Anarchism in Turkey
Haki
ANARCHISM IN TURKEY
From the title of this pamphlet one should not assume that we are going to
tell you a brief account of a long history of a political movement. The
history of anarchism is indeed very short in Turkey and the title of this
pamphlet simply expresses this fact. The anarchist movement came to the
political scene of Turkey less than 10 years ago. The publication of Kara
a monthly magazine, was the starting point of anarchism in Turkey in 1986.
Before the publication of this monthly magazine, there had not been any
anarchist periodical or any anarchist circle which attempted to express
itself. Of course that does not mean that there haven't been any
anarchists in the Geo-political borders of Turkey. An important point to
note is that before Kara, anarchist circles or individuals never tried to
become a political movement in Turkey.
Although the organised working class movement and revolutionary movements
have existed for 70 years in Turkey, anarchism has not been seen as a
political factor in Turkey. And this fact should be questioned. Why has
nearly every kind of Western originated revolutionary movement taken its
place in the political arena of Turkey, and not anarchism? Moreover we
should search for and discuss the reasons for that fact.
The incorrigible progressiveness of Marxism
Revolutionary movements in Turkey have been dominated by Marxism. The
reason for this domination must be found in the history of Turkey. The
Republic of Turkey and its past Ottoman Empire's last hundred years was
mainly dominated by a vital problem. That is the problem of modernisation
and westernisation. The undeniable power and influence of western
imperialism and the weakness of the Ottoman State (and later the Republic
of Turkey) has put the question of modernisation and westernisation in
front of the ruling elite and the intelligentsia of the country. In other
words, the argument is that Turkey, in order to be a power and independent
should break away from its traditions and it should become an
industrialised and socially westernised country. That is the project which
has always been shared by nearly all the political sides in Turkey.
(Except radical Islamist groups who were against any kind of break away
from traditions.)
Moreover positivism was the philosophy behind this project. As it is
known, positivism came to being in the west as the ideology of progress
and development in the middle of l9th century. And Marxism is partially
under the influence of that ideology. Turkish Marxists never attempted to
separate themselves from that ideology till the late 1970's. Thus Marxists
shared the dominant philosophy of the general Turkish intelligentsia.
Anarchism was born a part of the western and modern world, yet at the same
time it is a denial of these things. In this context, anarchism as a
denial of modernity and western domination is hardly the solution for the
intelligentsia and the politicians of Turkey.
The other reason why anarchism has developed late in Turkey lies in the
fact that the intelligentsia and political elite (left wings or right
wings) of Turkey has needed a strong State to implement its modernisation
and westernisation project. And one can easily think that anarchism is not
an answer to their needs.
Why anarchism appeared in 1980's
The fact that anarchism came into being so late in Turkey may be partially
explained by saying that modernist and westernised ideology was weakened
in the 1980's. Yet this can not be whole explanation. One should look at
the problem in its historical context. As we have said before, Marxism was
the dominant ideology in Turkey's revolutionary movements. In the 1980's
Marxism disintegrated world-wide and in Turkey because of the military
coup it faced a political defeat. Nearly all Marxist movements were
ruthlessly crushed by the military regime.
In this situation, many Marxist militants were faced with a dilemma,
namely the tension between the ultimate aim of Marxism which is a
stateless and classless society, and the real-politic of Marxism (in order
to achieve the ultimate aim Marxism argues that productive forces should
be developed and the state should preserved for this aim). This dilemma
led many Marxist militants to reject the real-politic of Marxism and to
seek ways to reach the ultimate aim of Marxism. This let many of them to
anarchism.
On the other hand, in the darkness of the military coup years, left wing
intelligentsia started to question Marxist collectivism and the Leninist
understanding of organisation. They inquired into the contradiction
between society and the individual. Their inquiries led many of them to
individualism. From there some of them started to defend the "responsible
individual". And they reached anarchism.
Publication of Kara
These groups and their discussions were represented and took their place
in a new monthly publication called Yeni Olgu in these years. The
publishing policy of Yeni Olgu was to create a political platform for the
youth in the climax of the coup years. Although it was short lived one
could say Yeni Olgu was successful in its attempt. The platform of Yeni
Olgu helped to show many closed revolutionary circles that there were
others who were thinking about the same problems. From this communication
base, these circles exchanged ideas and theses. This communication led to
diversification and break away in some circles and communes but sometimes
new communes and circles were also born. They were mainly diversified at
the topics that were Feminism, Ecologisim, anti-militarism. A few of them
started to concern themselves with anarchist ideas and they started to
express them.
The monthly magazine Akintiya Karsi was born from this source. Although
one could not call it an anarchist magazine, it was basically an anti-
authoritarian paper. After the publication of Akintiya Karsi, Sokak
Publishing House was set up by ex-socialist militants who saw themselves
as an anti-authoritarian line. The importance of Sokak Publishing House
lies in the fact that it published the first book with a truly anarchist
perspective in Turkey. That was Ida Mett's Kronstadt 1921 in which she
brings a new perspective to the Soviet Union and Stalin.
In 1986 some young members of Sokak Publishing House started to publish a
new monthly magazine called Kara. At first Kara gathered little attention
either from the general public or from left wing circles. In Kara on the
one hand society was criticised for its understanding and practice of
state, education and schooling and on the other hand the irresponsible
individual of this society was also subjeeted to criticism for its
attitude of standing by and watching things happen in society. Moreover
this individual was subjected to the question "Haven't you watched
enough?" This radical attitude of Kara created an interest in some Marxist
circles which were also discussing some of these issues in their closed
circles. These circles did not see anarchism as negative but rather as a
noble political theory not practical in reality. Even some members of
these cireles were quite sympathetic towards anarchism. They greeted the
emergence of anarchism in Turkey, whilst thinking that, it was not
practical. These people were the messengers of the first conversions of
the Marxists to anarchism.
Kara's perspective influenced both the most aware of the Marxist militants
and young new comers to the political arena of Turkey. The most
perceptible difference of Kara from other leftists periodicals was that it
did not praise the working class and it did not involve itself with daily
politics. Instead it was radically attacking the insti tutions and general
beliefs of society. Generally it was aiming to gather attention through
these radical critics. It was probably a necessary thing to do at first,
yet also this attitude could be viewed as insufficient or even some times
it can be viewed as the wrong thing to do. However, this young movement
was in its infancy and it mostly needed to express its reasons for its
existence and its own principles with this directness. Here because of
this reason, it was far from expressing original ideas on daily politics
of Turkey. Therefore it was expressing only general principles and they
were short of daily politics for example, it was unable to express or
develop an original perspective and to propose an original solution to the
foremost political problem of Turkey that was (and is) the Kurdish
national question. It stressed both the importance and necessity of the
individual's responsibilities and the independence of the individual from
society, yet it was unable to express ideas on the problem of organising
these individuals around a political movement. Especially, it was not able
to offer an alternative organisation model for ex-Marxist militants who
suffered under the Leninist model of political organisation in those days
in Turkey.
Kara ceased its existence in November 1987 after its 12th issue. In those
days there was confusion and disorganisation among anarchist circles or
communes (this was partly because the anarchist movement's supporters
mainly consisted of students). After Kara ceased its publication, there
appeared four autonomous groups from its remains. One of these groups
started to publish a periodical that was called Efendisiz as a
continuation of Kara. Efendisiz carried on what Kara tried to do till its
closure in 1989. The other groups also tried to do things in their
capacity and one of these created the Atolye A project that later started
to publish Amargi a monthly magazine. As a result we could say the process
of the emergence of Kara and Efendisiz papers was the emergence of
anarchism for first time in Turkey.
Amargi, Ates Hirsizi, Birey Yayinlari and Apolitica
Between 1989-1991 the anarchist movement did not have any periodical in
Turkey. However, it does not mean that the anarchist movement lost
interest among the people of Turkey. In fact rather the reverse was true.
The interest in anarchism actually increased and as a result of this even
non-anarchist publishing house started to publish books which were related
to anarchism. For example, Metis Publishing House printed P. Avrich's
Portrait of Anarchists and Anarchists in Russian Revolution.
The interest in anarchism and the culmination of the past five years of
the anarchist movement brought new anarchist enterprises. The first of
them was the Atolye A project. Atolye A project with the contribution of
the Association Against War set up the Amargi commune. This commune
started to publish a new monthly anar chist publication called Amargi in
1992. One year later an other anarchist publication started its
publication life. That was called Ates Hirsizi and it was published by an
anarchist circle from Istanbul. Also another anarchist circle created a
Publishing House called Birey Yayinlari.
However these two anarchist periodicals Amargi and Ates Hirsizi had
different perspectives from the beginning. Amargi mainly gave importance
in its pages to the problem of peace, the dilemma of the individual -
society contradiction and pacifism. One the other hand, Ates Hirsizi
rather stressed the problem of social revolution, the Kurdish national
question, and the problem of organisation. Moreover Ates Hirsizi discussed
the problem of organisation in its relation to anarchist experience and
the short comings and the wrongs of the anarchist organisations. Also Ates
Hirsizi was basically against pacifism contrary to the Amargi commune and
Amargi magazine.
In the summer of 1994 the Amargi circle proposed a collective publishing
of a new monthly paper to all other anarchist circles on the condition
that the differences between groups should be preserved. This project was
discussed and with the co-operation of an anarchist group from Ankara,
publishing of a new paper was agreed. According to the agreement the new
paper should be mainly concerned with daily politics in its pages. Yet
Amargi left this project just after this agreement. Therefore, the new
paper was prepared for publication by the anarchist group from Ankara and
by the members of Ates Hirsizi, an other anarchist periodical.
The new magazine is called Apolitica. Unfortunately, although it was
intended as a daily politics magazine, it became a theoretical magazine.
Its subjects have been mainly dominated by issues like the direction of
the struggle and the form of the organisation. At the moment all the three
periodicals that are mentioned above continue their publication in Turkey.
Lastly, anarchists first participated in the May Day celebrations with
their black flag in 1993 in Istanbul and again in 1994, in Ankara and
other places. Their presence created big interest in the media. The media
gave special coverage to the anarchists and announced that "at last we
have our anarchists".
The situation of the anarchist movement now in Turkey and its future
Turkey is a country that has the potential of important transformation
dynamics. Although this dynamic nature of the people of Turkey has been
ruthlessly repressed and has been intentionally attempted to be dismantled
by the ruling classes during the 1980's, from time to time it has emerged
again.
First of all, we could talk about the existence of a spontaneous and
dynamic working class movement. Just three years ago, a massive march of
the miners from Zonguldak to Ankara (the capital city of Turkey) created
great panic in the ruling classes. Yet, since the demands of these actions
are limited to the economic sphere, the ruling classes are able to control
these actions in the end.
On the other hand, the Kurdish national movement is a determining factor
in the political and daily life of Turkey. Actually, although it does not
have proper coverage by the world media, there is a civil war going on in
the south-east of Turkey where Kurdish people live. That is why, if one
wants to do a revolutionary politics, one cannot ignore the Kurdish
question. However, the Kurdish national movement is lead by a nationalist
and Stalinist leadership. It appears that Kurdish people in Turkey are
determined to change the status quo of the country for their good. All the
repression and the dirty war of Turkey against the Kurdish people does not
lead the ruling class of Turkey anywhere. Kurdish people resist all these.
And it seems that they are going to find ways of winning this political
and military war against the ruling classes of Turkey.
Moreover, there is another political factor that should be taken
seriously. It is the radical Islamist movement. The military regime of the
early 80's has intentionally promoted radical Islamist in the state
apparatus for the purpose of eliminating all other forms of civil
political groups and also for creating a new type of patriotism. Although
this movement and its leaders are actually at the service of the ruling
classes of Turkey, the masses choose this radical movement in order to
show that they are against the ruthless capitalism which exists in Turkey.
As it happens elsewhere in the world when the revolutionary fire is
deflated, the masses often choose the reverse way against the system. From
this point of view, we should try to understand the Islamic radicalism as
a complex issue which is both an obstacle for the revolution and a signal
of discontent of the masses from the system.
Further, left-wing groups are in a big defeat in Turkey. Social Democrats
are in the coalition government with a centre right party (DYP), yet they
are far from effective and they are rather a passive tool for DYP.
Therefore, it seems that the masses do not expect anything from the Social
Democrats anymore. Parallel to that the social democrats popularity is the
lowest of all times. On the other hand Marxist left is in decline as it
happens all over the world. Some reformist Marxists attempted to revive
the interest of the public, but they have not find enough support.
All these analysis led us to those conclusions:
1) The masses are discontented from the regime and they are looking for
new alternatives. The ruling classes have been successful in silencing the
youth and the intelligentsia by the military coup that did take place in
1980. However, the masses and the classes show their discontent in the
workers actions, in the armed national uprising of Kurds and in their
support of the radical Islam.
2) However, the idea of revolution does not become popular for the
discontent masses. Actually, all left groups lose gradually support and
credibility. At this situation, what is required is that a new perspective
and a new revolutionary understanding that could make the idea of
revolution attractive again and popular. Only a new type revolutionary
approach could attract the revolu tionary potential that exists in the
masses.
3) The society in Turkey lives full corruption of the capitalist system.
All moral, political and economic institutions of the country is in
explicit corruption. And everybody knows that and, nobody does anything
about it. In these conditions an anarchist movement could be the flag of
the hatred of the masses against corruption. Yet in order to do that
anarchists should get rid of individualism, marginality and
irresponsibility. They should organise themselves as a political movement.
Only then, anarchists are going to be able to move masses and their
constructive and instructive instincts.
As a conclusion the main problem of the anarchist movement in Turkey is to
be revolutionary and to interfere the life of people. It should save
itself from becoming a student movement and it should reach masses. It
should create the perspective of the substance of the revolutionary
movement against the corruption.
This text is a scan of the pamplet 'Anarchism in Turkey' produced by
Karambol publications, a group of emmigrants from Turkey living in London.
I obtained their permission to place it on the internet at the Anarchist
Bookfair in London in October of 1996. I would like to point out that part
of the original purpose of the pamphlet was to raise funds for Turkish
anarchists so I'm sure a donation no matter how small would be very
welcome by this group. You can mail them at Karambol publications
PO Box 1681
London N8 7L-UK
--- Transmission : End ---
-Surensoy,E.
The ruling elite of Turkiye including the military as well as many
of its opponents, such as Fundamental Islamists, are the descendets
of Ottoman establisment. For 600 years of Ottoman oppression, that
elite kept Turks under strict controls and deptrived them of
education and every possible opprutunity to improve themselves
politically, economically, socially and in every which way. Vast
majority of Turks were kept in dark ages and totall powerless just
to keep them from rebelling agaist the Ottoman oppression. That is
why nothing in science, technology, economy, medicine, fine arts,
etc. was achived in Turkiye by Turks and other Moslem peoples.
Turks had only die in miserarble deaths in Ottoman wars of Jihad
agaist the entire Christian World.
That was the way for the Ottoman dynasty to rule its Maslem masses.
Everythig contemporary, futuristic, scientific, technologic,
etc was agaist Ottoman law and was a crime, and agaist Isamic
law and was a major sin for centuries until the end of
Ottoman dynasty while Ottoman Christian and Jewish subjects
somehow were always exempt from such crimes and sins, and
benefitted from the Western sceintific and technological
advancement and in turn used them to gain their independence
from Ottoman rule.
Ottoman legacy and tradition still goes on in Turkiye; a vast
majority of general population is still illiterate. Certainly the
highest in Europe. The ruling elite, who knows how to build multi
billion-dollar bridges over Bosporous and other useless junk, still
fails to provide proper modern education to the illiterate majority.
For the military, it is much easier to crush its opponents than
educate the illiterate majority.
In article <7XMYG...@gds.free.de>, Haki <i...@koma.free.de> wrote:
)--- Transmission : Start ---
)
)ANARCHISM IN TURKEY
)
)From the title of this pamphlet one should not assume that we are going to
)tell you a brief account of a long history of a political movement. The
)history of anarchism is indeed very short in Turkey and the title of this
)pamphlet simply expresses this fact. The anarchist movement came to the
)political scene of Turkey less than 10 years ago. The publication of Kara
)a monthly magazine, was the starting point of anarchism in Turkey in 1986.
)Before the publication of this monthly magazine, there had not been any
)anarchist periodical or any anarchist circle which attempted to express
)itself. Of course that does not mean that there haven't been any
)anarchists in the Geo-political borders of Turkey. An important point to
)note is that before Kara, anarchist circles or individuals never tried to
)become a political movement in Turkey.
)
)Although the organised working class movement and revolutionary movements
)have existed for 70 years in Turkey, anarchism has not been seen as a
)political factor in Turkey. And this fact should be questioned. Why has
)nearly every kind of Western originated revolutionary movement taken its
)place in the political arena of Turkey, and not anarchism? Moreover we
)should search for and discuss the reasons for that fact.
)
)The incorrigible progressiveness of Marxism
)
)Revolutionary movements in Turkey have been dominated by Marxism. The
)reason for this domination must be found in the history of Turkey. The
)Republic of Turkey and its past Ottoman Empire's last hundred years was
)mainly dominated by a vital problem. That is the problem of modernisation
)and westernisation. The undeniable power and influence of western
)imperialism and the weakness of the Ottoman State (and later the Republic
)of Turkey) has put the question of modernisation and westernisation in
)front of the ruling elite and the intelligentsia of the country. In other
)words, the argument is that Turkey, in order to be a power and independent
)should break away from its traditions and it should become an
)industrialised and socially westernised country. That is the project which
)has always been shared by nearly all the political sides in Turkey.
)(Except radical Islamist groups who were against any kind of break away
)from traditions.)
)
)Moreover positivism was the philosophy behind this project. As it is
)known, positivism came to being in the west as the ideology of progress
)and development in the middle of l9th century. And Marxism is partially
)under the influence of that ideology. Turkish Marxists never attempted to
)separate themselves from that ideology till the late 1970's. Thus Marxists
)shared the dominant philosophy of the general Turkish intelligentsia.
)
)Anarchism was born a part of the western and modern world, yet at the same
)time it is a denial of these things. In this context, anarchism as a
)denial of modernity and western domination is hardly the solution for the
)intelligentsia and the politicians of Turkey.
)
)The other reason why anarchism has developed late in Turkey lies in the
)fact that the intelligentsia and political elite (left wings or right
)wings) of Turkey has needed a strong State to implement its modernisation
)and westernisation project. And one can easily think that anarchism is not
)an answer to their needs.
)
)Why anarchism appeared in 1980's
)
)The fact that anarchism came into being so late in Turkey may be partially
)explained by saying that modernist and westernised ideology was weakened
)in the 1980's. Yet this can not be whole explanation. One should look at
)the problem in its historical context. As we have said before, Marxism was
)the dominant ideology in Turkey's revolutionary movements. In the 1980's
)Marxism disintegrated world-wide and in Turkey because of the military
)coup it faced a political defeat. Nearly all Marxist movements were
)ruthlessly crushed by the military regime.
)
)In this situation, many Marxist militants were faced with a dilemma,
)namely the tension between the ultimate aim of Marxism which is a
)stateless and classless society, and the real-politic of Marxism (in order
)to achieve the ultimate aim Marxism argues that productive forces should
)be developed and the state should preserved for this aim). This dilemma
)led many Marxist militants to reject the real-politic of Marxism and to
)seek ways to reach the ultimate aim of Marxism. This let many of them to
)anarchism.
)
)On the other hand, in the darkness of the military coup years, left wing
)intelligentsia started to question Marxist collectivism and the Leninist
)understanding of organisation. They inquired into the contradiction
)between society and the individual. Their inquiries led many of them to
)individualism. From there some of them started to defend the "responsible
)individual". And they reached anarchism.
)
)Publication of Kara
)
)These groups and their discussions were represented and took their place
)in a new monthly publication called Yeni Olgu in these years. The
)publishing policy of Yeni Olgu was to create a political platform for the
)youth in the climax of the coup years. Although it was short lived one
)could say Yeni Olgu was successful in its attempt. The platform of Yeni
)Olgu helped to show many closed revolutionary circles that there were
)others who were thinking about the same problems. From this communication
)base, these circles exchanged ideas and theses. This communication led to
)diversification and break away in some circles and communes but sometimes
)new communes and circles were also born. They were mainly diversified at
)the topics that were Feminism, Ecologisim, anti-militarism. A few of them
)started to concern themselves with anarchist ideas and they started to
)express them.
)
)The monthly magazine Akintiya Karsi was born from this source. Although
)one could not call it an anarchist magazine, it was basically an anti-
)authoritarian paper. After the publication of Akintiya Karsi, Sokak
)Publishing House was set up by ex-socialist militants who saw themselves
)as an anti-authoritarian line. The importance of Sokak Publishing House
)lies in the fact that it published the first book with a truly anarchist
)perspective in Turkey. That was Ida Mett's Kronstadt 1921 in which she
)brings a new perspective to the Soviet Union and Stalin.
)
)In 1986 some young members of Sokak Publishing House started to publish a
)new monthly magazine called Kara. At first Kara gathered little attention
)either from the general public or from left wing circles. In Kara on the
)one hand society was criticised for its understanding and practice of
)state, education and schooling and on the other hand the irresponsible
)individual of this society was also subjeeted to criticism for its
)attitude of standing by and watching things happen in society. Moreover
)this individual was subjected to the question "Haven't you watched
)enough?" This radical attitude of Kara created an interest in some Marxist
)circles which were also discussing some of these issues in their closed
)circles. These circles did not see anarchism as negative but rather as a
)noble political theory not practical in reality. Even some members of
)these cireles were quite sympathetic towards anarchism. They greeted the
)emergence of anarchism in Turkey, whilst thinking that, it was not
)practical. These people were the messengers of the first conversions of
)the Marxists to anarchism.
)
)Kara's perspective influenced both the most aware of the Marxist militants
)and young new comers to the political arena of Turkey. The most
)perceptible difference of Kara from other leftists periodicals was that it
)did not praise the working class and it did not involve itself with daily
)politics. Instead it was radically attacking the insti tutions and general
)beliefs of society. Generally it was aiming to gather attention through
)these radical critics. It was probably a necessary thing to do at first,
)yet also this attitude could be viewed as insufficient or even some times
)it can be viewed as the wrong thing to do. However, this young movement
)was in its infancy and it mostly needed to express its reasons for its
)existence and its own principles with this directness. Here because of
)this reason, it was far from expressing original ideas on daily politics
)of Turkey. Therefore it was expressing only general principles and they
)were short of daily politics for example, it was unable to express or
)develop an original perspective and to propose an original solution to the
)foremost political problem of Turkey that was (and is) the Kurdish
)national question. It stressed both the importance and necessity of the
)individual's responsibilities and the independence of the individual from
)society, yet it was unable to express ideas on the problem of organising
)these individuals around a political movement. Especially, it was not able
)to offer an alternative organisation model for ex-Marxist militants who
)suffered under the Leninist model of political organisation in those days
)in Turkey.
)
)Kara ceased its existence in November 1987 after its 12th issue. In those
)days there was confusion and disorganisation among anarchist circles or
)communes (this was partly because the anarchist movement's supporters
)mainly consisted of students). After Kara ceased its publication, there
)appeared four autonomous groups from its remains. One of these groups
)started to publish a periodical that was called Efendisiz as a
)continuation of Kara. Efendisiz carried on what Kara tried to do till its
)closure in 1989. The other groups also tried to do things in their
)capacity and one of these created the Atolye A project that later started
)to publish Amargi a monthly magazine. As a result we could say the process
)of the emergence of Kara and Efendisiz papers was the emergence of
)anarchism for first time in Turkey.
)
)Amargi, Ates Hirsizi, Birey Yayinlari and Apolitica
)
)Between 1989-1991 the anarchist movement did not have any periodical in
)Turkey. However, it does not mean that the anarchist movement lost
)interest among the people of Turkey. In fact rather the reverse was true.
)The interest in anarchism actually increased and as a result of this even
)non-anarchist publishing house started to publish books which were related
)to anarchism. For example, Metis Publishing House printed P. Avrich's
)Portrait of Anarchists and Anarchists in Russian Revolution.
)
)The interest in anarchism and the culmination of the past five years of
)the anarchist movement brought new anarchist enterprises. The first of
)them was the Atolye A project. Atolye A project with the contribution of
)the Association Against War set up the Amargi commune. This commune
)started to publish a new monthly anar chist publication called Amargi in
)1992. One year later an other anarchist publication started its
)publication life. That was called Ates Hirsizi and it was published by an
)anarchist circle from Istanbul. Also another anarchist circle created a
)Publishing House called Birey Yayinlari.
)
)However these two anarchist periodicals Amargi and Ates Hirsizi had
)different perspectives from the beginning. Amargi mainly gave importance
)in its pages to the problem of peace, the dilemma of the individual -
)society contradiction and pacifism. One the other hand, Ates Hirsizi
)rather stressed the problem of social revolution, the Kurdish national
)question, and the problem of organisation. Moreover Ates Hirsizi discussed
)the problem of organisation in its relation to anarchist experience and
)the short comings and the wrongs of the anarchist organisations. Also Ates
)Hirsizi was basically against pacifism contrary to the Amargi commune and
)Amargi magazine.
)
)In the summer of 1994 the Amargi circle proposed a collective publishing
)of a new monthly paper to all other anarchist circles on the condition
)that the differences between groups should be preserved. This project was
)discussed and with the co-operation of an anarchist group from Ankara,
)publishing of a new paper was agreed. According to the agreement the new
)paper should be mainly concerned with daily politics in its pages. Yet
)Amargi left this project just after this agreement. Therefore, the new
)paper was prepared for publication by the anarchist group from Ankara and
)by the members of Ates Hirsizi, an other anarchist periodical.
)
)The new magazine is called Apolitica. Unfortunately, although it was
)intended as a daily politics magazine, it became a theoretical magazine.
)Its subjects have been mainly dominated by issues like the direction of
)the struggle and the form of the organisation. At the moment all the three
)periodicals that are mentioned above continue their publication in Turkey.
)
)Lastly, anarchists first participated in the May Day celebrations with
)their black flag in 1993 in Istanbul and again in 1994, in Ankara and
)other places. Their presence created big interest in the media. The media
)gave special coverage to the anarchists and announced that "at last we
)have our anarchists".
)
)The situation of the anarchist movement now in Turkey and its future
)
)Turkey is a country that has the potential of important transformation
)dynamics. Although this dynamic nature of the people of Turkey has been
)ruthlessly repressed and has been intentionally attempted to be dismantled
)by the ruling classes during the 1980's, from time to time it has emerged
)again.
)
)First of all, we could talk about the existence of a spontaneous and
)dynamic working class movement. Just three years ago, a massive march of
)the miners from Zonguldak to Ankara (the capital city of Turkey) created
)great panic in the ruling classes. Yet, since the demands of these actions
)are limited to the economic sphere, the ruling classes are able to control
)these actions in the end.
)
)On the other hand, the Kurdish national movement is a determining factor
)in the political and daily life of Turkey. Actually, although it does not
)have proper coverage by the world media, there is a civil war going on in
)the south-east of Turkey where Kurdish people live. That is why, if one
)wants to do a revolutionary politics, one cannot ignore the Kurdish
)question. However, the Kurdish national movement is lead by a nationalist
)and Stalinist leadership. It appears that Kurdish people in Turkey are
)determined to change the status quo of the country for their good. All the
)repression and the dirty war of Turkey against the Kurdish people does not
)lead the ruling class of Turkey anywhere. Kurdish people resist all these.
)And it seems that they are going to find ways of winning this political
)and military war against the ruling classes of Turkey.
)
)Moreover, there is another political factor that should be taken
)seriously. It is the radical Islamist movement. The military regime of the
)early 80's has intentionally promoted radical Islamist in the state
)apparatus for the purpose of eliminating all other forms of civil
)political groups and also for creating a new type of patriotism. Although
)this movement and its leaders are actually at the service of the ruling
)classes of Turkey, the masses choose this radical movement in order to
)show that they are against the ruthless capitalism which exists in Turkey.
)As it happens elsewhere in the world when the revolutionary fire is
)deflated, the masses often choose the reverse way against the system. From
)this point of view, we should try to understand the Islamic radicalism as
)a complex issue which is both an obstacle for the revolution and a signal
)of discontent of the masses from the system.
)
)Further, left-wing groups are in a big defeat in Turkey. Social Democrats
)are in the coalition government with a centre right party (DYP), yet they
)are far from effective and they are rather a passive tool for DYP.
)Therefore, it seems that the masses do not expect anything from the Social
)Democrats anymore. Parallel to that the social democrats popularity is the
)lowest of all times. On the other hand Marxist left is in decline as it
)happens all over the world. Some reformist Marxists attempted to revive
)the interest of the public, but they have not find enough support.
)
)All these analysis led us to those conclusions:
)
)1) The masses are discontented from the regime and they are looking for
)new alternatives. The ruling classes have been successful in silencing the
)youth and the intelligentsia by the military coup that did take place in
)1980. However, the masses and the classes show their discontent in the
)workers actions, in the armed national uprising of Kurds and in their
)support of the radical Islam.
)
)2) However, the idea of revolution does not become popular for the
)discontent masses. Actually, all left groups lose gradually support and
)credibility. At this situation, what is required is that a new perspective
)and a new revolutionary understanding that could make the idea of
)revolution attractive again and popular. Only a new type revolutionary
)approach could attract the revolu tionary potential that exists in the
)masses.
)
)3) The society in Turkey lives full corruption of the capitalist system.
)All moral, political and economic institutions of the country is in
)explicit corruption. And everybody knows that and, nobody does anything
)about it. In these conditions an anarchist movement could be the flag of
)the hatred of the masses against corruption. Yet in order to do that
)anarchists should get rid of individualism, marginality and
)irresponsibility. They should organise themselves as a political movement.
)Only then, anarchists are going to be able to move masses and their
)constructive and instructive instincts.
)
)As a conclusion the main problem of the anarchist movement in Turkey is to
)be revolutionary and to interfere the life of people. It should save
)itself from becoming a student movement and it should reach masses. It
)should create the perspective of the substance of the revolutionary
)movement against the corruption.
)
)This text is a scan of the pamplet 'Anarchism in Turkey' produced by
)Karambol publications, a group of emmigrants from Turkey living in London.
)I obtained their permission to place it on the internet at the Anarchist
)Bookfair in London in October of 1996. I would like to point out that part
)of the original purpose of the pamphlet was to raise funds for Turkish
)anarchists so I'm sure a donation no matter how small would be very
)welcome by this group. You can mail them at Karambol publications
)PO Box 1681
)London N8 7L-UK
)
)--- Transmission : End ---
Cluster User
>--- Transmission : Start ---
>
>ANARCHISM IN TURKEY
>
>From the title of this pamphlet one should not assume that we are going to
>tell you a brief account of a long history of a political movement. The
>history of anarchism is indeed very short in Turkey and the title of this
>pamphlet simply expresses this fact. The anarchist movement came to the
during the ottoman empire, many revolutiomary organisations drew
inspiration from european anarchist and the narodniks of russia.