperialists, and in the search for stability and prosperity, are dragged behind the bourgeois parties. Despite this, they do

not believe the party they follow - because of political oppression and poverty resulting from intensified exploitation - will give them freedom. Monopoly capital does not pos-sess the power to provide stability and comfort for the monopolies despite the support of imperialism and its characteristic role within the oligarchy and the other exploiting classes and sectors. A part of the instability is the clashes within the oligarchy and by in-citing and supporting these clashes, they only consider their own interests. Another and the main part of it is that, whether silenced or not, the existence of the great, permanent opposition of the masses of people and the oligarchy’s fear of this opposition. While in the imperialist countries, the monopolies provide the stability by their own power and form the state institutions in accordance with their needs, on the national and interna-tional level they do not face many obstacles in making decisions for their own advantage and applying them. Moreover, in our countries, since the monopolies do not possess the internal dynamism, they have to share almost all state institutions with the other classes and sections within the oligarchy. While this sharing causes a constant internal conflict within the oligarchy, none of them can come up with daring policies and face the op-position of the people. Because in order to turn their weaknesses into strength, each of them wants to use the masses. Therefore, they come up with policies that are partially acceptable and since these contradict the interests of the other exploiting classes, the dimensions of the conflict deepen. While US and European imperialism think of pro-tecting their interests by silencing the opposition with more severe and radical methods at the point when their interests under threat or will be, the other side tries to protect its interests by playing the democracy game. The conflict of interests of all these exploiting classes and imperialism is reflected from the bourgeois parties to the state institutions, to the army General Staff, to the contra-guerrillas, and develops secretly and/or openly.This orientation of the ruling classes and imperialism in Turkey and the continuous

contradictions are the reason for the instability of Turkey’s oligarchy, or the apparent stability is sensitive and weak and liable to be changed very easily. For example, today imperialism and some countries, as a tool for their interests and under the mask of protecting human and national rights, appear to defend the rights and liberties of the Kurdish people and accept the Kurdish nationalist movement in Turkey. Within the “New World Order”, without fear of this type of nationalism which is not targeted at the roots of the regime, they are figuring to take them under control. Nationalists also knew these plans and by developing the political manoeuvres on these grounds, they want to expand. The oligarchy of Turkey is not preparing to give any rights to nationhood despite this approach of imperialism and now, they want to solve the problem with the methods of the Ottoman Empire. But still they could not put their ideas into practice properly. Their dependency on imperialism in every respect stops them from resist it. They permanently keep the Kurdish national element on the agenda and want to use it as an opportunity in the conflicts within the oligarchy and between oligarchy and imperialism. Also, the ruling classes of Turkey are uncomfortable about the existence of pro-Iran Islamic movements and claim to be secular, but when they feel weak and des-perate against national and revolutionary opposition, they use the Islamists against the revolutionary movements. When the Islamists became a threat, this time another force

is used and then the interests of the previous force will be a problem. Today the state in a desperate situation so that it is searching for stability by accommodating bandits in the presidential palace.When we examine the recent past of Turkey, the 1960 coup d’état, fascism on March 12

1971 and September 12 1980 and despite all oppressive methods and laws, stability could not be established nor could the monopolies relax. In Turkey, the country of juntas, even the bourgeois parties and their military forces did not think that a new junta would solve problems and do not mention the concept of a junta. The instability and depressed con-dition of the Turkish Republic were revealed clearly before the masses of people.The basis of our revolution will be a correct revolutionary line, the internal contradic-

tions of the oligarchy, the results arising from the politics of dependency on imperialism, the substructure formed by the intensified oppression and exploitation over the people, the unstable state institutions and as a consequence of these, the unstable oligarchic structure that is causing the crisis.The last 35 years of the Republic of Turkey can be called the history of instability and

crisis. It is up to us to turn this history of crisis into the history of revolution. When we apply correct revolutionary politics and tactics, it would not be too difficult to divert this crisis, deepening every day and certainly, its flow to revolution could not be stopped. The revolutionary blows, while shaking and disturbing the equilibrium of the oligarchy, will weaken and destroy the counter-revolution wings by supporting the revolutionary front and consequently improving the blows. The most powerful institutions and the main support of the oligarchy, the police and military, are in crisis and contradiction and do not possess the power to protect the regime in the long term. The invincibility and the supreme power myths of the state are nothing but fairy tales now. With the cosmopoli-tan culture of distorted capitalism, the bureaucrats, military forces, intelligence services, diplomats, parliament members and ministers - from top to bottom, the majority con-sider their own benefit more than anything else.We can say that the oligarchy is facing the biggest economic, political and social crisis

in its history. The state has nothing to give to neutralise the opposition of the masses of people, on the contrary, in order to finance the war budget, which increases constantly, it increases the exploitation to higher levels. The control of imperialism is extending with the continuously increasing debts of the state. While deepened economic crisis is continuing, the increasing poverty, destruction of moral values, the hegemony of the cosmopolitan culture and increasing desire for a better life is causing a great social crisis.The economic and social crisis is so aggravated that, when a new government was

formed, the debate about a new election started and the duration of the new government was assumed to be months rather than years. In a country like Turkey, where instability cannot be prevented, even for a bourgeois party to be in power means to resign as an unsuccessful party. Therefore, for the bourgeois party to be in power is like swallowing fire. None of the bourgeois parties has power to solve the instability problem of Turkey’s oligarchy. This situation means that the bourgeoisie cannot administrate. Clearly there is also political crisis in the country. And it would be right to say the oligarchy of Turkey

is paralysed.The people who realize this economic, political and social crisis are slowly keeping away

from the parties of the regime but still vote for them to a certain extent. In reality, they do not possess belief and hope in these parties. But to live in the middle of the battleground of the bandits, they are in need of help. With the demoralization caused by crisis, in a society where self-interest, immorality and corruption have become acceptable, in order not to be lost or vanish in the regime, people are looking for a power to rely on. In the recent past, the peasants who believed in “god above and the state below” philosophy, as the extension of this philosophy, the propaganda of “ the state is powerful, invincible” in the cities lost credibility as far as the people were concerned. From top to bottom, the administrators of the state relentlessly crush the poor, miserable, corrupted and weak people. The increasing poverty and danger of losing all values pushes people into new searches. In fact this search is the revolution. But, since revolutionaries could not fulfil it, the other tools of oligarchy and imperialism came on the agenda and by re-directing the reaction of people against the regime towards the revolutionaries, the search for revolution was obstructed. The development of the Islamic groups and Welfare Party should be considered through this approach. As long as revolutionaries cannot direct the potential and the economic, political and social reactions of the masses of people towards supporting the revolutionary front, imperialism will continue to use and falsely direct people by utilizing these various currents.The revolutionary movement of Turkey lived through two eras when the social and po-

litical situations were ripened. The first one was before the September 12 junta. During this era, the revolutionary potential had developed all over Turkey and the masses of people were carrying the potential to take sides in the ranks of revolution. The bourgeois governments were impotent and hopeless, as they are now. Since the revolutionaries could not fill this period with well-organized forces and lead people against the oppres-sion and terror of September 12, the masses of people were repressed and the potential withdrawn. It will not be wrong to compare today’s revolutionary potential of the mass-es of people and the condition of power with the “pre-September 12 era”. If we cannot succeed in our duty of leading the masses, show the necessary audacity, the correct rev-olutionary tactics and the art of administering, one way or another, the oligarchy will be able to remove this potential. The oligarchy realises the increasing danger and tries to achieve the pacification of the masses by using every opportunity and massacres in the cities and rural areas. The main force is the guerrilla who will stop the pacification and direct the potential of the masses towards revolution. We must be the power that offers freedom in urban and rural areas, the voice of liberation and justice against the cruelty of tyranny. If the city and rural guerrillas do not grow, forcing fascism to taste its own medicine - continuously crushing pressure - and proving our determination despite the oppression, the great masses of people will approach us hesitatingly and be cautious.The oligarchy is aiming to neutralise the nationalist Kurdish movement in a period of

time by isolating Kurdistan and using tactics of terror and oppression. When it is under pressure, it tries to solve the problems of cultural conflicts within the boundaries of the local administrations, plans to make the nationalist Kurdish armed movement come

down from the mountains - giving up armed struggle - and destroy them. It is an anoth-er question whether they succeed or not. What we consider is the main source of fear for the oligarchy is not the nationalist movement but the development of the revolutionary movement in the cities and rural areas that directly targets the oligarchic state. Now, both Kurdish nationalist movements and Kurdish people realise that none of the move-ments can free them without targeting the oligarchy of Turkey. This dilemma makes the nationalist Kurdish movements rely on the other powers and the idea of liberation under their permission. This sort of thought and the approach of nationalist liberation are the consequence of the wrong strategy that is practised by all the nationalists. Those who do not struggle on the basis of the brotherhood of peoples, on the class and national level, and with the perspective of revolutionary people’s power, cannot destroy the oligarchic state. Since this is not the intention, they limit themselves to national reforms and ask the oligarchy for a federation. If they cannot get it, they choose compromise by demand-ing autonomy, etc. In any case the result will not be the liberation of the Kurdish people. The solution for the dilemma of the Kurdish people is to leave the marsh of nationalism, which appears to be a war of liberation. The re-direction of its great revolutionary po-tential on the path to destroy the fascist state is the duty of revolutionaries. If we cannot achieve in this mission, the revolutionary potential of the Kurdish people will be wasted, for nationalism will be neutralised eventually.Our country is home of very big revolutionary dynamics and to live a day without hear-

ing the weapons of the guerrillas in the cities and on the mountains is a great loss. The oligarchy may massacre in thousands, imprison tens of thousands and force people to migrate in millions. It may terrify people temporarily. But, as the hope of the people, the guerrillas on the mountains and in the cities can make people join them by attacking the oligarchy, avenging the oppressed people, destroying the centres of terror, and leading the inactive and terrified people to stand up for their freedom. The guerrillas grow from small mobile units to a guerrilla army and then the people’s army and speed up the revolution. The counterrevolutionary violence of the oligarchy can only be neutralised by revolutionary violence. This is the law and cannot be debated. But it is not enough to neutralise the counterrevolutionary violence if the main power of revolution is the masses of people; our revolutionary violence should organise people and make them join the war. Revolutionary violence that could not achieve the involvement of the mass-es is bound to get weaker and lose. We need to show the ability to organise the masses of people and apply revolutionary violence.In Turkey, the peoples of Anatolia, Turks, Kurds and the others, believe in the necessi-

ty for revolutionary violence against the cruelty of the authorities. Because there is no other force to stop injustice, exploitation and tyranny and protect them against the state. This power must be the armed forces of revolutionaries. In any case of injustice, cruelty and exploitation, the guerrillas are right beside the people, as the armed strength of the people will grow and develop. We must be an armed power functioning as the people’s justice. When we aim against the tyrants with our justice and determination, people will join the struggle, offering an unexpected degree of support.

The revolution of Turkey has very suitable conditions. We are part of peoples who have had enough of the regime and desire justice and a dignified life. The authorities, past and present cannot administrate. People have consciousness of the necessity for change but do not know who will achieve the change and how. They are searching for it. The devel-oping Kurdish movement, despite its nationalist character, created a great revolutionary potential and is a great force on the path to revolutionary people’s power. The Kurdish people in the other Middle Eastern countries are the potential supporters of our revolu-tion. Palestinians and Arab liberation movements are the support forces for our revolu-tion. The left wing that was affected by revisionism after the Gorbachev administration will regain the revolutionary essence, continue to grow and develop. These developing forces are the support forces for our revolution.Besides these advantages, our revolution has disadvantages too. In order to stop the

development of a revolutionary movement that opposes the oligarchy and imperialism, all these forces will unite to try to crush and destroy us. To isolate us from our friends and support forces, they will oppress us. They will stand in front of us with all sorts of revisionism and opportunism. They will use all sorts of tricks and plots to divide and weaken us. The manoeuvres by using the nationalists will not work on us. We must fight by believing that the only power we rely on is the people’s power. All these disadvantages can be turned to advantages and we can walk towards revolution when we unite the forces of our people for the goal of revolution and win the revolutionary democratic forces of the world onto our side. To demolish these disadvantages, we must possess a guerrilla force that fights on the mountains and in the cities and improve their credibility and authority. We are spending all our efforts to establish this force. Our country is ripe for revolution. The left wing of Turkey and the world is in the period of learning to stand on its feet by rediscovering Marxism-Leninism despite the effects of reformism after the collapse of the revisionist system.“The ones who work as extensions of parties abroad, whether their revolution succeed-

ed or not, and could not analyse correctly the concrete conditions of their own country, could not develop the country’s revolution nor answer the question ‘what kind of social-ism’ correctly. When the socialist parties that they are connected to and imitate deviated towards treason, they could not know what to do. By learning the necessary lessons from this bitter experiment, the ones who do not carry the dynamism to redouble the struggle chose the road of surrender to the bourgeoisie. The others, believing socialism as the only alternative to capitalism started to question their former thoughts. The sections that we should develop, strengthen and be in solidarity are those who carry the potential to recreate themselves. The politics of the Soviet Communist Party, Chinese Communist Party and the Albanian Party of Labour, which were significant until the 1980s and al-most monopolised the world’s socialist forces, incited hatred between the revolutionary forces and for their own political interests did not hesitate to cooperate with imperialists, even fascist regimes, then failed completely and left the followers of their politics greatly disappointed. The organizations like us, defending the ideas of socialism, have problems, and in the long term these problems can be solved with socialism, therefore it would be wrong to polarise by seeing the deviations and differences in socialist understanding as

hostilities, by maintaining the principles of criticism and friendship, our main mission is to carry out revolution in our country. We were declared to be “defenders of the middle road” by these deviations and to have abandoned Marxism. When these deviations that could not understand and live through the living meaning of Marxism-Leninism, allied with a party that had achieved its revolution, they thought they possessed absolute right and believed everything they do would be right too. They were in great crisis following the collapse of certain states and of their thoughts that they were defending as dogmas, and they transformed themselves into capitalists. While the followers of the Soviet Party surrendered to the regime, the supporters of the Chinese and Albanian Parties are still in the same crisis. Together with this collapse, the attitude of the THKP-C which do not behave like the traffic controller of the world’s leftists, defend the universal theses of Marxism-Leninism and believe in the necessity of the ideological struggle in this direction and aim to improve solidarity with all – including the parties who succeeded in achieving their own revolution - on the basis of friendship and criticism, was proven utterly and clearly correct. The initial point of this international attitude is to achieve revolution in our country by analysing Marxism-Leninism in our concrete conditions. But the future of this revolution cannot be put in danger by imprisoning within the borders of the country or a territory and isolation from the peoples of the world. A revo-lution which is not continuously expanding the boundaries of revolution, providing new revolutions, supporting the socialist and national liberation movements that are spread all over the world to develop and strengthen and strike against imperialism, is like a lone island in the ocean. None of the revolutions should be isolated. To be isolated means to be hungry, thirsty and dead. The revisionist system with its nationalist-pragmatist poli-tics prevented revolutions in several countries, thus allowing imperialists to tighten their siege, let imperialism strike the last blow and caused the destruction of these countries.Today, for the liberation movements and Marxist-Leninists, there are almost no coun-

tries to rely on and seek support from. Countries like Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, etc. that are under imperialist blockade, are continuing the pragmatic heritage from the revisionists, making concessions to imperialism and through this way think they can lift the siege. It is very difficult to break the siege with these policies. China is different. It possesses rich natural reserves, a huge population and effective economic and military power. In comparison with the other countries, it is easier for them to stand on their feet. The CCP administration, despite the deviation from socialism prevented the imperialist plots. Their line is pragmatic and revisionist. Imperialist plots will find it more difficult to succeed. But they are not on strong Marxist-Leninist ground. If they do not engage in ideological self-criticism and politically refresh and improve their revolution their inevitable end will be the same as the USSR’s.If the liberation movements and revolutions do not improve and strike blows against

imperialism from different fronts, to free these countries from their blockades is im-possible. The thought of solving the problems of life will slowly redevelop capitalism and bring the revolution to a very dangerous position. These countries on the other hand, are focusing on the problems of daily life rather than improving the revolution, by concentrating on relations with imperialist and capitalist countries and ignoring the

revolutionary developments, they are seriously mistaken.During the past, everything coming out of the parties that succeeded their revolution,

were taken and applied as dogmas by their imitators. These parties, which were born in a capitalist substructure and culture might be affected by the system that they came out of and might fall into deviation and treason. The people and potential leftists, in general, took the practice and experiences of these parties into consideration and did not want to see the truth or in other words, could not see it adequately. This sense and approach reflected upon the organizations in various ways and these organizations that could not organise masses of people and did not achieve revolution yet, by belittling themselves in front of these parties caused weakening in their self-confidence and ideological in-dependence. The weakening in self-confidence and ideological independence brought on the weakening of the sense of their ability to seize power and also caused a lack of determination and insensitivity in the struggle against deviations.Whether they achieved revolution, or by comparing with our own power, the organ-

izations that did not achieve revolution but took serious distances towards it, leading great masses, and such, these are not the parameters that we can use to evaluate an organization. The important thing is its approach towards country and the world. Their answers of the questions of what kind of socialism and what kind of internationalism, general approaches towards Marxism-Leninism and practice should be our criteria. We shall determine our attitude by analyzing the idea and its applications, not the power. A revolutionary organization, regardless of its power and effect, without falling into prag-matism in front of a powerful force, without accepting the superiority of anyone in any condition should have the courage of Marxism-Leninism.As a result of the pragmatism spread from the Soviet, Chinese and Albanian parties to

the world’s left, together with the collapse of the revisionist system, organizations were left feeling alone, weak and affected by revisionism are not sharing the submission of revisionism, but they are applying its pragmatism to a degree in a more rougher way under the conditions of loneliness and weakness. So that, the words of internationalism and revolutionary solidarity lost their meaning and were replaced by relations on the basis of the self-interest of capitalism. When an organisation developed relations with a patriot-revolutionary organization, it calculated what to get in return. Of course it would not be right to say this was done by all organizations. But this is the general situation.In order to rebuild socialism, which according to imperialism was “destroyed in a way

that will never come back to life” in a more healthy and stronger form, we must strug-gle against the ideas left by revisionism, preventing the development of revolution and revolutionary solidarity, and which still continue to make organizations decay. Without success in this struggle, the foundations of friendship and revolutionary solidarity with principles carrying the revolution forward cannot be provided. The pragmatist and re-visionist sentiments penetrated the structures of the organizations so that the concepts of friend and enemy became uncertain. None of the organizations contact the others through with complete trust and carried the doubts of “shall we be betrayed when they receive better opportunities”. Many of the organizations that lost the support of the re-visionist system, this time, by thinking of their own interests within another country

and their organisation’s calculations of benefits, turned towards the search for power, and directly or indirectly influenced these powers, came to a conclusion to determine the positive or negative relations, the revolutionary friendship and solidarity. What does this mean? This means that other countries will predict the future of every revolutionary movement or revolution and could be betrayed.The future of revolution depends on peoples and brotherhood between peoples; the

revolutionary solidarity of their vanguards and joint struggle against imperialists and capitalists until none of them exists in the world. The present view must definitely be changed.”