Greetings from a semi-colonised country

[Sarcosuchus]

Greetings! I am a middle-class background communist from the semi-colonised state of Turkey. I spend my days struggling with university life, protesting my government, and reading political articles and books. With the free time I get, I listen to heavy metal music or music with communist or anarchist lyrics, and tend to read fantasy fiction when not reading political stuff.

Anyways, I believe that bit about me is enough for now. So I have come here to befriend and understand comrades from other countries.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Welcome to RevLeft! :D

[Comrade Samuel]

Welcome aboard! We've had a couple of other Turkish protester join here in recent weeks and we're all happy to welcome comrades who are taking real action.

The world's eyes are you, soldarity from America!

[Q]

Welcome :)

If you have political questions, you can ask them in the Learning forum. That's why it's there after all!

If you have questions about your account, don't hesitate to send me a PM or ask here.

What are your political ideas, if any? Also, in what sense is Turkey colonised?

[RedAnarchist]

Welcome to RevLeft.

Please note that we have a Turkish language section that is barely used, so feel free to invite more Turkish comrades whether or not they speak English.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/turkce-f71/index.html

[Petrol Bomb]

Welcome, comrade, to RevLeft.

[Madame Ennui]

Welcome to RevLeft ;)

[Paul Pott]

Welcome!

Turkey is an inspiration to everyone, keep up the fight!

[Sarcosuchus]

Welcome to RevLeft! :D

And to everyone else who welcomes me, thank you.


Welcome aboard! We've had a couple of other Turkish protester join here in recent weeks and we're all happy to welcome comrades who are taking real action.

The world's eyes are you, soldarity from America!


Welcome!

Turkey is an inspiration to everyone, keep up the fight!

Thanks for the support. I can't explain how honoured I feel each time I use my chance to get out and protest, and how shameful and horrible I feel each time I miss a chance to get out and protest.


What are your political ideas, if any? Also, in what sense is Turkey colonised?

Semi-colonisation or half-colonisation is a country's status of immense dependence on foreign economics in capitalism and full alowance of imperialist powers to use strategical locations on her soil as military bases, etc. Granted the number of US military bases, US patriot missiles, and other NATO military camps on Turkey, it sure is a half- or semi-colony here.

Also, I am a communist who supports the immediate formation of an anti-capitalist front in Turkey and education of centre-left thinkers (for example, social democrats) in anti-capitalist and Marxist politics. We must spread the revolutionary fire among centre-left too, only then can it prevail over the masses.

I recognise the greatness and significance of Marxism-Leninism, but I am not so quick to take the entire ideology as it is - nor the way it was interpreted by Trotsky, Stalin, Khrushchev, etc. Perhaps you could say that I follow the lines of Paris Commune, Fatsa (Turkey), and Mahir Çayan; I support the revolutionary thought to be spread among the masses, I support that it should be the people by/for which communism is established, so that the guardians of communism in society will be none other than the people themselves. And although '68 generation of Turkish communists recognised themselves as Marxist-Leninists, you could argue they all developed thoughts of their own during their struggle, just like I have.

[Q]

Semi-colonisation or half-colonisation is a country's status of immense dependence on foreign economics in capitalism and full alowance of imperialist powers to use strategical locations on her soil as military bases, etc. Granted the number of US military bases, US patriot missiles, and other NATO military camps on Turkey, it sure is a half- or semi-colony here.
This is a rather strange definition. Germany has lots of American bases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Army_installations_in_German y). Is Germany then a semi-colony?

I think the whole notion of "imperialist" and "colony" nations is a skewed one. Turkey for example also has an increasing influence in its region, it is a NATO member and then there are of course the Kurd and other minority questions.

I think a more sensical way of approaching this is in looking at the world system of states as an international pecking order. Those on top (the USA and its allies) can dictate their terms on those below them. But Turkey is most certainly not all the way at the bottom of that pecking order.


Also, I am a communist who supports the immediate formation of an anti-capitalist front in Turkey and education of centre-left thinkers (for example, social democrats) in anti-capitalist and Marxist politics. We must spread the revolutionary fire among centre-left too, only then can it prevail over the masses.

I recognise the greatness and significance of Marxism-Leninism, but I am not so quick to take the entire ideology as it is - nor the way it was interpreted by Trotsky, Stalin, Khrushchev, etc. Perhaps you could say that I follow the lines of Paris Commune, Fatsa (Turkey), and Mahir Çayan; I support the revolutionary thought to be spread among the masses, I support that it should be the people by/for which communism is established, so that the guardians of communism in society will be none other than the people themselves. And although '68 generation of Turkish communists recognised themselves as Marxist-Leninists, you could argue they all developed thoughts of their own during their struggle, just like I have.An interesting set of views.. I think we can find some common ground around the need of mass party-movements that form our class as a class-for-itself.

I'm looking forward to our contributions :)

[Sarcosuchus]

This is a rather strange definition. Germany has lots of American bases. Is Germany then a semi-colony?

I think the whole notion of "imperialist" and "colony" nations is a skewed one. Turkey for example also has an increasing influence in its region, it is a NATO member and then there are of course the Kurd and other minority questions.

I think a more sensical way of approaching this is in looking at the world system of states as an international pecking order. Those on top (the USA and its allies) can dictate their terms on those below them. But Turkey is most certainly not all the way at the bottom of that pecking order.

Germany's emergence as a business/car product magnate saves them from being a semi-colony. Semi-colonies are mostly third world countries and they are not defined by the presence of military bases only, but also economical dependence on foreign investment. It would be wrong to say Germany, as it has a strong influence within NATO and EU circles, is a semi-colony like Turkey is.

I'd actually like to give a clearer explanation of semi-colonies to you, but I am not very well versed in the topic as to explain it in detail. You could probably look up the term, semi-colonisation, on any Marxist website.

[Rafiq]

To suggest a Turkish war of national liberation is preposterous. Turkey is an active participant of Imperialism, they are after all a member of NATO.

[Le Socialiste]

Welcome!

[Sarcosuchus]

To suggest a Turkish war of national liberation is preposterous. Turkey is an active participant of Imperialism, they are after all a member of NATO.

You don't need to think so, granted we understand the situation in Turkey; with progressive/populist institutions closed as per Truman Docrtine, fascist coups that came to aid US interests, and the Marxist guerillas of late 60s and 70s who began armed struggle with the dream of national liberation. With the 60-70s' Marxists mentioned, I wouldn't call their ideology or deeds preposterous or vain.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Welcome to the board and the tradditional RevLeft jumping-in: "Hello, welcome... NOW EXPLAIN YOURSELF!":laugh:

Anyway, welcome. I look forward to seeing what you have to say about Turkey and discussing many other things as well in the future.

[Q]

I'd actually like to give a clearer explanation of semi-colonies to you, but I am not very well versed in the topic as to explain it in detail. You could probably look up the term, semi-colonisation, on any Marxist website.
Sorry, but that doesn't do it for me. I'm actually pretty well versed in Marxist theory, if I may say so myself, and I simply disagree with the whole notion of "semi-colonies". They sketch a skewed image of reality and, like has also happened here, you get into fruitless discussions of whether a certain state is either imperialist or a (semi-)colony. This is why I'm pointing to a different paradigma: The world state system as a "pecking order" is much more useful as an explanatory system, in my opinion anyway.


Welcome to the board and the tradditional RevLeft jumping-in: "Hello, welcome... NOW EXPLAIN YOURSELF!":laugh:
If my posts come over as such, it is not intended like that. I like to treat every comrade seriously and engage with them as such.

This discussion in itself actually points to the fact that there is no one true "Marxism". Marxism, as a science, is a living a breathing thing that is constantly evolving due to different ideas and analyses "clashing their heads" into one another. As soon as you treat Marxism as a finished product, you no longer have a science, but a stale dogma that is out of touch with reality.

[Jimmie Higgins]

If my posts come over as such, it is not intended like that. I like to treat every comrade seriously and engage with them as such.Oh no comrade, I was teasing - and your post seemed to me to be totally sincere and open, not a off-putting challenge or anything. I was actually wondering about the same terminology when I read Sarcosuchus' post.

[Sarcosuchus]

Sorry, but that doesn't do it for me. I'm actually pretty well versed in Marxist theory, if I may say so myself, and I simply disagree with the whole notion of "semi-colonies". They sketch a skewed image of reality and, like has also happened here, you get into fruitless discussions of whether a certain state is either imperialist or a (semi-)colony. This is why I'm pointing to a different paradigma: The world state system as a "pecking order" is much more useful as an explanatory system, in my opinion anyway.

I understand your point of a "pecking order" and I believe a discussion regarding which country is a semi-colony, whether the notion of semi-colonialism is right or not, etc. would be routine and have no actual, tangible product. (Fruitless.) But I hope you understand, as well, the difference between developed countries and developing countries.

[Q]

I understand your point of a "pecking order" and I believe a discussion regarding which country is a semi-colony, whether the notion of semi-colonialism is right or not, etc. would be routine and have no actual, tangible product. (Fruitless.) But I hope you understand, as well, the difference between developed countries and developing countries.
Of course. There is certainly a difference to be accounted for and I'm not wanting to give the impression that there isn't. Most certainly some countries dominate others, have preferable economic relations, carry a heavy burden of debt, etc.

My problem with "colonies" and "imperialist" states is that it simplifies things too much, gives the impression that a state plays just one of these two "roles" and can lead to false political conclusions ("anti-imperialism", etc) that eventually lead to anti-proletarian positions (like for example those groups that, in the name of "anti-imperialism", support all kinds of reactionary regimes).

This is why I'm making this a point.

[Rafiq]

You don't need to think so, granted we understand the situation in Turkey; with progressive/populist institutions closed as per Truman Docrtine, fascist coups that came to aid US interests, and the Marxist guerillas of late 60s and 70s who began armed struggle with the dream of national liberation. With the 60-70s' Marxists mentioned, I wouldn't call their ideology or deeds preposterous or vain.

Then would you call European Left Militants wagers of German/Italian wars of national liberation? No, not at all.

[CatsAttack]

What are your thoughts on the Kurdish question and what is your opinion of the Armenian genocide.

Welcome.

[Sarcosuchus]

Then would you call European Left Militants wagers of German/Italian wars of national liberation? No, not at all.

I wouldn't have expected such an elitist statement, a statement which answers its own question and does not attempt to solve any problems or produce new ideas, from a leftist.

Anyways, Italian and German partisans who fought against fascism and nazism were wagers of national liberation in a way - you must understand that nazism was oppressing its own people, it was an elitist way of government that treated men like cattles, and Italian fascism was nothing short of becoming a puppet state of this nazi ideology. Italian partisans, unlike Germans, were not only fighting against fascism, but also their country's independence.


What are your thoughts on the Kurdish question and what is your opinion of the Armenian genocide.

Welcome.

Kurdish question is caused solely by the fascist and right-wing governments of the Turkey in the past. Our fascism, on contrary to the ideology's widely known anti-capitalism, was actually neoliberal in economics - to survive as an ideology, it needed American support, hence our fascists like Kenan Evren were capitalists all the same.

While it is true Öcalan's (PKK's founder, PKK fought for kurdish independent state, now wants autonomy) arrival in Ankara during early revolutionary movement may have been supported by the government to divide the left, (I suppose that is for now only an allegation) we must understand that PKK terror is born right out of the wrongs done by the government to the peoples of the southeastern Turkey. Indeed, I should not begin to tell the things that coup governments (Kenan Evren, Nihat Erim) would have done to the left-wingers, kurds, minorities, and even the fascists with whom they failed to agree ideologically, but I can guarantee were it not for them and other fascist governments of Turkey, there would have been no Kurdish question now.

As for the Armenian genocide; while it is true that many Armenians and other christians died in borders of Turkey, the context of the question of Armenian genocide is solely political, based on Armenia's wishes to widen its borders. I would also like to point out, that in Turkey it is illegal to recognise Armenian genocide and in EU it is illegal not to. The restrictions speak for themselves, I believe; the talk of genocide is caused solely by the high tensions between the countries and both countries' wishes to have more land.

[Rafiq]

I'm not talking about partisans. I'm talking about organizations like the Red Army Faction or the Red Brigades.

[Rafiq]

Turkish guerillas weren't fighting for national liberation. They were fighting the "Fascism" of the state like the RAF and Brigate Rosse.

[hatzel]

I would also like to point out, that in Turkey it is illegal to recognise Armenian genocide and in EU it is illegal not to.

I'm not sure where you heard that, exactly, but it's patently false; there are a number of EU countries which are yet to recognise the Armenian genocide themselves (including my own, the UK, the government of which has explicitly stated before now that the massacres are not presently seen to qualify as genocide - see column 891 (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70122-0001.htm)), let alone institute laws to punish those who fail to do so. Certain countries have laws against Armenian genocide denial, yet this is by no means EU policy - remember, in fact, that efforts last year to institute such a law in France were shot down as unconstitutional, and if it really were illegal in the EU not to recognise the Armenian genocide, I very much doubt that would have happened...