Kemal Okuyan, the first secretary of the Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) and soL news portal columnist, wrote an article on the upcoming referendum on the presidency in Turkey. Okuyan emphasises that a simple “no” vote is not enough on its own, and yet has the potential to create a revolutionary energy among the masses if accumulated in the right place.
'Yes': Insistence on the collapsed Ottoman project. What about 'no'?
Erdoğan is a politician who cannot function without regression and he proved that. That is why Turkey is being forced into a model that had been surpassed-shattered-overthrown long ago; a model that is coerced by Erdoğan, not only out of a reactionary admiration for the emperorship but also because he personally sees in it a protective climate.
Even though the bourgeoisie of the rotten Turkish capitalism has been bewildered by their own search for stability and fear of the working class, regression to the Ottoman model is unreasonable even for them. While the endeavour of modernising the Ottoman empire had failed about a century ago, polishing it as a "new vision" does not quite meet the needs of the bourgeoisie.
Yet, it is also true that the dominant class in Turkey is unable to offer a reasonable alternative to the stubborn and reactionary Erdoğan figure. As the political power relates the attainment of creating funds by plundering public funds and exploiting the people to the "Ottoman model", Turkish bourgeoisie keep silent about their reservations against the model and make the most of it until the whole model collapses.
Why is the Ottoman project destined to collapse?
The project itself had collapsed a century ago, and its replica a couple of years ago. The June Resistance in 2013 was nothing more than a powerful verification of a truth revealed in 2010 and 2011; that Turkey cannot fit in to the model the AKP government envisaged. The Turkey of the June Resistance period did not comprise only of the bourgeoisie. It was a grand country together with all its class conflicts, its ideological and cultural dynamics and its complex social structure. This country demonstrated the limits of Erdoğan.
In terms of the domestic policy, the Ottoman dream proved a false hope; and in terms of the foreign policy, the project against Syria hit the wall. The dream of raising the Ottoman flag over the Arab world shuttered and the June Resistance struck out at once.
Yet Erdoğan has survived. Because, as an actor that decided to get rid of the 1923 Republic, the Turkish bourgeoisie keeps Erdoğan alive, who follows populist policies in his own way, as the bourgeoisie searches for a way to keep the public away from the equation as much as possible and to transform them into a herd.
Now let's pause to have a closer look at the story of Erdoğan's strategy of detaining Fethullah Gülen.
1. This strategy was fostered by the Turkish bourgeoisie and some segments of the imperialist centres as a result of the difficulties of controlling the social movement against Erdoğan that emerged during the June Resistance.
2. These social reactions were forced, on the one hand, to rely on Fethullah Gülen, the conspirator; and to be channelled into CHP and HDP line, two political parties that accept the existing world order and do not push the boundaries of the political system.
3. The people, who had been dragged to the ballot box four times in 2014 and 2015, had been forced to make undependable and dull choices and to choose the lesser of the two evils.
4. When parliamentary calculations failed, they were delegated to a Gülenist coup attempt that even dared to bombard the parliament. In other words, they first tried to eliminate the rising social movement against Erdoğan, and then, after realising that the people cannot pull a rabbit out of a ballot box, tried to depoliticize the people by means of a coup attempt
5. The Gülen movement always hid its face, dealing in a conspiracy, which was both the strength and weakness of the Gülenist coup attempt. They infiltrated everywhere and it was their success. And yet, the coup attempt did not have a public figure. Although everybody talked about the technical weaknesses of the coup attempt, the real reason of the failure was their fear of the masses. However, this fear is not confined to Fethullah Gülen alone.
So...
Since the Turkish bourgeoisie knows that the Turkish society cannot fit in the Ottoman project, they have to devise an alternative for it. This also means a quest for the termination of the project. The same logic, though with more complicated reasons, is also true for the powerful imperialist centres.
All the evils of the 15th July coup attempt were blamed on the Gülen movement. However, they will keep making use of Gülen, because this dark organisation has deeply penetrated into Turkish capitalism and its international bonds. But they cannot insist on a solution that disinvolves the masses.
They will be in need of social energy. They are trying to build a mechanism that can limit and channel this social energy to a desired ideological and political direction. We are saying that they are trying but there is no specific actor to that end because capitalism is facing everywhere a deepening and complicated crisis that has no way out.
However, Turkey is an important country and the capitalists cannot simply say "well, never mind, we will accept the Ottoman project and make a killing". They cannot agree to that because of their fear of the masses.
They are preparing once again to deceive the masses with the masses. This is inevitable.
The referendum is fast approaching; things will not be settled with this referendum. If the "yes" side has the upper hand, Erdoğan will pass a critical point but he will never find peace. If the "no" side has the upper hand, then the will of the people will be strengthened in the increasing the intensity of the ongoing fight, but it will also accelerate the international monopolies' preparation and search for a change.
Who knows, maybe the process accelerates just before the referendum.
What about our side of the fight then?
We will keep the ones that try to fool the masses with the masses away from our ranks. The argument that the referendum is the beginning and end of everything is the invention of deceivers. It is our warning that they need the energy of the people against Erdoğan, but they are scared to death of this energy. They cannot regress back to the Ottoman model, but they are also scared to death of historical progress.
This is the crisis of the Turkish bourgeoisie. There is no way out of it. They wanted to get rid of the 1923 Republic and managed it. The overthrow of the Republic has opened the door to the Ottoman project. They will pass through that door but Turkey will not. This is the predicament they face. They want to stabilise uncertainty in Turkey. They wish the society to close the door to the Ottoman project and yet not to progress in the opposite direction!
This is our test.
In fact, prevention of the Ottoman project can create the energy necessary for the creation of a new egalitarian and free society in Turkey. Contrary to the general idea, the second option is not harder to attain than the first one as long as the energy of the masses is accumulated in the right place.
We will keep defending this idea wilfully. We will organise the working class in our ranks against the old lie “there are no classes; we are all in the same boat”. It is true that they need the energy of the masses badly. We will create the energy of the masses but we will not let it to fall prey to the bourgeoisie, the enemy of the people.
Yiğit Bulut seems to have been chosen as the flunky of the Ottoman project to manage the wealth fund. We will get rid of all these nonsense but we will not choose the lesser of the two evils and tolerate the plunder of the oligarchy and the monopoly.
Turkey has to open an alternative door while slamming the door in the face of the fervent admirers of the Ottoman Empire; otherwise, it leads to decomposition in mass.
That alternative door opens to socialism.
We can neither fight off reactionary admirers of the Ottoman Empire nor avoid traps unless we communicate what we advocate with a “no” vote.
“Not enough, but no”, a just claim, has become a popular slogan. Then, we have to define what is “enough”.
An Erdoğan rule purified of the Ottoman Empire admiration?
An AKP rule purified of Erdoğan himself?
A bourgeoisie dictatorship where AKP is neutralised?
A laicist and yet pro-American government?
What will be enough?
A simple “no” is not enough on its own, but the options above deserve a severe NO!
And yes, that alternative door opens to socialism. What will be enough has no counterpart other than socialism.
