INTERVIEW WITH THE REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNIST PARTY OF TURKEY (TDKP) - 4

An interview held in 1993 with a representative of the Central Committee of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey (TDKP)

On the main features of the working class movement and issues concerning trades-unions

The workers' movement is generally on the rise, but you often refer to its spontaneity and instability. Even though we can see temporary ebbs, this rise can be seen in many actions, in particular in the Zonguldak resistance which you define as "the peak of the workers' movement". What policies does your party put forward and fight for to facilitate the class movement becoming a "movement for itself"? 

The Zonguldak resistance is one of the peaks in the history of the workers' movement. It had unique features and was the most developed act of resistance in our contemporary history. The Zonguldak resistance played an important role in bringing political demands into the heart of workers' movement. However, it was not an action which transcended the spontaneity of the open struggle. Neither did it enable the workers' movement to leap into the real political arena.

The most striking feature of the present struggle is that the workers' movement still has a spontaneous character. The spontaneity of the workers' movement reflects itself in the unstable development of the open mass movement. For the last 3-4 years the workers' movement has been characterised by extreme ups and downs. Particularly since the November 1991 elections, the workers' movement has maintained its dynamic and built up its experiences. However, the open mass struggle has not yet recovered from demoralisation caused by previous defeats. 

As you have mentioned in your question our party continuously highlights the problem of the spontaneity and the instability of the movement. We draw attention to the causes of these weaknesses from different angels. We believe that it is not possible for the workers' movement to turn into a "movement for itself" without criticising spontaneity and exposing the concrete causes of the instability which is the most striking and destructive manifestation (and result) of this spontaneity. 

The spontaneous movement of the working class may unconsciously gain a socialist tendency through its natural development. However, it cannot develop to a real proletarian socialism (to the extent of conquering proletarian state power). This is based on genuine class consciousness. On the other hand, the present instability in the open mass struggle, which is a result of the spontaneous character of the movement, constitutes a serious weakness in beating back the offensives of the reactionary fascist front. It also hampers the adoption of more advanced agitational and organisational slogans. It is also one of the most important weaknesses in overcoming spontaneity, strengthening the morale and organisational dynamics of the movement as well as in gathering other labouring classes and strata around the working class. 

It is for this reason that our party's line and its work has as its central task the fight to turn the workers' movement into a "movement for itself". Thus, one of the main activities of our party organisations and publications is to comprehensively criticise spontaneity, the proletariat in itself and the instability of the open movement. We hope thus to overcome these problems. 

It is necessary to outline all of our party's practical and long term policies designed to help the workers' movement gain the character of a "movement for itself". This is because the main objective of all the policies and work of our party is to turn the working class into a "class for itself" and its movement into a "movement for itself". The working class must realise that it is a different class from all other classes and that they have to organise as an independent political party which is different from all other parties. 

Briefly our party's policies are as follows: 

a) We place great importance on the advance of the spontaneous movement of the working class (both economic and political, even if limited by economic demands). This appears as open mass struggle in the form of strikes, demonstrations, individual acts of resistance, general strikes and generalised resistance in society. It utilises all legal and illegal possibilities. In order to push forward spontaneous economic (and limited political) movement, our party encourages, supports and organises all forms of mass struggle, from the smallest economic demands to the broadest struggles. It implements this line even, on some occasions, risking the temporary liquidation of some party organisations. 

While doing this our party analyses the level of the mass movement. We look at its mood and characteristics, the content of the "spontaneous" dynamics of the movement and the demands it puts forward. Hence, we try to extract our slogans and calls for action from the real changes in the workers' movement and their lives. The slogans which became slogans of hundreds of thousands of workers in the recent period, such as "work- bread- freedom" and "general strike and general resistance", advanced and broadened the movement because they were not slogans "imposed" from outside but were derived from the lives and the demands of the working class and from the changing concerns of the labouring masses. 

Our party considers every strike, demonstration and resistance as an action that facilitates the struggle of the working class and the people expanding into a "general strike and general resistance". There will be no change to this policy so long as there are no fundamental changes in the current relationship between the revolutionary and counter- revolutionary fronts. 

There are two reasons why our party gives great importance to the existence of economic (spontaneous) movement, to its development, to its greatest possible stabilisation and its transformation into a movement which can take qualitative leaps forward. 

Firstly, the unconscious (economic) movement of the working class may "spontaneously" generate a tendency towards socialism in the course of its development. The workers can only come to appreciate slogans for political power and proletarian socialism through their own experiences in the process of the up-and-down development of the economic struggle and its development of socialistic tendencies. As a general law, it is almost impossible to create a socialist workers' movement without the economic movement of the working class and the transformation of this movement. 

The daily economic (spontaneous) struggle will have specific forms of development. However, its existence is the only way for the working class to learn that it is an independent class different to others, that it has to organise as an independent political party, that it is the only class that can emancipate other exploited classes and oppressed peoples alongside itself and that this emancipation can only be achieved by the overthrow of the bourgeoisie. The culmination of this process must be the establishment of the proletarian state power , the elimination of capitalism and the victory of the construction of socialism. Our party is aware that the more firmly rooted and widespread the open mass struggle of the working class, the closer the working class masses will be to proletarian socialism and the struggle for power. 

Secondly, even though it stays within the limits of the bourgeois-capitalist system and has a spontaneous character, the open mass struggle has two positive effects. It strikes a blow at the bosses, the bourgeoisie, the government and the dictatorship. Secondly, it gives rise, even though marginally, to the "improvement" of the life of the working class. The spontaneous open struggle of the working class within this framework is important for repulsing the attacks of the bourgeois-capitalist system, for deepening the crisis of this system and for accelerating the disintegration of the counter-revolutionary front. 

It is also important for the consolidation of the gains of the working class and the labouring masses and the possibilities of turning these gains into the basis of a broader struggle. It serves the awakening of the workers and the labouring masses and the increase of their capacity to organise and struggle. All these are reasons why our party gives great importance to the development of the spontaneous open struggle of the working class. 

Obviously, even if a movement is spontaneous, it has a certain level of consciousness, organisational skills and readiness to struggle. Such a movement can teach us lessons how to create a more advanced open struggle. It can also ripen the conditions for this struggle. It, objectively, represents democracy and freedom. Particularly in countries like Turkey at the present time, almost every outbreak of even spontaneous movements turn into political movements. These strain, but do not break, the framework of the system (although such breaks are also possible). These movements could also strike a blow not only at the bosses but also at the bourgeoisie, at the government and at the dictatorship. This situation can clearly be observed if the conflicts in Turkey of the last few years are analysed. 

As a conclusion we can say that because of the two main reasons we have stated here, our party considers it one of its most important tasks to assist the spontaneous struggle of the workers who are, irrespective of the reasons, clashing with the bosses, the government and the dictatorship. One should not forget that the first thing which inspires all of us are the mass struggles that take place spontaneously, the advance and the broadening of these struggles. 

b) It is a matter of principle for us that we give even more importance to a critique of and ideological fight against spontaneity, as we do to the very existence of the spontaneous movement and its development towards open mass struggle. The basis of the fight against spontaneity and its consequences is, undoubtedly, political agitation and assistance to the working class masses to transform their struggle into a struggle for power. That involves help to the economic struggle of the workers, exposure of economic injustice and agitation against it, and the combination of this with the political struggle. 

The basis of our party's whole work is to assist the working class masses to develop their economic struggle into political class struggle. This is because our party is aware that no matter how developed the spontaneous economic movement (which is against the consequences of the hegemony of capitalism) -even if it is at a level of a general uprising (which is possible)- it is bound to be defeated. Within the confines of the spontaneous movement and relying only on the experience of this movement, the working class will not gain the consciousness that they have to seize political power, destroy capitalism and construct socialism. For this reason our party considers political agitation and political struggle to be the basis of its work and its activity. 

First, we take into account the broadness and the depth of the mass movement and the political demands of the labouring masses. Then our party puts forward its agitation and its slogans for action, connecting them with political power and the demand for revolution. Our party considers it as its fundamental task to assist the workers in struggle to realise that it is vital to expand the political dimension of the movement into a struggle for political power. 

As a concrete example connected with the mass struggle of the last few years, our party has formulated the political demands of the workers, labourers and the Kurdish labouring masses for democracy and freedom -which tended to bring them into conflict with the bourgeoisie, government and the dictatorship- as an action programme. This programme constitutes a platform of struggle (a tactical political plan). It deepens the economic and political crisis in the country, puts the burden of this crisis onto the bourgeoisie and reaction, objectively strikes a blow at the economic and political basis of the state hegemony of the reactionary fascist front and demands complete political democracy for the proletariat, the labourers and the Kurdish labourers. In particular, one aspect of the political agitation of our organisations and publications is to push for the demands that are included in this political action programme. 

However, this is not the only element of the political agitation of our party. It also involves propaganda and agitation for fundamental demands concerning revolution and the seizure of political power. As long as the conflict between revolution and counter-revolution in Turkey remains the same and the mass struggle maintains and develops its dynamic towards " the general strike of the working class and the general resistance of all the working people", the political struggle platform of our party and the content of its political agitation will not essentially change, although it will continuously be renewed by the progress of the movement. 

The main function of the political action platform put forward by our party and our organisational plan of general strike and general resistance is to develop the working class (and people's) movement onto a new political platform of direct struggle for political power. It is designed to orientate the people towards the forms of organisation and action dictated by this new platform. This process constitutes, in the present conditions, the key element for the spontaneous workers' movement to turn itself into a movement "for itself". 

Political agitation involves the synthesis between scientific knowledge and the problems which cause friction and conflict between the working class/people and the bourgeoisie/reaction. This scientific knowledge occurs outside the spontaneous movement and cannot be created by this movement. Scientific answers to the problems of the working class and the labouring masses are transferred back to them through political agitation. It is also an instrument of drawing the working class nearer the lives of other labouring classes and preparing them for the struggle for political power. Political agitation is the fundamental condition for the spontaneous movement to develop into a movement "for itself". For this reason it constitutes the central chain in our party's policies and activities. Our party mobilises everything to realise this condition and to assist the workers in their struggle. 

c) The existence of the spontaneous movement in general and political agitation in particular are indispensable for the working class movement to develop into "a movement for itself". However, it is not possible to make a real contribution to the process of the workers movement developing into a socialist movement without political agitation, theoretical struggle and theoretical propaganda linked with political struggle. 

Theoretical struggle is one of the three forms of struggle of the proletariat. It is the struggle of the workers to equip themselves with socialism as a social system and the knowledge of Marxism-Leninism as a science of the theory and tactics of the victory of socialism. Together with political agitation, equipping the working class masses with the knowledge of socialism and Marxism-Leninism (theoretical struggle, theoretical propaganda and theoretical education) constitutes the essence of the struggle against spontaneity within the workers' movement and the theory it gives rise to (liberal trade-unionism and the trade-unionist socialism). 

Spontaneity within the workers' movement is a bourgeois influence in the ranks of the class. The main objective of our party's activities in the theoretical (and practical) arena is, as we have very often stressed, to demolish the (bourgeois) influence of spontaneity and assist workers in struggle to arrive at the knowledge and consciousness which will help them distinguish proletarian socialism from bourgeois and petit-bourgeois socialism. 

Our party is making efforts to renovate the usual stereotyped content, style and form of theoretical struggle and propaganda work. We must emphasise that there is a bourgeois and petit-bourgeois tradition in theoretical struggle as well as other aspects of revolutionary work. Historically this has been caused by the former main currents (TKP-Communist Party of Turkey/ TIP- Workers Party of Turkey) which claimed to be "socialist". The roots of this tradition lie in the inheritance taken from the intellectuals of the Ottomans and Kemalism. 

Its method, however, comes from the theoretical distortion and revisionist degeneration which took place in a period where, following the major defeat of the international proletariat in the 1950s, the parties of the proletariat degenerated into revisionist organisations. Ideologically, politically, organisationally and morally they broke away from the proletariat, even though for a long time they continued to have a hegemonic position over the proletariat. 

Besides theoretical distortion and degeneration, such an approach to theory splits it from practice. Nor is there any dialogue with the proletariat which is the actual beneficiary of the theoretical struggle. This degenerate tradition of "theoretical struggle" has nothing to do with the task of transforming the spontaneous struggles of the proletariat into a conscious fight for socialism. It is concerned primarily with "theorising" and legitimising the positions of existing factions and "leaderships". This "theoretical work" involves the "competition" of some supposedly simplified formulas, which have been isolated from their true content, in a superficial "academic" style. This "academic" approach is isolated from the class essence, the life of the workers and from the problems of the daily struggle. We can say that such "theoretical work" is, in fact, carried out to keep the proletariat away from theoretical knowledge and genuine political struggle. 

In general, the "socialists" who advocate the idea of a civic society and criticise the revisionist current as being "dogmatic, bureaucratic, etc.", the Euro "communists", the Trotskyists and the Maoists have the same distorted understanding. The common approach of all of them to theory and the theoretical struggle is a deviation from historical materialism and proletarian socialism. It is the negation of Marxism-Leninism. It is characterised by a lack of dialogue with the workers, an absence of understanding the workers' manner, their spirit, lives, morale and their style. It is for the theoretical (and political) disarming of the advanced workers. This type of "theoretical struggle" usually presents itself as a "project to change the world". Its manner and style have deep traditional roots in Turkey. However, it has neither the perspective nor the morale and courage to change the world. 

The essential pillars of this tradition suffered heavy blows in the late 1960s and 1970s. This tradition was based upon both the defeat suffered after the 12 September (1980 military coup) and the ideological, organisational and morale collapse created by the Gorbachovite offensive. Today it is renewing itself with a more degenerated, more "liberal", more "academic" and more "modern" content and style. It is completely distant from the working class. It also has a great influence on the revolutionary groups characterised by centrism. 

For the workers' movement to develop into a "movement for itself", it must demolish this "theoretical" tradition. This is because, even though it does not have power within proletarian ranks, it can quickly render totally impotent those revolutionary and the proletarian masses who are awakening to socialism. In the same spirit, it is vital to make theory an effective weapon and part of the lives of the proletarian and revolutionary masses. That is possible through a struggle with an innovative content and style. 

This involves drawing a demarcation line between proletarian socialism and all other "socialist" currents, between Marxism-Leninism and other so-called "Marxist" currents. It must consider the working class masses and the advanced workers as its main objective. It must strive to impart theoretical knowledge to the daily actions of the working class, deriving its spirit and style from this class. Thus, it must reshape militant theoretical literature with the attitude, spirit and morale dynamism of the class. We believe that it will not be difficult for the awakening workers to understand that such a struggle is the only way to smash the narrow "intellectual" understanding inherited from the above mentioned "theoretical tradition". This tradition is content only with "discussions" with the workers about the problems of trade unions. It considers theory and politics as the "work" of the "intellectual" petit-bourgeoisie and of the "high" trade union bureaucracy. To our experiences, it is not difficult or impossible for advanced workers toquickly see through these "intellectual" charlatans. 

We have already stated in the chapter on the theoretical problems of the international movement, even though in general terms, the objective of our party concerning theoretical struggle and the content of this struggle. Here we will only highlight the two aspects of our party's politics concerning theoretical struggle and propaganda: 

Firstly, our party considers theoretical struggle as an activity carried out within the daily struggle of the working class. It tries to derive theoretical solutions of the fundamental and actual problems of revolution from dealing with the problems of the practical movement -both nationally and internationally- with revolutionary theory. Our party links the following work to the daily struggle and political work: advancing theory, using it as a guide for action, developing its superiority to all other theories not only in terms of its scientific rigour but also in its influence on the proletarian masses and finally in having the workers imbued with revolutionary theory and with knowledge of socialism. 

Secondly, the working class masses, the young workers and labourers and the intellectuals who are devoted to the people, constitute the main sections that our party aims to embrace in the scope of practical struggle as well as in theoretical struggle and propaganda. Providing the tendency of the working class continues to be the same as it has been in the last few years and objective conditions allow, the aim of our party's work -and indirectly of its theoretical work- is to assist a process of unification on the basis of proletarian socialism. The working class -the main producer of the material life of society- and its leading advanced sections, must be united with sections of the intelligensia that are devoted to the people and are the producers of the moral-cultural life of the society, and with the young intellectual generation . Our party at present is making the same effort in the field of theoretical struggle. It is determined to maintain its theoretical platform in the coming period by intervening in all fields of the class struggle developing both nationally and internationally. 

In conclusion we can say that one of the most significant aspects of our party's politics is to assist the working class and its advanced and conscious sections in their theoretical understanding as well as developing the workers' movement from a "spontaneous movement" into a "movement for itself". Our party is aware that if this assistance fails to achieve its aims, the workers' movement will not be one "for itself". 

d) Our party's policy of assisting the working class in developing its movement into a "movement for itself" is, undoubtedly, not limited to helping the working class masses in struggling against the bourgeoisie, the government and the dictatorship. One of the two main aspects of our party's policy is to assist the organisation of the working class masses struggling under the repression of the bourgeoisie, the government and the dictatorship. 

There is no doubt that under capitalist exploitation and organised systematic repression, the working class is nothing without an organisation. Nor can it take a step in its struggle without an organisation. Since the working class have grasped this fact through harsh experience, they wage the struggle by organising at a level commensurate with their experiences, knowledge and conscious. In this struggle they also learn that they need to be organised in more skilful bodies. One should also stress that the question of the workers' movement developing from a "spontaneous movement" into a "movement for itself" is directly connected with the working class becoming an organised force. For this reason, in our party's policy and its action, practical help to the workers in their daily struggle through propaganda, agitation and our broad and effective participation is indivisibly combined with help given to them to organise. 

If we leave aside the temporary organisations formed for a particular strike or action and the proletarian mass organisations which appear in a period when either the movement develops to higher levels or retreats to a very low stage, trade-unions are the main mass organisations today where the workers are organised or tend to organise when they begin to become active. When the advanced workers, who have a position of leading and organising the movement, realise the indispensability of revolution and socialism through revolutionary propaganda, agitation and organisational work linked with their own experiences, they tend to organise in the vanguard political organisation which is able to make revolution and organise the proletariat as a ruling class. That is the independent political party of the proletariat. The two main organisations of the working class at present are: (i) the trade-unions as mass organisations where the workers are organised as a whole and (ii) the party as a leading organisation in which the advanced, class conscious workers who are indivisibly linked with the working class masses come together. 

Today a significant part of the working class is organised in trade-unions. However, the majority of the class is still deprived of organisation even at the trade-union level. Our party helps those workers who are struggling to demolish the hold of trade-union bureaucrats (the fractions of the bourgeois parties within the class) and the line they represent. This line uses the bureaucrats' authority with the class to undermine the struggle and the organisation of the workers. 

Our party's line involves the seizure of trade-unions by the workers, their democratisation and reshaping as centres of resistance and organisation. It also fully supports the acceleration of the awakening of the working class masses who are not yet organised but who would have a tendency to organise in trade-unions. As we have indicated before, the main task of our party is to assist the broadest sections of the class to organise in all kinds of forms. However, the central task here is to assist the advanced workers who have the skill to comprehend Marxism-Leninism and to organise and lead the movement to merge with the structures of the Marxist-Leninist party. This is because there is no other way for the workers' movement and its organisation to be successful. Without this, the trade-unions, for example, cannot turn into centres of resistance or become the unions of the class. 

Moreover, the working class can never act as a separate and independent class nor can it wage its independent political struggle, unless it organises itself as an independent political party led by its political vanguard. That is why our party links inseparably its propaganda and agitation work within the working class with the task of organising them. In other words, the content of our party's policy is a genuine assistance to the working class to expand their struggle and organisation into the fight for political power; to realise the indispensability of socialism; to understand that the main task for its advanced sections is to organise as a party and to educate themselves with the spirit of the party. This assistance also involves the unification of the workers' organisations (trade-unions, strike and resistance committees, etc.) around the party and of the political workers' leaders within our party organisations. 

When our party accomplishes this task, that is, in gathering at least the majority of the awakening working class masses and their political leaders around the party and within the party organisations, the workers' movement then will develop from a "spontaneous movement" into a "movement for itself". The instability in the open mass struggle will inevitably be reduced to the lowest level, to the extent that the prevailing objective conditions allow. 

At this point it is quite natural to pose this question: What are the present dynamics and the possibilities of the working class movement developing into a "movement for itself"? We cannot predict in what forms the workers' movement will develop and what kind of line it will follow in the future. However, we can stress with confidence and certainty that the economic and political dynamics of the movement are unprecedentedly strong. This is combined with a tendency that has been manifest in the struggles of the last few years -for the working class to start to act more as a class rather than as isolated individuals or sections. 

Irrespective of its developmental trend (it may develop slowly and unstably, it may destroy its dynamic and be defeated, it may explode, etc.) the workers' movement at present is more rooted and closer to an inevitable settling of accounts with the bourgeoisie and reaction than it has ever been. Even if you leave aside other objective factors, this characteristic of the movement -despite its serious weaknesses- constitutes its principle dynamic. It opens the possibility for it to head towards becoming a "movement for itself". 

Secondly, the movement has the party which has links with the proletarian masses in the main proletarian centres and main industrial enterprises. This party has gathered some part of the vanguard workers, even though the minority of them as of yet. It has advanced its revolutionary line and work and has had the courage to announce that its lack of skill and its shortcomings are the main barriers that need to be overcome in order that the workers' movement can develop into a socialist movement. 

On the other hand, there are some groups which do not recognise the party but at the same time announce that they alone cannot cope with the problems of the workers' movement. This is certainly true. They can only theorise defeat and seek for "new theories of socialism". Even though they do not perceive their real position, we definitely believe that the awakening workers will. 

After stating this let us stress that there is a party in Turkey which is able to overcome all the problems of the movement and to surpass all kinds of barriers in the way of the class turning itself into a "class for itself". This party has the capacity to fight against all kinds of bourgeois influence within the ranks of the working class and against the infiltration of the impotence of the petit-bourgeoisie into these ranks. It also has the capacity to provide genuine aid to the workers in their struggle to find their own path and it announces that it represents the potential power of the proletariat. This party is our party, the Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey. No matter what difficulties it encounters and what kind of offensives it is subject to, it constitutes the principle possibility and guarantee of the working class movement developing into a "movement for itself". These are the two main dynamics and possibilities of the proletarian movement and, in our party's opinion, they can be depended on. 

e) The question of the working class movement developing from a "spontaneous movement" into a "movement for itself" (revolutionary political movement) is the principal problem of the class movement, in other words of revolutionary work among the workers. Therefore, it is necessary to briefly elaborate on some points in order to both outline completely the policy we have mentioned previously and to highlight some problems that intimately concern the workers' movement. 

Firstly, there is a bureaucratic, trade-unionist, reformist and parliamentarian attitude which has been dominant in the "socialist" movement in Turkey for 70 years. This attitude has its roots, nationally, in the "revolutionism" of the Ottoman and Kemalist upper stratum intellectuals, and internationally, in the revisionist-bureaucratic degeneration that the workers' parties suffered in the 1950s. This attitude and work was embodied in the past in the life and action of now extinct "socialist" parties such as the TKP (Communist Party of Turkey) and the TIP (Workers Party of Turkey). 

However, these kind of understandings, attitudes, work and action continue to live in various forms. For instance, some "socialist" currents theorise spontaneous movement. Some "Marxist" currents negate and degrade not only spontaneity but also the workers' movement itself. Other "leftist" groups, on behalf of the working class, try to find revolutionary tendencies in the petit-bourgeois classes. No matter how much they talk about the working class, the attitude of almost all leading "socialist", "Marxist" and "leftist" currents towards the workers' movement narrows the field of revolutionary action for the working class to the parliamentarian and trade-union arena. Some of them do this in a conscious, theorised way and the work of others, objectively, results in this. For them political and theoretical "struggle" is the work of a special "revolutionary" stratum which has a certain composition. Despite the "differences" in their appearances or reasoning, all main "socialist" currents have a trade-unionist, reformist and parliamentarian position towards the working class and its movement. This holds true for organisations like the SBP (Party of Socialist Unity) and the Socialist Party of D. Perinçek which are openly reformist, trade-unionist and parliamentarian, Dev-Yol (the Revolutionary Path) which has quickly slipped towards reformist "socialism" and bureaucratism in the name of democracy, Devrimci-Sol (the Revolutionary Left) which advocates "vanguard fight" and the PKK (Workers Party of Kurdistan) . 

One must state that this approach and the "revolutionary" work carried out with this outlook have constituted an habitual and deep rooted bureaucratic-opportunist tradition for a long period in terms of policies, organisation and style in work. Also we must say that this tradition has deeply influenced the line, work and action of the "socialist" groups which are closer to the workers' movement and socialism. 

It is indispensable to wage a continuous fight against this trade-union socialist understanding, the influence of the form of work and organisation which is traditionally created by it and which has penetrated into the workers' lives and even into the work of our party organisations. For this reason, our party gives special importance to the ideological and organisational struggle against the tendency of the opportunist organisations to theorise the spontaneity of the class movement and, as its basis, against the liberal trade-unionism, parliamentarian and reformist work (bourgeois and petit-bourgeois socialism). 

The policy of assisting the workers in ideologically and organisationally demolishing bourgeois influences -liberal and socialist- in their ranks is one of the principle elements of our party's work in its propaganda, agitation and organisation within the class. This is because the bourgeois-liberal and bourgeois "socialist" influence within the ranks of the class is the main barrier which atrophies the dynamism of the class and stunts its capacity to struggle and organise. It holds the workers back from self-tuition and pushes them to a morale collapse. It is not possible for the working class to reach proletarian socialism unless this influence (of the bourgeois party and its "socialist" fractions) is demolished. 

One of the principle conditions, at present, for the workers' movement to develop into a "movement for itself" is to wage a decisive and patient ideological and organisational struggle against the liberal-trade unionist and reformist-"socialist" influence within the ranks of the class, designed to unite with the real experiences of the workers themselves. This fight is one of the corner stones of our party's policy and its work. 

Secondly, we want to speak about a phenomenon and concept which, in Turkey, has been divorced from its essence and degenerated in a petit-bourgeois manner in the theory and practice of the bourgeois and petit-bourgeois "socialist" currents that present themselves in the name of the working class and socialism. This is the phenomenon of leadership and the concept of leadership. It is impossible to have a long discussion here about this concept. 

However, we must say that the phenomenon of leadership in its degenerated form that has been illustrated by the "socialist movement" of Turkey implies to the following: drugging the working class masses "in a socialist way", blocking their initiative, disorganising them and dispersing their ranks; organising as a "leadership" a (liberal or "socialist") trade-union bureaucracy and a special "socialist" semi-intellectual stratum (as a bourgeois "socialist" party) that purports to "represent" the class and to provide "leadership". The "socialist" currents' traditional understanding and practice of "leadership" of the working class is, in the final analysis, a "socialist" version of what the "leadership" and the "representatives" of the Türk-Is (Trade Unions Confederation of Turkey) bureaucracy is doing. They drug and disorganise the working class and remove their initiative from their own hands. Some often repeated concepts such as "the leadership of the class", "workers' initiative", "trade-union democracy", "the control of the rank and file", etc. mostly do not have any other function than playing a ("socialist") role similar to that which parliament and elections play for the bourgeoisie. In other words, behind the veil of parliamentary democracy, the bourgeoisie maintains its hegemony. 

It is true to say that the concept of "leadership" which was debased in the past mainly by the theory and practise of TKP, TIP and DISK (Revolutionary Trade Unions Confederation) when it was under the hegemony of TKP and the "left wing" CHP is still dominant today in the line and work of the main "socialist" groups. Indeed, its bureaucratism has developed further. This concept of "leadership", in reality, imposes the leadership of another class which has arisen from the combination of the "socialist" trade-union bureaucracy, workers aristocracy and "socialist" semi-intellectual groups. This is a petit-bourgeois class which artificially implants its leadership over the working class and theorises this imposition. 

Despite the differences in their appearances and slogans, the policies of almost all the leading "socialist" groups and their conception of the leading role of the working class in practice equals unity with the "socialist" trade-union top bureaucracy. This bureaucracy relies on the workers having no initiative, on their disorganisation -even though they are organised in trade unions- and on their deception. D. Perinçek constitutes one extreme, Devrimci-Yol (Revolutionary Path)'s policy towards DISK -formally at least- is another. There are more profound reasons, based on an ideological degeneration, for Devrimci-Yol's policy of encouraging the affiliation of sections of the workers' movement to DISK as a viable revolutionary alternative. However, it is obvious that this policy is determined by the desire of Devrimci-Yol to gain some foothold within the DISK bureaucracy in particular and trade-union bureaucracy in general. They wish to recreate the bureaucratic apparatus of DISK, utilise the possibilities of this apparatus and thus create a "leadership". 

The policy of the PKK (Workers Party of Kurdistan) is also an example of the traditional "socialist" understanding, method of leadership and organisation. This policy gives importance to "arming the people". But in practice, it ignores the workers and peasants taking initiative, their mass struggle and the process of their independent mass organisation giving rise to a class mobilisation. It abandons the field of mass struggle and mass organisation to the parliamentarian, trade union and reformist "leaderships". These currents and other "socialist" groups do not carry out any work of systematic propaganda, agitation or organisation among the workers. Almost all their work is directed to the "socialist" trade-union bureaucracy. If a worker somehow joined them they usually try to put him/her into the trade-union bureaucracy or direct him/her to their "vanguard fighting" or "vanguard parliamentarist" work carried out "on behalf of" the working class. 

All these phenomena cannot be separated from their understanding and implementation of "socialist leadership" that we have spoken about. The common characteristic of these "socialist" currents concerning the "task" of forming and organising the leadership of the working class (and people) is the absence of a perspective of developing the independent initiative of the working class and people. Nor is there any perspective of creating the workers' own class leadership and organisation which will be built up by their independent struggle and allow them to lead their own action. 

This practice of "leadership" is, undoubtedly, identical with the dominant "understanding of revolution". And the essence of this is the imposition of the leadership of another class (petit-bourgeoisie) upon the working class. 

As most people affirm in words, revolution is made by the masses. The leader of the revolution is the working class and there is no other stratum or class to "lead" this class. Organising the working class, developing the leadership of the proletarian (and popular) revolution and taking it to a stage that embraces the whole class and people is inseparable from emphasising the awakening of the working class masses, their revolutionary creativity, class initiative and organising them within their own class organisations. The working class creating and organising its own class leadership can only be achieved with such an approach. They cannot realise this under the conditions where they are unconscious and disorganised or where some "ruling" stratum is acting on their behalf. 

It is a fact that no non-proletarian class force can constitute the leadership of the working class. This leadership can only be organised by the working class based on its own political vanguards who have unbreakable links with them. This does not contradict the fact that knowledge of scientific socialism comes into being outside the spontaneity of the workers' movement and is given to the working class from "outside". 

We must emphasise that the party is a part of the working class. The characteristic composition of the party -vanguard workers who have unbreakable links with the working class masses and who are armed with the knowledge of scientific socialism- illustrates this. The party carries out work that truly assists the workers in their organisation and struggle against the bourgeoisie and reaction. This assistance constitutes the significance of the party being an "organised advanced detachment" of the working class. The vanguard and leading role of the party within the workers' movement and in revolution is to assist (ideologically, politically and organisationally) the working class masses which are fighting, organising and making the revolution. That is why the party considers factories in which the workers' struggles explode as a basis for the activities of organising the workers politically and in trade-unions. 

In answering your question and explaining the difference of our party's policy and work from all other "socialist" currents, the reason why we highlighted and have drawn attention to the concept of "assistance" was to point out the true content of the question of leadership in our party's line and work. It is a vital question of the workers' movement but has been turned upside down by the "socialist" movement of Turkey. 

Our party is composed -for the moment- of the minority of the class conscious leaders of the working class, of the communists who came from other labouring classes who joined the working class and of organisations that have been formed within the awakening working class masses. The party's assistance to the workers in their struggle and organisation is the key factor for the workers' movement developing into a revolutionary (socialist) movement (a movement for itself). At the same time, the workers creating new leaders organically and sending them as their political representatives into the party ranks will strengthen the authority of the political organisation of the working class among the proletariat. This will also guarantee the re-construction of our party and the leadership of the movement at every new stage of the class struggle. The relation between our party, which is a part of the working class, and the working class will continue and constantly renew itself throughout the whole period of the movement, even after the working class has organised itself as a ruling class. 

For the workers' movement to develop into a "movement for itself", it is vital to have correct revolutionary policies. This, however, is not enough. It is also necessary to have a correct style of work and organisation, a correct revolutionary understanding and method of leadership (assistance). Nevertheless, the petit-bourgeois bureaucratic concept of "leadership", which has been imposed upon the working class for a long time in the name of socialism, had a destructive influence in the working class ranks in general, and on the advanced workers in particular. It adversely affected their ability to comprehend the struggle, their creative and revolutionary initiatives. In the face of the 12 September coup, the working class masses from DISK which had socialist tendencies were demobilised because of the disorganisation that they had suffered. The Zonguldak coal miners' resistance was dragged to defeat. Despite the workers' great anger against the government, they had to admit this defeat and leave their march to Ankara unfinished. All these constitute important conclusions that need to be studied in terms of the understanding of "socialist" leadership and the "revolutionary" method of organisation as well as other ideological shortcomings of the masses. 

The distorted understanding and methodological approach to leadership and organisation which arose among the working class masses and advanced workers is one of the factors that leave the class powerless. For the developmental process of the class movement not to destroy its own dynamics, it is very important to fight against such an understanding to facilitate the class movement developing into a "movement for itself". 

Concerning this question one of the policies of our party is to accelerate the ideological and organisational advance against such distorted understandings and habits as a part of the fight against the spontaneity in the workers' movement. The working class masses and the advanced workers will understand the essence of this fight through their own experiences. Therefore, when the workers comprehend the slogans of this fight, there is no doubt that all sincere and devoted elements of the "socialist" trade-union and intellectual stratum which has been imposed upon the class through bureaucratic-bourgeois apparatus and methods will join the ranks of the class and embrace proletarian socialism. The question today for the party organisations and the revolutionary circles is to learn to assist the workers struggling against the bourgeoisie and reaction and not to waste revolutionary energy. They must also learn how to separate the proletarian and revolutionary features in their lives and actions from the bourgeois and bureaucratic ones. 

f) The last point we want to make to complete our answer to your question concerning the workers' movement turning from a "spontaneous movement" into a "movement for itself" is the organisation of the working class and styles of work and organisation in particular. We have already stated that the work of propaganda, agitation and organisation does not consist of different processes following each other but of chains linked to each other in the same process. This work involves the transformation of the working class into an independent organised force. We also have spoken about the party which is the highest form of class organisation and the guarantee of the transformation of the workers' movement into a "movement for itself". 

Let us state here that revolution means in fact the organisation of the class. Without the organisation of the class and a party which is rooted within all the various organisations of the working class and has the skill to gather all others around itself, to direct and lead them, the workers' movement can neither develop as a movement against capitalism nor is it possible for the working class to become a ruling class. The most strategic question of revolution is that of the cohering of the class as an independent revolutionary party. For this reason, while our party links all its work among the workers to the task of organising the class, it places at the centre of this work the unity of the advanced workers as a party. Our party's policy of organisation will continue to renewed and developed according to the conditions, throughout the whole process of revolution and even after the working class is a ruling class (that is, until the period when the whole class has reached the level of the advanced sections and classes, the party and the state have withered away). 

In the present conditions where capitalism and reaction is dominant, one of the most significant questions that we are faced with is that of organisation, in particular styles of work and organisation. This question involves the forms in which the advanced-revolutionary workers will be organised as a party and the way in which the party organisation will give its assistance to the working class masses in their struggle and organisation. This is because styles of work and organisation have a vital significance in two respects. First, for the content of theoretical and political work to embrace the workers and spread with all its profoundity and richness. Second, for the working class to exercise its skills of struggle and organisation under the conditions of the hegemony of the bourgeoisie and reaction -independently of the democratic or fascist form of this hegemony. Achieving the style of work and organisation which corresponds to the laws of the class struggle, to the requirements of the political regime and to the relations of power between revolution and counter-revolution means the working class being armed at a level that will allow it to demonstrate its ability to become a ruling class. In short, the question of the style of work and organisation is the question of whether the working class has a revolutionary party or not. 

Without this style of work and organisation, it is always said, neither theoretical facts nor revolutionary calls mean anything and the working class is bound to be defeated. This is also acknowledged, in general, by those who claim to be "socialist". No one can openly deny the fact that the political struggle of the working class cannot develop and that revolution cannot be successful without a party which is shaped with the forms corresponding to the conditions of a particular period, without an organisation which is able to fight even in the most difficult conditions and to be remolded in new forms when needed . 

However, the following questions are not dealt with and solved in a revolutionary manner: On which organisational basis will the working class organise its revolutionary vanguard, namely its political party? Will this party be organised on an illegal basis or in legal forms? If it will be organised on an illegal basis, what characteristics will its relation with open and legal fields, forms of work and organisation have? How will it cope with the difficulties that it is faced with in terms of the styles of work and organisation that are necessary in all periods? We can say that the question of the style of work and organisation, in the present period, appears to the working class in this form. 

First of all, we want to highlight our party's organisational policies and its reasons for having such an approach. Under the conditions where capitalism is dominant, the working class parties have to have an illegal basis, even though they can be founded and work legally in the countries where bourgeois democracy is dominant. In the countries where there is a fascist dictatorship, these parties are bound to be organised on an illegal basis and to have a style in their work and organisation corresponding to the conditions of illegality. However, it is crucial that these parties pursue an organisational line to fully utilise open and legal forms of struggle, work and organisation (including the form of a legal party). Without doing this it is not possible to embrace the workers' movement. Nor is it possible to build an illegal party organisation or to be a real class party. 

Our party organises in illegal forms on an illegal basis, but at the same time utilises legal and open styles of work and organisation to the full. The reason why our party considers the organisation of the advanced workers in illegal structures as fundamental is not because our party "enjoys" doing it this way. Contrary to what is put forward by those who sabotage revolution and socialism with a "revolutionary" and "socialist" mask, our party is aware that illegality is only a tool of revolutionary work, but an inevitable one. It is also aware of the unwanted "ills" caused by illegality. Organising on an illegal basis is an indispensable obligation for a revolutionary class. No one can deny this indispensability except those who have sold themselves. 

What an advanced worker and a revolutionist must be actively conscious of is this: The class struggle is a struggle that cannot be restricted by any law. Neither can the struggle of the working class -economic or political- be restricted by any law. Under the conditions where the struggle between revolution and counter-revolution and between the working class and the bourgeoisie is not limited by any law, restricting the vanguard of the class to bourgeois laws is the biggest treachery to the class and an unforgivable offence committed against socialism. 

Our party's line on forms of work and organisation is determined by the laws of class struggle, the historical experiences of the international working class, the constantly changing balance of power between revolution and counter-revolution and by the obligations of revolution which do not recognise any "law". Our party will never refrain from utilising legal opportunities, no matter in which direction the relationship between revolution and counter-revolution changes. We will carry on this work whether the bourgeoisie submits to "democracy" or it is a period in which the class struggle undergoes the most severe clashes; whether our party gets the opportunity to carry out open or semi-open work and organisation, or it is face to face with the task of organising an open socialist party behind which there are its illegal organisations. However it will never abandon the task of consolidating its illegal basis and organisation, spreading it among the workers and helping illegality to organise within the ranks of the class. 

Corresponding with the development of the class struggle and the positions won by the working class, the living dialectical relations between the illegal forms of work and of organisation and the legal ones change constantly. However, our party will preserve and consolidate its policy regarding the forms of work and organisation based on illegality so long as the bourgeoisie and reaction continue to have the power. That is the only way the capacity of the working class to struggle and organise and its real power to fight can express itself. Also, the task of raising revolutionary cadres -which is one of the most important elements of the question of party and organisation- can only be realised with organisation and work that is guided by such a line and understanding. 

Additionally, other organisations of the working class can become real class organisations, resistance centres and the instruments of revolution by virtue of the organisation and work of the party, work which is not restricted by any law. The party is the revolutionary workers organisation, it is the director and the leader of the movement as a whole. That is also the only way to succeed in uninterrupted revolutionary work within the class. That is the policy of our party concerning styles of work and organisation. This is the only policy of organisation that corresponds to our party's ideological and political work and its objectives. 

Let us state the reason why we have mentioned in detail our party's policy of organisation: 

Firstly, the current organisational situation of the working class is characterised by bourgeois influence in the ideological and organisational sphere. This is based on the long-standing hegemony of the understanding of work and organisation of legalist-bureaucratic "socialism" and reformist trade-unionism. It has caused the advancing workers' movement to drown in spontaneity. 

Secondly, a large number of "socialist" groups such as SBP (Party of Socialist Unity), the group of Dogu Perinçek, the groups that advocate the idea of civic society, Trotskyist groups and Dev-Yol (Revolutionary Path) have been trying to impose a legalist, bureaucratic, trade-unionist and parliamentarian style of work and organisation upon the awakening young revolutionary masses and the working class. 

Thirdly, almost all political organisations which claim to be organised on an illegal basis have activities that combine traditional semi-legal forms with petit-bourgeois illegality and play a role supporting spontaneity as a result of their trade-unionist and reformist forms of work and organisation. 

In conclusion, it is important to say that both the spontaneity that exists in the workers' movement and the activities of all these groups in the field of work and organisation constitute a serious threat that cuts off the potential of the rising class movement to utilise its possibilities and dynamics. This is despite the fact that these groups do not have the possibility to become a massive force. This is the reason why our party attaches special importance to the organisation of the working class and to the style of work carried out among the workers. 

We must emphasise that the bourgeois influence within the working class movement and the legalist, bureaucratic and parliamentarian tendency which is carried to the working class ranks in the name of "socialism" are not only manifest in ideological and political fields. They also have an organisational aspect. The working class has to rescue itself from the trade-unionist spontaneity in its ranks and the disorganising and weakening effects of legalist, bureaucratic and non-class forms of work and action that are being imposed by these "socialist" groups. This is necessary for the working class to demolish the barricade that blocks it, to find its own way, to expand its movement into a political and revolutionary one, to re-establish its independent and revolutionary organisation in all conditions and to create the opportunity to take the political and organisational leadership of its own movement into its own hands. The working class masses, especially the advanced sections of the class, have to understand that they cannot make any political progress or turn into a class for itself unless they get rid of reformist and bureaucratic organisational disorders, which are alien to the true aspirations of the class. These organisational disorders (habits in the forms of work and organisation) have always played a disarming and disorganising role within the class movement. They constitute "invented" and "imposed" forms upon the class and deform the revolutionary tendency, the understanding and the spirit of party within the workers' ranks. 

For the development of the worker's movement from a "spontaneous movement' into a "movement for itself", our party's policy concerning the forms of work and organisation attempts to assist the workers to learn to separate a reformist form from a revolutionary one. Our assistance also involves founding revolutionary organisations, spreading them across the country, unifying them and directing these organisations towards becoming true class organisations. We do this because when they get rid of the dominating understanding and habits carried into the class by reformist "socialist" currents and liberal trade-unionism, there will be no obstacle to them founding true workers' organisations and directing them. It is also obvious that the workers who can separate true workers' organisations from others, establish them and direct them will have been equipped with new and effective weapons against all sorts of bourgeois offensives, including the deceptiveness of bourgeois and petit-bourgeois "socialism". 

In the meantime, the realisation of the following tasks that we consider as the principle condition of the unity of the working class movement is the central objective of the policy of our party concerning its work and organisation: (i) to construct the basic organisations of the party in the main industrial towns and enterprises. These basic units are flourishing at the moment; (ii) to ensure that there are enough worker-revolutionaries in these structures to represent the awakening working class masses from these industrial centres; (iii) to create an army of professional revolutionaries which draws its strength and the bulk of its membership from these basic organs; (iv) to ensure that this cadre base enthusiastically completes all party tasks locally and nationally. It must devote itself to the class and the cause of socialism totally; (v) to ensure that the basic party units have large numbers of supporters to meet the requirements of the movement; (vi) and lastly, to gather these party structures around the CC and to firmly root the CC in them. The realisation of this task is the main guarantee for the working class movement to gain stability and develop into a "movement for itself". 

Having taken into account the conditions in Turkey -the broadness of the liberal trade-unionist and legalist-reformist "socialist" front and this front benefiting from the possibilities presented by the bourgeois political system- some may doubt that our party can accomplish this task. It is true that at first glance the reactionary-liberal trade-union bureaucracy and legalist-bureaucratic bourgeois "socialist" currents which are organised as ideological and organisational extensions of the bourgeois-capitalist party within the ranks of the working class and labouring masses have some advantages given by the existing system. However, they also have disadvantages that make them powerless before the working class movement and the struggle of our party. 

First of all, if the development of the workers' movement takes a step forward, this creates impasses that they cannot overcome. This is because their theoretical, political and organisational line and work openly or in a concealed way negates working class and proletarian socialism and are in stark contradiction with the most significant interests of the class. They theorise openly either the "powerlessness" or the defeat of the working class and "form" organisations of immobility, sluggishness or the acceptance of defeat from the beginning. 

Secondly, beside bourgeois "socialism" all "socialist" currents which impose upon the working class trade-unionist, parliamentarian and reformist forms of work and organisation have an "illegal" background. Their "leadership" and "cadres" come from "illegal organisation" and "illegal work". These currents and organisations which seek "new socialism" and the legalist and parliamentarian forms of work and organisation corresponding this orientation are not "discoveries" based on sincerity, heartfelt belief or revolutionary self-criticism. These organisations are expressions of the "theory" which justifies "not getting your fingers burned" with illegal work, of disbelief in the class and revolution, of insincerity and surrender. In their theory and practice they themselves acknowledge this, along with their lack of confidence, disbelief in the class and their powerlessness. It is impossible for the class in action to trust those who are insincere and who have no confidence or belief. 

Thirdly, these are the "socialist" groups that deny their own "legality", the very existence of the working class and its movement. Because they spread hopelessness, empty beliefs and promote the "stability" of the political regime, these organisations are in a position completely contrary to the objective conditions of Turkey and the potential dynamics and possibilities of the workers' movement. (D. Perinçek's group encourages spontaneity and theorises it. This is another kind of negation of the working class and its movement). If they were in a period when Turkey was heading towards "stability" in the economic and political spheres, they might have the opportunity, even though for a short while, to mislead the class and the advanced workers and trip up the movement. Unfortunately they appeared in the wrong period for them. The facts show that no matter how hard they try to pull the movement backward, they have to be satisfied with "watching the back" of the class when the workers' movement is on the rise. In fact, they are in such a situation and desperately declare that "they cannot gain the attention of the workers". We believe that the working class is close enough to socialism and will not make the mistake of "trying out" these currents. 

This is the situation of the legalist and parliamentarian block of bourgeois "socialists". Their malaise, however, is an advantage and an opportunity for the working class and its movement, and consequently for our party, even though it is beset by great hardships and problems. However, the main advantage of the working class and its party over the reactionary trade-union bureaucracy and the legalist "socialist" currents (which constitute the bourgeois party and its fractions) lies in another area: That is in the working class movement which is strengthening its forward dynamic and is taking advantage of possibilities without regard to bourgeois law. Alongside this, there is the ideological, political and organisational line of our party as the party of the class, its revolutionary work among the class and the revolutionary organisations it has founded. 

Another important advantage of the class movement and our organisation is the actual tactical platform of our party -political and organisational- and its sincere attitude. This attitude is underpinned by the struggle for the unity of the working class, its interests and the development of its open movement. Independently of their ideological views, the party calls upon every individual and group who are "in favour of struggle" for unconditional co-operation. It also helps the workers to learn from their own experiences. 

Furthermore, the following facts constitute the guarantee and the basis for the superiority of proletarian socialism and of the true class party over the non-proletarian "socialist" currents and legalist-reformist organisations and thus, for the political development of the workers' movement. Our party has the apparatus of illegal agitation and organisation which can survive the growing attacks of the dictatorship. This apparatus has been recognised for a long time by the main body of the class and has gained their trust. Moreover, in contrast to the inability of other "socialist" currents to work systematically, our organisations' links are improving in Turkey and Kurdistan, in the principle industrial centres and enterprises that are strategically important for the class as a whole. Our party's influence among the working class is increasing, while others are going backward. These constitute the advantages and possibilities of our party and the working class. 

Does our party have no hardships, problems or weaknesses beside all these possibilities and its advantages? Are all our organisations in a good state or is our party's work perfect? Of course not. Our party is aware that to acquire the knowledge of what is correct and revolutionary is not sufficient to conduct revolutionary work and organisation or to truly assist the working class. Therefore, it never relaxes the fight against its own mistakes and shortcomings and the lack of skill that appears in the actions and lives of its organisations. 

For our party and organisations, the platform of ideological struggle that we have already outlined does not only imply an ideological renewal but also an organisational one. In our party's line and its work, the tasks of the "transformation of the working class movement into a movement for itself" are equal to the tasks of a constant transformation, revolutionisation and renewal of our organisations and cadres. The stronger the revolutionary progress in our party, the stronger the revolutionary advance within the working class ranks will become. In the same way, the more political progress the working class makes, the faster the progress and transformation in our party will be. This is one of the characteristics of the policy we pursue to help the workers' movement to turn into a "movement for itself". 

It is inevitable that the forthcoming period in the workers' movement will be characterised by the widening and intensifying struggle between our party and the reactionary, liberal, reformist and "socialist" legalist bureaucratic currents, which are organised within the class as the extensions of the bourgeois-capitalist parties. It is in the nature of class struggle that the more the working class movement advances, the working class masses and, consequently, our party will encounter on a broader front all the non-proletarian currents and apparatus which equate with the trade-union bureaucracy and worker's aristocracy. 

It is also obvious that this struggle does not only have an ideological aspect but also an organisational one. The achievement of the working class movement in developing into a "movement for itself" is directly linked to the growing ideological and organisational struggle between the bourgeoisie and the working class. For this reason, our party will never retreat from helping the workers to organise and enlightening them about the line and activity of the bourgeois capitalist party and of its "socialist" fractions within the working class ranks. In the meantime, it will continue to educate them about the treachery of all the old and new despicable elements of "socialism". The transformation of the class into an organised power is synonymous with the fulfilment of these struggles of our party. 

To sum up, we can say that all our party's policies and its whole work aim for the transformation of the workers' movement into a "movement for itself". This is because the transformation of the workers' movement into a "movement for itself" implies the organisation of the class for the revolution and the class entering into a direct and inevitable struggle to organise as a ruling class. Our party does not and will not have any objective other than assisting the working class to organise as a ruling class and find its way to play its historical revolutionary role. 

DISK is reorganising and trying to seize many sectors which are affiliated to Türk-Is at present. Also it is trying to annex the public employees' unions into the confederation. What is your opinion on the unity of the working class in trade-unions and the DISK phenomenon? What proportion of the awakening working class sections are flowing into DISK? What is the possibility of large sections of the working class affiliating to DISK? 

In order to answer this question, we must evaluate specifically the conditions in which DISK started to function. Let us first state that the main factor in lifting the ban on DISK was the expansion of the struggle of the working class (even though the workers did not directly go into action for the legislation of DISK). From one angle this situation can be explained as below: The advance and expansion of the workers' movement made the old platform of Türk-Is (the 24 principles of Türk-Is) impossible to implement. Besides, the trade-union bureaucracy of DISK took advantage of the weaknesses of the growing workers' movement and succeeded in moving towards a "new" collaborationist platform of "trade-unionism of production and compromise". This meant that the Türk-Is bureaucracy and the DISK bureaucracy came very close to each other. In this situation, the "ban" on DISK became meaningless. Also, the bourgeoisie and reaction needed to "smooth" the conflict going on in their ranks over the degree of represiveness of the regime and at the same time to lighten the pressure of internal and external "democratic" public opinion. These were the circumstances in which the lifting of the ban on DISK was put on the agenda. As was the case in the unbanning of the parties that were swept into the dustbin (*) there was no "drawback" any longer for the bourgeoisie and reaction to re-open DISK. The process of DISK's establishment was reactivated therefore. 

However, there were other factors that gave rise to its re-opening. DISK would also create a new possibility for the bourgeoisie, reaction and the trade-union bureaucracy which was having hard time. In the last few years, the working class had proved -by strikes, resistances, demonstrations and their demands against the trade-union bureaucracy- that they had entered into an unprecedentedly broad movement and that they had begun to act as a class. The Türk-Is bureaucracy and its platform lost more credibility than ever before. The workers'/mass movement may outgrow Türk-Is and enter into an explosive new direction. Therefore, the "socialist" DISK which had "credibility" in the past among the advanced sections of the class was an appropriate barricade in front of an increasingly threatening working class movement. DISK would potentially embrace the sections of the working class which are the closest to socialism. 

Also, the competition between the confederations could create the opportunity for a new division between the working class masses and its advanced sections. Thus, the workers' movement could be pushed backwards and even the traditional Türk-Is? bureaucracy could be saved. The power of the class could be eradicated in this way and the government's and union bureaucracy's space of manoeuvre against the working class masses could be broadened. We cannot know whether the trade-union bureaucrats, the representatives of the bourgeoisie and the government officials carried out such debates. The facts, however, demonstrate that this is the real, unseen reason why DISK resumed its activities. This "opportunity" for the bourgeoisie and reaction was created simultaneously with the re-establishment of DISK. 

There is no doubt that it is important for the workers, especially for the advanced sections, to know this fact and consequently determine their attitude towards the bourgeoisie, the government and the trade-union bureaucracy of both DISK and Türk-Is. This is one aspect of our party's opinion on the attempt to reorganise DISK. 

It will be correct at this point to examine the attitude of the advanced sections of the class towards DISK and whether it can embrace these sections. Let us first say that DISK's resumption did not create a significant tendency among the working class masses to gravitate towards it. In particular, the workers who were its members in late 1970s and 1980 were the most cautious part of the class. If what is happening among the masses is taken into consideration, one can see that there is no rank and file tendency to join DISK. 

As we have tried to state previously, the present platform put forward by DISK is not, for the working class, a more advanced one than other trade-unions'. As a matter of fact, the "socialist" trade-union platform presented by DISK did not have any come-back from the working class. This is not, for example, because the working class is "apolitical" or "apathetic", as Dev-Yol circles suggest. On the contrary, it demonstrates the mistrust of the class for DISK's platform. This reaction is drawn from their healthy class instincts and is more advanced than Dev-Yol's attitude. To sum up we can say that despite all the treachery of Türk-Is, the working class masses, at the moment, tend to organise and struggle within the existing trade-unions. 

However, despite the fact that DISK has not been popular among the working class masses for the last one or two years does not mean that DISK cannot succeed in organising as a trade-union confederation or encompassing a significant part of the workers. First of all, the DISK administration has got significant relations in Turkey and internationally with the trade-union bureaucracy, the influential spokesmen of the bourgeoisie and governments. It also has the image of a "left" trade-union and immense financial means. 

Additionally, the divisions in Türk-Is are quite widespread. In most of the trade unions affiliated to Türk-Is, the contradictions between the headquarters of these unions and their branches have increased and deepened. In the course of the struggles of the last few years, the top Türk-Is? bureaucracy has been subjected to significant attacks from the lower echelons of the union bureaucracy on which it is based. Also the "subordinate" bureaucracy on which it is based has lost its "stability". Furthermore, the branch administrations of the unions which have been opposing and not trusting the Türk-Is? bureaucracy are partially in the hands of the strata tending to "socialism". At the same time, this strata has a relative predisposition to bureaucratism. DISK's principle policy of organisation is based on the divisions within the high strata bureaucracy of Türk-Is, the contradictions and conflicts between the headquarters and the branches of the unions. This situation in Türk-Is and the existence of independent trade-unions which have a "left" orientation constitute the advantages of DISK. 

The phenomenon that makes all these advantages "exploitable" is, undoubtedly, this: The broad masses of the working class which have a great anger against the Türk-Is bureaucracy and the opposition within the union branches which are affiliated to Türk-Is lack a common democratic and revolutionary platform and organisation. This situation can change in the future, but presently it can make DISK an alternative to Türk-Is for various sections of the working class during major collective bargainings, strikes or at any time when the movement is escalating and the workers express great anger against the treachery of Türk-Is (as was the case in the council workers' strike). DISK's policy is to wait and prepare for a convenient situation to utilise these 'advantages'. 

Some political groups and old "socialist" circles, which have a deformed understanding of "socialism" and which have merged into bourgeois liberalism, mainly the DEV-YOL circles, have an orientation to cooperate with the "socialist" DISK bureaucracy. They provide the support of their "socialist cadres" and enable the considerable financial resources of DISK to be employed. It is an undeniable fact that this situation represents another "possibility" for DISK. One can say that all these are the "advantages" DISK has over Türk-Is and, in fact, over the working class and its movement. 

At this point it will be helpful to speak briefly about the relationship between the public employees' union and DISK. It is well known that Dev-Yol which is one of the groups active and influential within these unions is encouraging them to affiliate to DISK. If we take into consideration the relationship between the DISK's "new" platform of trade-unionism and Dev-Yol's orientation towards a liberal popular "socialism", it is not difficult to see that Dev-Yol's attempts to encourage affiliation to DISK are not tactical. On the other hand, it is possible that an orientation towards DISK may spread, despite setbacks, in these unions which have not yet organised wide sections of the public employees. Consequently, the main discipline in these unions is not a mass one but that of the political groups that have a distorted understanding of "socialism". And this weak state of the public employees' unions constitutes another potential "possibility" for DISK. 

Let us come back to your question. Although there is no significant orientation towards DISK among wide sections of the working class and labouring masses, the situation of the trade-unions affiliated to Türk-Is and the weaknesses of the rank and file opposition may in the future nourish the tendency towards DISK. This may also give an opportunity to DISK to divide the existing trade-unions and absorb some of the workers' and public employees' unions. In this sense, we believe it would not be wrong to say that DISK organising as a confederation can be a "reality". 

That is the situation of DISK. The main question, however, is this: What role did/will DISK play in terms of the workers' movement and the organisation of the public employees? What kind of attitude should the workers' movement and public employees have towards it? Is DISK a progressive alternative, an advantage or an opportunity for them? 

In our party's opinion, DISK is neither a "progressive" alternative nor an advantage for the working class and public employees. With its hidden agenda, the function of DISK is to be a new and influential second barricade, alongside the Türk-Is bureaucracy, blocking the working class movement. The workers' movement does not need a "new" trade-union confederation. The question for them is to democratise the present trade-unions, pull them to a revolutionary line and seize them. The working class movement is, in fact, divided by Türk-Is. It is predictable that all that can be gained from the "new" competition that DISK is initiating will be a new division between the advanced sections of the class and its more backward elements. 

Some may claim that the advanced workers organising in DISK and entering into more advanced struggles can mobilise the relatively backward sections of the class and be the "basis" for the movement in general to develop onto a more advanced platform. Yet when we take into consideration the concrete circumstances of the working class and its movement, the reactionary platforms of Türk-Is and DISK (which are closer to each other more than ever) and the "strength" of the forms of organisation of the "left" and "right" trade-union bureaucracy, we can easily see that this assumption does not reflect reality. 

We must also emphasise that the success of DISK would mean the 'buying off' by the bourgeoisie of the advanced workers and trade-unionists who have been brought to the fore by the workers' movement. Implicit in it would be the expansion and renovation of the bureaucratic petit-bourgeois strata. The Türk-Is bureaucracy could relax, their hegemony would be restored and the present trade-union apparatus would be abandoned to them. The bourgeoisie wants DISK to organise as a new fraction of the bourgeois-capitalist party within the class. With its platform, activities and objective role, DISK is a new bridgehead into the working class by the bourgeoisie. Its function is not different from the one SHP has in the present government vis-a-vis the working class and the Kurdish people. They are building a new breakwater beside the old undermined one in the face of the gathering storm. 

This opinion we advance should not be misunderstood. Our party does not have a view that a new trade-union alternative to the present ones cannot be founded under any circumstances. That is determined by the conditions in which the workers' movement develops, the state of the fight between revolution and counter-revolution, the balance of power between the progressive and reactionary forces within the movement and many other factors. In our party's opinion, for example, the split of DISK from Türk-Is? in the late 1960s (despite all the shortcomings) was necessary, useful and correct for the workers' movement. In the late 1970s and in 1980 the existing platforms of the trade-union confederations constituted a disadvantage for the working class and its movement. In short, the existing trade-unions can be dispersed or new ones can be founded, if that corresponds to the conditions of the workers' movement. If required one can be preferred to the other. It cannot be denied that this is a general and valid tactical approach. 

When evaluating the situation of the movement and circumstances where DISK is being put forward as a "new" alternative, our party never ignores this basic approach. On the contrary, it evaluates the mutual relations of all phenomena, the dynamics and weaknesses of the class movement, the balance of power within the trade-unionist movement and draws its stance from this objective analysis. What kind of path will the working class follow? Will they be able to succeed in understanding the role assumed by DISK within the movement and in countering the threat posed by the Türk-Is and DISK bureaucracy? Do the working class and their advanced sections have the possibility to pursue an independent path? The essence of which direction events take lies in these questions. 

It is obvious that it is not possible to make concrete predictions on whether DISK will be able to embrace the advanced sections of the class. However, there are possibilities (if utilised) to beat back both the Türk-Is? and DISK bureaucracy; to stop attempts to split the workers' movement (the competition between trade-unions); for the workers to gain positions in the trade-unions, no matter which confederation they are affiliated to; and to reverse the process of splits and divisions which is practised with all its contradictions and conflicts. 

The first one of these possibilities is the discontent and anger in the rising workers' movement and the profoundity of the social and political movements that have produced the stirrings in the class over the last few years. 

Secondly, there is the possibility of the development of the trade-union branches' platforms, which have emerged in the main industrial centres as a result of the workers' struggle of the last few years, onto a revolutionary-democratic platform. Also we look to these platforms combining with the relatively progressive trade-union centres in a common democratic movement. 

Last but not least, this would require the advanced workers developing their intervention with the branch platforms and the progressive union centres -irrespective of which confederation they are affiliated to. They must orientate towards the class and these organisations, towards an understanding of the importance of them making themselves the basis of the opposition against the top bureaucracy of Türk-Is and DISK. 

Let us say that the sooner the workers' movement gets rid of the temporary stagnation that it is suffering and of its crippling morale and organisational decline, the sooner it speeds up its movement towards freedom and democracy, the easier it will become for the struggle within the trade-unions to find its way. Moreover, the working class movement has strong allies which have the possibilities to develop. For example there is the Kurdish popular movement and the public employees' movement. These allies are also the socio-political factors which weaken the trade-union bureaucracy and the reactionary bourgeois camp and facilitate the workers' movement entering into a new period of progress. No one can claim that the movement entering into a new period of progress does not imply, in the conditions of Turkey, the advance of the opposition within the trade-unions. 

Some people, who put forward DISK as an alternative, start from the "hypothesis" that it is impossible for the workers to seize the trade-unions affiliated to Türk-Is. This, however, is not true. It is quite obvious how the workers overthrew the Harb-Is administration in which the Türk-Is bureaucracy was very strong. This achievement of the workers proves the fact that the possibilities we have outlined above can be utilised by the working class and the present trade-unions can be seized. In our party's opinion, the advanced sections of the working class must realise that "opting for" the DISK 'alternative' implies a life which is as hard, if not harder, as the life under the hegemony of Türk-Is?. When the workers' attitude reflects this understanding it will be clear that the muscle of the class will be strengthened. There is no doubt about this. 

Just to make clear our opinion on the trade union question in the workers' movement in Turkey and the DISK "alternative" let us illustrate our party's trade union tactic which has been renewed with the reorganisation of DISK. Briefly, the principle elements of our trade union work among the workers are these: 

a) Our party does/will not offer any present trade union (including the confederations) to the movement as an alternative. Our party's work is based on the exposure of the line and activity of the reactionary trade union administrations, independently of the confederation or trade union they are affiliated to. It makes propaganda for the indispensable seizure of the present trade unions by the workers, their democratisation and their revolutionisation. In other words, we are for their transformation into schools of socialism. It is also based on helping the workers to expand and advance their opposition to the trade union bureaucracy. That is the only way for trade union unity of the working class. 

b) If DISK becomes a pole of attraction -either to the rank and file or to union leaders- our party organisations will not oppose this tendency. We will not refrain from exposing DISK's bureaucracy as well as that of Türk-Is?. However, our party organisations will base themselves on the orientation and attitude of the majority of the awakening workers. They will carry out their activities within all the trade unions which are recognised by the workers to turn them into genuine workers' organisations -irrespective of the confederations or union centres they are affiliated to. 

c) It is obvious that the great majority of the working class masses are not yet organised in the trade unions. In organised workplaces, our party takes a number of factors into consideration when we encourage workers to join a particular union. These include the situation of the unions in that sector, the features of the union in which the struggle and opposition of the majority of the workers in that sector is concentrated, the level to which the majority of the workers in that sector are convinced of the need to join that particular union, etc. In organising the workers in an appropriate union, our party organisations will make the maximum effort to create genuine workers' organisations. Throughout this process, they will continue to express their views on the reactionary lines of the trade union administrations. 

d) Despite difficulties, it is possible for significant changes to take place. These depend upon the general trend of the workers' movement, the character of the opposition to the trade union bureaucracy, or even on the wave of class anger reaching a level which can actually shift the balance of power between the classes. For instance, the trade unions can be reorganised as class unions or on a platform determined by freedom and democracy, they can turn into genuine workers' organisations . The workers' movement may put onto the agenda the inevitability of schism and the organisation of a separate trade union confederation for the advanced sections of the class. Under different political circumstances and power relations, the mass movement and the separate trade union organisation of the advanced sections of the working class may/can give rise to progressive changes within all other sections of the class and open the way to class unity. One can be sure that, under such circumstances, our party's work and policy would be to consolidate and take part in such a development. 

e) In order to develop politically and organisationally, the working class movement does not at the moment have to change its trade union or trade union confederation affiliation. The trade union bureaucracy is deceiving and disorganising the workers on behalf of the bourgeoisie. In these conditions the fundamental task is to assist the workers to become conscious, to turn into a genuine organised force in their workplaces, to sharpen their attempts to eradicate the trade union bureaucracy. The movement will succeed in this task by basing itself on the existing organisations and by fighting to seize them. For the workers' movement to utilise its possibilities it is very important to destroy the reformist and bureaucratic orientations within the trade union platforms through work and organisation among the masses. What is also important is for trade union branches to get closer to the workers and workplaces. Therefore, our party organisations will greatly increase their activities in this direction and base themselves on assistance to the workers in their struggle and organisation. 

f) As for the public employees' unions, in our party's opinion the key question for these unions is not that of "centralisation". Nor is there any "gain" for them in affiliating to DISK. Those who are advocating affiliation to DISK and its bureaucracy are trying to drown the working class by submerging them into a general "working people", (it is irrelevant that a part of these sections is workers). They are also, on behalf of the bourgeoisie and liberal bourgeois "socialism", trying to stunt the public employees' movement with parliamentarian illusions and thus keep it under their control. If these unions affiliate to DISK, they will gain nothing but the reactionary barrier of the DISK bureaucracy. 

The main question for these unions today is to become mass organisations, to unite all their forces and to pull them into the open mass struggle. In the meantime, they must give importance to advancing the common platforms that they have founded. The centralisation of these platforms will enable them to achieve the power and the authority that will allow every one of them to organise the broadest masses possible in their own field of work and centralise the united mass struggle of all the working people. When centralisation is on the agenda, one must consider it as a federation of the unions of the public employees. 

The true relationship and solidarity between the working class and the public employees will be realised by pursuing such a line, not by the affiliation of these unions to DISK. Experience proves this. That is our party's position on the question of the organisation and centralisation of public employees' unions. The work of our party organisations among them will advance this policy. 

This is our party's analysis, evaluation and tactical policy regarding the actual trade union problems of the working class, the question of DISK and work within trade unions in general. In our opinion, every political current and group which claim to be devoted to the working class and socialism must have such an outlook and work on such a platform. That is our opinion.