TDKP History - Defeat

The September 1980 defeat and the struggle against liquidationism

However, the developments did not take place as assumed. As everybody knows, the gang of generals of the 12 September 1980 coup launched its attacks in conditions when a link had not yet been established between a small fighting section of the working class and the majority of the masses; and when the fighting section had not succeeded in overcoming internal divisions to create a united force. Consequently, the mass movement was stopped. The coup dealt heavy blows first against other organisations and then against ours. The junta made good use of the weaknesses of the workers' movement and of the reformist and sectarian environment surrounding the left-wing organisations.

After the 12 September coup mass movement had been repressed, opposition organisations were smashed, and the country was silenced. Political currents disintegrated and melted away in liquidationist divisions. Although our party protected itself for a while from these developments, it could not stop the liquadationist waves from emerging in its ranks with a right-opportunist tendency at the centre of our party and within the party circles. This right-wing opportunist influence increased as the silence caused by the 1980 coup continued. The year 1985 witnessed this right-wing opportunist current maturing and bursting like the head of a boil.

It is known what had happened in the party from 1985-87, namely the elimination of the liquidators in mid-1987 and the CC taking the initiative into its own hands. It was not a coincidence that the liquidationary attacks in the party took place at a time when the silence caused by the military coup was being overcome. The masses were heading towards a new awakening and all these developments were having an impact on life. The transformation into an overt liquidationism of the opportunism which had been maturing over the years just at a time when the conditions were emerging which could have ended this process, was to do with escapism from the demands of open struggle. No matter how the liquidators/opportunists justified their counter-revolutionary actions (the blows our party had suffered, its mistakes, and the defeat it had suffered were all given as excuses), the content of their demands was enough to give away their escapism.

The liquidationary groups attacked our party and denied its existence, basing their criticism on the defeat, the shortcomings and the weaknesses it had suffered. However, the party can be the guarantor for the victory of the revolution and socialism but it cannot guarantee that it will not be defeated. On the other hand, the weaknesses and shortcomings of a party cannot be the reason for its liquidation, as any party which struggles might naturally make mistakes. Also, it may not always be possible at every time and in every situation for a young party to go far beyond the stage of development of the society (of the class, people, cultural and ideological environment, etc.) to which it belongs, and beyond the views, understandings, traditions, and styles from which it has just emerged. In fact, to demand perfection and pure correctness from a young party indicates a lack of understanding of sociological and political life.

The liquidators denied this, not wanting to understand these most obvious facts. Their actual aim was to destroy the gains made by the class through our party; to destroy our organisation and to avoid the responsibilities of class struggle. Although, the liquidators were using them against it, our party nevertheless would not and did not cover up its shortcomings and weaknesses. Our party would not and did not deal with its problems on the liquidators'terms. In addition, throughout its history, it has never been afraid of acknowledging its mistakes and shortcomings. On the contrary, it has always considered it as a fundamental task to fight these problems with revolutionary self-criticism and in a revolutionary way.

Our Central Committee, when it started re-constructing the organisation in mid- 1987, considered it a central task and fundamental policy to advance the party in accordance with the demands of the class struggle. This was the precondition for success in all tasks, including tackling shortcomings and weaknesses. Our organisation was led down the path of liquidation through being diverted from class struggle. The only way to reorganisation was through basing itself and its work on the requirements of daily struggle, of the awakening and the organisations of the masses. This was the line to be followed in order to reveal, recognise and overcome the shortcomings and weaknesses.

The task was to reposition the party forces on the basis of factories, workplaces and residential areas; linking the agenda of the organisations, which united and established a common party life, with the demands and the requirements of the mass movement. Tackling the shortcomings and weaknesses inherited from the past were part of this agenda and of everyday political and organisational work... This was the line followed by our party which considered it the precondition for being revolutionary and communist to protect what is communist in the character of our party as its most precious achievement, making this a part of everyday struggle. 

The period which began in mid-1987 and continued until 1990 has marked a period of real progress for our party. This period witnessed not only the isolation of the liquidationist groups and the recovery of our forces, but also the establishment by our cadres and circles of closer links with the factories. It brought our organisation to the centre of the workers' movement, eliminating other groups. The 1988-89 workers' movement tested the policies and the line of our party, also showing the way forward for the criticism and correction of shortcomings and weaknesses. Poor tactics and non-class-based approaches had suffered heavy blows by the year 1990 as our organisation had had significant experiences not only in teaching the workers but also in learning from them.

The May 1990-91 struggle let advanced workers and public opinion see the difference between other groups and our party. From 1987 to 1990 the development of the party continued, being marked in 1190 by one of the most significant events in our party history: the February General Conference. In mid-1987 by the liquidator "entrepreneurs" attempted to hold a conference but later had to cancel it because there was no majority. Thus the February General Conference was the first such event since the First Foundation Congress of 1980.

This General Conference discussed, apart from theoretical and programmatical problems of our party, all political and organisational problems (making the balance sheet of the last 15 years in terms of political, organisational line and tactics), and made revolutionary decisions and resolutions based on the experiences of the struggles carried out over the years. The Conference, taking all moral and organisational responsibility for the mistakes in our history, analysed and criticised our current political and organisational work. It was also a many-sided, direct, revolutionary and proletarian declaration of war against the Gorbachevist liquidationist tendency which had risen after 1985 in the Soviet Union and had had a disturbing effect on the "left" and " intellectual" circles in our country. 

When the working class and the theory and practice of its revolutionary party were going through a very critical period characterised by unprecedented counter-revolutionary attacks, the February 1990 Conference took very important decisions, re-emphasising our party's position. At a time when all other currents were seriously shaken, our party renewed the decisions of the 1980 Congress with regard to the revolutionary party of the working class; and highlighted the task of re-constructing the party and advancing towards the revolutionary mass party in line with the developments of the class movement. In this way it challenged all liquidationary orientations.

"The re-construction of the party organisation on strong foundations and as a total of workers organisations; the gathering into the party of the best, the most devoted and advanced elements and their political leaders having unbreakable links with the proletarian masses; the advance of our party organisation towards a revolutionary mass party in line with mass revolutionary development, all of these summed up the task ahead. It was natural, therefore, that these ideas gave the meaning and essence to the rest of the decisions and demands of the Conference.

The essence of the liquidationist thesis was the declaration of the "loss of importance" of class in society, and of the "bankruptcy" of the Leninist Party. Under conditions when revisionist liquidationism was at its peak, our Conference did not limit itself only to taking this decision and making its demands. It was also to set out a line which would secure as far as possible the implementation of the decisions and the calls. Under those conditions when irresponsibility towards the workers and working people and open attacks on Marxism-Leninism had become blatant, attention had to be drawn to the necessity of putting into practice these decisions and demands. These were as follows:

Firstly, it was imperative "to take part in the spontaneous struggle in the most determined way, and with the most correct tactics, and to correct our mistakes and shortcomings by utilising the experiences of the workers".

Secondly, it was necessary to follow a revolutionary and assertive path "which understood the urgency of defending the theory of proletarian revolution, Marxism-Leninism, in the face of the destructive campaign carried out by the imperialist and revisionist bourgeoisie, by the bourgeois, revisionist, Trotskyist and social democrat circles, and which also recognised the urgency of launching a developing war on every front of theoretical ideological struggle against the imperialist-capitalist ideological offensive".

The Conference platform not only set the aim and task and the line to be followed, but also concretised these and linked them to a specific objective: "Our party's second congress will be held as a congress of the organisations of the bravest and the most self-sacrificing elements of the working class, and of an organisation which, depending on the growth of the class movement, has taken steps on the path towards being a mass party". 

Alongside other imperatives, it was necessary to recognise the importance of the form of work and organisation in order to achieve this objective. The Conference emphasised once again the "illegal base" of our organisation, drawing attention to the liberal "wave of legalism" resulting from the regime's "comedy of liberalisation". The Conference acted in accordance with the line and resolutions of the 1980 Congress, and based itself on the dialectic of illegal and legal work. It underlined the task of "following a line based on illegality, but making the best use of the 'legal' opportunities provided by the dictatorship for its class collaborating servants. It also emphasised the task of "strengthening and deepening this line".

Our Conference underlined this task intentionally. This was because, on the one hand there were some political currents in our country which were completely isolated from the masses, as a result of having based themselves on a so-called "illegality" which was used as an aim rather than an instrument, and of taking the path to terrorism and degeneration. On the other hand there were other currents, defenders of legalism, who denounced illegal work, limiting themselves to the boundaries of "legality", and appealing to all other currents to enter that arena. It was necessary for our party to re-draw a line of demarcation between itself and these two tendencies; and for our organisation to combine legal and illegal work and organisation, to stand firm in the face of the wave of legalism, and to make creative use of every opportunity and platform.

Our party platform warned our organisation over the "problems" which had never been a problem before: the "rising values" of liberal legalist "socialism" had denigrated values like "work discipline" and "duty" which are the most fundamental obligations of being a party and organisation. And this was a threat to the work of the new generation and our organisations, and to their revolutionary character. Our platform, warning that "our analyses, line and plans should not remain on paper or as a formula", called for the "study of the tasks set forth by the platform we stand on, and the implementation of the plans in every area and unit in a creative way". This demand, while encouraging our organisations to carry out their work within the class in a more energetic and determined way, played a significant role in their stronger stance vis-a-vis the revisionist and liquidationary pressure and influence. (Above quotes are from the 1990 Conference documents)

In the post-Conference period, the struggle of our organisations advanced, drawing attention to important shortcomings and uncovering the degenerated petty-bourgeoisie elements. The evaluations, criticisms, decisions and demands of the Conference formed the platform of struggle and action of our organisation and its fundamental material. Although the Conference had partial traces of traditional style and approach, its evaluations, criticisms, plans and resolutions were revolutionary and proletarian. It was natural that the following period would developed as it has -when the party's esteem has further increased and our organisations' work and relations among the workers have become stronger.