The Kurdish nationalist movement’s anti-communism
>By Cansu Oba
>A recent article published by one of the Kurdish nationalist movement’s media outlets has provided an opportunity to revisit certain aspects of the movement’s class character and ideological foundations.
>In reality, this stance is not new. Throughout Abdullah Öcalan’s years in prison, he has repeatedly produced statements and writings that target socialist experiences and the founders of scientific socialism. These have for some time been highlighted in the movement’s own media.
>What makes the current moment significant is that Öcalan is one of the central actors in an ongoing political process in Turkey. The “peace process”—carried out with the open support of the leader of the fascist party and through direct contact between Öcalan, a parliamentary commission, and state officials—has transformed the political environment. At the same time, a former co-chair and current MP of the Kurdish nationalist movement’s party, the DEM Party, declared that the party now effectively serves as the country’s main opposition. All of this signals that the emerging bourgeois political landscape provides fertile ground for the resonance between the Kurdish nationalist movement’s attacks on socialism and the bourgeois politics’ more traditional forms of anti-communism.
>Yet the PKK was never, in reality, a genuinely Marxist-Leninist organization. Founded in the late 1970s, a period in which the left dominated Turkey’s political and social arena, the PKK employed Marxist-Leninist terminology and drew from these values, but it was always, at its core, a national movement.
>Claims that Öcalan has “surpassed Marxism”—when considered together with his recent statement that he has been “waiting 50 years to be understood”—suggest a line of ideological continuity rather than a merely conjunctural shift.
>The Kurdish nationalist movement, now firmly situated somewhere between social democracy and nationalism within Turkey’s political landscape, has strengthened ties with various factions of the bourgeoisie, including some of Turkey’s most prominent capitalist families. Meanwhile, its distance from the republic’s founding principles and from secularism has frequently aligned it with the AKP government not only on current political issues but also on long-term regional strategy. The most recent peace process aimed to formalize this alignment into a strategic partnership tied to a broader regional imperialist project.
>Outside Turkey, however—especially in Europe—the movement’s image is refracted and softened within left-wing public opinion. One reason is certainly the complexity of Turkish politics, which is difficult to understand from the outside. But this is not the only factor.
>International exposure to Turkey has grown, and it is easier than ever to follow developments due to the country’s increasing visibility in global media. It is therefore hard to claim that these kinds of statements or texts are inaccessible to international audiences. Indeed, the movement’s arguments, as well as interviews with its representatives, frequently appear in European publications.
>And some realities speak for themselves. The passages quoted below illustrate this clearly. Before turning to them, however, it must be noted that this “misperception” is also reinforced by the European reading of Turkish politics exclusively through the lens of an “authoritarian Turkish government.” While not wholly inaccurate, this perspective often ignores or obscures class dynamics within Turkey and the AKP government’s alignment with Turkish capital. As a result, many international observers view the Kurdish nationalist movement’s struggle primarily through a liberal “freedom vs. authoritarianism” framework.
>Additionally, a long-standing romanticism within parts of the European left regarding the right of oppressed nations to self-determination—regardless of contemporary material conditions—has also contributed to this distortion, something the movement itself has instrumentalized.
>Yet during this same period, within the movement’s own press, articles are found accusing communist movements of “defending the system,” equating actually existing socialism with fascism, and claiming that Marxist, Leninist, and Maoist revolutions ultimately became instruments of systemic power:
>“The Marxist, Leninist, and Maoist revolutions—built through immense sacrifice and effort—ultimately became entangled with the system and even evolved into its strongest defenders. Lenin’s Soviets, under Stalin, transformed into a form of Soviet fascism, while Mao’s communism was pushed into becoming a major capitalist force. A socialism detached from society cannot become anything more than an extension of the existing system.
For this reason, new and innovative ideas must be developed within socialism, Marxism, Leninism, and Maoism. Socialism needs to be re-evaluated and re-socialized. A viable socialism must be freed from mistaken interpretations and outdated mentalities so that its social essence can emerge. A socialism that does not belong solely to a single class must be approached broadly and rooted within society as a whole.”
>The text goes on to declare that socialism does not belong to any particular class, and that Öcalan has brought new life to socialism:
>“Within this framework, Leader Apo (Abdullah Öcalan) sought to identify the shortcomings of socialism and to change and transform it into a socially grounded model. By addressing the weaknesses of real socialism and scientific socialism, he introduced a new perspective and, through the development of democratic socialism, aimed to reveal socialism’s core essence.”
>And finally, the author “buries” scientific socialism in Rojava—ironically one of the closest U.S. and Israeli allies in the region and a convenient asset in their Middle East strategy—and elevates it as the “first step of democratic socialism”:
>“Rojava is the place where this new perspective on socialism has been introduced and developed. Indeed, Rojava represents the final stop of socialism and the first step of democratic socialism.”
>As noted earlier, these are not new arguments. Öcalan’s own writings over the years contain many such analyses. His letter to the PKK’s 12th Congress—held last May, where the organization decided to dissolve itself—provides an especially distilled summary of this worldview and, in effect, rewrites the history of class struggle:
>“Historical materialism should replace class struggle with ‘the commune.’ It is more accurate to revise Marxism through this concept. History is not a history of class struggle but of conflict between the state and the commune.”
>He continues:
>“The fundamental contradiction begins with the conflict between the masculine and feminine elements in society. It does not originate from class. Marx’s class-based conflict theory is the main reason real socialism collapsed.”
>He even criticizes Marx for “not being Marxist”:
>“Marx, to live with his wife, sells his coat. He says, ‘Let me write this book so it earns money and saves my marriage.’ Is this what Marxism is supposed to be?”
>These quotes demonstrate that Öcalan’s approach is neither new nor incidental: it has deep roots in the ideological history of the movement.
>Why, then, is it important to accurately understand the PKK’s non-Marxist character now? As stated at the outset, Öcalan’s analysis now fuels a new wave of anti-communist discourse in Turkey. His claim that the PKK was founded on the basis of “real socialism,” but became dysfunctional once real socialism collapsed and could not find a replacement, mirrors the government’s own narrative that absolves the state and blames “the left” for past conflicts. In response, the TKP Central Committee emphasized that the PKK was never a Marxist organization and stated that, at a moment when the PKK is contemplating its own dissolution, the government’s effort to shift historical responsibility onto revolutionaries and socialism will not be allowed to stand uncontested. The statement underscored that a nationalism interwoven with liberalism—and political alliances with the United States or Israel—cannot in any form be reconciled with Marxism.
>Assuming this approach—rooted in anarchism and other petty-bourgeois ideologies, such as liberalism—within the left spectrum represents, from a leftist standpoint, a form of self-negation. Let us recall that in the same letter, Öcalan references Kropotkin and states, “Lenin should have listened to him,” even though Lenin, in the Marxist-Leninist tradition we inherit, criticized Kropotkin and the anarchist currents of his time for petty-bourgeois romanticism and utopianism. In this light, it is no coincidence that the author of the initially cited article remarks that Rojava reminds him of Thomas More’s works.
>There are, of course, certain limits to treating these theses with full theoretical seriousness. This is largely because they do not form a coherent whole, but rather consist of arguments drawn from various theoretical backgrounds and combined in an eclectic manner. Nevertheless, this movement has a significant social base and is still regarded in many parts of the world as a progressive or socialist force. For this reason, we need to address this somewhat misleading image with greater care and clarity.
>If we accept that Marxism cannot be stretched to the point of severing it from its class foundations, it becomes evident that this nationalist movement—whose ideological roots lie in pre-Marxist and non-Marxist traditions—must be approached without romantic lenses. In terms of realpolitik, tolerance for alliances with the United States and Israel or participation in expansionist neo-Ottoman projects, and, on the ideological plane, tolerance for petty-bourgeois currents and the new wave of anti-communism, are matters for those who have already abandoned the target of socialism—not for those committed to it.
>Cansu Oba is a member of the TKP Central Committee
>>2586843>“Historical materialism should replace class struggle with ‘the commune.’ It is more accurate to revise Marxism through this concept. History is not a history of class struggle but of conflict between the state and the commune.”>“The fundamental contradiction begins with the conflict between the masculine and feminine elements in society. It does not originate from class. Marx’s class-based conflict theory is the main reason real socialism collapsed.”>“Marx, to live with his wife, sells his coat. He says, ‘Let me write this book so it earns money and saves my marriage.’ Is this what Marxism is supposed to be?”Daym did Öcalan really say this? is he stupid?
This is an ok analysis from what I've read so far. But I don't get these guys obsessions with "national movements" zeroing out the possibility of genuine Communist intentions. If the Kurds are oppressed, national liberation is perfectly materialist surely.
I'm tired a contrarian Turkish leftists supporting Kurdish hitlers, they're just like westoid leftists supporting brown hitlers.
>>2586843These so called Turkish Marxists are having a sperg because Ocalan doesn’t adhere to their dogma.
In a recent press conference he stated: quote-
>The PKK has fulfilled its historical mission by securing the national existence of the Kurdish people, while also exposing the limitations of nation-state socialism. Twentieth-century socialism emerged as a negative revolutionary intervention, yet failed to present a lasting alternative. Despite enormous sacrifices, this struggle has become a legacy enriched through both theoretical and practical critique. To honor and to own this legacy properly requires transforming socialism from a mere memory to a living social force beating at the heart of the people. The socialist tradition in history must be understood as a legacy aimed at building both peace and democratic society, and the path forward lies in fulfilling internationalist responsibilities—in theory and in practice.
>Although utopian socialists and Marxists have offered comprehensive critiques of the capitalist hegemonic system since the 19th century, they failed to develop a decisive line with concrete results. Today’s capitalism is no longer merely a crisis; it has become a disease threatening the very survival of humankind. The monopoly of violence in the form of the nation-state plays a defining role in this collapse.
>Just as capitalism cannot be explained solely through economic motives, the failures of socialist movements cannot be explained only by capitalist repression. Historical and contemporary mistakes have also been decisive.
>My critiques of Marxism must be understood correctly. I do not blame Marx; in his era, history was not better understood as it is today and there was no ecological crisis, and capitalism was still on the rise. Even so, Marx was a thinker of profound self-questioning and intellectual courage. He perceived the importance of women’s liberation, yet approached it superficially, believing that once economic exploitation was overcome, gender oppression would naturally dissolve. His attempt to interpret social history exclusively through class, and his insufficient analysis of the state and the nation-state, led to serious consequences. While offering these critiques, I would like to underline my deep respect for Marx’s efforts and have no doubt about his sincerity, and note that I distinguish Marxism from Marx himself. When we critique Marxism and actual existing socialism on certain fundamental questions, what we feel—as socialists—is the spirit of self-critique from within.
>Anti-systemic forces must revisit historical materialism in a way that aligns with the reality of human society. It is essential to understand that capitalism did not “descend from the heavens” in the 16th century; rather, its roots extend back to the 10–12 thousand years of evolution of civilization that began in Lower Mesopotamia. Archeological sites such as Göbeklitepe and Karahantepe shed light on this historical origin. For this reason, I find it more accurate to define the existing system of civilization as a “caste-based system of social murder.” Archaeological and anthropological findings show that male hunter castes, through the development of killing techniques, suppressed and enslaved women-centered clan communities. This marks the deepest rupture in human history—indeed, a major counter-revolution shaping all subsequent developments of civilization.
>Understanding capitalism from this long historical perspective allows for far more eye-opening analysis. This system not only deepens internal social contradictions; it also threatens the extinction of the human species by producing chemical and nuclear weaponry that can annihilate the planet, by polluting the environment, and by plundering nature’s riches both above and below the ground. It is one of the essential duties of the international to offer humanity a new analysis of capitalism founded upon this grave reality.
>We need to examine the history of the oppressed through the perspective of the commune, which emerged first and foremost as a formation of self-defense. This requires seeing early tribal communities as the beginnings of the commune and adopting a historical perspective stretching to today’s proletariat—and to all oppressed groups.
>On this basis, we state that history cannot be reduced solely to class struggle. While class struggle is indeed part of it, it is more accurate to read history as a long process of relation and conflict between communal development and anti-communal development extending back roughly 30,000 years.
>I anticipate that this conference also by engaging with the theoretical analyses I have offered here, will foster important debates that can contribute to the development of a new perspective of political program and organization. In this process, the fundamental method is dialectical materialism. However, certain excesses of classical dialectics need to be overcome. We must see contradictions not as opposing poles destined to eliminate one another, but as social phenomena that also sustain and shape each other. For without the commune, there would be no state; without the bourgeoisie, no proletariat. Thus, contradiction must be assessed not with a logic of annihilation, but through a transformative historical perspective.
>Scientific developments show that the dialectical method remains an effective tool for social analysis, so long as it is not treated as absolute. With this framework, updating the commune–state and class–state dialectics is imperative. The failure of 20th-century real socialism stemmed from an inability to interpret this historical dialectic correctly: state-centered socialism seized the state, only to be defeated by it. By binding the right of nations to self-determination to the nation-state, it became confined within the boundaries of bourgeois politics. The concept of a “proletarian nation-state” similarly produced nothing but a reproduction of statist mentality.
>Interpreting this reality correctly, I stated the following: nation-state socialism leads to defeat, whereas democratic society socialism leads to victory. Today, the time has come to advance toward democratic emancipation on the basis of democratic society socialism.
>On this path, I move forward with the conviction that we will succeed in reconstruction not through the state, but rather through the paradigm of a democratic republic and a democratic nation founded upon principles of women's freedom, ecology and democratic society.So in other words, he critiques the use of the state, expands his thought based on new findings and comes to new theoretical advancements because of this.
Big L from the TKP.
>>2587769I wonder why communists would criticize a revolutionary leader for abandoning armed struggle to collaborate with a reactionary nationalist state.
>>2587802Ah yes because they'd totally be on board otherwise trust me guys:)
>>2586843>Rojava—ironically one of the closest U.S. and Israeli allies in the region and a convenient asset in their Middle East strategy<turkroach talking points, no proofs.So tiresome.
>>2587824
The notion TKP has been 'dickriders' for Rojava/DAANES in the past is either delusion or lies. Neither would surprise me.
>>2587802>>2587809No arguments detected.
One the PKK doesn’t outright reject Marxism. They’ve critiqued its limitations and overlooks and acted accordingly. Not to mention they feel confident that they can at least negotiate with the Turkish state owing to growing opposition to Erdogan.
2. Rojava hasn’t sold out to Israel and has taken in refugees from Lebanon when they attacked. Not to mention the PKK has consistently fought Israel.
Rojava has condemned the genocide against the Palestinians.
3. The idea that they’re “collaborating” with the regime is laughable. They are still clashing with them and still have their autonomy and have rejected the model of government that the regime has.
These arguments have as much weight to them as the TKP which is to say none.
>>2587829>>2587824Third option: You're confusing TKP and TKP-ML/TİKKO.
>>2587769You're confusing the TKP with the TKP/ML, the former never supported Rojava. The problem with most those Maoist organizations is that they are front organizations for Kurdish interests, they don't have a serious interest in carrying out serious revolutionary and political engagement in Turkey and for the Turkish people for themselves.
How useful is a "communist party" when it solely cares about a minority? For a revolution you need serious dual power, Turkish unions and workers on your side, not just caring for a militant project in the eastern, more agricultural regions of Turkey for a specific minority. The political opportunism of the Kurdish project and PKK/Rojava/YPG/SDF etc. was always pointed out by the TKP.
>>2586843>communist party that has never achieved anything criticizes AES movements like RojavaIts pathetic and Turkish racism towards Kurds can be seen kilometers away even if its disguised into ideological criticism.
>>2588003The few town mayors the TKP has have achieved more than Rojava because all it has done has turned out to be quite harmful.
>AES movementNot even Rojava supporters claim that is actually existing socialism.
>Turkish racism towards Kurds Sure thing, who are the ones constantly doing roach posting in every threat? The only ethnicity where it is even more "okay" to be racist against in left-wing circles are Indians.
At the current post-war moment in Syria, Rojava deserves critical support.
Nationalist on nationalist violence
Veysi Aktaş: The Turkish left continues with the same old routine, not renewing itself
Leader Apo's message was read at the International Peace and Democratic Society Conference organized in Istanbul by the Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party).
The letter was read by Veysi Aktaş, who was released after spending 30 years in prison, the last 10 of which were in İmralı.
Speaking to Bianet, Aktaş responded to criticisms of the letter. He stated that the common problem stemming from the reaction from the government, as well as the left and socialists, is bigotry. He said, "Bigotry isn't just experienced on the right; it's also experienced on the left. This is one of the most fundamental problems facing the Turkish left. For this reason, a 'breakthrough' is impossible. Socialization is impossible, and those ideological molds can't be broken and established on a political basis."
'SOCIALISTS HAVE NO REASON TO SAY'
Aktaş, reminding that the letter draws attention to the crises experienced by the left not only in Turkey but also globally, stated the following: "There's no end to socialists' words. 'We've told the world what we had to say in the name of socialism, and that's it.' A socialist's words are endless. It's impossible for a socialist to experience political deadlock. Because they are based on society, they're based on truth. These assessments are an acceptance of the end or bankruptcy. The Turkish left, too, continues with this mentality, following the same rote, failing to renew itself. In fact, they're essentially holding onto a set of dogmas. They think that if they abandon these dogmas, they'll be swept away, they'll lose everything. That's why they cling to those dogmas so tightly. And they don't analyze them, they don't criticize them, they don't approach them with a free mind. The same rote is repeated over and over again.
WHY DON'T THE TURKS HAVE A HISTORY OF THE OPPRESSED?
Criticizing the Turkish left's understanding of history and calling for a self-critical approach, Aktaş said: “If they want to interpret the leadership correctly, they need to improve themselves in historical sociology. They need to read history correctly. They are strangers to their own history. Even within their own history, a 'history of the oppressed' hasn't yet been uncovered. Why don't the Turks have a history of the oppressed? They are constantly being imposed upon a historical understanding and perspective dominated by the ruling class. Society is also subjected to this. Who is responsible for this? They can't get away with simply blaming the state. They need to take responsibility themselves and approach it self-critically.”
A NEW READING OF HISTORY MUST BE MADE
Aktaş stated that the left needs to re-read history, saying: "They need to acquire a new perspective and understanding of history, and they need to develop it. They need to examine it from the perspective of the oppressed. Where did the Turkmen lose? They are the ones who will reveal that the Turkishness that emerged has no connection with the Turkmen. They need to know that this was formed through a dominant perspective. For example, there are foreign figures like Vambery (Arminius) who played a significant role in the development of nationalism. In this sense, they need to re-read history."
THE TURKISH LEFT MUST RENEW ITSELF
Aktaş added: "Just as the Kurdish political movement has engaged in self-criticism and renewed itself, the Turkish left also needs to renew itself. They too have the same old habits we criticize from the government's perspective. To develop the right approach to the process, they must first learn and internalize the dialectical method, which they constantly repeat like a verse. Two, they must understand that dialectics alone is insufficient to explain society. Three, there are new approaches. There are certain approaches that develop quantumly, certain realities that emerge, and Öcalan is, in fact, the philosophical form of this, but they fail to understand him."
STOP BELIEVING THE KURDS
They need to emerge from the 19th century, shed that atmosphere, that atmosphere, that politics, and renew themselves, and speak out about today. I think they need to get out of there and overcome this so they can overcome social chauvinism. They need to stop belittling the Kurds. In other words, they can't accept that the other leadership is Kurdish, or that the person driving socialism today is Kurdish; they belittle it. This isn't right. So, can't a Kurd lead? They need to admit this to themselves.
>>2587861
damn based anarchist
>>2587885
God the seething and the 'nooo why aren't you doing what I want you to do?!?' is off the charts here. Its depressing how far fallen the anarchist space has.
Fdpd
I will say, if anarchists were as willing to cooperate with le stalinists in the Spanish civil war as they were in Rojava, Franco would be living in a prison in Morroco.
https://www.autistici.org/tridnivalka/focus-on-rojava/>Why a focus on Rojava in 2024? Both because of random discussions, but also because the most widespread form of military-revolutionary mythology about Rojava has reappeared as an ideological support for an “anarchist” commitment to the war in Ukraine, going as far as to valorize the career paths of people who have gone from one war to another. On this occasion, a military commitment in Rojava is “naturally” presented as an authoritative justification for joining the Ukrainian troops “in any case”, the case being understood as a leftist or “anarchist” cause.[…]
>The struggle in Chiapas since the 90s was– and to some extent remains – a banner for this matrix, although this does not coincide with its complex and contradictory reality, a serious analysis of which would take up too much space here. Anyway, a superficial and left-wing vision of Chiapas is often provided by the zealots of “Revolutionary Rojava” in support of their theses, notably on these issues: autonomy, territory, civil society, democracy without a State, participative governance, armed struggle, gender. All these elements need to be critically examined, but the very nature of the ideological matrix is to make them unchallengeable, in a fearsome machine that has seen considerable expansion about Rojava. Instead of talking about the fate of the insurrectional struggle of 2011 and beyond, instead of seeing the Kurdish national movement as antagonistic to that struggle, we are being fooled with the people, militarism-feminism, collaborative economy and the glorification of “civil society”, as if the latter were not the space par excellence of class collaboration, the other face of the State, its guarantor and pillar. >>2608378
<bumps weeks old thread to make the same not-an-argument he already tried and failed at
Roachposters are i think unironically the dumbest people on this site.
>>2608635Fact: Rojava was only propped up to advance American and Israeli interests in the region.
Fact: All 'modernisers' and 'enrichers' of socialism who take explicity anti-marxist and pro-American measures are renegades and in due time will out themselves as stooges of fascists. Case in point: Ocalan.
>>2587769>Strawmann of marx/engels and dialectical materialism while claiming to have overcome both by replacing class struggle by a commune/state model (kek), also capitalism is much older just like the neoliberals say :)You are retarded if this text sounds in any way convincing, that you fall for this is prove of your idiocy. This sounds like one of those dumb maoists who thought China disproved the base/superstructure model because they had a "more advanced" superstructure than base lel. Imagine cucking out to the turkish state, pathetic.
>>2608882>Fact: Rojava was only propped up to advance American and Israeli interests in the region. Like the last thousand times you've tried this here, you're welcome to post proof any time.
>>2588139Damn, this is complete and utter garbage. Who is convinced by this?
There have been no accomplishments of the PKK aside from ethnic-based terrorism, no wonder Communism is so weak in Turkiye.
Öcalan: Democratic Islam means returning to the spirit of the Medina Charter
Abdullah Öcalan sent a message to the 1st Ordinary Congress of the Mesopotamia Islamic Research Federation, held under the slogan “From Democratic Islam Toward Peace and a Democratic Society.” Emphasizing that at its core Islam is a religion of freedom, justice, and equality, Öcalan pointed out that official state Islam—turned into an instrument of power and plunder by capitalist modernity—or communitarian structures have lost this essence.
Öcalan’s message reads as follows:
“To the Congress of the Mesopotamia Islamic Research Federation,
Islam, at its core, is a religion of freedom, justice, and equality. Official state Islam, transformed by capitalist modernity into an instrument of power and plunder, as well as communitarian structures, have lost this essence. Democratic Islam, however, means returning to the spirit of the Medina Charter. That charter was a contract of coexistence, without oppression, based on the free will of different beliefs, peoples, and cultures.
It must be known that true jihad is the struggle carried out through constant self-criticism against the ego and against oppression. The concept of shura in Islam signifies collective reason and democratic decision-making.
Let us not make Islam a political instrument of the state or of any group, but rather place it at the service of a free life of society organized from the grassroots. Democratic Islam is a civilizational alternative that places women’s freedom, ecological balance, and the brotherhood of peoples at its center. Only this democratic interpretation can heal the bleeding wounds of the Middle East. In this framework, I hope your discussions will serve the democratic society process we have initiated. With endless love and greetings…
Abdullah Öcalan
Imrali.”
>>2612764Why do Multipolaroids hate Rojava and ocalan if it's a nationalist socdem experiment that likes Islam? Isn't that the whole multipolaroid thing?
>>2612774Where is the multipolaroid?
>>2586843>Additionally, a long-standing romanticism within parts of the European left regarding the right of oppressed nations to self-determination—regardless of contemporary material conditions—has also contributed to this distortion, something the movement itself has instrumentalized.Hit the nail.
Unique IPs: 23