Here are a few points in response to Mine's posting.
Citing Dogu Perincek as an example of the "ultra-nationalism" of the left in
Turkey is flawed on several counts. Neither he nor his organisation
(currently named IP, Isci Partisi or "Workers' Party") is representative of
the revolutionary left in Turkey.
Perincek has been around a long time but his behaviour has long been
questionable, to say the least. During the late 1970s, he is reported as
being so hostile to the Soviet Union that he saw some merit in Turkey's NATO
membership (see article on the left in Turkey in "Problems of Communism",
1980, we think the July-August issue.) This attitude, which dovetailed
rather neatly with the views of the authorities, meant that his group was
tolerated when other groups were being banned, though later on, when the
coup took place, his party was banned along with every political formation
in Turkey. Even then, Perincek was hostile to the Maoist guerrillas while
claiming to be Maoist.
1. Uniquely among left-wing publications in Turkey, the IP journal Aydinlik
(Clarity) frequently publishes government leaks. Indeed, Aydinlik seems to
be regarded as a special outlet for such things. This points to Perincek and
the IP enjoying a special relationship with the authorities, of a kind no
other group claiming to be Marxist has.
2. Again, uniquely among left-wing organisations in Turkey, the IP waves the
Turkish flag at demonstrations such as on May Day. Its supporters sometimes
use such occasions to denounce and even physically attack supporters of
other organisations (like the DHKP-C) who do not wave the Turkish flag.
Again, the IP's attitude is closer the one held by the state than to the
mentality of the revolutionary left in Turkey.
3. Aydinlik thinks the military will be the source of Turkey's revolution.
In contrast to other publications on the left, it lauds the role of the
armed forces. Considering how powerful the armed forces already are in
Turkey, this aspect raises the suspicion that Perincek, Aydinlik and the IP
are elements of the system, not a revolutionary alternative to it.
4. Aydinlik has published the names and addresses of people it says belong
to "terrorist organisations". In the context of Turkey, this amounts to
preparing the ground for the state to arrest or even kill them.
Mine's strictures on the left in Turkey apply far more to the IP than to the
DHKP-C. But, in view of what we have said above, are Perincek and people
like him actually a part of the left? We think not.
Claims that the revolutionary left in Turkey are hostile to foreigners are
false. It is possible for people not from Turkey and not from the
Turkish-speaking diaspora to join us and other parties and groups. For
example, TIKKO (Workers' and Peasants' Liberation Army of Turkey) has one
Swiss martyr, a woman named Barbara Kistler. She was martyred in a clash
with the army in Kurdistan in 1993. She was a Maoist who came to know
Maoists from Turkey who were exiled in Switzerland, and she gradually became
more involved with the struggle in Anatolia, eventually sacrificing her
life. Critical though we are of the PKK, we respect the sacrifice made by
those Europeans (especially Germans) who fought in its ranks.
The DHKC has produced a document in English, "Fascism in Turkey". This
covers our attitude to fascism as well as to the military coups and the
cultural impact of imperialism in Turkey. It is probably too large for the
L-I list at 10,000 words, but in the next few days we will look it over and
select excerpts to send to the list.
A final point: it is not the policy of DHKC Information Bureau workers to
identify themselves individually. Several people work at the London
Information Bureau, for example, but we don't identify ourselves as a
security measure, since e-mails and telephone lines are likely to be under
surveillance and names may be passed on to the authorities in Turkey. We
have indications of British police collusion with the police in Turkey.
But a more important reason than security for not identifying ourselves,
even with an alias, is collectivism. Our work belongs to our organisation,
not to ourselves.
DHKC London Information Bureau
----------------------------------------------------------
Thanks DHKC comrade for the clarification. I will raise a couple of points.
I
wish I knew your name, so I could address you accordingly...
>dhkc wrote:
> >Mine asks us to clarify what we identify fascism with in Turkey - the
> >Kemalists or the MHP?
>
> >We do not see the system in Turkey as a Kemalist one. Whatever else >it
was,
> >Turkey under Mustafa Kemal was not a neo-colony.
I agree:)
> >Fascism in Turkey is not
> >classical fascism, like Nazi Germany, but is neo-colonial fascism
> >dependent upon imperialism. So the key fascist institution in Turkey >is
the
> >MGK (National Security Council). It is this body, dominated by the >armed
> >forces who are answerable to NATO and more broadly to imperialism, >which
> >rules
> >Turkey, not parliament.
National Security Council is evidently a militaristic institution. It is
totally
undemocratic and indirectly rules the government acting on behalf of the
parliament and Turkish people. It is accountable to US imperialism and
involved
in several organized crimes and contra- guerrilla movements against leftists
and
Kurdish people in the Southern Part of Anatolia. I would *never and ever*
dispute the brutality and oppressiveness of military forces in Turkey, *and*
the
civil/bourgeois establishment that serves to its interests.
My sense is that the left in Turkey has never understood Kemalism.
Accordingly,
It has failed to understand the military. As you know comrade, Kemalism and
military has being sleeping in the same bed since the foundation of the
Turkish
Republic. In a late developing country where the military is given the power
to
modernize the country, that is what you get. Calling military *fascist*
obscures
any serious historical understanding of this love relationship. It is no
good
for a serious leftist struggle. Take the example of militant Deniz Gezmis
death's penalty in the 70s? What did the Kemalist party do (CHP) when our
"modern pashas" dictated their own terms on civilians and forced them to
accept
the death penalty? The party ranks automatically compromised. The
distinction
between progressive/left wing military (1960s) versus regressive
(reactionary/right wing, 1980s) military is a false distinction in the
context
of Turkey. The ruling classes persistently refer to this distinction to
divide
and rule the left. You implicitly make that distinction as well when you
call
1980 military coup as fascist. So military was not fascist prior to 1980 and
suddenly become fascist in the 80s? Excuse me, but the big social democrat
businessmen like Ishak Alaton (who is also a committed Kemalist) and civil
society liberals refer to the same distinction in their denunciations of the
undemocratic regime in Turkey. Let's not let our own bourgeoisie of the
hook,
comrade!
Yes, Turkey is a neo-colony. Its economy is largely dependent on the west.
However, it is also an *inter-imperialist* ally of the US, so it is not
hundred
percent a victim of imperialism. Its ruling classes want to benefit from the
pie. From the beginning, Turkey has been committed to becoming like a
western
bourgeois democracy. Technically speaking, Turkey stands somewhere between
the
core and the periphery of the world system. It is not another Egypt or India
having massively suffered from a deep rooted establishment of imperialism.
For
example, Turkey, to a certain extend, broke the chains of cultural
imperialism.
This is evident in the education system where, for example, there is still a
strong commitment to principles of nationalism, official history, and
Kemalism.
You can not pass the fifth grade in elementary school without memorizing the
national anthem. Period. Now, the former maoists like Dogu Perincek says in
his
Aydinlik magazine "English is a language of hooligans". So what kind of a
country is this suffering from neo-colonialism comrade if the leftists make
such
ultra-nationalist comments? Accordingly, it would be still better if you had
substantiated what you mean by neo-colonial fascism.
comradely,
Mine
> Ultimately we do not see fascism in Turkey as a
> home-grown product but rather as a form of imperialist control, so the
> anti-fascist and anti-imperialist struggles are linked.
>
> The MHP are among the guard-dogs of the regime, and are the more open
> expression of its fascist face, but the system's fascism does not depend
on
> them. Its essence would not change even if MHP leader Devlet Bahceli's
> recent call for the MHP to have total governmental power (rather than as
> part of a coalition) were to
> come true, because it is not parliament that rules Turkey. (By the way,
> and just as an amusing coincidence, "devlet" is the
> Turkish word for "state".) We mentioned the MHP earlier mainly because the
> climb of the butchers of Maras into a government coalition had passed
almost
> unnoticed while
> everybody was screaming about Haider in Austria.
>
> Discussion about whether or not Turkey is fascist is not the point. Mine
> thinks calling the system fascist in Turkey harms the struggle. Yet the
most
> militant part of Turkey's left (a large proportion of which is in jail,
but
> the jails are merely another front in the struggle) does
> call the system fascist, and this is a significant fact. The CMK statement
> posted earlier is a good example
> of this. When prisoners like these were being attacked at Ulucanlar and
> Burdur, they did not have time to engage in the checklist approach, "Those
> gendarmes attacking us with guns and clubs can't be part of a fascist
> system, because a., b., c.,..." The prisoners did have time to shout
> "Kahrolsun
> fasizm! Yasasin mucadelemiz!" ("Down with fascism! Long live our
struggle!).
>
> Our final point is this: if you think Turkey is a democracy which merely
> happens to have a few problems, and the people who reject the "fascist"
> description seem to us to tend in that direction, then you cannot fight
the
> system there. In fact you might even be talked into thinking it is the
> prisoners like those who signed the CMK statement who are one of the
> problems, not the system itself.
>
> DHKC London Information Bureau
>
_______________________________________________
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
