The Turkish state has carried out a new massacre in the midst of its military operations going on for a long time. Kurdish villagers traditionally engaged in smuggling across the Iraqi border were bombed in Uludere Sirnak by Turkish fighter-bomber aircrafts. The attack was carried out on December 28, around 22.30 by F-16 fighter-bombers killing 36 Kurds, most of them at the age of 15-19. Still there are 17 missing.

Prime Minister Erdoğan admitted in a speech that the Turkish state has made a massacre in Dersim in 1937-8. Showing some official documents from state archives Erdoğan said that there were 13.806 persons killed, more than ten thousand deported and thousands of little girls forcibly taken and raised by army officers. He claimed that as government they were coming to terms with the past and shedding light into dark corners of history, adding that “if there is need for an apology on behalf of the state, if there is such a practice in the books, then I would apologise and I am apologising.”

The debates on “the nature of the Soviet state” served to divide the communist movement into pieces for many years. This question is still important and is not just confined to explaining a historical phenomenon. The question is about how do we conceive socialism, what kind of workers’ state do we aim and how do we attain these goals. It is self-evident that a question of this nature is fundamental to almost all aspects of political struggle. Therefore on the occasion of the anniversary of the October Revolution we think it will be useful to provide a summary composed of the work In the Light of Marxism by Elif Çağlı who provided a scientific and original answer to this question on Marxist premises.

Once again Turkish state is stepping up repression of Kurdish movement and Kurdish people. As usually it is accompanied by chauvinist frenzy stepped up after Cukurca raid by Kurdish guerrillas. As military operations go on in Kurdish provinces, especially in the border areas, there are many attacks by fascist gangs in the company of the police across the country against the Kurdish party BDP (Peace and Democracy Party) premises and Kurds. Ocalan has not been allowed to see his lawyers for more than 3 months. And media employ a strongly anti-Kurd language which is similar to 1990s.

The subject of sub-imperialism involves controversial dimensions that are offshoots of differences on how to understand imperialism or globalisation. There have been erroneous political attitudes on the part of the world left in general and Turkish left in particular because of ruling out the distinction between the colonial and imperialist stages of capitalism. One expression of such attitudes has been to brand the countries such as Brazil , Argentina and Turkey as semi-colonies or neo-colonies. While these positions prevailed for many years they have recently been refurbished and popularised in the context of the debates on globalisation. A typical example of this is to deny that globalisation under capitalism is a more developed state of imperialism and present it as a new stage of “empire”.

Although such experiences are pleasing in themselves since they carry forward the mass of the class, they are by no means enough for the working class to break the chains of wage-slavery and achieve freedom. Conditions of emancipation can develop depending on the quality and quantity of the distance taken by workers towards political consciousness and organisation. In this respect, it has a vital importance to make sure that at least the vanguard elements of the class are capable of answering the questions such as “what kind of organisation?” or “what kind of a unity?” in a way to carry forward the struggle.

The wave of popular uprisings that started in Tunisia and continued with Egypt embracing North Africa and the Middle East has reached a new phase. Though one needs to analyse the situation in Egypt in the aftermath of Mubarak’s overthrow, there is no doubt that the process of mobilisation of millions and Mubarak’s eventual step-down in itself is already a serious source of inspiration in the eyes of other Arab peoples. New upsurges of mass movement that are taking place especially in Yemen, Bahrain and Libya are a demonstration of this fact. Whatever the short term results of this mass wave of revolt it is clear that there is a new era in this region unfolding and that nothing will be the way as they were so far. The social-political struggles to take place in this region in the period ahead and the kind of regimes to be established will be the focus of attention for revolutionaries as well as bourgeois political realm.

The working class youth and those young people who are discontented with capitalist society today need Marxism more than ever. Capitalist system is escalating social maladies it created to unbearable levels, darkening the lives of the working masses day by day. The kind of life offered by capitalism to them is full of anxieties and worries which is in sharp contrast to the world it has decorated with bright lights of technological innovations. Although it is often said that future belongs to the young, there is no happy future for those millions of young people under capitalism.

When you look into the various cases of opportunist tendencies within Marxist movement you cannot but see that a common feature of all opportunist tendencies is to turn a deaf ear to revolutionary criticism. Although the opportunists sometimes seem to accept general revolutionary principles when they are squeezed, in effect they keep following their well-trodden opportunist way. Thus opportunism makes upsurges that are generally unavoidable. Giving concrete examples will surely make clear these features of opportunism that we state here very briefly. As a striking example we can take the upsurge of opportunism in the case of the IMT (International Marxist Tendency) lead by Alan Woods.

The struggle for the creation of the international organization of the working class requires intransigence in principles and flexibility in tactics. Neither opportunism pursuing short term so-called political achievements nor sectarianism unwilling to see and accept anything other than its own small organization can be of any use for this struggle. The reality we face today in the issue of building the revolutionary international organization of the proletariat puts very important responsibilities and tasks over the shoulders of the internationalist communists. Those who are self-confident will continue revolutionary efforts in every field undertaking these responsibilities and tasks. Those who are not intimidated will move forward. All big problems in history have been resolved this way.

Imperialism is a world system that links all nation-states large or small to each other through diverse (and of course unequal) economic relations. For this reason, to defend that nation-states can even be fully independent in an economic sense despite the imperialist system is not overthrown by proletarian revolutions progressing on a world scale is a distortion of Marxism. In conclusion we have to point out once again that we must understand from national liberation nothing but achieving political independence. Economic liberation is a matter of social revolution.

In conclusion, tendency to give the proletariat a national consciousness is a reactionary one. And it is has been the attitude of all petty-bourgeois revolutionary leaderships who, on the one hand, proclaim themselves as “Marxist-Leninist” and on the other hand defend “national culture” in their all ideological and political practice. Rejecting the defence of “national culture” as part of proletarian internationalism is not only the task of the communists of the oppressing nation. This task is equally up to the communists of the oppressed nation.

A very intensive debate over the question of European Union has been conducted in recent years. But it is hard to say that, a well-built and a complete Marxist perspective could be suggested, especially by the leftist group in Turkey. This pamphlet composed of three section aims to suggest such a Marxist perspective.

The importance of theoretical struggle on national question springs essentially from the need to take a correct political attitude based on Marxist foundations in the face of the liberation struggle of oppressed nations. Marxism is not an impressionist or positivist philosophy limiting itself only with interpreting the world, but an integral world view which strives to change the world and develops in an inextricably dialectical relationship with revolutionary practice.

The cause of the working class is not one of providing some free social services coupled with keeping the population under political pressure ensuring a formal equality on poverty. The aspiration of building a world without classes and exploitation, i.e. the cause of socialism, is the cause of equal sharing of not poverty but the whole wealth of the world, meeting material and moral needs and thus removing all kind of obstacles on the way of individual and social development of humanity. Therefore international communists defend that whole world needs not Chavezes, Castros etc. but Bolshevik revolutionaries.

The recent developments in Venezuela and especially Chavez’s talk of socialism which he named as “Socialism of the 21st Century” created a new wave of excitement in the vast majority of the world socialist movement. It is undoubtedly exciting and pleasing for anyone who calls himself/herself Marxist to see that working masses demonstrate openly their discontent against the system by eliminating traditional bourgeois parties, repulse - by fighting in the streets - attempts of coup d´état supported by the Venezuelan oligarchy and the US imperialism and finally create a revolutionary situation. But, the meaning of these developments changes when it is realized that the real source of this wave of excitement is not the revolutionary situation created by the initiative of the masses but the demagogical talk and populist policies of Chavez.

You cannot play games with revolution. If the ones who talk about revolution and socialism want to stand by their words, they must follow a proper way to fulfil the resulting tasks on an organizational and strategic level. However some socialist groups including some would-be internationalists have already indulged themselves in the so called “left winds”. With a frivolous attitude, they follow a policy of “saving” the moment.

In recent years, a great deal has been written and said about globalisation. The imperialist powers even derived an ideology which is expressed with this concept, and which corresponds to their worldwide interests. To such an extent that, everything is being explained via this concept: Global economy, global interests, global terror, global assault, global defence, global hazards etc. Under conditions that the socialist movement is at the bottom and the bourgeois ideology has gained strength, the concept of globalisation has been almost declared as the motto of the twenty-first century. The liberal and reformist left circles that tailed after the bourgeois ideology theorised the fact of globalisation in accordance with the interests of the bourgeoisie. Globalisation has been and is being presented decorated with pompous labels like “post-capitalist society” or “information society” as if it were a magic potion that would eternalize the capitalist mode of production.

Is there any room for a "socialism in one country" in Marx's scientific theory of socialism? Is there a separate socio-economic formation called "socialism" in itself independent from communism in Marx's theory? Can the socialist organisation of society (which is classless society) be compatible with the simultaneous presence of a "nation-state"? Can there really be a workers' democracy if the workers do not rule, even if there is a state conducting "in the name of" the working class, organised in a bureaucratic manner with its professional army and police, judicial and administrative machinery? Or, in such a "workers" state, in whose hands would be the real power: in the hands of workers, or of some others?

In this book, Elif Çağlı deals with these questions and other similar ones, and gives answers on the basis of Marxism.

For such a long time the significant lyrics of the Internationale have reflected the revolutionary hope and enthusiasm of the working class in many countries. The International unites the human race! These words do not merely voice revolutionary enthusiasm rising up through the air, but also express an important truth. It is an indispensable condition that the working class must be successful in its struggle against capitalism in order for the humanity to achieve liberty, getting rid of the evil of exploitative and class societies. To advance this struggle and gain victory depends in turn on the level of internationalist consciousness and organization of the proletariat.

The trade unions cannot be surrendered into the hands of the bureaucrats, particularly at such a crucial time. The unions can undertake very important functions when there is a wave of struggles that rises from the rank and file of the working class. Look at the deep discontent that is simmering among the rank and file of the workers' unions. Listen to the voice of militant workers and shop stewards who are try to give a fighting lead in the various union branches. Forward to the class struggle against the imperialist war! No room for pessimism; mobilise in the struggle against the imperialist war and this condemned capitalist order!

We are passing through an atmosphere in which the rage against the imperialist war is turning into a massive reaction throughout the world. Through pacifist actions, pacifists and reformists are trying to limit this reaction of the masses, which is gradually assuming an anti-capitalist content, to the confines of capitalist order. Yet the only force that can stop this war is the organised power of the world working class, which comes from production. All revolutionists, communists and conscious workers should mobilise all working class organisations, above all unions, to form factory committees against war and coordinate them on a national and international scale. Preparations and rehearsals of general strikes that will stop all production and transportation when the war begins should immediately be started.

One should never be misled by the cheap heroism of the Turkish bourgeoisie - its government, official opposition, organisations of capital, General Staff - that gives a false impression of anti war attitude. There cannot be a common point between the genuine anti war attitude of the overwhelming majority of the working class and toiling masses and the attitude of bourgeoisie. Because their problem is not their conscience but wallets. What troubles them is not mutual massacring of sons of poor people but whether they will profit from the adventure of war they will set out. Now the Turkish bourgeoisie comparatively reckons the loss and profit in case of both giving and not giving support to war in Iraq. So the prospect of an imperialist war exposes the disgusting face of capitalism in a blatant way.

Although the blow inflicted by the toiling masses against the rotten bourgeois parties is welcome, we understand that, unless they are organised, the masses cannot reform this system. Nor can they resist the attacks of the capitalist system, whatever bourgeois party they bring to power. The task of communists, contrary to the propaganda of the bourgeois liberal priests, is to transform the anger of the working class into a conscious opposition to the system. Their task is to organise the struggle effectively, and prepare the way for the underlying opposition to the system to express itself clearly and prove itself on the streets. Now the broad masses are expecting jobs, democracy etc., from the AKP government. ... The truth has to be explained and the advanced layers need to be organised. This task falls on our shoulders. In a bid to save its morale, the bourgeoisie is presenting the AKP government as opening up a new period where its own interests can be defended. A new period also opens up for us, in which we need to step up the struggle in the interests of our class, the working class.

Turkey is now engulfed in economic crises never seen before. There are aspects of recent crises peculiar to Turkey, but the source of problem is essentially the world capitalism. As a result of economic programs dictated by the imperialist organisations like World Bank and IMF, Turkish economy constantly resorts to devaluations and lives with loans. Turkey is now one of the eight most indebted countries of the world. The total amount of its debts is nearly $210 billion.

As membership of Cyprus to the EU draws closer, the pressure exerted by liberals in the Turkish press on Denktas (the president of the so-called, but unrecognised KKTC, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) has been increasing. All of a sudden they have started to complain about how many millions of dollars Cyprus has cost Turkey in these hard times of economic crisis, and what a huge fetter this is for Turkey’s entry into the EU. The debate has swiftly turned into a blunt choice of “whether to abandon Cyprus or annex it”.

We know that the world capitalist system, which moves through cycles of crises, tries to overcome big crises with wars, repression and reactionary regimes that mean incredible suffering for the masses. But we must add that the convulsive periods in world history have also been the womb of revolutions...