Thoughts on the PKK?

[PigmerikanMao]

I've been wondering what the general feel for the Kurdistan Workers Party is on the forums. Do you see them as terrorists or revolutionaries? I found an interesting video about the PKK and the role women play in their struggle. All in all, they seem relatively progressive and have ended the promotion of some of their more controversial policies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRsw5s28jxY&feature=related

[Leo]

They are a nationalist, anti-working class organization that is not any different from the Turkish state.

[Devrim]

Anti-working class nationalist gangsters.

Devrim

[chebol]

that is not any different from the Turkish state

I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense. Regardless of your view of the PKK, they are not identical to the Turkish state.

[Charles Xavier]

Petty-bourgeoisie nationalists which supported the US invasion in Iraq.

[Leo]

I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense. Regardless of your view of the PKK, they are not identical to the Turkish state.

They are not as strong, obviously, but they do equivalent things within their power. A few examples that come to mind is their campaign of murdering teachers, their attempts to cleanse all other left-wing groups operating within their territory, and other anti-working class murder activities, such as the bombings etc.

[Abluegreen7]

The killing of teachers? What would be the point of that. Are they leftists or serial killers?

[Leo]

The killing of teachers? What would be the point of that.

The justification they gave to that act was that they were doing it to cleanse the region from influence of the Turkish state, since teachers are state employees.

[Abluegreen7]

I guess its the same logic they kidnapped the German tourists with.

[Leo]

It's a bit more anti-working class and harmful, of course.

[Devrim]

Do any of the people voting that 'The PKK are revolutionaries and a great group. They are exactly what Kurdistan needs right now' actually know anything about them?

Devrim

[apathy maybe]

"I am indifferent"

Of course, I'm not actually indifferent, I just don't know enough about the situation (I am ignorant on this issue).

However, if I'm going only on what Leo and Dev. are saying, then yeah, sounds like I should oppose them. Of course though, in this case I'm only getting one side of the story. I'm not getting the PKK, or even the Turkish state side (though I don't think much of it).

Basically, I don't have enough information to make an informed opinion, and I would suggest that most people on RevLeft don't have enough information either.

[Abluegreen7]

I understand alot about how they trying to create an independent kurdish state. However some of the things they do are just plain dumb.

[F9]

i am in exactly same position as AM.I dont know enough on the situation but from what i have read from Devrim & Leo, i accept their positions and realise that they have nothing to do with leftism.
I voted 4 option because 1st calls about elimination,and its not what i have on mind.To kill all of them i dont think of it as a proper measure!
Although their actions shouldnt be tolerated and as revolutionary leftists we are against what they doing so i voted 4th option.
And hopping some more explanation so we get to know more about the issue!;)

Fuserg9:star:

[Crux]

The PKK-members I have spoken with in sweden have been relatively sensible (we co-organized a demonstration against the Turkish bombings of southern kurdistan), but I disagree with their use of terrorist methods and their, or at least the leadership's, continous shift to the right.

[KurtFF8]

I chose the fourth option. No organization should be looked out without criticism. This seems to be a trend with guerrilla movements though: turning away from their original revolutionary roles and focusing on self preservation at any cost.

Not that I don't believe the other members but what exactly have they been doing that indicates that they are moving to the right ideologically?

[Crux]

Well they no longer claim to strive for a socialist kurdistan, or even a fully independent one.

[Chapaev]

Kurdish organizations in the Near East are generally imperialist proxies. Indeed, in Iraq, Kurdish militias have been actively fighting the resistance on the side of the imperialist aggressors. In Iran, Kurdish reactionaries play right into the hands of imperialist designs on the nation.

The PKK have degenerated into a counterrevolutionary gang that should be liquidated. As the U.S. Journalist S.Hersh demonstrates, there is evidence that the PKK is supported by predatory imperialist forces, including the terror regime in Palestine.

The proletarian world view is incompatible with any nationalist ideology. Nationalism hinders the development of the liberation struggle of the working class and of all the oppressed and exploited because the triumph of the liberation struggle depends on the international unification of the working people of all nations. Communists are implacable in their attitude toward nationalist vacillations in their own midst, which are caused by pressure from bourgeois forces and by the activities of imperialist agents.

[KurtFF8]

But don't you think that it's good that they no longer support an independent nation? They claim that they support full liberation of peoples (I would assume they mean workers if they are truly Marxists of course). The proliferation of nation states isn't exactly what Marxists should be focusing on anyway in my opinion.

Granted I'm still relatively ignorant of the PKK but I don't think that supporting the creation of another country instead of also supporting Turkish and Iranian workers of different ethnicities is not a good move.

[Crux]

But don't you think that it's good that they no longer support an independent nation? They claim that they support full liberation of peoples (I would assume they mean workers if they are truly Marxists of course). The proliferation of nation states isn't exactly what Marxists should be focusing on anyway in my opinion.

Granted I'm still relatively ignorant of the PKK but I don't think that supporting the creation of another country instead of also supporting Turkish and Iranian workers of different ethnicities is not a good move.
Well, the thing is they are looking to the UN to help them. they even made some bizzare statement, after hearing the PJAK-guerilla in Iran Iraq recieves US monetary support "so should [the PKK]". So the political consciousness of the eladership is fuzzy at best, plus due to their shifts to the right they are also losing support. Also, they are no less culturally nationalists, so it's almost the worst of both worlds really.

[Abluegreen7]

How could the UN help the PKK they are designated as a terrorist orginization by almost every nation in the world. Thats like the UN helping Farc. Never going to happen. Especially with the Bush Regieme around. Possibly pre 9/11 but after 9/11 no way.

[leftist manson]

How could the UN help the PKK they are designated as a terrorist orginization by almost every nation in the world. Thats like the UN helping Farc. Never going to happen. Especially with the Bush Regieme around. Possibly pre 9/11 but after 9/11 no way.
Exactly. :thumbup1:

[Serkan]

What do you know about the PKK?. How much do you know?.. I think, they are making war for the Kurdish people. A few person is accuseing them. Why?. Because, "anti-working" "nationalist" loll "LIE". PKK workers is the party. Didn't you read historical. Reading please..

[ShineThePath]

What do you know about the PKK?. How much do you know?.. I think, they are making war for the Kurdish people. A few person is accuseing them. Why?. Because, "anti-working" "nationalist" loll "LIE". PKK workers is the party. Didn't you read historical. Reading please..

They fight for the self-determination for the Kurdish people, therefore they're 'reactionary nationalists' and 'petty-bourgeois.' Standard line of class reductionism...you know! "The Workers have no Nation!":rolleyes:

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

They fight for the self-determination for the Kurdish people, therefore they're 'reactionary nationalists' and 'petty-bourgeois.' Standard line of class reductionism...you know! "The Workers have no Nation!":rolleyes:

I think it has more to do with them murdering teachers, and being crazy cultish stalinists. They also have a propensity to shoot those on the left that disagree with them.

[ShineThePath]

I think it has more to do with them murdering teachers, and being crazy cultish stalinists. They also have a propensity to shoot those on the left that disagree with them.

Never said I am on board with the PKK, I was criticizing a particular line that someone was putting out. That said, revolutionary struggles often become very bloody, confused, and even brutish.

Think of CNT killing priests and peasants. Some of that was probably call for...

Sometimes so called 'leftists' are nothing but reactionaries, informants, and pigs. I don't think everyone with a red or black flag is untouchable in revolutionary war...like Mensheviks in Georgia, Makhno in the Ukraine, and Kronstadt.:)

[avantgarde]

They are a nationalist, anti-working class organization that is not any different from the Turkish state.
I am guessing that to someone like you (any all left-communists), anything outside your tiny sect is 'anti-working class'.

What is really 'anti-working class' is dogmatists refusing to change tactics and strategy based on the nature of the revolutionary process, people who think their views are always correct and always appropriate to everywhere in the world at every time. That is dead-end of dogmatism and the recipe for failure.

'Leftists' constantly deny the anti-imperialist nature of the revolution in the neo-colonial world, and seek to impose their bankrupt theories over the top of the existing movements in these countries.

[leftist manson]

I don't think everyone with a red or black flag is untouchable in revolutionary war...like Mensheviks in Georgia, Makhno in the Ukraine, and Kronstadt.:)
Thankyou:thumbup1::thumbup1:
That said, the PKK is perhaps the greatest guerilla army in history. They are making 'class war' (the very essence of the 'class struggle' and its highest form on both philosophical and practical levels) at a time when such struggles have been infiltrated, violently oppressed, even annihilated. Not only the Brit, US and turk imperialists , its the bourgeois parties and the scum islamofascists that they have to deal with everyday. All salutes to them. That said i'm not going to go over the shift to the right and embrace of wallersteinian-braudelian world-analysis concepts by the new PKK. That's another thread:)

[Jorge Miguel]

I don't think there is a "new PKK" as such but it's very clear there has been a shift to the right which borders on a complete capitulation to the Turkish state. No longer do the PKK fight for an independent Kurdistan, but what they call 'Democatic Confederalism', i.e. automony for Kurds but still within Turkey. I have read some of the articles Öcalan has produced from prison, including his calls for talks with the Turkish ruling class. The role played by Öcalan in the degeneration of the PKK is yet unclear but what is certain is that his arrest and detention on Imrali Island has consistently weakened the organisation.

The situation the PKK now finds itself in is consisent with many national liberation groups which failed to adopt a consistent class programme, their objective has naturally reached the conclusion that the struggle is for civil rights. It is now that we see the emerging Kurdish middle classes looking for a strong representation outside of the established Turkish parties. This will chart the rise of DEHAP.

[ernie]

I don't know much about this organization. Is it similar to something like Shining Path in Perú?

[Wanted Man]

None of the above. A Turkish comrade recently wrote a good article about the PKK, unfortunately it's just in Dutch.

According to this article, the PKK's ideology is not marxism-leninism, but Kurdish nationalism. They don't support the Kurdish and Turkish workers, but the Kurdish people, i.e. both the Kurdish workers and the Kurdish bourgeoisie. The PKK also cooperate with the American imperialists in Iraq, just like the Turkish state itself.

It goes on to say that, of course, the Turkish state oppresses the Kurds. Therefore, the Kurdish workers are right to struggle against it. However, the Turks killed in this struggle have always been the Turkish soldiers, poor people, etc. The war hasn't killed the actual oppressors, the Turkish capitalists and the state that represents them. Imperialism tries to pit the Turkish and Kurdish workers against each other. Only class struggle by the unified Turkish and Kurdish workers can establish Kurdish freedom that is based on something, i.e. socialism, as well as socialism in Turkey itself.

Two pictures that illustrate the problem well:

http://www.voorwaarts.net/site/uploads/images/artikelen/2008november/3.jpg http://www.voorwaarts.net/site/uploads/images/artikelen/2008november/4.jpg
Left: Turkish prime minister Erdogan with George Bush. Right: Massoud Barzani, president of the 'autonomous' Kurdish government of occupied Iraq, with George Bush.

What do people here think of this position?

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

None of the above. A Turkish comrade recently wrote a good article about the PKK, unfortunately it's just in Dutch.

According to this article, the PKK's ideology is not marxism-leninism, but Kurdish nationalism. They don't support the Kurdish and Turkish workers, but the Kurdish people, i.e. both the Kurdish workers and the Kurdish bourgeoisie. The PKK also cooperate with the American imperialists in Iraq, just like the Turkish state itself.

It goes on to say that, of course, the Turkish state oppresses the Kurds. Therefore, the Kurdish workers are right to struggle against it. However, the Turks killed in this struggle have always been the Turkish soldiers, poor people, etc. The war hasn't killed the actual oppressors, the Turkish capitalists and the state that represents them. Imperialism tries to pit the Turkish and Kurdish workers against each other. Only class struggle by the unified Turkish and Kurdish workers can establish Kurdish freedom that is based on something, i.e. socialism, as well as socialism in Turkey itself.

Two pictures that illustrate the problem well:


Left: Turkish prime minister Erdogan with George Bush. Right: Massoud Barzani, president of the 'autonomous' Kurdish government of occupied Iraq, with George Bush.

What do people here think of this position?

The PKK leader Ocalan describes Barzani as a traitor to Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan. Barzani also provides millitary access to Turkish Army during their operations in Iraq. All the PKK supporters and socilalists in Turkey know Barzani as an unreliable and slippery leader. We all should be aware of the difference between Kurdish resisters and Uncle Barzani...

[Sasha]

i went for option 2 because i support their struggle for socialist national libaration and against ethnic opression by the hyper nationalist turkish state but i'm higly crittical of their attacks on other leftwing groups (same goes btw for dkhc-p in turkey, who killed numerous anarchists, even in prison)

[Sasha]

I don't know much about this organization. Is it similar to something like Shining Path in Perú?

non at all, they are an (popular) nationalist movement with an official maxist program.
if anything i would compare them with the ETA or Fatah.

[Leo]

The PKK doesn't have an official marxist program.

[Sasha]

my bad, i thought they had...

[Jorge Miguel]

Some information regarding previous points on 'democratic confederalism' - http://www.freemedialibrary.com/index.php/Declaration_of_Democratic_Confederalism_in_Kurdist an

[Devrim]

The PKK leader Ocalan describes Barzani as a traitor to Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Would this be the same Ocalan who proclaims his willingness to serve the Turkish state?

Devrim

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

Would this be the same Ocalan who proclaims his willingness to serve the Turkish state?

Devrim

As you remember, he was caught by the cooperation of US services and Turkish Intelligence Organization, in Kenya. During his journey to Turkey, he was given some drugs, and if you watched the video at that time, he was unconscious. You should take those words normal though :)

[Djehuti]

They are a nationalist

Are they? What I've heard from PKK-kurds they are anti-nationalists and don't advocate a kurdish state or any state for that sake, and their movement is open for people of every nationality no matter if it's kurds, turks, iraqis, armenians or french...

Ideologicly they are so called communalists (they have abandoned marxism-leninism) and advocates direct democracy and federalism. It's also much less focus on violence and terrorism as a method, they have called for several truces. From what I've heard it's nationalist splinter groups that have stood for the larger part of the terrorism during the 21th century.

Don't know much besides from what i've heard from various PKK-kurds though...

[S.O.I]

are some of you complaining about theire militarism, when theyre country is in the middle of a giant war? dont know very much about em tho, just stating something ive summed up reading this thread...

[Small Geezer]

I mean, how on earth are western leftists supposed to have any any sort of half way accurate appraisal of the PKK? Just because they tick the 'socialist' and 'national liberation' boxes? I smell another protracted and complicated mess.

[Bronsky]

They are not as strong, obviously, but they do equivalent things within their power. A few examples that come to mind is their campaign of murdering teachers, their attempts to cleanse all other left-wing groups operating within their territory, and other anti-working class murder activities, such as the bombings etc.

Its not a question of their strength against that of the Turkish state is it? Their place in the class struggle is what matters. I agree with many who have voiced the clear opinion of them being a nationalistic tendency, you should have stated that should they come to power they would replace the present oppressive state with one very similar in character.

[Leo]

Are they? Yes.


As you remember, he was caught by the cooperation of US services and Turkish Intelligence Organization, in Kenya. During his journey to Turkey, he was given some drugs, and if you watched the video at that time, he was unconscious. You should take those words normal though :)Well yeah they are normal and he did not contradict them afterwards either.


What I've heard from PKK-kurds they are anti-nationalists They are self-proclaimed patriots (which means something like lover of the motherland)

I'll let you judge whether that is nationalistic or not.


and don't advocate a kurdish state Well - they advocate something in between a compromise with the (fully capitalist, nationalist, imperialist and oppressive) Turkish state and a "free Kurdistan".


and their movement is open for people of every nationality no matter if it's kurds, turks, iraqis, armenians or french...Of course all similar movements are.


Ideologicly they are so called communalists Never heard that - they generally call themselves confederalists if anything as such.


It's also much less focus on violence They have an army actively but "slowly" fighting another army.


you should have stated that should they come to power they would replace the present oppressive state with one very similar in character.

Quite possibly - in any case they don't offer any salvation from national oppression to the Kurdish working class. Only intransigent internationalist proletarian struggle against all nationalist bourgeois forces does.

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

Ocalan tries to find a solution for the conflict which will be beneficial for all Kurds and Turks, and indirectly the working classes.

Take Shining Path, their legendary leader was Guzman I suppose, he was caught by Peru, and denied to find a solution for the conflict. Finding solution does not stand for surrender . After Guzman's policy, we see how Shining Path is weakened. Today, Ocalan tries to protect Party from that end.

By the way, I am not a Kurd, but I still believe my people (Turks) will not reach the actual salvation, untill the Kurdish national movement succeeds...

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

At least they fight against the oppression of Kurdistan...

[Devrim]

By the way, I am not a Kurd, but I still believe my people (Turks) will not reach the actual salvation, untill the Kurdish national movement succeeds...

I think that this sums up the problem. It isn't about 'our people', it is about our class.

Devrim

[BIG BROTHER]

I'm rather ignorant about them, I'll vote until I feel I'm informed.

[Guerrilla22]

Nationalist group that kind of sort of follows Marxism-Leninism. It isn't their use of violence that bothers me, but the fact that their ideology seems to be all over the place, who knows where they actually stand these days.

[Devrim]

It isn't their use of violence that bothers me, but the fact that their ideology seems to be all over the place,


It isn't 'violence' as an abstract that bothers me. It is its class base, and I think much of the PKK's violence is anti-working class violence.


who knows where they actually stand these days.

As close to the US state as possible.

Devrim

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

It isn't 'violence' as an abstract that bothers me. It is its class base, and I think much of the PKK's violence is anti-working class violence.

As close to the US state as possible.

Devrim

How can a movement that targets Turkish ruling classes, a movement which attacks Turkish colonialism, a rebellion against the status quo, can not have the inherity of the class struggle. From its nationalistic nature, of course Kurdish movement cant be counted as an actual class movement. However, we should all recognize the socialist identity of the Kurdish movement.

[Crux]

How can a movement that targets Turkish ruling classes, a movement which attacks Turkish colonialism, a rebellion against the status quo, can not have the inherity of the class struggle. From its nationalistic nature, of course Kurdish movement cant be counted as an actual class movement. However, we should all recognize the socialist identity of the Kurdish movement.
but everything that isn't the ICC is just the left of the capitalist machine. Well at least according to their party programme.

That said the PKK has been on a rightward shift for years and they weren't that good to begin with.

[Jorge Miguel]

The PKK have servely degenerated in recent times. Since the capture of Öcalan they have adopted 'Democratic Conferdalism', that is to say they have dropped the demand of an independent (socialist) Kurdistan.

It is true they have murdered revolutionaries. I particularly remember the murder of a Maoist and other friction with Maoists but there may be more. Fueding amongst the left and/or national liberation groups is not unique to Turkey or Kurdistan.

The PKK are also darlings of the Americans in Iraq and the Turkish left have take some seriously damaging positions regarding Turkish state incursions in Iraq against the PKK.

I didn't vote in the poll. I have no concrete opinion of the PKK.

[Devrim]

How can a movement that targets Turkish ruling classes, a movement which attacks Turkish colonialism, a rebellion against the status quo, can not have the inherity of the class struggle. From its nationalistic nature, of course Kurdish movement cant be counted as an actual class movement. However, we should all recognize the socialist identity of the Kurdish movement.

What about the the fact that it is a movement that has targeted workers? What about the campaign of murdering school teachers? What is socialist about that?


but everything that isn't the ICC is just the left of the capitalist machine. Well at least according to their party programme.

That is not actually true.

Devrim

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

What about the campaign of murdering school teachers? What is socialist about that?

Did you know that most of the teachers that were punished by the Party were secret agents of the government. And some of these officers (which you call workers) caused dozens of innocent civillians death (JITEM) by their incriminating information. By the way, if you are aware of the presence of JITEM in Kurdish territories, you should know whom to accuse for murders...

[Devrim]

What about the campaign of murdering school teachers? What is socialist about that?

Did you know that most of the teachers that were punished by the Party were secret agents of the government.

Yes, of course. You don't seriously expect people to believe that line, do you?

Devrim

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

Then you believe that millions of Kurds that is opressed by the Turkish ruling classes, support just a fanatical murder group. Guerilla cant exist without the support of the people. If PKK had killed civillians in this war, they would not get any support or supplies from Kurdish villagers and workers. You should think twice before using bourgeois type of criticism.

[Devrim]

The thing about the 'reasons' behind the teachers campaign is that they have got more and more exaggerated as the years have past. At the time it was said that these teachers who were killed were 'fascists', now they have proggressed to being state agents.


Then you believe that millions of Kurds that is opressed by the Turkish ruling classes, support just a fanatical murder group. Guerilla cant exist without the support of the people. If PKK had killed civillians in this war, they would not get any support or supplies from Kurdish villagers and workers. You should think twice before using bourgeois type of criticism.

The fact that they get support does not make them in anyway socialist, nor does it stop them from playing their role in dividing the working class. However, I think historically you will find that they had supports from regional and international powers, made money from their criminal and business interests, and forced villagers to help them under threat of death. And of course some people supported them too.

Devrim

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

I repeat what I say.Kurds would have been destroyed if the guerillas had never existed. And PKK would have been destroyed if they intentionally killed Kurdish villagers.

I am not saying that PKK had never killed civillians. But in these kind of cases, we should analyze the situation by looking for the further questions. For example, imagine three villagers in somewhere were executed by the patriots. What you heard from the Turkish media is '' Terrorists killed 3 innocent villagers in ...'' and you start your criticism. What if those 3 villagers caused death of 9 guerillas in that place by giving information to the officers??? What if they were rangers ??? I dont think you would defend the rangers, that are the disgrace of this country.

What I mean is, what we see may not be always the truth.

[Crux]

That is not actually true.

Devrim


All the so-called ‘workers’, ‘Socialist’ and ‘Communist’ parties (now ex-’Communists’), the leftist organisations (Trotskyists, Maoists and ex-Maoists, official anarchists) constitute the left of capitalism’s political apparatus.

from:
http://en.internationalism.org/basic-positions

[Devrim]

I know what it says. I just said that your statement wasn't true. It is not everything.

Devrim

[Crux]

I know what it says. I just said that your statement wasn't true. It is not everything.

Devrim
You also reject "United fronts" (of course there exist no other proletarian organisations than the ICC how could there be a United Front?) or any collaboration with any other organisation whatsoever. I mean, if anything you are the ultimate example of why Left communism is, indeed, an infantile disorder. Only in the 1920's it was a little more understandable.

[Devrim]

You also reject "United fronts" (of course there exist no other proletarian organisations than the ICC how could there be a United Front?) or any collaboration with any other organisation whatsoever. I mean, if anything you are the ultimate example of why Left communism is, indeed, an infantile disorder. Only in the 1920's it was a little more understandable (and even reasonable).

Actually, we rejected united fronts in the 1920s too. We don't think that there are no other proletarian organisations than the ICC though.

What we reject are organisations that took sides in imperialist wars. Just like Lenin did actually.

Devrim

[Crux]

Actually, we rejected united fronts in the 1920s too. We don't think that there are no other proletarian organisations than the ICC though.

What we reject are organisations that took sides in imperialist wars. Just like Lenin did actually.

Devrim
Ah you must mean those rigth-wing oppurtunists like Rosa Luxemburg, Vladimir Lenin and James Connolly that took part in the Zimmerwald congress?
I thought the ICC *liked* Lenin.

[Leo]

Ah you must mean those rigth-wing oppurtunists like Rosa Luxemburg, Vladimir Lenin and James Connolly that took part in the Zimmerwald congress?

You don't really know much history do you? While of the three you have listed, only one, Lenin actually took part in the Zimmerwald conference, the conference nevertheless was never an organization in support of the war, the majority consisted of pacifists who opposed the war but did not call for the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie, while the left wing minority opposed the war as well as called for turning the imperialist war into civil war. Also a "united front" did not come out of a result of it; quite the contrary, it was a conferance of people who had previously been in the same organization where a split took place exactly on this question.


of course there exist no other proletarian organisations than the ICC how could there be a United Front?

There are several other organizations which our current regards as proletarian organizations and with whom our current called for joint work, such as the International Bureau for the Revolutionary Party, numerous Bordigist organizations (il Programma Comunista tendency, il Partito Comunista tendency, il Comunista tendency and so forth), there are numerous new left communist groups coming into existence in lots of different parts of the world with whom our current has even closer relations with who we of course regard as proletarian groups, and lastly there are councilist or internationalist anarchist groups in numerous parts of the world who because of their positions our current considers them to have proletarian positions and had joint work, organized joint public meetings, published their statements and so forth. In other words what you have been going on about here is factually wrong. We judge whether an organization is a proletarian organization or not depending on their positions, namely the ones on nationalism, national liberation and internationalism, the ones on the trade-union and parliamentary questions, on class analysis and attitude against class-collaboration etc. Depending on such criteria we say "[A]ll the so-called ‘workers’, ‘Socialist’ and ‘Communist’ parties (now ex-’Communists’), the leftist organisations (Trotskyists, Maoists and ex-Maoists, official anarchists) constitute the left of capitalism’s political apparatus." Again depending on the same criteria we say other organizations do not, and that they are a part of the political proletarian camp.

[Crux]

I know irony can some times be difficult to discern over the internet but seriously...

Judging from your website I thought you weren't that friendly with the International Bureau. So other miniscule ultraleft sects are the only viable collaboration partners in the struggle for revolution? Great. Good luck with that.

[Leo]

Judging from your website I thought you weren't that friendly with the International Bureau.

ICC and IBRP indeed doesn't have very good relations due to past history. We are working towards better relations on the other hand. Our current regardlessly recognizes the undoubtedly proletarian character of the IBRP.


So other miniscule ultraleft sects are the only viable collaboration partners in the struggle for revolution?

Well, at least our best buddies aren't counter-revolutionary bourgeois social-democrats and Stalinists.

[Crux]

Well, at least our best buddies aren't counter-revolutionary bourgeois social-democrats and Stalinists.
Not mine either, but I am sure you don't realize that.
Ah, the wonders of secterianism.

[black magick hustla]

I know irony can some times be difficult to discern over the internet but seriously...

Judging from your website I thought you weren't that friendly with the International Bureau. So other miniscule ultraleft sects are the only viable collaboration partners in the struggle for revolution? Great. Good luck with that.

I think you dont get "it". we left communists dont think parties should be "mass labor parties" nor we think the party is the one that makes the revolution. so its not that they are "viable" collaboration partners, because every time there is a strike or class struggle, people in those become "collaboration parties". a party argues within the class for revolution, it does not make revolution for them. so we are not concerned with the dumb recruitment mindset of many other organizations.

[Leo]

Not mine either, but I am sure you don't realize that.

Your current was practicing entryism for a long time and still does it in some countries.

[brigadista]

does anyone know what the PKK stance is on the practice of FGM and honor killings in the Iraqi KRG?

[Leo]

I would imagine that the official position is against both.

[brigadista]

well unless anyone can tell me to the contrary they seem to be standing back on these issues

[Crux]

a party argues within the class for revolution, it does not make revolution for them.
So, in actually doing that don't you need...a significant presence in the class mentioned?

[griffjam]

their Iranian wing is supported by the U.S.A.

[Crux]

PJUK isn't actually their iranian wing though.

[Leo]

So, in actually doing that don't you need...a significant presence in the class mentioned? We think that the party needs a significant influence like the Bolshevik Party in 1917 who did not have a significant presence and was a narrow party; not a significant presence like the Menshevik Party or the German Social Democratic Party which either strived to be or were mass parties.


PJUK isn't actually their iranian wing though. PEJAK is actually basically Iranian wing of the PKK, it is a member of Koma Civakên Kurdistan which is basically what can be called the proto-state of the PKK movement, the "democratic confederalism". The usage of different names shouldn't confuse anyone, all these movements are aligned with each other and are directed by the same leaders.

[Hassan-i Sabbah]

their Iranian wing is supported by the U.S.A.

The Iranian wing is listed in the terrorist organization list by the US, and the operations thru the Party is supported and supplied by US...

[Leo]

The Iranian wing is listed in the terrorist organization list by the USThat is a very recent development though, done under the Obama administration as a gesture towards the Iranian state. It was not listed as a terrorist organization by the US previously.


and the operations thru the Party is supported and supplied by US... I would imagine that is still more or less the case although quite probably on a slower pace at the moment.

[Tek Yol Devrim]

They are terrorists Grup...

Ally Look ; "Başbağlar massacre"...

"Güngören" and other bomb attacks. Chil, Civilian, aged ally murder.