Unity of the communists and the experience of MLCP
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
 
Other articles
 
Page 4 / 5

 

Party and Unity Conference

The water given through the political surge to the victory of the struggle for unity blossomed unity revolution. The rising vanguard party was taking shape in the MLCP. The break-off with some extensions of the past, which were living in form, the internalization of achievements, solving of the problems in a wide party platform, determining of new targets, the confirmation and announcement of the gained party reality and the solution of the question of unity with the TKP/ML YIO were the questions and tasks that made necessary the gathering of the Conference, determined the agenda of the Conference and brought to the open its place in the party's history. All party organisations were represented in the 1st Conference, convened in the summer of 1995. The TKP/ML-YIO participated with its delegates whose numbers were fixed and elected by itself.
The Conference, primarily, dealt with the question of unity with the TKP/ML-YIO. The purpose was, by solving this matured question, to discuss and decide upon the other problems with the spiritual state of communists who united in the same organisation. The questions of the character of the power to be established through the democratic revolution, various organisations' ideological characteristics from the period of '71' to '79' when Mao Zedong thought was criticised and refused, and the assessments on the unity process were discussed. After that the TKP/ML-YIO delegates met separately in order to make internal evaluation and unanimously they decided to dissolve the TKP/ML-YIO and unite with the MLCP-F. The Conference had added a new link of success to the struggle conducted for the unification of communists.
The Conference dealt with the question of party both on the theoretical/thoughtful dimension and on the grounds of real development of MLCP's ideological, political and organisational existence. The understanding of Party was discussed during the Unity Congress and theoretical, ideological approaches which were dominant during the groups' period had become the subject of criticism and discussion in some aspects. The Conference dealt with the question at the point where the Unity Congress was left, discussed Marxism's teachings on the party in the axes of "group, organisation, and party" as different levels of vanguard organisation, evaluated the reality of the MLCP under the light of this and reached the following conclusion:
"The MLCP is a party", because:
"1) Its Marxist-Leninist theoretical base is built strongly and reached to a level which it could settle accounts with bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideologies on every aspect.
2) It has got a revolution strategy and, an expression of this, a programme that leans on the Marxist-Leninist analysis of the social material realities of Turkey and Northern Kurdistan.
3) It carries an experienced leadership reality and potential, reached to the level of an organisation which created by local centres and affiliated organisations and , finally, it forwards with a discipline that obligates every member through a constitution which is the work of organisational functioning and collective will."(36)
The Conference emphasized that in our country "bringing together the communist cadres through the unification of groups as a duty before the process of being a party"; the maximum of this which could be obtained instantly and directly was succeeded. The Conference achieved a break-off from the period of groupings through the understanding of party that it has developed. It strongly criticised the spontaneous approaches that refuse the willing character of establishing the party by sheltering behind the formula "party is the unity of workers' movement and socialist movement" through leaning on its abstract, mechanic and perfectionist interpretation, and leaving out the party foundation to unclear future. It declared that the "groupism which reached its peak at the end of the '70s' played a special role in the creation" of such approach (37). The Conference had also strongly emphasized that the duty of leaning on to the working class movement, bonding on the working class movement that stands before the party is "indispensable", and the impossibility of being the leader of revolution and marching socialism without succeeding in this. The Conference reached the following conclusion:
"The MLCP-F has gained the essential features of being a party on its current ideological, political, and organisational level and quality, and has succeeded in the task of integration and merging as a specific process."(38) It determined that the supplement 'Foundation' which was a remnant of the past and an the reflection of a bridge from the past to the future -the reality of transition period- had become unnecessary by the completion of the process, and decided to remove the supplement 'F' from the party's name.
The place of the 1st Conference in the history could be defined by the expression "party and unity". In essence, it is nothing else than very practical and concrete outlook of the "party and unity" reality when Conference discussed the developments, problems, tasks and lessons of all spheres of the work and all fronts of the activities. "The party style"..."relates, in essence, to the practice, daily political activity and its necessities." In other words, the break-off from "the style that is turned inside, problems of inner-organisation" was achieved.
As a problem that appeared in the party life and as an important and meaningful problem in terms of the party's development, the Conference seriously dealt with the destructive and subversive activities of "a few like-minded people who tried to form a fraction" against the party by stationing in the organisations abroad. In the face of these tatters' numerous acts which violate the constitution, tending to break the morale of the party, the Conference, by criticising and judging the leadership's "exhibiting of an attitude that is half-willing, postponing of the matter and onlooking to the guilts" as "practices opposite to the party traditions that are being tried to be installed, and the content and spirit of the constitution", demonstrated in which direction the party leadership should be developed.
The Conference played a very important role in the struggle against the opportunist corrosion which came to the open in oversees' organisations. The strong revolutionary atmosphere of the Conference, the moral power of the party reality thanks to the victory of unity revolution and the successes in political surge, influenced very deeply the delegate who participated in the Conference from the overseas' organisation and impelled him to explain mostly known or predicted extra-constitutional relations that he penetrate into. The explanations of this cadre, who became the victim of his own revolutionary good will, but who was also influenced by opportunist decay and, to some extent, entered into factional relationships, revealed with all of its dimensions the decay that was lived by this megalomaniac and a group of a few people whom he gathered around him, hoping for the failure of the party, and rather becoming a reaction in the face of the unity revolution and later daring to become an informer. The Conference added strength to the revolutionary move against the draft of fraction formed by a handful of reptiles, those who poisoned from top to bottom the environment of overseas organisation and tried to blemish the unity revolution. The organisations overseas raised up following the struggle which spread into some months after the Conference, renewed in terms of being revolutionary, and reached to a revolutionary environment, a real party atmosphere and party unity.

 

When the leadership was not able to leap forward

The destruction and extermination of the revolutionary spontaneity which was the understanding and method of political struggle and style in the epoch before the party, and the jump of mentality that manifested itself as the appearance of the party method, is the essence and summary of the unity revolution.
Seen from the success of the reality of establishment of the party, the struggle for unity bears a specific sense as an extensive preparatory work for the party. The reality which was created by the revolutionary action during the foundation process, the destruction of revolutionary spontaneity and the appearance of the party style were prepared by the revolutionary critic -on the ideological and intellectual sides- of the mentality of leadership of the party predecessors and revolutionary movement at the period of struggle for unity. However, the party, in the foundation epoch, was not able to create opportunities to digest theoretically the leap that it had experienced in its understanding and style of struggle and take it to organisational results.
The victory of the struggle for unity, the unity revolution and the establishment of the party appeared as a new reality, but the structure of leadership, which the party predecessors had determined, remained as a direct continuation of the old within this reality. The party was a new creation of the unity revolution, but the structure of the party leadership was an old and obsolete thing, which was determined by the predecessors. In fact, there is nothing wrong with the structure of the party leadership being determined by the predecessors, for they were the cadres who led the unity revolution. This would not mean that the party and the leadership were in disharmony. Nevertheless, there was a main problem about whether the party leaders, like other cadres, comprehended the unity revolution and the party reality, and, whether they succeeded in themselves the leap to the party in the form of a leap to the party leadership. More important was that the party leadership -as an organ- was not able to reconstruct itself with the mentality of the unity revolution which the party experienced, was not able to leap to the level of the unity revolution in terms of leadership and management style, and perhaps was not able to create the opportunity to fulfil this.
A fundamental reality of the foundation epoch was the failure in building a leadership style and structure that can reply to the new party reality and the needs of the growing, intensifying, hardening political struggle. As it was shown by the line of anti-revolutionary and anti-communist war implemented in the period of 1995/96, the enemy had analysed and understood before the leadership of the MLCP the power of the MLCP reality and the qualitative progress that it can create and also the actual and potential danger that it posed. However, despite the rising MLCP reality, the leadership of the foundation epoch tried to lead the party overwhelmingly as its predecessors through its restructuring, leadership style and understanding, and remained behind the party reality or on the level of its predecessors. The struggle for unity and the unity revolution were a great leap forward and a big political move. But the leadership could not prevent the enemy getting the initiative when it could not comprehend the rising realty of the war party and when it could not design its leadership style and understanding, its structure in accordance with that. The primitiveness and amateurism, which it had gotten from its predecessors, eased the enemy's job.
The rising party reality meant the destruction and defeat of the leadership understanding and style, which was disabled by the revolutionary spontaneity of the pre-party period and predecessors of the party. Considered as a whole, the new reality, defeated within the party, the understanding and style of leadership, which did not catch the level of the party. However, the new qualitative level, which appeared in the whole, basically was not internalised and developed, although it was unequal -organs including cadres and leadership- in each part creating the whole. The political police followed the struggle for unity with great attention and it formed a new strategy covering political liquidation as it was brought to the open in later processes.
The political police, which noticed the great danger that it posed, tended to destroy and disable the MLCP before it completed its formation. They dealt heavy blows during the period 1995/97. The number of MLCP prisoners increased rapidly in dungeons. The leadership, which failed to protect itself and the party from attacks of the political police, gradually lost its domination of the party and began to vacillate when it also was affected by the blows and losses. The increasing political and organisational expectations of the party organisations, the effects of the police attacks and the accumulated and continued pressure of conditions began corroding the revolutionary will of the party. The resignation of the Provincial Committee of Istanbul under these conditions was a stunning indication of the difficulty experienced by the party will. As a result of the ongoing attacks and losses, eventually, the party leadership was mostly liquidated. At first, because of its losses, the party -whose collective leadership was destroyed- came face to face with a danger of an organisational chaos before the 2nd Congress. The deep effects of losses of the party would come to the open in the future.

 

Some Lines of the Party Style

Despite the programme, strategy and tactics, and also the theoretical/ideological ground that all these are built upon, it is the action of self-existence that makes the party a party. Eventually, for all the parties, it is the style of self-existence which gives meaning, life and soul to the theoretical/ideological grounds, programme, strategy and tactics, to the organisational perspectives and plans. The history of any party, in essence, is nothing else than the style of self-existence and reproducing its existence. The action of self-existence, which always exists under the given conditions that are always ready but are not absolute and non-changeable, its self preference and direction, its will can only work under the opportunities of existing conditions.
The MLCP positioned itself among the working class, public sector labourers, youth, working women and urban poor gathered in suburbs. It tended to interfere within all problems and demands of the afore-mentioned sections. It put in the centre of its political action and political route the solution of the question and demand of political freedom. It took part in all struggles of the working class, public sector labourers, youth and urban poor. It participated and supported the Kurdish national liberation fight; it concentrated to reply to reply to the national liberation revolution the national liberation revolution by developing revolutionary workers` and labourers` movement, the second revolutionary front in the west. Despite being stamped by the "left" with giving concessions to the nationalism of the oppressed nation and separatism by the bourgeoisie, it is not contrary with its proletarian internationalist stance. On the other hand, it tended to break-off with national nihilism which is rather rooted in the revolutionary movement, and to form an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist patriotism. The MLCP became visible as the "vanguard" party by positioning itself in the forefront of the battle of the oppressed and exploited social forces, with its political reflexes and foresight. Being "vanguard" is one of the fundamental lines that would characterize the party style and, doubtlessly, would be developed and matured together with the party.
The "revolutionary spirit of surge", the party style's evidential line, is the result of the "unity revolution" of which its seeds began giving flowers and fruits in the fire of the achieved political surge. The political surge concretised the unity revolution. Breaking with the old, identification with the MLCP was the reality that was developing and determining the party's future direction. The political surge did not only concretize the "unity revolution", but also gave it strength and energy, pushed it forward and widened its sphere. It cleared its way for deepening and increased its perspective and assertion. The unity revolution does not only consist in the organisational atomisation of the old structures, the predecessors of the MLCP, and in the foundation of the MLCP. Almost everything more or less changed, faced transformation and redesigned both in content and in form by being tempered in the fire of political struggle with break-offs and leaps. The unity revolution smashed the mentality and the forms of thinking that had stamped its mark on the specific revolutionary style which was created within its own historical conditions and had reached its limits. It paved the grounds of the new style by clearing its way, built it or brought to the open in order to develop it essentially.
When searching the method of its self-existence, even at that period of the history, the development of concrete policies to the concrete situation; spreading, generalising, deepening of each concrete demand, problem, contradiction and clash with the perspective of destroying capitalism would attract the attention. This, however, was in the struggle of the high school student youth, the work among the laboring women, in the singular workers` resistances and Istanbul Worker's Congress, in the Gazi uprising and in the fight against the disappearances policy at that period. Trying and tending to make policy of the concrete situation made it dynamic and tied to the actuality. It was in conflict and break-off with the old style that was repeating itself fruitlessly without a horizon and that takes itself as the aim. It was a revolutionary challenge against the ongoing attitude that puts the principles, the pure realities of theory or the programmatic truths instead of making the very concrete politics of the very concrete situation. Conducting the revolutionary activity restricted and reduced to the "special days", became the target of open ideological fight.
Observing it closely, the concentration on distinguishing the differences of importance and priority among the concrete problems, efforts and attention on the principal problems can easily be noticed. However, political work is a whole. The concentration of attention and efforts upon the priorities should not cause the neglect of other tasks in a one-sided manner. This, however, would necessitate the skill of conducting many duties at the same time.
Nevertheless, the limiting and conditioning characteristics of the objective nature of the political situation, -which is always complicated, harbours together innumerable problems, contradiction and conflict, and puts many tasks before the party at the same time- on the will of the vanguard cannot be denied. The revolutionary practice, which shaped the MLCP, detected that the party's activity/practice should have been separated and intensified in durations of a few months for distinctive some problems and demands or protruded contradictions and conflicts. If necessities of these are not understood, responded and fulfilled in a revolutionary way for each case, it will not be possible to become either a "vanguard" or a "leader". However, the concentration upon the main problem of that period could not have brought to a single theme of the party activity. The vanguard always deals with a couple of problems and tasks in changing concentrations at the same time. What is normal under the conditions of a normal and routine party activity is to deal with a couple of task and problems. Although, the special moments of the clashes necessitate on one hand the special concentration on the problem, which is very much talked of, but also the other immediate tasks, that is the work of being competent in political leadership, domination of forces and in the art of management.
Another clear line of the discovered revolutionary method is the movement of the ready-forces in the form of "vanguard intervention", "vanguard emergence". The ready forces, beyond the mass agitation and general mobilisation of organisation, are considered as the torchbearers and riveting motor of mass movement in suitable "moments". Based on correct analysis of the demands and aims against the fascist dictatorship's policy of disappearances, the communist vanguard moved forward its ready forces with tools, methods and forms of struggle suitable to the "moment", created influence not only among the progressive and revolutionary circles, but also among the liberal democrats, and turned it into an effective force of political pressure by discovering the accumulated dissatisfaction in society. The willingness of the style also includes this catalyst role of the vanguard.
"Vanguard intervention" or "vanguard emergences" does not mean to decide by itself without the masses, to fight on their behalf or separate from them. The masses do form the centre of the party's attention even when it interferes within the problems by its ready-forces through vanguard emergences. Vanguard intervention was set up upon the activating and gaining of the masses together with all of its elements. The vanguard intervention would face degeneration and could not play its role of being a catalyst when distanced from this purpose.
When analysing the MLCP's way of existing, it is seen that, while organising itself underground on the basis of illegality, it at the same time had the aim of using widely the opportunities of open and legal struggle. Open and underground working methods, legal and illegal, peaceful and armed forms of struggle and organisation form a richness in its practice. The MLCP's revolutionary practice looks for the complementary connection between the mass movement and the forms of armed struggle. In the use of the forms of armed struggle, it fully avoids the tendencies which would cause a duel with the state security forces. But it also did not permit this to turn into a refusal in practice of the use of forms of armed struggle. Therefore, what is essential is to bring to the open and resolve in practice the connection between foresights of the party strategy and advancement of the actual situation in a revolutionary direction. In principle, the appropriation of the whole, even the most different methods of the struggle and concrete preparation to use them and practically the combination of the most appropriate methods of the struggle in each concrete situation shall be succeeded. This is the language of the MLCP's revolutionary practice.
"The capacity of uniting different forces" appeared as one of the specific and determining elements of the party style not only as a natural extension and achievement of the struggle for unity and the unity revolution, but at the same time by being a result of the political perspectives and orientations. In fact, this is a very practical and meaningful phenomenon of assertion of leadership. Leading communists to unite in one single vanguard party, the unification of advanced, vanguard and other workers on the basis of defending the vital interests of the working class and labourers, the oppressed, the unity of the working class and all oppressed in the struggle against fascism and capitalism, the unity of forces that are defending freedom against fascism... "Uniting capacity" necessitates the overcome of relative narrow-minded approaches and selfish interests, sectarian mentality of all colours. The Unity Congress formulated the essence and spirit of direction towards masses: to work together, to change within the common struggle. The revolution and also the party can only be developed through making revolutionary the huge masses, who do not think like the party.
As one of the clearest lines of the new style, or let's say, the "mentality", the effort of breaking off with the old style which dominates the revolutionary movement became clear in the approach to the history, revolutionary achievements and revolutionary structures. Beyond the organisational identity of their subject, therefore, whoever the subject/constructor, all values and achievements which are meaningful for the revolutionary were appropriated, absorbed and defended very consciously. It mobilised its forces in the propaganda-agitation work for the memory of the massacred combatants of the revolutionary organisations or attending in their funerals. Sectarian mentality, in essence, is pessimist and considers itself as everything. It very easily says "we will talk even if we are in silence, but when we are in silence everyone will stop talking". Party style is unprejudiced and without a complex; it would draw a meaning and importance to everything -belongs to history or actual- revolutionary according to their heaviness, and would give value theoretically and practically. It would walk on the line of consciously breaking off with the idealist heresies of the old style, dominant within the revolutionary movement, and developing the materialist dialectic in the politics.
Page12345
 

 

Archive

 

2019
March
2018
November September
June March
2017
October
2008
December January
2007
January
2006
January
2005
April
2004
September

 

Unity of the communists and the experience of MLCP
fc Share on Twitter
 
Page 4 / 5

 

Party and Unity Conference

The water given through the political surge to the victory of the struggle for unity blossomed unity revolution. The rising vanguard party was taking shape in the MLCP. The break-off with some extensions of the past, which were living in form, the internalization of achievements, solving of the problems in a wide party platform, determining of new targets, the confirmation and announcement of the gained party reality and the solution of the question of unity with the TKP/ML YIO were the questions and tasks that made necessary the gathering of the Conference, determined the agenda of the Conference and brought to the open its place in the party's history. All party organisations were represented in the 1st Conference, convened in the summer of 1995. The TKP/ML-YIO participated with its delegates whose numbers were fixed and elected by itself.
The Conference, primarily, dealt with the question of unity with the TKP/ML-YIO. The purpose was, by solving this matured question, to discuss and decide upon the other problems with the spiritual state of communists who united in the same organisation. The questions of the character of the power to be established through the democratic revolution, various organisations' ideological characteristics from the period of '71' to '79' when Mao Zedong thought was criticised and refused, and the assessments on the unity process were discussed. After that the TKP/ML-YIO delegates met separately in order to make internal evaluation and unanimously they decided to dissolve the TKP/ML-YIO and unite with the MLCP-F. The Conference had added a new link of success to the struggle conducted for the unification of communists.
The Conference dealt with the question of party both on the theoretical/thoughtful dimension and on the grounds of real development of MLCP's ideological, political and organisational existence. The understanding of Party was discussed during the Unity Congress and theoretical, ideological approaches which were dominant during the groups' period had become the subject of criticism and discussion in some aspects. The Conference dealt with the question at the point where the Unity Congress was left, discussed Marxism's teachings on the party in the axes of "group, organisation, and party" as different levels of vanguard organisation, evaluated the reality of the MLCP under the light of this and reached the following conclusion:
"The MLCP is a party", because:
"1) Its Marxist-Leninist theoretical base is built strongly and reached to a level which it could settle accounts with bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideologies on every aspect.
2) It has got a revolution strategy and, an expression of this, a programme that leans on the Marxist-Leninist analysis of the social material realities of Turkey and Northern Kurdistan.
3) It carries an experienced leadership reality and potential, reached to the level of an organisation which created by local centres and affiliated organisations and , finally, it forwards with a discipline that obligates every member through a constitution which is the work of organisational functioning and collective will."(36)
The Conference emphasized that in our country "bringing together the communist cadres through the unification of groups as a duty before the process of being a party"; the maximum of this which could be obtained instantly and directly was succeeded. The Conference achieved a break-off from the period of groupings through the understanding of party that it has developed. It strongly criticised the spontaneous approaches that refuse the willing character of establishing the party by sheltering behind the formula "party is the unity of workers' movement and socialist movement" through leaning on its abstract, mechanic and perfectionist interpretation, and leaving out the party foundation to unclear future. It declared that the "groupism which reached its peak at the end of the '70s' played a special role in the creation" of such approach (37). The Conference had also strongly emphasized that the duty of leaning on to the working class movement, bonding on the working class movement that stands before the party is "indispensable", and the impossibility of being the leader of revolution and marching socialism without succeeding in this. The Conference reached the following conclusion:
"The MLCP-F has gained the essential features of being a party on its current ideological, political, and organisational level and quality, and has succeeded in the task of integration and merging as a specific process."(38) It determined that the supplement 'Foundation' which was a remnant of the past and an the reflection of a bridge from the past to the future -the reality of transition period- had become unnecessary by the completion of the process, and decided to remove the supplement 'F' from the party's name.
The place of the 1st Conference in the history could be defined by the expression "party and unity". In essence, it is nothing else than very practical and concrete outlook of the "party and unity" reality when Conference discussed the developments, problems, tasks and lessons of all spheres of the work and all fronts of the activities. "The party style"..."relates, in essence, to the practice, daily political activity and its necessities." In other words, the break-off from "the style that is turned inside, problems of inner-organisation" was achieved.
As a problem that appeared in the party life and as an important and meaningful problem in terms of the party's development, the Conference seriously dealt with the destructive and subversive activities of "a few like-minded people who tried to form a fraction" against the party by stationing in the organisations abroad. In the face of these tatters' numerous acts which violate the constitution, tending to break the morale of the party, the Conference, by criticising and judging the leadership's "exhibiting of an attitude that is half-willing, postponing of the matter and onlooking to the guilts" as "practices opposite to the party traditions that are being tried to be installed, and the content and spirit of the constitution", demonstrated in which direction the party leadership should be developed.
The Conference played a very important role in the struggle against the opportunist corrosion which came to the open in oversees' organisations. The strong revolutionary atmosphere of the Conference, the moral power of the party reality thanks to the victory of unity revolution and the successes in political surge, influenced very deeply the delegate who participated in the Conference from the overseas' organisation and impelled him to explain mostly known or predicted extra-constitutional relations that he penetrate into. The explanations of this cadre, who became the victim of his own revolutionary good will, but who was also influenced by opportunist decay and, to some extent, entered into factional relationships, revealed with all of its dimensions the decay that was lived by this megalomaniac and a group of a few people whom he gathered around him, hoping for the failure of the party, and rather becoming a reaction in the face of the unity revolution and later daring to become an informer. The Conference added strength to the revolutionary move against the draft of fraction formed by a handful of reptiles, those who poisoned from top to bottom the environment of overseas organisation and tried to blemish the unity revolution. The organisations overseas raised up following the struggle which spread into some months after the Conference, renewed in terms of being revolutionary, and reached to a revolutionary environment, a real party atmosphere and party unity.

 

When the leadership was not able to leap forward

The destruction and extermination of the revolutionary spontaneity which was the understanding and method of political struggle and style in the epoch before the party, and the jump of mentality that manifested itself as the appearance of the party method, is the essence and summary of the unity revolution.
Seen from the success of the reality of establishment of the party, the struggle for unity bears a specific sense as an extensive preparatory work for the party. The reality which was created by the revolutionary action during the foundation process, the destruction of revolutionary spontaneity and the appearance of the party style were prepared by the revolutionary critic -on the ideological and intellectual sides- of the mentality of leadership of the party predecessors and revolutionary movement at the period of struggle for unity. However, the party, in the foundation epoch, was not able to create opportunities to digest theoretically the leap that it had experienced in its understanding and style of struggle and take it to organisational results.
The victory of the struggle for unity, the unity revolution and the establishment of the party appeared as a new reality, but the structure of leadership, which the party predecessors had determined, remained as a direct continuation of the old within this reality. The party was a new creation of the unity revolution, but the structure of the party leadership was an old and obsolete thing, which was determined by the predecessors. In fact, there is nothing wrong with the structure of the party leadership being determined by the predecessors, for they were the cadres who led the unity revolution. This would not mean that the party and the leadership were in disharmony. Nevertheless, there was a main problem about whether the party leaders, like other cadres, comprehended the unity revolution and the party reality, and, whether they succeeded in themselves the leap to the party in the form of a leap to the party leadership. More important was that the party leadership -as an organ- was not able to reconstruct itself with the mentality of the unity revolution which the party experienced, was not able to leap to the level of the unity revolution in terms of leadership and management style, and perhaps was not able to create the opportunity to fulfil this.
A fundamental reality of the foundation epoch was the failure in building a leadership style and structure that can reply to the new party reality and the needs of the growing, intensifying, hardening political struggle. As it was shown by the line of anti-revolutionary and anti-communist war implemented in the period of 1995/96, the enemy had analysed and understood before the leadership of the MLCP the power of the MLCP reality and the qualitative progress that it can create and also the actual and potential danger that it posed. However, despite the rising MLCP reality, the leadership of the foundation epoch tried to lead the party overwhelmingly as its predecessors through its restructuring, leadership style and understanding, and remained behind the party reality or on the level of its predecessors. The struggle for unity and the unity revolution were a great leap forward and a big political move. But the leadership could not prevent the enemy getting the initiative when it could not comprehend the rising realty of the war party and when it could not design its leadership style and understanding, its structure in accordance with that. The primitiveness and amateurism, which it had gotten from its predecessors, eased the enemy's job.
The rising party reality meant the destruction and defeat of the leadership understanding and style, which was disabled by the revolutionary spontaneity of the pre-party period and predecessors of the party. Considered as a whole, the new reality, defeated within the party, the understanding and style of leadership, which did not catch the level of the party. However, the new qualitative level, which appeared in the whole, basically was not internalised and developed, although it was unequal -organs including cadres and leadership- in each part creating the whole. The political police followed the struggle for unity with great attention and it formed a new strategy covering political liquidation as it was brought to the open in later processes.
The political police, which noticed the great danger that it posed, tended to destroy and disable the MLCP before it completed its formation. They dealt heavy blows during the period 1995/97. The number of MLCP prisoners increased rapidly in dungeons. The leadership, which failed to protect itself and the party from attacks of the political police, gradually lost its domination of the party and began to vacillate when it also was affected by the blows and losses. The increasing political and organisational expectations of the party organisations, the effects of the police attacks and the accumulated and continued pressure of conditions began corroding the revolutionary will of the party. The resignation of the Provincial Committee of Istanbul under these conditions was a stunning indication of the difficulty experienced by the party will. As a result of the ongoing attacks and losses, eventually, the party leadership was mostly liquidated. At first, because of its losses, the party -whose collective leadership was destroyed- came face to face with a danger of an organisational chaos before the 2nd Congress. The deep effects of losses of the party would come to the open in the future.

 

Some Lines of the Party Style

Despite the programme, strategy and tactics, and also the theoretical/ideological ground that all these are built upon, it is the action of self-existence that makes the party a party. Eventually, for all the parties, it is the style of self-existence which gives meaning, life and soul to the theoretical/ideological grounds, programme, strategy and tactics, to the organisational perspectives and plans. The history of any party, in essence, is nothing else than the style of self-existence and reproducing its existence. The action of self-existence, which always exists under the given conditions that are always ready but are not absolute and non-changeable, its self preference and direction, its will can only work under the opportunities of existing conditions.
The MLCP positioned itself among the working class, public sector labourers, youth, working women and urban poor gathered in suburbs. It tended to interfere within all problems and demands of the afore-mentioned sections. It put in the centre of its political action and political route the solution of the question and demand of political freedom. It took part in all struggles of the working class, public sector labourers, youth and urban poor. It participated and supported the Kurdish national liberation fight; it concentrated to reply to reply to the national liberation revolution the national liberation revolution by developing revolutionary workers` and labourers` movement, the second revolutionary front in the west. Despite being stamped by the "left" with giving concessions to the nationalism of the oppressed nation and separatism by the bourgeoisie, it is not contrary with its proletarian internationalist stance. On the other hand, it tended to break-off with national nihilism which is rather rooted in the revolutionary movement, and to form an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist patriotism. The MLCP became visible as the "vanguard" party by positioning itself in the forefront of the battle of the oppressed and exploited social forces, with its political reflexes and foresight. Being "vanguard" is one of the fundamental lines that would characterize the party style and, doubtlessly, would be developed and matured together with the party.
The "revolutionary spirit of surge", the party style's evidential line, is the result of the "unity revolution" of which its seeds began giving flowers and fruits in the fire of the achieved political surge. The political surge concretised the unity revolution. Breaking with the old, identification with the MLCP was the reality that was developing and determining the party's future direction. The political surge did not only concretize the "unity revolution", but also gave it strength and energy, pushed it forward and widened its sphere. It cleared its way for deepening and increased its perspective and assertion. The unity revolution does not only consist in the organisational atomisation of the old structures, the predecessors of the MLCP, and in the foundation of the MLCP. Almost everything more or less changed, faced transformation and redesigned both in content and in form by being tempered in the fire of political struggle with break-offs and leaps. The unity revolution smashed the mentality and the forms of thinking that had stamped its mark on the specific revolutionary style which was created within its own historical conditions and had reached its limits. It paved the grounds of the new style by clearing its way, built it or brought to the open in order to develop it essentially.
When searching the method of its self-existence, even at that period of the history, the development of concrete policies to the concrete situation; spreading, generalising, deepening of each concrete demand, problem, contradiction and clash with the perspective of destroying capitalism would attract the attention. This, however, was in the struggle of the high school student youth, the work among the laboring women, in the singular workers` resistances and Istanbul Worker's Congress, in the Gazi uprising and in the fight against the disappearances policy at that period. Trying and tending to make policy of the concrete situation made it dynamic and tied to the actuality. It was in conflict and break-off with the old style that was repeating itself fruitlessly without a horizon and that takes itself as the aim. It was a revolutionary challenge against the ongoing attitude that puts the principles, the pure realities of theory or the programmatic truths instead of making the very concrete politics of the very concrete situation. Conducting the revolutionary activity restricted and reduced to the "special days", became the target of open ideological fight.
Observing it closely, the concentration on distinguishing the differences of importance and priority among the concrete problems, efforts and attention on the principal problems can easily be noticed. However, political work is a whole. The concentration of attention and efforts upon the priorities should not cause the neglect of other tasks in a one-sided manner. This, however, would necessitate the skill of conducting many duties at the same time.
Nevertheless, the limiting and conditioning characteristics of the objective nature of the political situation, -which is always complicated, harbours together innumerable problems, contradiction and conflict, and puts many tasks before the party at the same time- on the will of the vanguard cannot be denied. The revolutionary practice, which shaped the MLCP, detected that the party's activity/practice should have been separated and intensified in durations of a few months for distinctive some problems and demands or protruded contradictions and conflicts. If necessities of these are not understood, responded and fulfilled in a revolutionary way for each case, it will not be possible to become either a "vanguard" or a "leader". However, the concentration upon the main problem of that period could not have brought to a single theme of the party activity. The vanguard always deals with a couple of problems and tasks in changing concentrations at the same time. What is normal under the conditions of a normal and routine party activity is to deal with a couple of task and problems. Although, the special moments of the clashes necessitate on one hand the special concentration on the problem, which is very much talked of, but also the other immediate tasks, that is the work of being competent in political leadership, domination of forces and in the art of management.
Another clear line of the discovered revolutionary method is the movement of the ready-forces in the form of "vanguard intervention", "vanguard emergence". The ready forces, beyond the mass agitation and general mobilisation of organisation, are considered as the torchbearers and riveting motor of mass movement in suitable "moments". Based on correct analysis of the demands and aims against the fascist dictatorship's policy of disappearances, the communist vanguard moved forward its ready forces with tools, methods and forms of struggle suitable to the "moment", created influence not only among the progressive and revolutionary circles, but also among the liberal democrats, and turned it into an effective force of political pressure by discovering the accumulated dissatisfaction in society. The willingness of the style also includes this catalyst role of the vanguard.
"Vanguard intervention" or "vanguard emergences" does not mean to decide by itself without the masses, to fight on their behalf or separate from them. The masses do form the centre of the party's attention even when it interferes within the problems by its ready-forces through vanguard emergences. Vanguard intervention was set up upon the activating and gaining of the masses together with all of its elements. The vanguard intervention would face degeneration and could not play its role of being a catalyst when distanced from this purpose.
When analysing the MLCP's way of existing, it is seen that, while organising itself underground on the basis of illegality, it at the same time had the aim of using widely the opportunities of open and legal struggle. Open and underground working methods, legal and illegal, peaceful and armed forms of struggle and organisation form a richness in its practice. The MLCP's revolutionary practice looks for the complementary connection between the mass movement and the forms of armed struggle. In the use of the forms of armed struggle, it fully avoids the tendencies which would cause a duel with the state security forces. But it also did not permit this to turn into a refusal in practice of the use of forms of armed struggle. Therefore, what is essential is to bring to the open and resolve in practice the connection between foresights of the party strategy and advancement of the actual situation in a revolutionary direction. In principle, the appropriation of the whole, even the most different methods of the struggle and concrete preparation to use them and practically the combination of the most appropriate methods of the struggle in each concrete situation shall be succeeded. This is the language of the MLCP's revolutionary practice.
"The capacity of uniting different forces" appeared as one of the specific and determining elements of the party style not only as a natural extension and achievement of the struggle for unity and the unity revolution, but at the same time by being a result of the political perspectives and orientations. In fact, this is a very practical and meaningful phenomenon of assertion of leadership. Leading communists to unite in one single vanguard party, the unification of advanced, vanguard and other workers on the basis of defending the vital interests of the working class and labourers, the oppressed, the unity of the working class and all oppressed in the struggle against fascism and capitalism, the unity of forces that are defending freedom against fascism... "Uniting capacity" necessitates the overcome of relative narrow-minded approaches and selfish interests, sectarian mentality of all colours. The Unity Congress formulated the essence and spirit of direction towards masses: to work together, to change within the common struggle. The revolution and also the party can only be developed through making revolutionary the huge masses, who do not think like the party.
As one of the clearest lines of the new style, or let's say, the "mentality", the effort of breaking off with the old style which dominates the revolutionary movement became clear in the approach to the history, revolutionary achievements and revolutionary structures. Beyond the organisational identity of their subject, therefore, whoever the subject/constructor, all values and achievements which are meaningful for the revolutionary were appropriated, absorbed and defended very consciously. It mobilised its forces in the propaganda-agitation work for the memory of the massacred combatants of the revolutionary organisations or attending in their funerals. Sectarian mentality, in essence, is pessimist and considers itself as everything. It very easily says "we will talk even if we are in silence, but when we are in silence everyone will stop talking". Party style is unprejudiced and without a complex; it would draw a meaning and importance to everything -belongs to history or actual- revolutionary according to their heaviness, and would give value theoretically and practically. It would walk on the line of consciously breaking off with the idealist heresies of the old style, dominant within the revolutionary movement, and developing the materialist dialectic in the politics.
Page12345