4. The Racist Policy of Imperialism and the Racist Policy of the Indigenous Ruling Classes
The Safak Revisionists confuse two different things – the racist policy of imperialism, and the racist policy of the indigenous ruling classes – with one another. They talk about “the racist policy of imperialism aiming to create enmity between the peoples of Turkey to crush them.” It is apparent that imperialism wishes to create hostility between the peoples of Turkey and crush them, and that it wants to take advantage of every opportunity to achieve these vile ambitions.
The policy of racism in Turkey is a policy of the indigenous ruling classes, a policy of the most politically reactionary sections of the bourgeoisie and feudalism: the feudal and feudal-bourgeois tendency. Because of its character, the policy of racism is even the enemy of a consistent bourgeois democracy. The most extreme representative of this current in Turkey is the Hitler-clone Türkeş[14] and his Party. The racist policy and support for it also exists substantially in the AP[15], MGP[16] and CHP[17] and other similar parties. The racist policy is a policy of crushing, subduing and eradicating the other nations and peoples. In Turkey, those who pursue a racist policy towards the Kurdish nation and other minority nationalities are these feudal and feudal-bourgeois classes and their political parties and governments. Imperialism, when it suits its interests, will encourage and support the racist policy of these classes, and, when it doesn’t suit its interests, may oppose it. For instance, US imperialism, which is dominant in Turkey, having bound the Turkish ruling classes to it, has an interest in encouraging and supporting Turkish racism and it carries out this duty (!) willingly and to excess. For example, Soviet social-imperialism is not dominant in Turkey, it opposes Turkish racism, but in Pakistan it unhesitatingly incites racism against Bangladeshis. As for Turkey, if tomorrow the US cannot possess the whole of it, if it is able to break off a piece, there is no guarantee that it will not support a reactionary Kurdish nationalism or racism under its control, in the guise of supporting nations’ right to self-determination or the liberation struggle of an oppressed nation.
The racism policy pursued by imperialism itself is something entirely different. The rubbish peddled by the fascist Hitler, claiming the German race was the most superior in the world, created to rule the world, the “great state chauvinism” of US imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism, their belittling of the world’s oppressed peoples and nationalities and their shameless interference in their internal affairs, and their interventions – these are the manifestations of the racist policy of imperialism.
The Safak Revisionists have confused things. Who do they want to rescue by concealing the racist policy of the Turkish ruling classes?
Racism is not something brought in from out side, but it may be supported from outside. There are classes and layers on which racism relies. When it suits imperialism, it encourages and supports the racist policy of these classes. These classes and layers do not exist just among the Turks, but also certainly among the Kurds. As we mentioned above, let there be no doubt that when it suits it, imperialism will not hesitate to incite and support them. It is for this reason that the struggle to be waged against racism is first and foremost a struggle against these classes and layers, and one of the most important tasks of the proletarian movement is to expose them to the toiling people. Also, in relation to this, to expose the racist policy promoted by imperialism itself: to expose how it has shamelessly instigated and supported racism between various nations, and to spread “the international culture of democracy and the global workers’ movement.”
Therefore, it is not solely the “racist policy of imperialism” that is failing, needs to fail and will entirely fail, but the racist policy of imperialism and indigenous reaction.
The wondrous formulation set out above will only serve to assist domestic racists, and to blunt the awareness of the proletariat…
5. The Champions of National OppressioninTurkey and their Accomplices
The real champions of national oppression in our country are the large comprador Turkish bourgeoisie and landlord class. US imperialism backs their policies of national oppression and racism and encourages them. But the Turkish medium bourgeoisie is also complicit in this crime of national oppression with more insidious and subtle methods. In the words of Comrade Lenin: “The liberals approach the language question in the same way as they approach all political questions—like hypocritical hucksters, holding out one hand (openly) to democracy and the other (behind their backs) to the feudalists and police.”[18]
Look at Dogan Avcioglu[19], Ecevit[20] and all our opportunists! Look at Mihri Belli, H. Kivilcimli[21]. How they fit this definition of Lenin’s. While on the one hand they oppose the feudal cudgel of government, saying it is useless, on the other they cannot resist recommending more subtle, polite methods of national oppression. D.Avcioglu attempted to defended the repression led by a commando that even the rabid, fanatical Turkish chauvinists who have firmly grasped the feudal cudgel have not dared to do, publishing a vile article entitled: “A Commando Officer Gives an Account” (Devrim newspaper). He defends the repression thus:
The soldiers search women. A detector is used in the searching of women. It is not true that everyone apart from the landlord is publicly beaten. The allegations that the people have been made to strip and crawl on the ground en masse are baseless. But people have been made to obey orders to lie down and get up. It is also true that suspects in places where weapons and fugitives have not been handed over have been threatened with being forced to strip, along with their wives, and exposed, which is an effective method. But this has not gone beyond a threat.
In response to the crude chauvinism and vile accessory to the crime of D. Avcioglu and others, M. Belli and other similar people raise high the banner of Turkish nationalism (attempting to mask it with Marxism-Leninism) in a more clandestine way (but, again, obvious) and deem this to be “the historic tasks of socialists.”
M. Belli, who even finds a positive aspect in the racist Turanian fascism[22] of Türkeş, says the following regarding the Kurdish question:
We have stated for ethnic communities in Turkey, in particular for the Kurds, that we see it is necessary for there to be a centralized, secular, revolutionary republican government education in order for there to be mother tongue and cultural education… for the fraternity between Turks and Kurds, which has historical roots, and the national and territorial integrity of Turkey to be sabotaged in whatever way, would result in an outcome contrary to the real interests of both the Turks and the Kurds and consolidate the situation of imperialism in this region of the world. [my emphasis]
Is this not dominant nation chauvinism? Isn’t appearing to be in favor of the equality of nationalities while in reality only recognizing the privilege of founding a state to the Turks and removing the Kurds’ right to found a state with demagogic bourgeois slogans such as “national unity” and “territorial integrity,” advocating the most blatant inequality between nationalities and the privileges of the Turkish bourgeoisie? Socialists are opposed to the smallest privilege for any nation or any inequality. However, in Turkey it has always been the privilege of one nation, the Turkish nation, to establish a nation-state and this is still the case. We, as communists, just as we defend absolutely no privilege whatsoever, also do not defend this privilege. We defend, and continue to defend, with all our might, the right of the Kurdish nation to found a state. We respect absolutely this right we do not support the Turks’ privileged position vis-à-vis the Kurds (or other nationalities); we teach the masses to recognize this right without hesitation and to reject the right of founding a State being the privileged monopoly of any single nation. Comrade Lenin says:
14
Alparslan Türkeş was the founder of the neo-fascist Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and of it clandestine armed wing, the Grey Wolves. Since the end of the 60s, the Grey Wolves have led an armed opposition against the growing communist revolutionary movements, assassinating different leftist leaders and leading operations of terror against (among others) the Kurdish, Alevi and Armenian populations.
15
Adalet Partisi (Justice Party), or AP, was the ruling party at the time when Kaypakkaya wrote this document. This party was a reformation of the Democratic Party that was overthrown by a coup in 1960 and was the main opponent to the Kemalist CHP. The Party had some support from the Kurds, not because they were progressive on the Kurdish question, but more because of a historical hatred for CHP, seen as the party that led a bloody repression against the Kurds.
16
The Millî Güven Partisi (National Reliance Party) was a right wing split of the CHP that disagreed with the progressive transformation of the Party into a social-democratic one. Anti-socialist, the party tried to return to its Kemalist roots. At the time of Kaypakkaya, the Party had a handful of MPs in the parliament. In 1973, it merged with another party to form the “Republican Reliance Party” and supported the Justice Party in elections. It progressively lost its minor popularity and was finally disbanded in 1981.
17
The Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (Republican People’s Party) was a party found in 1923 by Mustafa Kemal “Atatürk,” the so-called “founder of the Republic of Turkey” and its 1st President. In “On Kemalism,” Ibrahim Kaypakkaya described the ideology and regime of Mustafa Kemal as being a “military, fascist dictatorship” that was necessary for the transformation of Turkey from “a colonial, semi-colonial, semi-feudal structure to a semi-colonial, semi-feudal structure.” While CHP’s ideology has always been Kemalist, since the 60s it has been affiliated with the Socialist International and is usually seen as a social-democratic party.
19
Doğan Avcıoğlu was an MP from CHP. His analysis was that Turkey’s foreign policy had been controlled by the United States from 1947, and that the solution was a national democratic revolution from a “socialist Kemalist” point of view. He participated in the coup attempt of March 1971.
20
Bülent Ecevit was the general secretary of CHP from 1966-1971 and 1972-1980. He oriented the Party on a social-democratic line. He was the prime minister of Turkey several times.
21
Dr. Hikmet Kıvılcımlı was a Central Committee member of the clandestine Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) until its liquidation. He spent over 12 years in jail for his communist ideas. His ideas were similar to those of Mihri Belli: support to the “progressive officers” of the army in view of making a “revolutionary coup.” Today, a tiny part of the Turkish left continues to uphold his ideas.
22
Turanism is a racist and colonialist ideology claiming that the Turks are the origin of all other nations and the origin of all languages of the world. It advocates for conquest and racial cleansing in favor of the Turks and is upheld by the MHP and the Grey Wolves.