Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Other articles
Page 2 / 3

The Communist Women's Organization and organizational principles

The first issue the conference focused on was political continuity; the task to unite politically and organizationally with the masses of women and the second issue was with which organizational form this period may be led without interruption; that is to say the problem of organizational continuity.

The organizational logic of the KKÖ consists not simply in leading the area of “women's work” and concentrating on that. It is an organizational understanding with the aim to lead the woman understanding and the woman action organizationally, politically and ideologically within the party, to rise the woman action in all fields of struggle, to turn women revolution into a strong political movement with the central element of winning the masses of women to the struggle on one hand, and to build its organizational structure and leadership on the other hand. The unity of organization and policy; meaning that  political continuity requires organizational continuity and the relation between organizational continuity and permanent political action has shown itself in our history from time to time that way, that when one of the two elements or even both were interrupted, this caused a retreat in the respective front. The correct approach on creating unity among organization and policy is the most important way for the materialization of the ideological knowledge accumulated in this front. The KKÖ is exactly the result of the efforts to establish this unity among organization and policy.

Why not an independent women's organization but organizational autonomy? Or why not a wing-type sub-organization but a form of political organization and political autonomy being the half of the party?

The content of the political action is the basis of the answer to the question “what kind of organization?”. Given that the content of our political action; our programme of women liberation, does not consist of making the masses of women a “reserve” of the social revolution but given that the women revolution aims at a social revolution with which the social sexism will be abolished, the question of “what kind of organization” has to be answered according to this aim.

Fundamentally, the communist women's movement stuck in its own history into two types of organization.

On one hand, there are independent woman associations, trade-unions and similar means of struggle organizing the masses of women in the political struggle or in the context of their own partial agenda. Although these independent woman organizations are today indispensable means, too, in order to mobilize the masses of women in the political and social struggle for change, they are no means which can make possible the march of women into the center of struggle for political power, the vanguard and leadership of a social overthrow in the extensions of women revolution.

On the other hand, there are types of organizations like commissions and wings, “sub-organizations” or “partial units” of different kinds of social organizations like parties, trade-unions or similar things. This kind of organizations are partial, they do not correspond to the needs of a party-like political organization according to the woman freedom programme and which can assume their leadership. In order to leap the struggle around an advanced political programme it was necessary to found a political vanguard, a subject which answers to the programme of a social revolution.

Furthermore, the organizational understanding which the KKÖ is based on is nothing new for our party. It is both the normal result of its history and line of the women's liberation struggle and in baselines also part of the decisions of the 4th congress. In the period after the 4th congress, some organizational experiences were made in the different front organizations parting from the same understanding. So what are the concrete changes, where are the differences of woman organization concerning the organizational functioning for the party and what are the main organizational lines of the KKÖ?
Firstly, the KKÖ is not only the organization of the communist women in the area of mass work among women but the organizations of all communist women from all areas, from the communist women underground to above ground, from Europe to Kurdistan, from the press to the political-military front.

Secondly, it is based on its woman and leadership understanding leading all fronts. The efforts within the wing-type organization, fundamentally trying to change, lead and form the whole which starts from the woman mass front, have natural limits due to their organizational form. Thus, the contradiction between content and form, between political/ideological content and organizational shape turns into an objective border of the efforts of the communist women. While as a part of the party, the woman leadership leading all fronts is led by the party, at the same time it leads the party in a dual relation on the whole and it is a form of solution according to the change of the gender problem aspired. In this sense, the women leadership, different from the past experiences, when it was mainly limited with organizational leading of the mass front of women and making political proposals for the whole, now has the position of a political and organizational leadership of the women's freedom struggle as well as the position of an operational and complementary element of the realization of leadership within the current organizational form of the party and at the same time the position of a changing ideological center for the whole party.

Thirdly, we have to mention the quality of the organizations which the new model of organization is based on. The 4th Party Congress had lifted the limitation of the woman organizations of being only commissions including the central woman organization, however the organization did not overcome the spirit of commission, neither the modus operandi, the function linked to that nor the party opened the way for these organizations to play a role more advanced than commissions. The organization of our women's front remained on a half-autonomous level and was not donated with mechanism and rights needed for the power of implementation of their decisions. Our new organizing model is fundamentally based on authorized organs, as the 4th Party Congress has foreseen it. Together with the other elements of the model and especially together with the organizational autonomy, a real entity from right, authorization and responsibility came into being and it became possible that the qualities aimed at really could put into practice.

Fourthly, we want to mention the form of organizational hierarchy. The former organizational system was allowing only to the extend which it was possible to have organizational relations among the woman leadership and the forces of women in a certain area, in which organs directly responsible for woman work were founded. Given the fact that authorities and responsibilities as well as planning, leading and controlling were split among different organs, the women's freedom struggle could not be led in an all-embracing way. But the new organizational model binds all woman forces in different ways to the woman leadership and opens the whole party work to the control of woman understanding. Thus, at the same time, the direct interference of the women's organization and leadership into processes of building the necessary woman quality for the foundation of the required organs on all fronts has become possible.

Fifthly, organizational autonomy is the crucial point which gives all this mechanism the quality of a real organization; which gives a real material existence, a real functioning to the organs, the organizational structures. The new model of organization caused – immediately after being announced and inevitably – doubts and questions concerning the “double burden”. Why not only a certain number of woman comrades concentrate on the questions of this front and the others only on those of other fronts, but instead, additionally to those comrades in charge of this front, all woman comrades of all fronts are faced with additional responsibilities and duties? Does this model give additional responsibilities to the woman comrades who already have duties in different organizations? Does the model add another task to the dozens of tasks already existing? Yes, it does, however the problem is that this is objective. There cannot be another consciousness of gender and another struggle of gender. That is also not different for those women who selected a totally separate way of organizing with a practice leaving apart other social struggles, also for women who decided to be completely organist in the way of sub-organization and carry out a partial work in this area. Yes, to be present in all areas and to say your opinion objectively means additional tasks, additional responsibilities, “double work, double time”.

However this is not a problem created by the new model, it just became more visible. Yesterday it did not look like that or not that clear. The new model makes the tasks, which already existed before, more visible. Thus, it should be even less legitimate for the communist women to abdicate from their responsibility. The new model did not create these disadvantages, on the contrary, it offers us a real concrete basis to overcome them. An organizational chain of the women's front with a leadership, which is really in the position to direct it with organizational autonomy, is the necessary condition. However, how much we will take advantage from that necessarily depends on the women's will. It is true that actually this was not different than before. To sum it up, double tasks require double rights. If the communist women, who are expected to raise women's liberation struggle on all fronts, to play a special role in education of woman cadres, to put questions concerning women's liberation on the agenda and produce solutions for the corresponding cadres; if they do not have “additional authorization” despite “additional tasks”, or to express it in a different way, if they do not have the right to say something in the matter of cadres who should carry these out, or this right is not based on concrete organizational mechanism but depends on intention, understanding, capacity of this or that organ or cadres who “recognize priorities” and it is carried out only in a limited way; conditions for fulfilling their tasks would be limited from the very beginning. Apart from that, organizational autonomy is based on the idea which the point of view, the understanding and the priorities of women are taken as the basis for education, instruction of communist women and the solution for their problems. In a way, this is based on the understanding of the potential superiority of women concerning women issues. Thirdly, organizational autonomy is an answer to the need of taking decisions on our own, assuming responsibility for these decisions; also to learn, committing mistakes; to go forward leaning on its own experience, its own power and thus to strengthen the basis of revolutionary cooperation among women. Such an organization of women requires a high quality of cadres and at the same time, generates it.

Parting from this fundamental ideas our conference, constructed a model. At the same time, this model is in every regard, a state of transition. It is a state of transition regarding the adaptation with the general functioning and the constitution of the party. The model drafted in essentials and based on the present experience will find more real and concrete forms in the implementation. and it is a state of transition in this sense, too. The efforts to implement this model with a strong will, will create the basis for the model achieving further qualities.”5