31/03/2024
We have found this article In the red herald (heraldorojo.org)
We publish an unofficial translation of the article Published by Yeni Democrasi
On March 8, International Women's Day, has been left behind. We see that those who "maintain" alive on March 8 have a great blurred consciousness. This blurred consciousness has led them to call March 8 "Women's Day" or "Working Women's Day." Leaving aside the possibility of using this nomenclature as a tactic to be "inclusive", we will treat the revisionist line that we see specifically; Because the fight against revision is in favor of our revolution and will help produce the correct line. This fight implies not only the destruction of the adversary, but also our own development. We must constantly fight to search, expose, defend and overcome the truth so that the revolutionary line can be victorious. We must not forget for a moment that those who assume the responsibility of producing and disseminating the revolutionary line are not free from the regression and the problems that will lead to it.
In revolutionary women's organizations, especially in the last 10 years, we can say that feminist attitudes, sometimes timidly and sometimes boldly, have gained prominence. These attitudes, which are visible from declarations to slogans and banners, have "now" gone beyond the level of being a tendency, and a sexist tendency has begun to replace the class position. The scientific nature of this position, which is legitimized by calling it "the women's point of view," is never disputed. The righteous rebellion of the oppressed woman is reduced to the level of a reproach that fits within the order. From the point of view of the bourgeois woman, association is not perceived as a class problem. Since the ideological struggle against feminism is recommended, this process has evolved into supporting the feminist movement, following/not following it, and gradually resembling it.
A strange war
The thief's guilt will be revealed; In this article, we will deal with large landowners. While the women's organizations that claim to be revolutionary leave the question of women's emancipation for other issues, they seem to have thrown overboard what they stand for. Many women's organizations openly accept the line of feminism. In any case, what we expect from these organizations is nothing more than the way they currently express themselves. The problem lies with those who claim not to be feminists: Conformism will lead to uniformity and, ultimately, to the rejection of the revolutionary line. The reason we and some other women's organizations like ours are "marginal" is that they cannot "become the same," not because of incompetence, of course, but because of the revolutionary tradition on which they are based and the class attitude on which they feed.
When we observe the statements of March 8 of the Democratic Movement of Women (DKH) and the Liquidationist Group of the right, we see the "unbearable lightness" of not even to call March 8 "International Day of the working woman." We can evaluate this situation as a "confusion" or a "keyboard hypocrisy", let's evaluate it as such and continue. In the DKH statement entitled "We rebel against war, poverty and women's massacres" and the word "war" in the title, we could not find a phrase in the content. With this approach, we see that March 8 is compressed only in identity policies. We understand that the declaration read by Comrade Barbara Anna Kistler on March 8, 92 has been erased from memory, allow us to remind us: "Contrary to what feminists say, the woman's question is inseparable from the class issue."
There is acceptance of war as "man's work" by bourgeois currents. Unjust wars also exist to impose, consolidate and prevent the collapse of male domination. In unfair wars, women have been subject to enormous attacks, enslaved, captured, emigrated, sold in slave markets, subjected to worst torture and raped. Women's opposition to war is revolutionary if their main objective are unfair wars. Women do not have to be trampled herb while elephants trample!
Women who take sides in fair wars say that in the war they develop and release. Gül Kaya (Nergiz) states: "When it comes to war, a field symbolized by men, our work becomes even more difficult," and advises women to get rid of the vines that support them by the feet. GamzeGül Kaya (Ekin) Reality is captured when "my reasons for fighting increase day by day." Therefore, we will continue to participate in fair wars against imperialist-uninjusting wars. We want to "fight where there is life." This approach, which limits women to certain areas of struggle, is very dangerous. Women, who are part of humanity, must fight tirelessly in all fields by the liberation of humanity.
Unity for what?
We often see these comrades following a bourgeois group, current or movement. We catch them insisting on unions based only on "power" by saying "the broadest unity." We know that being many, multiplicity without a goal of power is not power. You can't be strong if you consider practices that don't aim at power to be "lifelong."
In trying to respond to the process, deviations to the right and left manifest themselves in different ways. The action unions have begun to drift into ideological alliances because the mechanisms of criticism are not sincere and the plane itself is slippery.
Without based on the unity of working women and the unity of women of oppressed classes, revisionism will be destiny. Faced with this, the development of the unity of action of the revolutionary organizations of women will pave the way for a revolutionary approach to the liberation of women.
No form of revisionism is innocent. The demand for disorganization is not a demand for protection and freedom for "individual women." On the contrary, it is a concern to protect already traditional individualism and feeds entirely the close interests of those who impose this demand, which have a place in this order. Of course we will also walk with them, of course we will also listen to you. We will do it without giving up developing our own line, without neglecting the responsibility of developing the correct line and without forgetting that the need for unity is born of the objective of making a great revolutionary war victorious.