You are on page 1of 127


usurluk was the final straw that broke the camels 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 parliament, 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 Peoples
Councils. The objective: establishing revolutionary peoples power.
This book contains various texts shedding light on the origin and work of the Peoples
Councils. Further texts offer background as well as the perspective with which the Peoples 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 Peoples
Councils possible and is seeking to put them into practice everywhere and increase their



Kurtulus no. 6, August 19, 1995

he 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 distortion, 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 examples 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 inflicted by the system by engaging in uprisings, despite the peoples apparently varied political
So our struggle and organisational strategies are directed on the one hand towards organising 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 Peoples Councils, Peoples 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 peoples organisations the
revolution can never be achieved. On every day the revolution takes place, these organisational forms must be spread further and oriented towards the masses.
The revolutionary movement does not have enough of these organisations whose creation s urgently necessary to push the revolution forward.


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 peoples 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 PEOPLES 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 defence.
We want to seek out all places where the people are, all neighbourhoods and villages 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 peoples problems and experience 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 Peoples Committees harm the development of the revolution?
Many reasons can be given for this.
The peoples 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 Peoples Committees are dispensed with, if they are not taken seriously, 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
peoples 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 troublemakers 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 trying 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 Peoples Front is the Peoples 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
Those who are outraged by the states cruelty, who are humiliated and long for a more
human life, are deeply moved by every action in the name of peoples 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 Peoples Committees and Peoples Committees are to turn the trust and sympathy
into support and the potential into a revolutionary, organised force.
By spreading this organisation, the peoples 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 mission. 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.


The oligarchy knows the power of armoured vehicles, artillery guns and military aircraft, and in spite of its economic weakness it invests a large part of its budget in such
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 working 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 dont support strikes in other factories, the millions of inhabitants 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 peoples 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 organised 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 oppression 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 peoples 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 proceed in the cities and regions. While centralised, decentralised and mixed peoples organisations 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 peoples organisation and peoples 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 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 peoples committees are the soil in whch to grow the unity of anti-fascist 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 peoples 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 nevertheless 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-confidence 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 prevented 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 wont 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
We must insist that the left takes its place inside the peoples 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, peoples 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 peoples 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
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 peoples committees have to
be formed and what their function is, the peoples 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 peoples 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, suspicious, 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 organisation of the people is proceeding too slowly. Only the enemy is helped by this. We must
strive to build peoples 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 peoples 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 whatever their needs are, are forced to fight concepts like There isnt any, It wont 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 isnt any, and it wont work into There is, and itll 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 dont 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 peoples 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 peoples 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 potential 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 themselves: 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 peoples committees, peoples 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 struggle.
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 peoples committees are organisations 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 organisations 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, cadre 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 process forward, even if it gains power. The peoples 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.

The setting up of peoples 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 peoples 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 peoples 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 peoples unity.
They stood up for the peoples 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 nonetheless the authority of the revolutionaries and the people still held sway...
In the middle of the district, the peoples 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 peoples 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 collective 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 sensitive and ready to wage a struggle. However, when they did not go beyond their boundaries 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 peoples struggle. An example of
these are the committees of defence and struggle against fascism and the peoples committees, 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 peoples organisation for struggle which has to be formed in a serious and responsible 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-Fronts 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 authority. As a result the people can be won and its organisation strengthened.
Inside the peoples councils and committees we will lead an ideological struggle against
bourgeois ideology, opportunism and revisionism and try to reduce the influence of opportunism and revisionism. To achieve this and to make legitimate the fronts 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 peoples 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 campaigns will not be of lasting character and lead to victory if the development of the committees, 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
Today we must build peoples committees, peoples councils and committees of defence
and struggle against fascism to strengthen the resistance to economic, cultural and political terror and fascist attacks, to spread the struggle and bring about peoples 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 organisation 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 peoples 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


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 correctly 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 committees is that they support revolutionaries in the struggle against fascism, are elected by the
people and their activities have the peoples 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 conditions 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 peoples
The peoplecouncils 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 peoples 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 peoples 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 peoples 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 favourable times. Waiting will not improve the situation. So we must first work in the peoples 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 peoples committee, the ground for the
committee to be laid on the basis of the amount of access to the people.


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 committees 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 peoples 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 peoples 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.


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

or 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 peoples 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
peoples 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 committees 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 peoples 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 problems 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 apartments 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
peoples participation, will and powers of decision-making. We can say, with pride, that
the founding of Nurtepe was a unique example among our countrys shantytowns of
how the revolutionary leadership and the peoples 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 peoples 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 peoples consciousness).
This was so normal that everyone, the drivers of small buses, children and elderly people, spoke of Cayan district as though it had had no other name. However, this development 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 Istanbuls First of May district, in many towns and villages in Anatolia, everywhere that revolutionaries had resisted the fascists, the organisation and involvement of
the people led to the blunting of fascisms attacks and the failure of the oligarchys 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 peoples potential was shattered. No unity 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 disturbed.
Before September 12, 1980 the different organisations which called themselves Marxist-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 founding 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

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 popular 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 property for themselves and are not a part of the revolution. Major popular movements and
major revolutionary acts are not possible without setting up peoples 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, Dont
conduct an ideological struggle, dont look at the mistakes of others, lets 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 between 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 realised, 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 peoples movement is developing
amid increasing radicalism. So our primary task is to spread the peoples 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 competitiveness 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 consequence 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 peoples 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 declined 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 peoples 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 cannot function without the participation of the people, and no proper decisions can be taken. So the peoples 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 peoples committees can, in areas where they gain their authority from
peoples councils, in which the peoples 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 organisations, revolutionary organisations take on more highly developed forms and the revolutionary 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 difficult 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 peoples committees and the peoples 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 peoples 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 organisation to head all the peoples 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 peoples organisations and their activities will in time be
able to lay bare, halt and place such highfalutin claims in their proper light.
OF RESISTANCE AND THE FIGHT AGAINST FASCISM will, under current conditions, 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 mobilise...
We must achieve this...



n March 12, 1995, Gazi became a city neighbourhood in Istanbul which appeared on the front pages of all of Turkeys newspapers, as a result of a massacre
carried out there by contra-guerrillas and the popular uprising which was the
Today, the people of Gazi have the honour of having taken the peoples initiative which
bears the name of Peoples Council. Despite certain difficulties at the beginning which
were overcome, the Peoples 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
Peoples Council provides us with such an example.


It is a neighbourhood one will hear a lot about. It is a neighbourhood in which the
first Peoples Council was founded, and accordingly it is setting the agenda. Gazi Neighbourhood began to be settled in as a gecekondu (slum area) back in 1970, next to the
Alibeyky 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 problems 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 Peoples 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 participation from the people the Peoples Council for Gazi and the neaighbouring area of
Zbeyde Hanim was formed. The peoples will and initiative found detailed expression.
In general the tasks of the Peoples Councils are to work on the problems and concerns of
the people, whether of a political, economic or social nature. The Peoples Council is the
basic organisation for the various compartments of life. The Peoples Council of Gazi and
Zbeyde Hanims foundation was formally announced after three months of meetings,
and was marked by a circumcision ceremony.
The Peoples 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 Peoples Council. After the circumcision ritual, carried out
by volunteers from the health body SES, celebrations began amid scenes of enthusiasm.


Ali Ekber Emre, who made the speech opening the Peoples Council of Gazi and Zbeyde Hanim, declared the reason for setting up the Peoples 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 kilometres from Istanbul. The problems of Gazi remain unresolved, while the states 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 Peoples 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 Peoples Council on the basis of unity and togetherness... This Peoples Council is the common will of our neighbourhood.
It was announced that the Peoples Council at the time consisted of 130 people, who
were shopkeepers, housewives, pensioners, workers and young people.


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 Peoples Party, one of the main social democratic parties in Turkey), HADEP (Peoples Democracy Party, a legal pro-Kurdish party much harassed by the state)
and the DP (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 Karagz,; the third chairman of the Genel-Is, Mersim Gvenlik; the department head in Thrace (European Turkey) Arif Kutan, the sixth chairman, Hasan Kaya;
the CHP member of parliament, Ercan Karakas, the chairman of the CHD (Contemporary Jurists Association), Murat Inceoglu, the chairmen of the Cemevler (Alevi community centres), the chairman of the Migrants Association, Sabahatin Celik, lawyers of
the Peoples Law Bureau and the speaker of the Platform for Rights and Freedom, Oya
Moreover, there were solidarity messages from various organisations and associations and from the socialist newspapers Kurtulus, Atilim, zgr Gelecek, Isci Hareketi,
Kervan and Partizan Sesi.
At the celebration the programme was livened up by the childrens chorus of the Mesopotamian Culture Centre, the Gaziosmanpasa peoples dance group affiliated to HADEP,
and the music groups zgrlk Trks and Grup Yorum. The messages from Nurtepe
and Alibeyky (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 Peoples Council would be transmitted to all working-class


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 wanted 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 insufficient, 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 Peoples Council
is indispensible, to create a culture of solidarity and be able to solve the problems here
1. 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 infrastructure, education, social security, health, accommodation and food.
3. To tackle social and cultural problems of people such as drugs, gambling, alcoholism and other illnesses, which come about through the systems influence. As a
basis for this we will put forward positive peoples values.
4. Womens problems are to be taken up. A womens 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
6. All problems such as parks, marketplaces, state hospitals and so on which are conditioned 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 encouraged, 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 possibilities 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 circumcision ceremonies and marriages. Problems are to be solved with as little financial
outlay as possible. We decided to set up a Peoples 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.

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 Peoples Council was set up
within these criteria. With the agreement of all participants, these rules were adopted.


The Peoples Council is a civilian institution which discusses all the peoples
affairs, takes decisions and puts these decisions into practice. It makes no differences on the basis of nationality, religion, beliefs and political views. The Peoples
Council is a democratic institution, open to all segments of the population.
The Peoples Council deals with the economical, social, cultual, political and neighbourhood problems of the people.
The Peoples Council consists of the general peoples meeting, the councils
committee, the spokesperson, the secretariat and specific committees.
A. The general peoples meeting is the highest decision making and controlling body. The members take part voluntary.
B. The council committee is elected by the general peoples meeting. The number of members is limited. The council committee takes decisions which do not concern the general meeting.
C. The spokesperson is the one who makes the councils 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 limited number of competent people. They deal directly with questions and problems, addressed by the council.
A. All inhabitants of the neighbourhood who have become 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 members of the general peoples meeting.
C. The council committee is elected by the general peoples meeting. The councils bodies are appointed by the council itself.
A. The general peoples meeting meets regularly once a year to elect a council
committee and twice a year to control the councils activities. The general peoples

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 peoples meeting. The committee exists of at least 25 persons.
According to the will of the peoples 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 council committee. The length of the term is determined by the council.
D. The secretariat is appointed by the peoples 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 committees 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.
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.
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 member 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 expelled with a majority of 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.
All members or persons who implement the decisions and carry out tasks and participate in the activities as elected persons or volunteers accept the regulations of the peoples 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 Peoples
Council. The regulations and the council were confirmed after several open meetings at
a meeting of 1.500 members of the general peoples council on October 5, 1996.


The people must be shown how to take a position of leadership
The Gazi Peoples Council concerns itself with the problems of people

EVZI KURTULUS (Folk singer and songwriter)

I have a very positive view of the founding of the Peoples Council, because people are able to determine their own future; the states 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 peoples 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 Peoples Council determines what the problems of the neighbourhood are, one must think that the problems on the spot are being resolved. A concrete
example of that is the activity of the Gazi Peoples 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 different religious convictions. In short, the people have lost any hope they might have had in
the state authorities. The work of the Peoples Council, which is guided by revolutionaries, is a first step towards democratic peoples power. I support it.


I have a positive view of it and think it appropriate that a Peoples Council is being
formed. Something like it should be spread to other areas. It should come to the publics
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 Peoples 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 Peoples
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.


In the Peoples 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 Peoples 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-today problems. Here it is very significant that politics in life which flow from above to
below do not fall into oblivion.
Peoples Committees are steps towards democracy. The necessity of a Peoples Council
should be demonstrated on the basis of cultural, health and social problems.


The Peoples 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 legality 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.


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.


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 Peoples Committee in Fehiye. There the representatives of the various assocations, 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 assess the organising of the people as a positive thing, because the parties must be induced
to work for the people.


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 desired freedom and democracy begins with the free expression of opinion. The word democracy 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 Peoples
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.


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 Peoples Committees of Gazi and
Zbeyde Hanim are coming together to solve the problems of health, education, social
and cultural problems by acting in solidarity. Such Peoples 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 Peoples Parliament as an alternative to the Turkish parliament should be

founded. I think that such civic organisations would have a positive effect on our country.


It is very nice that no distinctions are being made among our people. We want there to
be Peoples 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 Peoples Councils. I want all
oppressed people to have a positive assessment of such Peoples Councils. The forming
of Peoples 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 Peoples 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 Peoples Council every success.

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 Peoples Committee. People of different
cultures collect in a Peoples Council, and that will give them strength in the fight with
the capitalists.
People must be further educated in the Peoples Council, and care must be taken that
they can live from their labour. My wish is that Peoples Council can also be formed in
the other neighbourhoods. I call upon all artists to aid the cultural development in these


If problems can really be solved by the Peoples 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 cant solve our
problems. I wish the Peoples Council much success.


Q: You, as the electricity commission in the Peoples Council, have been working for
some time. First of all, what kinds of power supply problems are there in the neighbourhood?
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 conductors, 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 committee 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 Peoples 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 Zbeyde Hanim, which we had been awaiting 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. Electricity 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 Davutpasa 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 havent decided. We will discuss it at a meeting of the Peoples Council and then
decide. For example, the sewage channel at Kazim Bekir Street 1268 is blocked. 500 metres 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.

We are taking on sport with a new spirit
Q: What have you done as the Sports Commission of the Peoples Council, and what
will you be doing?
A: There are a lot of young people in the neighbourhood. We dont 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
Peoples Committee and met with various associations in the neighbourhood. We met
representatives from Bykky, Igdeliky, Cavdarky 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.


It is quite normal that Gazi should provide the first example


Our population has a fear of organisation. Probably we are afraid that political organisations will dominate them. Education by our families and the government pushes us in
this direction, towards fearing organisations. Moreover, since the September 1980 military 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 speakers 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 Peoples Council is a step forward in upholding the rights of people in Gazi and Zbeyde Hanim. The people of this
area have acheved the most difficult steps. But they still have a hard furrow to plough.
Some call the Peoples Committee an illegal organisation. Some say: We dont 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 Peoples Committees have a difficult task. The first paragraph of the Peoples 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 Peoples Council is an assembly which does
not draw any distinctions over religion, belief or origin.
It is a democratic assembly. I hope the Peoples 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 Peoples Council and not oppose it.


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 Peoples 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.


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 Peoples 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 Peoples Councils is to be a school


First of all, the Peoples 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 Peoples 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 result 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 Peoples Councils is that they are
not influenced by existing organisational models. Whatever the pro-system organisations 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 hierarchical 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 permanent 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 Peoples Councils will become empty. The Councils must be increased in
number and scope, on condition that they develop in a positive manner...


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 underestimate 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 important 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 actions 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 everybody 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 misfortune 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 expenditure 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 consciousness that even if only the population of this one neighbourhood knew it, it would
be able to change many things in Turkey.



he Peoples Council was formed amid great participation from the population,
because it corresponds to the needs of the people there. At the inaugural meeting, a secretariat and representatives of the Peoples Council were elected.
The founding of the Peoples 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 Peoples Councils foundation?

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 affectionate 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 governments 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 government 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 Peoples Council, I and a couple of friends went to the electricity 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 Ataky 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 problems. 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 steadily. 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 Peoples 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 Peoples Council.
Who did you go to with the suggestion of founding the Peoples Council? Did you talk
to associations and political parties, or just the ordinary people?

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 Peoples 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 meetings. From 60 to 70 people, it quickly grew. We had reason to hope. The decisive factor
was our confidence that the Peoples Council would be successful, since the majority of
people had given a positive assessment of it. And also because we had no limits on political 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.

We representatives do not want people representing political organisations in the Peoples Council, they should all be personal representatives. The people we include can be
members of the CHP, REFAHYOL, DP or the ANAP. They can be from different parties or political outlooks, but we want our Peoples 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 because 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.

When we went to small traders, friends and people, we planned things so that people
who participate in the Peoples 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 Peoples 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?

Before we went to the people, we wrote a report about our aims and our views. We discussed 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 constructively and contributed to solving problems.

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 dont 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 cooperation 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 Peoples
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 chemists 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 serious 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 Peoples 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 didnt 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?

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.

We went through the phase in which discussions took place. Again and again we had
meetings to encourage participation in the Peoples 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 Peoples 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 peoples confidence. Therefore we could not wait
for the Peoples Council to arise of its own accord. We spoke of founding a commission.
The commissions were only a transitional step, we founded an administrative commision. And over the administrative commission we placed specialised commissions. These
commissions worked independently.
We had to arouse the peoples 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 medicine. 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 medicine. We did not say that we could examine everybody in the Gazi and Zbeyde 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 Peoples 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?

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 Peoples
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 Peoples Council and began to tackle other tasks.
Before you founded the Peoples Council, you held a lot of meetings. What did you
watch out for at these meetings and where did they take place?

We were careful to ensure that the people did not see us connected to any political parties. So that meant we could not meet in the CHP building or in the DSP one. Moreover,
as inhabitants of Gazi and Zbeyde Hanim we had to hold the meeting in the neighbourhood. At this point we had not set up the Peoples 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 Peoples Council. And very soon we will find such a place.


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 Peoples 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.

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 governments attitude to you?

The authorities got to know of us early on. They looked askance at us. Policemen came
to some of our meetings and said. Arent we of the people?And we said that if it is necessary we will call them in future. They also came to observe our circumcision ceremony.
Up to now there have been no attacks.

There have been no attacks but they made a demand on us. They wanted a list of Peoples
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 Peoples 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 Peoples
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 Peoples Council, what are the requirements?

He or she must not be under 18 and must live or work here and must not have committed any crime against the people.
You told us that the founding of the Peoples Council was marked by a circumcision
ceremony. Would you like to tell us about it?


When the Peoples Council had taken shape, people were informed about it and were
invited. We decided to celebrate the opening with a circumcision ceremony. The ceremony 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?

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 Peoples 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.

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

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.

And there was something else. In Turkey, parties, communities and presidents organise
circumcisions. But never in anyones 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.


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 during the school term. Secondly, we should get more people to provide clothes. Not for financial 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?


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 problems. We want to develop a culture of solidarity. There are people who want to sow conflict between Alevis and Sunnis. We dont 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 Peoples Council also concern itself with problems outside the neighbourhood? How does it behave in relation to the oppression of other areas and indeed repression in the whole of Turkey?


We have already mentioned that ww will not stand idly by in the face of all Turkeys
problems, indeed those of the entire world. For example, when there are injustices somewhere 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 Peoples
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 problems into their own hands they will find solutions. If that is not done, no solutions will
be found.




On September 22, 1996, there was a meeting of the womens commissions. Our women 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 Peoples Council highly. There was no difference between the work of the
committees. We went to both the mosques and the Alevi community centres. At meetings, 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.


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 womens 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 womens 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 womens 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.


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.


We have a lot of problems in our neighbourhood. Health, electricity, water and others.
We want the Peopless 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 womens 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 womens 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.


I esteem the peoples 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 peoples 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 ourselves. Up until now I havent gone to the meetings of the commission but I will do so. It
is very good that there is a womens commission and it defends the interests of women.


We expect the Peoples 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 Peoples
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.


I am a member of the womens commission. We discuss the education, health, electricity 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 peoples 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 Peoples Council, and the people
know that. Everywhere I go, I tell people about the peoples committees and the Peoples
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 peoples committee. 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.


I took part in the last meeting, it was the meeting of the womens commission. I went
with my mother. I thought it was very good. I see it as very positive that peoples committees 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 telephones. 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 Peoples Council. It groups people together because
the situation in Gazi is very difficult.


The inhabitants of Gazi have a great many problems. I am a member of the Peoples
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 demand our rights. We must become even more successful. In the womens 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 Peoples
Council. At our last meeting it was about womens 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.


Kurtulus November 30, 1996

fter the Susurluk accident, one can see the fascist mafias 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 countrys fate is given into the hands of imperialism. Our people are robbed of their honour. The population of Okmeydani which
knows state terror very well, is now founding its own Peoples Council, following the
model of Gazi and Zbeyde 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 Peoples 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 Peoples 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 declared 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 Peoples 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 peoples 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 politicians 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 Peoples Council showed courage and cheerfulness in demonstrating the strength and power of the Peoples Council.

Kurtulus Dezember 28, 1996

They are up to their necks in filth, but they still have policemen guarding their villas. 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, lets see if they have the courage
to tear down Bucaks 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 people 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 Istanbuls
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 Pasaky 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 taken 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 streams 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 peoples
health. ISKI (Istanbul Waterworks) decided to tear down all houses within 100 metres of
the streams basin, both to its left and right. The committee founded on the initiative of
the Peoples 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 Atatrk 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. Thereupon the meeting was dissolved and its participants began to rain stones at the gendarmes.
After the gendarmes had been forced to retreat, the peoples enthusiasm grew and songs
by the music groups zgrlk Trks 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 gendarmes 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, merli, Pasaky, Yenidogan, Sarigazi, Sultan Ciftligi and Cekmeky 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 authorities 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
Bucaks. All that filth is right in the centre of Ankara. They ought to instal sewage facilities there. Another said, You are wrong. They cant 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 arent
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., Lets 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 cant they take care of their own rubbish? We cant
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 wont go under if your house is dirty
for a day, why do you keep cleaning it, when theyre 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 didnt 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 Susurluk lorry. Everything is uncovered but nothing is done, because the whole justice system
doesnt 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 states 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.


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 dont 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 wont be demolished and demand that the barricades 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 assured 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 responsibility 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 arent 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.


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 states people are supposed to have taken part in that, the state is not doing anything 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
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.


We will spend the night on the barricades
We have spoken with the people who have been on the barricades for two days to protect 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.


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.

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 Peoples Council
has been formed. These are important developments.

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 merli 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 reason 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 doesnt 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 wont 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.


The initiative of the Peoples Council has been founded

We are carrying out actions in line with Peoples 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 Peoples 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.

The Peoples 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 oneroom apartments are destroyed? That is not so simple. The Peoples Council is very important, it should function like it does in Gazi. If necessary, one whould go as high as the
President, but I cant 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.

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 Peoples 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.

They cant 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 Gods sake, lets 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 wont solve it.

Kurtulus January 4, 1997

he peoples anger knows no limits. The peoples 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 peoples councils, started in Gazi, are now rapidly spreading to
all working areas.
After a decision by the initiative for a peoples 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 youll 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 feelings 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 follow 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.


The sign with the slogan We are the people, we are right, and we will win was carried
by the 12 year old mit 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, mit
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 Bayram (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 dont care what happens to their houses but we
will not allow them to tear down our houses. mit speaks with a conviction which one
would not expect at his age. The demagogy of Abdullah Bayram doesnt have any effect

on him. Whether the mayor will tear down his house or not, it doesnt matter to mit at
all, but he will not allow them to destroy his own house. The children of Samandira have
grown up, another child suddenly speaks: Hes 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. mit 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 barricades, 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, mit 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?


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 foreign 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 populations basis for existence.


Imperialism is the enemy of all human values and destroys nature in its drive to accumulate 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 organising 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 Peoples Council was set up according to the wishes
of the villagers, to take part in the struggle against Eurogold.
The Peoples Council is the true organisation of the people. Here, word and deed are the
same. The Peoples Council is the organisation where all problems and attempts at solution 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 murderous efforts of Eurogold to extract gold using cyanide.
Different parties and organisations (HP, DSP, CHP, DP, KESK, SES, Atatrkcu
Dsnce 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
Peoples Council, founded by the freely expressed will of the people, consists of villagers.
To make the work of the Peoples 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 Peoples 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
The people of Bergama will not sell their land to the imperialists.


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.


Hseyin 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.


Sleyman 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



Kurtulus no. 19, March 1, 1997

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 peoples movement, 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 (Peoples Liberation
Party and Front of Turkey), stretching to the present day DHKP-C (Revolutionary Peoples 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 peoples 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.
Its 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.
Didnt the oligarchy and its papers know that the DHKP-C would take its place in this
peoples movement, just like in other areas? Didnt 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 punishment of an enemy of the people by DEVRIMCI SOL in 1990.

the oligarchy dont 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 before. 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, its 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 consensus. 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 weve 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 cannot 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 peoples movement can be sensed in these lines. They are afraid
and thats why they attack. The influential role of the DHKP-C in this peoples 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 establishment 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 peoples movement is growing on
all levels.
The bourgeoisie is powerless against the growing peoples movement, but they are trying to take over the political lead. The Democratisation Report of the monopoly association 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 peoples 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. Thats their only goal. Its not about clearing up the events around
Susurluk, or even holding those responsible accountable, they think all is achieved by
bringing down the government.
Thats why they are all singing the same song about the imminent end of secularism.
And the general staff acts as the lead singer. Thats 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 importance 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.
Whats the logic behind this attack? What does the oligarchy hope to gain with this
demagogy? The intellectuals and the democratic associations should pose these questions in the first place. For years, there have been extra-judicial executions in this country, 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 legitimacy of the Front as well.
Its 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, towards the future of this country, which they take seriously.
The demagogy of the oligarchy is saying: Well, youre participating in this action, led
by the Front, youre becoming accomplices of the Front. Yes, the Front initiated this
action. But do you therefore have to distance yourself from this action, an action youve
defended till yesterday? Is this sincere conduct? The slogan Do not remain silent, if you
remain silent, youll 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 its 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 its wrong?
The question whether a slogan originated from the Front or not is not important. Its
important whether its right or wrong. Is it humiliating the intellectuals when a slogan
of the Front proves to be right? Then why this conduct? But thats the logic of the intellectuals: 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?
Whats to be said against the goals, the ideals of the Front for the people?


Its obvious, nobody must avoid this issue. There are those who try to mislead the people.
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, youre 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. Weve 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 youve 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 peoples movement in different ways. The characteristics of the peoples movement, stemming from the light action,
were a reason for the Front to halt military actions for the time being. Perhaps youve
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 bourgeoisie, Mesut Yilmaz, who is well known to want to stabilise the system, with the DHKP-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 legitimising 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 peoples 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 chairman 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 admit 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 darkness 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 peoples 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 influence of the demagogy can be curtailed.




Organising the people must be supported by all democrats, intellectuals and revolutionaries, by all those who oppose the mafia gangs. Only an organised people can change
the policy successfully. As long as the peoples 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 peoples
movement, on the other they try to exploit it.
All people, from the trade unions, the democratic initiatives, from intellectuals to the
democratic peoples 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 dont 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 always 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.


Although the reformist and opportunist groups do not have the same ideology as the intellectuals, 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 proposal 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 bourgeois parties which are stuck in a quagmire. They all didnt want to see the true reasons
for the misery, they wanted to deny the fact that only revolutionary peoples 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 peoples
movement can be developed. They describe how to break the influence of the bourgeoisie, 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 leadership 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 peoples 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 lefts
belief in its own strength, weak to start with, dwindled even further when TUSIAD began 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 oppositional stance. But when one looks more carefully, it can clearly be seen that they actually 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 nonsense, 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 platform 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 programme, organising the masses to fulfil the peoples demands.
The views of the DHKP-C, as well as those of the other leftists must be judged from this


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 determination of communists. The ODP and other reformists are looking for the benevolence
of the bourgeoisie. Thats 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 arent 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. Thats 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. Thats our task, we represent
hope, we are the alternative. Everybody has to see the events, the consciousness and the
worries of the people. Its obvious to every democrat, every ordinary human being whats
going to happen when the government is changed. Its 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 peoples despair. Offering 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 peoples movement roots among the
broadest sections of the people, giving this movement a concrete goal, strengthening organisation in the masses, establishing the peoples 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 Peoples Liberation Front will fulfil these tasks and take its place
within the peoples 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 peoples movement. No demagogy and no attack
by the oligarchy will be able to prevent the Revolutionary Peoples Liberation Front from
doing so.
The military is trying to make the state apparatus, which became incapable after Susurluk, function again by intervening. It is preparing new attacks against the peoples
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. Its 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 similar forces which pretend to demand clean politics and a clean society are not on the
side of the peoples front, they belong to the fascist front.
Because the military cannot create the necessary conditions to legitimise its interventions, 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 peoples 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 peoples movement. 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 weakness, the lack of orientation and the lack of solutions of the system. This lack of orientation and these cracks in the system will increase, while the peoples 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 cant possibly stop the
peoples movement. Thats 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 peoples 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 revolutionaries continue. Under these circumstances, there is only one way: destroying the enemys
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. Its impossible for the supporters of civil society and
the reformists, despite all their attempts, to steer the peoples movement into another
direction. It can be said that these revolutionary dynamics have brought many disillusioned 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.


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

ne 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 forces, 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 controlling 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 revolutionary 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 employers association TUSIAD to the bourgeois parties, the army, police and media, all are
united and directing their entire strength against the revolutionary peoples 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 revolution 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
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 constructively 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 peoples 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 imperialism 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 appropriately. With such a tactic the revolutionary peoples opposition is incapable of functioning, 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 peoples 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 peoples opposition throughout the country are not successful,
the bourgeoisie, which is in an immense crisis, will manage to crush the peoples opposition 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 decisions 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 protests 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 planning 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
ones 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 revolutionary 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 carry 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 peoples 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, various professional associations, legal left-wing parties,human rights associations, revolutionary 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 democratic 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 revolutionary democratic opposition. Not satisfying these expectations would mean leaving
the peoples forces at the mercy of the bourgeoisie and under its ideological hegemony
and would prevent an even greater and stronger peoples 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 organisations 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 peoples forces.
By coming together, the different political structures, persons, groups, democratic organisations can form platforms for discussion and an answer can be found to the questions, with whom, what, and how. While almost all sections of the oligarchy are carrying 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 peoples resistance bound and gagged to the bourgeoisie, to
prevent imperialism and TUSIAD from taking decisions about the freedom of the people, 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 peoples 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
peoples opposition. In this Peoples Council all kinds of problems can be discussed. It
will make judgements and have them carried out. It will be artery through which the
peoples lifeblood flows.


Kurtulus no. 31, May 24, 1997

he 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 revolutionaries out of the publics eyes for as much as possible, and secondly, the
oligarchy did not achieve any success on May Day.
From the leadership of Trk-Is, the governor of Istanbul to the columnists in the papers - like Mehmet Ali Birand - all of them spoke about a successful May Day. They
expressed their wish and thats all they got. They made themselves ridiculous. The masks
of the collaborators fell and the situation of the popular masses was obvious. Trk-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 peoples forces
which can be pushed into the background in one way or the other, and that the revolution 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 Susurluk, the number of people should have increased, but the participation of the masses
was more or less equal to the previous year. Thats 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 participated 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 pursued a road which established this mistrust. The year-long policy of liquidations, massacres 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 disadvantages and the deficiencies, the Front presented itself as a force. And the Front, with
its strength, will go on to organise and develop the peoples 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 governments, 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 peoples 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 TSIAD, 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 reforms, 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. Its 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: curtailing 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 Peoples Councils and the proposals
for a peoples 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 Fronts 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 peoples movement. We are aware of the fact that there will be no
revolution without a front and the peoples movement. This is our task and we will pursue 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 enlarging 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 peoples front,
to restrict the enemys front. There are two sides to this. One side is to unite all peoples
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 organisations 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 peoples forces, the
peoples 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 peoples 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. Its obvious, the oligarchy will try to block the Front constantly 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 enemy. 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 stronger, 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 peoples 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 actions. 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 shoulder to shoulder with its friends. This claim is not unrealistic. Its 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 development 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.


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

he coalition between the DYP (True Path Party - rightists) and the CHP (Republican Peoples Party -social democrats) has failed. The attempt by the DYP
to govern on its own failed; they didnt get the confidence of parliament, despite
the support of the MHP (Nationalist Action Party - fascists). Thereupon the old coalition 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 detat 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 imperialist 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 parties 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 detat 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 National 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 dependence 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, government and parliament, for their own goals. They did not hide embezzlement and immorality, 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 - Refah 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 verbally 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 became 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 apparatus 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 monopolies. 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 losing 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 zal (a former premier of the 1980s, now dead) and the USA. When zal 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 USbacked 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 follows all the decisions of the National Security Council and he is starting to be a carbon
copy of the veteran fascist MHP leader Alparslan Trkes (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 characteristic that they support the ruling fascist system in its main directions.
The collapse of the socialist system concerned the Marxist-Leninist liberation movements 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 appearance 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 Party (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 slogans, the TKP has always made policy for the CHP. The TKP did not shape its policy
to bring about a peoples 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 governments 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 peoples 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 regime 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 peoples power, neither peace nor democracy can be introduced. 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 Lets 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 peoples 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. Thats why they are all united in this front for work, peace and democracy.
The Kurdish nationalists dont 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. Parliament cannot be the place for this struggle. Against the parliamentarian struggle in itself,
nothing can be said. Thats 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 politics 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 liberation 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 peoples 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 democracy, 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
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 Peoples Democratic Party (HADEP) come from several 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
democracyaccording to these interests. It puts nationalist interests before the interests
of the Kurdish and Turkish people and develops its policy accordingly. The DEP, its predecessor 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 democracy, 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 peoples power. On the contrary, it makes compromises with the bourgeoisie based on national interests.
Thats 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 Kurdistan, 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 Peoples Committees and Peoples 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 Peoples Front.
Neither the bourgeois parties, nor the peace parties.
For independence, against imperialism.
For democracy, against fascism.
For socialism, against capitalism.


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

here 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 didnt want
the Refah Party to become a decisive factor, they believed it could succeed, together
with Tansu Cillers 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 regimes problems which
are inherent in the system, and it was unable to weaken the peopless 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: its 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 became so public. Who governs, and how? In a totally different way, the people were shown
quite a large slice of this states 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 shocking. 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 peoples reactions. Justice, 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 politicians 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. Its 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 situation 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, thats obvious. These people, of whom history
gives many examples, theoretically and by intuition know their efforts will remain fruitless. 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 peoples 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 characterised 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 comparison to the predominant opinions of the past years, major steps forward have been taken.
The peoples consciousness is clearly developing rapidly. Its 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 peoples 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 discussions and the desires of the people, all this did not concern them very much. Consciously, 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 fragmented struggles of the people. Faction forming and competition are their fundamental 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 ones 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 enemys front, which always aims
to kill us, delivering major and minor blows regardless, aiming at our destruction, it
means enlarging the peoples 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 enemys 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 peoples 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 peoples 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 peoples
opposition, the war by the enemies against the people will continue, and the enemys
front - although unstable - will survive and hold on to power, using different and chang-

ing supporters.
Its 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 peoples front, as broad as possible, when
the circumstances allow this, one does not take seriously the demands and the psychology 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 oppositions 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 dont
have a clue whats going on in this country. We cant be communists by emphasising in
every speech, in every paragraph, that we are communists. Only if we understand reality
correctly, organise the peoples masses, and fight with the correct tactics, can we seize
power and establish the classless society of revolutionary peoples 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 peoples opposition are
even more destruction, even more mass arrests, more disappearances and more cruelties. They have no other answer, no alternative. We cannot say that this cruelty doesnt
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 organising 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 theoretical conditions or other, being haughty, thats 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 organising the people. Realising the peoples 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 dont

adapt to the rapid changes, if we dont produce and apply new tactics quickly. Of course,
the ineffectiveness will not persist, but it would work like a brake, slowing the rapid development 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 peoples movement in this direction, we wouldnt be fighting with effective tactics, we
wouldnt be mobilising. We must get the masses moving by quickly aiming all economical, democratic and political demands by all peoples 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 categories 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 Party-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 peoples opposition, the revolutionary peoples 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 peoples 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 others 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 labels 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.


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

he 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 peoples 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 werent 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 peoples 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 system. 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 intervene 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 intervene 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, its an instrument which expresses the armys 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 organisations 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 junta, 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 existence 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 interventions, 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 slavishness is proof of the continuing dominance of the military over future governments.
The discussions about the Islamists or the enemies of progress, whose representatives 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 Islamist 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 revolutionary struggle and destroying the growing peoples movement.The
fact that the state believes in the propaganda of a Islamist threat shows the system is collapsing, 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 burnedout 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 integrated 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. Thats why the military is talking about not using the methods 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, its impossible for the bourgeois parties to free themselves 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 - thats 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 present 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.



e live in a country where the tactics of the oligarchy, the situation of the peoples masses, the international conditions and our own struggle, can develop
and change radically at any moment. In such a country, we drive the revolution forward and we lead on the strategy of the revolution. Neither for the counter-revolution, nor for the revolution, is a new day like the one before, there are no repetitions.
Thats why our work, our energy and our attention must always be directed to orientating 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 organising and struggle were no repetitions of the past. Without understanding these processes, 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 conditions. 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.
Thats 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. Thats our difference with other
What the THKP-C is, what it is not, how it must be defended and how it must be interpreted, 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 resulted 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 developing the revolution. Thats 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 explained 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 especially 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 ones own life. (DURSUN KARATAS,
Congress Report of the DHKP-C, page 3)


The answer to this question on what the THKP-C is is our first characteristic. Our participation 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 Party-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 Party-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 struggle 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 practice, 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, discouragement 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 authority 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.


In the developing process, the THKP-C was mostly judged regarding these two questions. In the most answers the Marxist method, the dialectical view of history, was applied 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 didnt see their task in the armed struggle,
but they criticised the THKP-Cs 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), didnt 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, didnt 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 Turkey. 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 direction anyway, started to push several circles in this direction in a intensified manner. The
whole process couldnt 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, didnt 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.


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 cadres 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 revolution. 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
With the founding of DEVRIMCI SOL, we formed the Armed Fighting Teams against
the Fascist Terror (FTKSME). This didnt 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 didnt 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.
Thats 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 representatives of the THKP-C. And in fact we heard: Look, their masks have fallen, such a form
of organising didnt 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-Leninism, 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.


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 certain circles are an example. We watch and we see that they write dozens of pages analysing 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 obstacles. 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
The problems of the revolution and the struggle are so extensive and variable that theydont 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 revolutionary movement confronted them with a theory and a practice which they couldnt 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. Rightwing 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 organisations, 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, independent 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 FTKSMEs 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 peoples 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 peoples

army and peoples power. All forms of organisation are possible which change the situation 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.

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 solutions. Those who use them do not stick their heads out in the street from within the unions 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
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 using 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.


The FTKSMEs, the SDBs, the militias, the committee of struggle and defence against
fascism, the peoples councils, the peoples 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... lets change the category... The hunger strikes, the protests by ironically clapping hands, by forming human chains, occupations, barricades, press statements, revolutionary violence, punishments, boycotts... Another category... Legal, illegal, semi-legal, 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 doesnt 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 losing 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. Its 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 revolution, 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 argument: 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 revolutionary 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. DEVRIMCI 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 peoples power. In the struggle for revolution and peoples

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


fter 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 continuing 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 being 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 imperialists 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 peoples search and pressure from below, the newly developed bourgeoisie 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 imperialist 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 international 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 peoples 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 countries 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, demanded 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 socialist 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 peoples 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 peoples 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
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 revisionist 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.
Imperialisms 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 increasing 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 selfishness, 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
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 inhibitions about acting together with the imperialists against revolutionary movements if
their national interests put this first. The fact that socialism was formed on a revolutionary level, that despite peaceful co-existence with imperialism, the national and social
forces, they developed politics within the stalemate between imperialism and the revisionist system, and this gave national and social liberation movements an advantage. Today, 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 Union 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, depending upon the strength of the people to be able to organise a force against imperialism,
he thus hoped to resist imperialisms 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 peoples 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 countries 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 peoples 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 systems collapse, supported Saddams uprising with great
enthusiasm, they had regained hope from it. With the crushing of the uprising, the petit-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 peoples struggle. The final steps taken in relation to this were Arafats
surrender agreement. However, neither the New World Orders bloody attacks nor betrayal are sufficient to wipe out the peoples 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 Arafats betrayal and has secured the
raising of the flag of freedom.
Without relying upon external forces, relying upon their own strength, they are thinking, 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 collapse. All over the world, we have entered a period of not accepting imperialist surrender. There is belief in the power of the people and the struggles of the organisations
are increasing. In the Middle East, the Palestinian peoples 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 peoples liberation within the context of the New World Order and making agreements with imperialism, and despite the fact that some sections have not yet collaborated with imperialism 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 understanding, 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. Revolutionary 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 production or the relationship of imperialism and imperialisms new form of exploitative relations. 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 developing 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 USAs 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. However, 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 imperialism 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 peoples 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 economic 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 conflicts, 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, today 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 contrary, 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 todays 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 opposition movement that will spoil the rule of imperialism. In revolutionary strategy, all programmes must be shaped in accordance with this situation. Every revolutionary organisation 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, delaying it, moving towards an opportunist understanding of rejecting armed struggle. We
must preserve our long-term Peoples 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.


n 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 relations of imperialism that arise from this development, no areas are left where the local 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 imperialism. 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 peoples opposition by force and violence, 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 oligarchys
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 undeveloped 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-damaged economists exaggerated the mission of the monopolist capital of Turkey, ignored
the revolutionary struggle and announced that Turkey had changed its structural status, 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 especially 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 revolution 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 Communist Party and the Party of Labour of Albania - the ones who called themselves socialists- 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 power 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 economic 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 continuous stability, ease the contradictions among the people or stop them reacting against
the regime.
Within the oligarchy, monopoly capital, the commercial bourgeoisie and feudal remnants 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 founded in the interests of these exploiters, divide society up like plots of land and for the sake
of the oligarchys 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 international level - and on religious grounds, the support of countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia 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 possess 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 inciting 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 oligarchys 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 international 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 opposition 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 protecting 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 Turkeys 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 desperate 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 dtat, 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 condition 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 contradictions 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 cosmopolitan culture of distorted capitalism, the bureaucrats, military forces, intelligence services,
diplomats, parliament members and ministers - from top to bottom, the majority consider 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 Turkeys
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 political 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 oppression and terror of September 12, the masses of people were repressed and the potential
withdrawn. It will not be wrong to compare todays revolutionary potential of the masses 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 revolutionary 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 another 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 movements 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 peoples 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 demanding 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 potential 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 hearing 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 peoples 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 masses 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 necessity 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 peoples
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 developing Kurdish movement, despite its nationalist character, created a great revolutionary
potential and is a great force on the path to revolutionary peoples power. The Kurdish
people in the other Middle Eastern countries are the potential supporters of our revolution. Palestinians and Arab liberation movements are the support forces for our revolution. 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 peoples 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 succeeded or not, and could not analyse correctly the concrete conditions of their own country,
could not develop the countrys revolution nor answer the question what kind of socialism 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 almost monopolised the worlds 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 worlds 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 revolution 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 politics 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 countries 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 USSRs.
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 impossible. 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 independence. 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 organizations 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 pragmatism 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 worlds 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 struggle 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 revisionist 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 revisionist system, this time, by thinking of their own interests within another country

and their organisations 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