|
From the magazine "Yasadigimiz VATAN
(HOMELAND We live in)"
[May 28, 2001, 92nd
Issue]
THE LEFT IN EUROPE AND THE REVOLUTIONARIES IN TURKEY
WHO ARE TRYING TO BE LIKE THE EUROPEAN LEFT
We stated in our previous issues that certain elements of the
left in Turkey would not be able stand on their feet without rejecting being
Europhiles. In order to carry out the struggle against this trend it is be
necessary to define this “European leftism” which is a part of
this Europhilia.
What are the main characteristics of
European leftism?
Compare these summarised
characteristics with the legal reformist circles in Turkey. Great similarities
can be found.
When these similarities are analysed,
it can be seen that, with its “political parties which are
non-political”, it’s parliamentarism, always just being in a supportive
position, always being within the permissible areas of the state and within its
self-contained culture, the left in Turkey has become distant to the concept of
conquering power.
ANTI-ORGANISATIONAL, INDIVIDUALISM, ACTING
WITHIN THE PERMISSIABLE AREAS,… BUT DESPITE OF THIS CERTAIN TITLES COULD NOT BE
ABANDONED
The reformist left has been
“anti-organisational” for years.
Their propaganda even went as far as
to say “do not get involve with these organisations otherwise you will be in
trouble”. They have told the masses “come and join my legal trade union and
ignore the others”. They have adopted the understanding of Civil Society
Organisations or Non-Governmental Organisations, which are the
creation of imperialist democracy. Political parties were converted into human
rights associations and became like ordinary trade unions. Their activities are
carried out almost in a disorderly manner, like in civil society organisations,
not like in accordance to the rules and principles of political parties or
democratic mass organisations. With the understanding of “let them work if they
want to, let them be lazy if they want to, let them do whatever they want to do
and whenever they want to do it”, their organisations became paralysed.
According to this understanding, even
if they are “parties”, they will be “political parties which are
non-political”. These parties will not be illegal but something like “the
legal party of labour”.
There will be no form of
collectivism. The terms like being responsible, volunteerism and
discipline will not be mentioned.
A distorted and Europe-originated
individualism determines their lives and thoughts.
They never want revolutionaries to
be organised.
They never defend the
revolutionaries’ freedom of thought.
All of this is what is required of
them to get permission from the oligarchy. Since this permission is the main
thing for them. For the “freedom of thought” of an imprisoned author, they
mobilise but they ignore the disappearances of hundreds of revolutionaries.
While the country is turned into a bloodbath, they occupy themselves with the
issue of the citizenship of Nazim Hikmet (*)
But never will they carry out actions
that carry the probability of receiving police brutality or detention. This is
how they theorise their position, one of them will say “this is how to be a
revolutionary and have a comfortable life at the same time”, whilst another one
will say, “scenes of beating will make it difficult to organise the
masses”
Here the main contradiction lies,
despite of all this, they keep using the titles revolutionary, socialist
and communist. This is the point where Turkey’s
revolutionaries became like the European leftists.
These ladies and gentlemen will avoid
being organised and disciplined, will use the “right to be lazy” and will
also be able to be revolutionaries and communists without paying the obligatory
visit to a police station. This is exactly what we call European
leftism.
PETTY BOURGEOIS LIVES WITHOUT
DEDICATION AND ENDEAVOUR
For a while we have been talking
about certain issues under the title of “Is this being a democrat and a
revolutionary?”
Here we will mention an
example.
This is taken from discussions about
the “reception” that would be given to marchers who would arrive in Ankara on a
Sunday. IHD (Human Rights Association) suggested another day and said “if the
action is carried out on a Sunday, this will stop the gathering becoming
massive, people would rather to go to a picnic or stay at home”
What we are witnessing here are not
the concerns of whether the gathering will attract a small crowd but rather the
preferences of this type of revolutionary and democrat who refuses to abandon
both their individual and political status quo. More importantly, following the
deaths of more than 50 martyrs, and almost 50 living dead, how did excuses like
“I am busy that day” or “people will prefer to go to a picnic”
occur during a discussion about the possibility of tens of more deaths? How did
this become normal, natural and ordinary?
This mentality is like that of a
European leftist, a “supporter”. It provides its “support” without jeopardising
its own life style and status quo.
What outcome can we expect from this
mentality? Because no matter how long the discussions take, no matter what
decisions are made and no matter how often there are reminded of their
responsibilities it will always clash with their status quo.
Their adapt their politics according
to their life style. Their understanding of being a revolutionary is; (we
already forgot about expecting them to sacrifice their lives) they are not
prepared to sacrifice their life style such as, their car, their job, their
home, their children need to be taken to school and back, they need to chat with
friends preferably in a bar.
The strange thing is, they were
saying “stop the resistance, give in,…we will follow up and undertake the
affair” What if on the same day that they decided to follow things up on
some other matters, like going on a picnic, arose?
Since such a style is done under the
pretext of being a revolutionary and being a leftist, today most of the
revolutionary and democratic institutions are run in a non-serious way. They
became distant to being dedicated and having endeavour. The branches of the
trade unions and legal parties are not regularly opened their phone and fax
lines are cut off. In time a “could not care less” kind of attitude became the
norm. Can these parties, trade unions and associations organise the masses? Can
these form a barrier against the decaying culture of imperialism and the
individualism of the bourgeoisie?
They are trying to legitimise this
life style which is one of the characteristics of the “European leftism”, under
the pretext of being a revolutionary and being a leftist.
REVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES DO NOT EXIST BUT
BOURGEOIS METHODS AND THOUGHTS ARE
EVERYWHERE
Take a look at the relations between
revolutionaries and democratic institutions. Unfortunately, you could come
across with all sorts of deceptions. It has been accustomed to make promises but
not to keep them. They are avoiding their responsibilities with an excuse of “I
am very busy”.
Most of them mention “democracy”
whenever they talk. They criticise revolutionaries for not practising
“democracy-within-organisations”. Have a look at the democracy of ODP (Freedom
and Solidarity Party). They throw out those who think differently from the rest
of their members. They organised a plot and coup d'�tat in KESK (Trade Union of
Civil servants). These are the methods of bourgeois politicians and are valid
for such a kind of leftism. This is inevitable for those who are distant from
the struggle and revolutionary values.
Strange terms are inserted in the
revolutionary and leftist literature. Those who talk about the European Union,
the Copenhagen Criteria, “International Standards” are already under the
ideological control of European imperialism. This means that the European
leftism is ideologically well founded.
What follows next is the same scenery
as went before.
At this point the Europe authorities, the oligarchy
and the reformists are hand to hand in order to destroy the revolutionaries.
They all become alike because they dream of a Turkey where they can play the
game of “civil society”. But their dreams can not come true because of the
reality of Turkey.Let’s think about it. What are the customs of leftists and
revolutionaries from Turkey and what else is compelled to them? Think about our
customs. Being and adopting a life style that is decent, clean and clear,
courageous, sharing, showing solidarity, being modest, sacrificing, being
fearless…
On aspects of ideology and individual
lives and attitudes, many of the positive values and customs of revolutionaries
were rejected by those who kept saying we were “vulgar and intransigent”.
Instead they became incompetent and corrupt.
As far as revolutionaries are
concerned their problems, like passivity, being marginalised, having the problem
of legitimacy and from time to time losing respect and reliability before the
eyes of the masses, should be focused upon and their so called great politics
and strategies should be put aside. The causes of these problems can be found
within the attitudes that we have mentioned.
(*)He was a well-known communist and
poet from Turkey. He was died in 1963 whilst in exile in the Soviet Union and
his Turkish citizenship was taken away. |
