I

CHAPTER FIVE

"TURKISH SOCIALISM" OF THE Yon GROUP AND THE SOCIETY OF SOCIALIST CULTURE

In December 1961 a group of leftist Turkish intellectuals began publication of a social and political daily newspaper called Yon (Direction). Its chief editor was Dogan Avc10glu, a well-known economist and journalist. A group of intellectuals formed around the paper composed of academics, journalists, people active in the arts, civil servants, teachers and doctors. For all the variety of ideological and political views represented by this group, all its members were of one accord: that Turkey could not overcome its social and economic backwardness by developing along the capitalist path. The founders of Yon held that only socialism could solve the problems before the country. The paper adhered to three tenets: that rapid economic development was possible only on the basis of social justice; that owing to the rapacious nature of development in the private sector and its thirst for superprofits, private enterprise could not guarantee rapid advance in the national economy; and that the power of foreign capital and the dependence of Turkey on the West had disastrous consequences for the country. In its first issue (20 December 1961) Yon published a Statement, endorsed by 150 Turkish intellectuals, presenting their outlook on the social and economic development of the country. In their opinion, Turkey's economic policy had to be based not on production by private capital but on 11 a new progressive type of statism" and planning, and on cooperatio� .1 between the state and the private sectors, the leading role being that of the ' state. Although the term "new progressive type of statism" was not defined, it was clear from the Statement that it meant a planned, socialist-oriented economy. The authors indicated that the state sector must become the dominant force in the economy, while the private sector would operate under the strict control of the state. They believed it necessary, for the sake of social justice, to carry out agrarian and tax reform. As their model they took the mixed economy with the predominance of the state and cooperative 86 CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALISM I OF THE II Yon" GROUP , 87

o m to e sectors. s ciali th views he d e ad � l by th K ro group in the 1930s ore o as o ev e ed e eme s se e t a s or (123, p. 179). ,.F ign p licy w n t r i w in th Stat nt, but �n ub qu nt Wi hin_ h t time br es o e anch f th SSC ope ed s l a s e s ure a n in I tanbu , I art c s Yon, s s atories adopted an nti-We t rn po t ; they Diy· r baku a d ot er es zrnu, i le in it ign n h . citi . �_!965 mem e s e b r hip of th o e as a o t c ed r e s coo e a o a d e dema ded e ve t o sa d S ci ty w b u r Tu k y' p r ti n with NATO n th USA, n _th � h u n (by com ar so mem ers c iti iz 1 p i n, o e b hip f th TLP d d r ed e eed e in 1966-1970 emov o e m ar ases o s so a d x o sa d e o i not r al f for ign- ilit y b n Turki h il, n u g that Turk y join e t n th u n ). Th e s t e o a at � S ci ty e th pr p o ur s so a o re e s ts m g ion f T ki h t o ed moveme t o e a eme d o a o ed to ci lism he n n-align n . Alth ugh th St t nt di n t p s nt a ain g al nd h p e e t e o d � pr par h gr un t e es l s me o r demo ra a o soc .s a for h tab i h a ter o c ss es de t o e o e eed e iali t t a la m nt f in nal p li y i u in tail, i sp k f th n fo c tiz ti n in th t p r y wi h p tfor ased o s de b n thi i ology. e se e o e as c e o a e deo o o ever as ot Th SSC it lf o tr e ta e rigin of n w i l gical h w , w o t art a c un y. Th S t m nt f th 150 w in fa t th _ n a p li ical p d eac mem er uld y n h b co e o o a so sm 11 o eve d d o ass e t e s b l ng t n; moveme c ed r s r; i n t um par y h wi ed e act v t es nt all "Tu ki h ciali , which, h w: h . T.li i i t e et er i of h Soci y w e co d o o s e s a o s e d ere d a t mes eve os a t o o nfine t th s t nt an , t i , n opp ing ' org niz i n ect es o v s di tinc utline . Th ign t rie h l diff � f l ur n ariou as e ts o e soc p c f th io-polit deo o ca a d o c v e s o e e t e s e s c st a o c develo me t o ical an: i l gi l n p liti al i w . T g th r wi h l fti t writ r , publi i s nd econ rru p n r e e o a f Tu k y, th pr p gatio o e dea o e evde d a m so sm n f th i f Turk' oe s as e r e a M h t ciali a o d e a es IS h p ts uch K mal Tahi , Q tin Alt n, M lih C t An ay, u ' , nd h 1 ing d b t re ese ta ves with pr n ti d e e ol t al e meclis o e e ces of iff r nt p i ic Makal and Fakir Baykurt, were members of th n th l ft of the for . e e eo es a r e d o e o e leade R publican P pl ' P rty (RPP) including Tu an Giin � an C �kun Kuca, S v ral f th TLP s e e a r , B hic Bor n a d r o a a a . e ato r .1cular o n E d gv n B Yr� a d rme mem ers omm ee r a o pa , osed e es a s me m n fo r b of the C itt fo N ti nal. Unity (CNU), S n r � pp th t bli h o t e e nt f h SSC. Th m ed t at e a s e oc1et o y aintain h a a am e s o t e e e e y d re e a s amo th S rni Kiic;iik, Suphi K r an, and V hbi Er ii. Am ng h int ll ctu l w r � w ul c at plit s c s s o ng o iali t , b th or a a o d s as e ad e a e l 1c. g niz ti nally an o sts o e o ar sm e sm 1d g ally e re om t v s ciali cl s t M xi -L nini uch Q tin Altan, S un Ar n nd 1 � . Th p d inan e t e eaders � i w in h TLP l hip as t a et a o r at reas ad o ed e s e s ose ose t a s o a at o w hat ny F hi N ci wh fo th on h j in th TLP, a w ll a th cl o sbci h t rg niz i n no a ed o e o t b s n th w rking a s o d ev ta . to cl s w ul in t ester soc a emo ac s as o a v m a s a se ta a o i bly urn W n i l-d cr y uch D g n A c10glu, Mii t z Soy al, �d m a c ri n group e le t s ose a f int l c ual wh v ould a o t o e cti ity w m un o o ev re a dem r ere ere so a omm st o r eo r e romo o o t n � ket Sii yy Ay i . Th w al nti-c uni b u g is � than th p ti n so st s o a s or f ciali l g n a e o e a rt leaders . F th t r as n th o re s s as o d e e me 1 a d · P y a e ed to l L b ur formist uch �iikrii K c;, Ab i Ip kc;i, M h t Ali K �lah n Omer � pp al al gro s o soc uping f ialist-inclined e ec al o t a o d t int ll tu s Sarni Co�ar. Despite the wide range of politics and ideology, however, they uru e r un he TLP. t a de e em ves s so s s e s ed r s o t e Yon o r a ll fin d th sel a ciali t . Th publi h w iting f h F r thei p rt the eo s s �SC id logi t - A vc d d m ro wglu an Ay e ir _ d ot oc st e ar d t e a r e rm t o o e oc e ap ve o e e a di n s iali s pr p e h w y in 1962 fo th fo a i n f th S i ty for f th TLP duc o al or a c sed \ ti n w k nd ac u t e r o t 1alist. h pa ty f split ing t e a s e o e t ve o seve o e a ors o t so ovem t e e eved h Soci li t Cultur (SSC) n th ini iati f ral f th uth f he � n ; th y b li t at t co a � � h i uld not chieve a a e ateme sm r o s e ected es de o e so e g s as t e v e ny t ngibl St nt. O an Nu i T run wa l pr i nt f th ci ty and ai , m h u i � o o s r � the c nditi n in Tu e e e o e r alist k y w r n t y t e a e at r e e e se e a o ad ee c rme o e soci a o r a e ip for N j E d r g n ral cr t ry. B th h b n hai n f th State _ l b u p rty. Th Yon d e e an SSC th a s soc e rde or tici n of Turkish al m r a at o e rm o s o o e as eade r ga d e d o e i is Planning O g niz i n. Th info ati n ecti n f th SSC w h d by th foun ing f th TLP as rema re a d , p tu n ld at s t a e e sa o he th fir t i w v 1 mse d e or a a o a se o s re e s ry e a e e o a s A c0glu hi lf, an th g niz ti n l cti n wa di ct d by Sun � � _ t ng g in th pr p o o s sm amo . gati n f ociali t e l ta a d a o e s a es o t 1 ' a te e ng h mi i ry n Hocaoglu, an RPP member of the meclis. M ny f th ign tori t he c1v1h n m lhg_ ntsia. 1 ta eme a s e ame em e s o e e o a s o e The s o a t t o S t nt l o b c m b r f th l ading rg n f th SSC. The bur t f c ivi y n e art o r s .. th p f the Tu ki h intellige t a eo a a d o o a m o e o et as te m d Yon a d ater t e n si in founding id logic l n p litical pr gr m e f th S ci y w r e "Turkish n l h SSC caused s e o di quiet in th c tr s o at ve ed un y' c nserv i circles so sm e s es c e e a e rm a ed vc1 Imm i at 1£ o e a ciali ," th ba ic principl of whi h w r l rg ly fo ul t by A 0glu � Y all wing th ppeara o t e st ss . nce f h fir i ue of Yon a o a a a re o as a ro ssor e ac o o c e and s m1 e eme ts n ti n list nd S dun A n, wh w p fe in th F ulty f P liti al Scienc at I l a · c l n he d ro e t em rat _ l p t s d onst ions a t e a e t t gains th p p r, charging vers t o a a o e deo o s so sm a evkel th I wa a omm or a the Uni i y f Ank r . An th r i l gi t of Turkish ciali w � � � s c unist g n (167, a e 7 J n. 1962). Th Prime ter t e a em r o ad o e a a om e r s omm s a e Minis Isme arty Inonu" st t d · t e meclis t a t e ad Siir yy Ayd i , wh h br k n w y fr th Tu ki h C uni t P _ m h h t h e e t o o a m . . h r n s f s ci lis , who e e ted t e ear er e ar c a e deavo red o a ma e e e e s o r • P. os s t eco o r j c h li . H , in p ti ul r, n u t pproxi t th t n t f Tu kish ibih y of n c ve o me a o mi de l p nt l t e es o t e - ng h lin f h Western TURKISH SOCIALISM OF THE" GROUP I 89 CHAPTER FIVE Yo�" 88 / and e nt do e e he ne e ea n a . a . a o d e o o cou ry, but I b liev in t c ssity of cr ti g soci list p rty. I h l a a he he el w re o a e ha a t ms v s t c mmunism a a a t a e e e . o . e o ro le de s, d ctually tt c d th t such p r y m y b ffec f Iv m s 1vmg th c untry's p b ms" ( m cr ci e 125, p. e el e t d o h a de t a he a ate e e dan pt. 1962). o ed .. . g rous (197, 27 S n o n 668). Gurs sugg s e t t e TSP 1e rs h t t y p r fic1p · m th qually n ea blig the he a a n a di g c mmu ism e o de e e r n ent 0n ot o o a he e ard e d t e e e a a gai st Yon of spr r a de t T ccus tio s o ar the el cti ns spit th i i t 1· n t .d o s s t Y r g h ms lv s s h a i ttitu o d olo o t cl ify oo r o II .. a a a. a n a e e e on le soci lism o o · e gists f Turkis n heo et an "sch l fo s cialism Akguc; w s g mst t ki g p rt m th l cti s, whi i ne the ea s f Turkish s cialism · a e l di g t r ici anda r o e e ed ha ar a 0n a ne e a he r en on ninism. O of o t ro a Ti it glu b li v t t p ticip· t1· w s c ss ry. T disag eem ts M rxism-L e are a n t o p p g is o e o l c mmunism. C mmunis e aro e n a d e e e a ed a t n he y, w gai s n e ena wr t : "Obvi us anned n o o lties. this issu , which s i August n S pt mb r 1960, c us spli i t he on t t on and c u try. Th p 11 dden is b i ur o rt ii and o e e nde o eade t e t c sti u i e do no o e t ' forbi by e a o a e t ·t�s pfl. y' Akg c; his upp rt rs l ft it. U r Tirit glu s l rship h a t a e W t bj c quit ppr pri t . do e ade no r : at e e on he o and a a a o . . c ivity r o he an TSP � ma k w so v r t c untry w s p rty nly m for communist de e ned is t ti t to o xplai : "S cialism n e to e a t . e te er e t o t 1962). Ay mir o le a · · · (202, 28 N v. o e e e ean gai st · nam . Tiri glu quit th p r Y m S p mb 1961 p ssnrns 1c ab u its d ere e he s f strugg ' o a st ff ctiv m n b' e e a ed a e er he er ne a th for is t m he t eat o o c mmunism n er oted th g i prosp cts . He was r p1 c s party l ad b t 1awy , Mm ttull h d o e "t hr f l si h w v , n at eat daro at o e at e e � . e h r (ibi .). Yon, e he Hay glu, wh s initi iv th TSP merge with th Turkis Labou communism" dan e o r t thr of end n e o Turk y. As for r n a nde st g r us fo nto a a p e c is m to t n he nt P·a ty i M y 1962. i e ed e ry i v ssal of t in ord r ur t cou n he la ed o e a o n o . . a o his is xploit e I 1963-1964 t SSC p nn t st blish I·t s w s c1al1st p rtY, t be communism, n the e en No. 81, p. 8). r and o pr s t regim " (202, 1964, d e o e a e . a o r e e o . e . e impe ialism ... t sustai c alle th W rk rs P rty. Th aim w s t fo c th TLP t urnt with th art a o o ed o o e r an o t e o e rtew p y. It w s als pr pos t ffer th chai m shi P f h W rk rs Parties o e he d o e ii t ra de . on d a . 0n and e e Up Western-TypeSocial Democratic Party t th a f th T rk-I � uru fe er t1 RPP m mb r Attempts to Set e . o t e an r ed r a e SeyfiD rrnrs y. Bu th pl p ov unwo k bl . e t a e o ar de n o e e n r o a at on o o t wing Th hird tt mpt t set uP such a p ty was ma i N v mb r 1964, e to ard d o life i Tu key foll e o tiz i f p li ical a e e ene o nded he v w s em cr e to ee ne Th m d t e n w w ys of when th former CNU memb r G ral· S · Ulay f u t Social t on o a g circl s s k a art r a t o e a ort t e re ol 1960 fo!ce h ruli h . . v u i f 27 M y eo n he Democr tic P y (SDP) This pa ty s w i s purp s s supp mg the h e o ar t e socialist · a n he n en id logy i t Turkis e a a d t and e t o a t on o f M xis -L ninist ht o e . ti g t i flu c o t n the "principl s of 27 M y" n fig h mg· communism 1 ftis · rg ruza i s of c mb a to en o a e t stablish e en ne a s cialis s o rig t en at n e a t e en le e e e an e and y w s c ur g e a at . . mov m t. O w ha d t on hat ori t io . Th p r Y was v ss ff ctiv th th TS p, within de a a e c stitut thre to e e n e o tic p rti s t t woul no r o t e e er ed . e de te e W st r -styl s cial mocr a yea f i s stablishm nt 1·t m g with th RPP (35) Thus, spi th e · e e e t e n r e e a e t o n a . e e te n e r gim . on the ht a backing. of th ruli g ci cl s, th tt mp t fou d via bl W s r -styl th xisting the the o m de hree t e ha rig a n e ed a n dera e de r e t o d n 1960s s cialists e . h first lf of a ho t e socialist p rty i Turk y fail . To co si bl g e his c ul be I a e he r 1960 coup, o n h s s r ly befor th d e atte p rti s. T fi st w n to lit en e o n ade t e o . e re d mpts t fou d suc d e de e plaine first, by th abs c f a qua s c1 al· basis for th sp a of e a a d res, tryi g . sp x e o e n ent r n A nan M n n o a d n e t o m of C lal Bay o ra er wh n the g v r the a aran e o Wester socialist c ncepts n seco d, by the fairly succ ssful ac ivity f the d e t e e c cy, p mitted t e o n a ppe c f dem i a a a e t ttra a ant. r e t n giv h ir r gime t nd h r h opp sitio r or t ii k sh Labour P rty, wh' ic h w s bl o a ct sub st ial pa t of th socialis n nd c; o fou t e Tu e a e aed a P ofess A if Akg t o e n l wy r Al di Tiritoglu ed on an ar d poten ial f th cou try. th he a ter e ta u y 1960, consiste t a l t , s blish 19 J P rty (TSP). T a d o a o Socialis o e o a sition hardly a ro o l n p litic l p o a wh s ideol gic eade ll g up of s cialists, a the f sm a e t t e l rs of the e o the Af er h M y 1960 coup The Theoreticians of Turkish Socialism on the Impossibility of the o r p rti s. a o e to re differ d fr m t tr d n e e vitalize t a o w y p ssibl n Uni y ie i v ry e in Development of Turkey along the Capitalist Path. tee for N ti nal e e ent n he e ruli g Commi he ro o t m rg g there ne tr n l m s i t Avcioglu's "Path of National-Revolution" g t p -c mmunis r a by u alizi t at ear e e this party, e t ne m n of th t an t o of h y th Chai t n . On 29 Ju 11 de d socialis m vem n r e a . I lef is ii d 1 mocrat e e i te vi w: am e e e n o to e a G rsel, sai in a press e G n ral Cemal t an e a e our Th th or ticia s f Turkish socialism ok th pos1·t1 on th t Turkey CNU, e o t ssfully in ot e t at t Par y c op r t succ do n beli ve h h C mmunis CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALISM 90 OF THE "Yon" GROUP I 91 I ou no o er ome t o e n r ne e e n r he e t c ld t v c i s s cial and co omic backwa d ss by d v lopi g could fo ce t w ll- o-do e t on o t e o . s c i s. f h p p ul on ontr. ute on t e rm r n n er e t r o . . ati to c ib e Th fo e Fi a ce Minist , and R c o of the are the ome to t e a sizabl al g the capitalis path. sh f 1 mc h ro u t e r n h � p d c iv b a c es. o re t nt e te n er o e n o n em r e o e . They als d w a te io Middl Eas r Univ sity f T ch ol gy at A kara, K al Kurda�, w ot in t th disparit o o o n y f s cial and om n e o e o ec n ic e ds f th on n o o e u he n Yon en e o o m n u e e e p pulati a d a 1 s t an articl p blis d i titl d, "The fiasc f capitalis i T rk y": the un v n oppo u th t th rt nities a e capitalist th o e e o v pa f d v 1 pmen t offered The Western world was able to develop in conditions of T ur k ey. A vc10glu noted that e n h u n n ou capitalist lib ralism, passi g t ro gh a very lo g a d tortu s the e e o n en ur o n n un e o e e o e e o en o T day, ca a derd vel p d l v l f d v l pm t our e on oe not p ri d lasti g a c t y. er om f c omy d s n oun r en ure o e entur e o n n u diff fr that o ro e . esse tially c t y d a wh l c y d vel pi g withi s ch a e f Eu p m 1800 u n er o e oreo e n e o e e o men e r qUi· reme · B t i t ms f syst m? M v r, i this 100-year p riod f d v l p t th nts and way of n . the en e thi _ k"m� we are m t en et e o t er m e o e o e re c tury W must 0 . u t w ti h syst m f capi alist lib alis xpl it d c loni s and ceived tr h J s ic e r o he om ne n nen u me n s e n r n t high wag�s, th igh� lp fr w co ti ts s ch as A rica a d Australia. ik , � d st o g ;;�/ -W hall t t n n i:U.� e � nse u e o re en t e n t e o on o bl� a t i justice n he t · n p agai�st Turk y, which nly c tly was i s lf i h p siti f a i t dis rib!tio ° ome e e o on no u o o u e n o e me private ter r e f m� _ . M anwhil c l y, has s ch pp rt niti s. A d if it foll ws th sa en p is which e t , o u t n d ds °\ capi alist re t t n to e h n o t e o o er pr d c io , also ' te i;� t la i�ns ?f pa h it will agai fall in th a ds f h c l niz s. (202, 31 e stipula s se1y t e te m nt n n th on um on e o a th sta ai ai Ja . 1962) c s pti lev l r m e o e en ur o f th� b oa d ass s f th o · n � � a 1 w wage e e the p pulat 1� , . n u l v l, assist ca itali n· · nore o I J st1 u er m . . P s ts, a d ig s cial ce; nd socialis . e . e t o n u n e e r o e e on o t o u e t rt n o n l���- Justic will b ake he D ga A vc10gl ot d th fa sl w r c omic gr w h f T rk y as s a i g p i t (202, 3l Ja�. n as t compared with neighbouring socialist countries, Bulgaria and Rumania. He u me e e e e e o n o n e o o Avc10glu s m u e e o t e on . b li v d that by d v l pi g al ng capitalist li es th c untry w uld be d p th vi w f h Yt so t n o c1 alis s a d f the SSC as follows: n e he o h er ent nnu u e u abl to attain hig r gr wth t an 5--6 p c a ally. This fig r was h o e o n bstacl t the way of social n considerably lower than that of other states, and consequently the relative :�o ��r���::s!\� {u�fe a d e r �. 2. All ffo o e e o e e 0 . r n o e o n e e o e m n ts t d v l p th c h t e . o e backwa d ess f Turk y w uld i cr as . T ov rco e this withi 20-25 e t m Y "? � aid f for ign capital and th s i ulatio o �� ,¥1 i r t m te n f t urk is p ivate secto years, he calculated that an annual growth rate of 10-15 percent was "' ul i a ly fail. r will e e o 3. Th dev l pme t o u on . . e e m nt ne t ro e n f T rkey a 1 g t he t th n c ssary (95, p. 593). Avc10glu ai ai d hat p v d unsuccessful. capi alist pa has 4· The Turkish e ot e e o e ono all n t e u e t n me n capitali s t c 1 ass, h re e o Turk y cann d v l p c mic y o b ca s i s i co is o e-t o t e n . w hi c ceiv s ab ut hird f h nat" al u o e too small but because the sources of its income are incorrectly in every possible a:������� i_s s pp rt d by the state e e t e r u on he o e o n o n the t w�; p e tmen e e xploit d. If h dist ib ti of t s urc s f i c me a d he major t o ' � 1nv � t. It x� nds me n o e o m ere n e e o e e o par f its share t e ome o a s f xpl iting the w cha g d, Turk y c uld d v l p consumption · f mc n private n th u re n reo o no . rapidly a d wi o t fo ig aid ... If this rganizati n is t c no ontr e ou e ono e e o men e o g� :i �� �!: mic c adict on re n t n e o carri d t c mic d v l p t will b sl w, with an t e ; t i s a o bei g r s lved e e ern te n n u e incr ase in xt al debt, was , a d i j stic (95, p. 618). 6 The o n nt e · d mi a class s sta · t o e no e o me t o the n d m h � way f co dev l p n f cou o . . u mic e ntrY , s cial J stice, democr n Kurda� reinforced Avc10glu's prognosis with figures, reporting that indep ndence (95, p. 740). acy a d

e t e e o e em e n e o u at pr sen , 1.5 p rc nt f th ploy d populatio of Turk y Avc1 gl an e d his like-mind d colle e e t receives 35 percent of the national income; 30 percent of the agu s h 1 d tha "social and e o o dev me e en t c n mic on ome e r um n te elop nt d p ds no o o t e o on nati al inc is expend d by this st at o its priva nly n h s luti of pro em o e on u o r e t n u t on . m bl s f cr dits and c s mpti n. This ais s he followi g q es i : Is it capital accu ulat on . e me t e m e o e e en t e n ome o r en i and mv s t n , b t . o o ne e p r issibl t giv 35 p rc t of h i c t this 1.5 pe c t . V u is als c n ct d with a h n e o I reg1 e u u c a g f e m e o u on t o tr ute m mu o m . " A vc10gl p r r ree o of th e ploy d p p lati , if hey c n ib a axi m f t fo wa d th paths f e o ent ono e m o e e o en o the b d vel pm for�c micall 4-4.5 percent of th inco e . t th d vel pm t f ac kward states· e o m y . th c m urust· path t e n t economy? Would it not be more just if the state allowed this . . ; h America pa h (based o re ca tal an th t n fo i n e t o e o t n o e en n allo e d e priv e sector); a th at s c i n of th p pula io nly 10 p rc t, a d tt d the �� � nd e st ist, or national-revolut em e en t n e t ent o a ln h. e iona!y r aining 25 p rc t to capi al i v s m ? (202, N . 64) P · is valuat10n of t e ommu h c mst· path Avc10glu o nte ou h e one m p i d t t at 11 "wha t ev r n o . t me o . e o o o o m e o t ay thi k f I s th t ro Th ide l gists f Turkish. s cialis h ld that. nly "a s atist systern ds, i has p ved capable of great TURKISH SOCIALISM OF THE" GROUP CHAPTER FIVE Yon" / 93 92 n n n effectiveness of this path, system. The political sway o! the landow ers and their represe tatives i the 619). As testimony to the n n success" (95, p. arliame t is growi g stronger by the day... After the Second Republic (the Central Asia, which had overtaken p Avc10glu cited Bulgaria and Soviet n the American path, revolution of 27 May 1960) the revolutionary forces were pushed back i to of economic development. Regarding Turkey in terms econd place, the revolutionary spirit was undermined, and freedom of were of the opinion that Turkey had s the ideologists of Turkish socialism t to overcome its hought was suppressed" (202, 28 Feb. 1962, p. 3). It was fromthis position course too late, and therefore was unable embarked on that t Avc10glu understood the terms "democracy" and "liberalism." The through reliance on the private'" tha social and economic backwardness rapidly the t�p_at-h' of Atatiirk regime "was more authoritarian than the Demirel regime but more capital. For Turkey Avc1oglu proposed sector and foreign democratic. path. Describing the features of There may exist both a multiparty dictatorship of capital, development - the national-revolutionary n n path, it does not stipulate which is liberal in form but anti-democratic, and a outwardly authoritarian wrote: "I contrast to the first n this path Avc10glu one-party democracy, which relies on the labouri g masses. It is not the it differs from the second path in that It the hegemony of the proletariat and h classes. In general, t e form that is important but the content." Avc10glu analyzed the question of is directed against a coalition of the conservative n role in this democracy ot only in terms of political liberties but also fromthe social and of petty bourgeois origin plays the main patriotic intelligentsia n economic viewpoint. He warned against confusing the terms "democracy" The ational revolutionary path, of development" (95, p. 670-71). n type n and "liberalism." The theoreticia s of Turkish socialism held that the the followi g features: a n Avc10glu said, had p rliamentary system expressed the interests only of the co servative classes state sector and its 1. the primary development of the and was not equipped to solve the problems of economic development. the economy; n dominant role in tate control; a key branches of the economy t? be under � n "Regimes that cannot find solutions to the problems f ci g them are doomed 2. the of foreig and local t 3. reduction of the scope of operat10n o perish," Avc10glu warned (95, p. 720). The proponents of Turkish capital; . monopoly of feudalism and the socialism noted that also in other developing countries that could not solve 4. the eradication of the vestiges n agrarian reform; th i stitution of radicaln sector; eir social and economic problems western political structures had crumbled , primarily within the state n 5. industrializatio n of the economy. (95, and had bee replaced by authoritarian regimes. Therefore, Turkish , 6. central and compulsory pla ning p. 671) soci�sts were turning · to extra-parliamentary forces and means of taking and utilizing P� Miimtaz Soysal, in particular, pointed to this path. In an article limiting the activity of the private sector · Avc1oglu proposed entitled "By the lakeside," published in Yon, Soysal asserted that as the n access to new technology. To only for the purpose of gaining n foreig capital parliament was dominated by the bourgeois parties, which blocked legislatio necessary to remove the coalition of realize all these reforms, he believed it n Here he observed two aspects of on social reforms, the· only way out was to tur to extra-parliamentary the conservative classes from power. hts n n n n forces and to carry out the reforms usi g no -parliame tary forces and n On the one hand, democratic rig parliame tary democracy i Turkey. a n masses; on the other, methods (202, 13 June 1962, p. 3). By non-parliame tary forces the Turkish to enlighten and organize the popular s were required s�ialists meant the left-leaning section of the military and civilian representatives of conservative force parliament with a majority made up of t 4 April 1962, P· 3). in elligentsia, the trade unions, and the youth organizations. They held that the necessary reforms (202, n n would not implement the social reforms had become an inevitable necessity a d that any gover ment of Turkish socialism, Taner Timur, saw Avc10glu and another adherent t t n conservative forces '"in he �at sidestepped them could ot remain in power for long. For Avc10glu and domination of the parliament by t cause of the his his fellows the chief thing was not to take power but to replace the ruling structure." Timur noted that " special features of Turkey's social atoms, to a regime. They noted the experience of the Western European countries where broken up into 1 which may be imagined as villages t n structure, n he 1o ialist parties had taken power but had not altered the social and eco omic n co trol of the electoral system to large extent ha ds over the right of t Therefore, Avc10glu asserted, s ructure, merely restricting themselves to a handful of reforms. Unlike the (202, 21 Mar. 1962, p. 14). art n landowners" TLP leadership, Avc10glu and his cirde were highly skeptical of the cha ces _by the existence of the multip Y "progress in the country is being retarded I CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALISM 94 OF THE " GROUP Yon" 95 o an n t n t n t t o t o on o o o ta f ch gi g he regime i Turkey wi hi he erms f he 1961 c nstituti . int cl ser c n c t wit· h a onal o t t on o t a o t intern ti imperia . . . a lism." He regarded "Our c nsti u i , which pr vides for liber ies nd s cial jus ice, is 1mpenal1sm, feudali o a o sm nd the b"ig c mpr o a n t a o t on t on o a o o . al o d r bourge isie s the ever heless h rd pressed t realize hese c di i s," Avc10glu bserved. obst cles t s ci pr gress ur main o o n t n t o t t t on not to a o at in T key. al "F r ur genui e fai h i he c ns i u i b'7COme blind nd d gm ic, a an Feud ism o :e a t o t a t a o t n t t t on n o o n nda the remn ts . o we mus rec gnize h t fac . The cl use f he co s i u i requiri o ee fo the d ges, g our c u try h s n t fr m which a nt o t o t o t an n n a a t o b n able t free �1 f the s , areo the henchmen p yme f he full c s f he l d withi te · ye rs sh rply reduces he o n big ob turgeoisie Th !fil. na o o a y t 1r d � an nt n o a a a c u try's p li a ti n f the o icn l onsystem t� �;f; ch ces of impleme i g seri us gr ri n reform" (95, p. 737). While , Thr ugh spendi . o an ncena wit_h feudalism. t o o g ublic rel n an o a an ono a a he big a d fia nci g the press dem ding s ci l d ec mic reforms Avc10glu's dherents were fe rful o b urgeo isie is In controt a of In n o n �� �\ rge _P rt of the ot a n t t tato o t o a at an o o rdero t sile ce the , medi . o t t ct ua tr s gres b h M rxism-Leni ism wi h i s dic rship f he pr let ri d f a b urge isie / a rz a os1ve oforces, the big t exploi s he r di wn a t o o tato o a n a o a a thereby t a e � f c mmunism o o ries t impede o o t_ nd righ b urge is dic rship, which c uld rise i the c se f sh rp n o t a h w kerung f the a a on o a ont a on o t a t o c nsci us ess f he m sses t p li ical ex cerb ti f cl ss. c r dicti s. Therefore, foll wing he cquisi i n of (ibi�. o t ta an an nt t a an t n t t t o o o a o n o a n p wer by he mili ry d civili i elligen si d he i s i u i n f s cial Avc10glu s w the f a o un ldi g f ew struggle al a on a t an o o t o o a t n to a a a t t a o l for n ti n liber n1 . o a o ti s he d ec n mic reform, hey pr p sed re ur p rli ment rism. A he ta o a nat n I t t t ke n o a a t n o n t na o t t o an o o sks f io al dem cr tic s me ime, i devel pi g his sce ri he he retici s f Turkish s cialism :a :: �Tu:�e;�;d:;,� �e� no a at a n t o o t o nt :::, did t dequ ely ex mi e he experience f the p li ical devel pme of o n lo like n t at t an an an o nt o t at t a an therl u derdeve ped . . t t o o a he Asi d Afric c u ries, which sh wed h he milit ry d civilian strugg na on c � nes, s _ he h!esh ld t le for ti al libe � d a tf nt t a t at a ta o a s on o nta such time torugg e is successfully � a on s oahis i elligen si h h d ken · p wer by force were extremely reluct nt to o a a o alc J�J��-s me v dem cr n a nce aal g the r d n t o a t o cy tnd s ci ism is ece�s to o a reli quish his p wer. le ds t a onry. The w y s ci to a thr ugh he s r 1 a n lism a gt al er tio d y he chief t sk �! i/��: � � o. Therefore, an a d a OCI st rec ns theon anti-imperialist � r �ruc�ipnt is o a o at dan nti-feu strugg c cern f ll dem cr a t . o o l_e, which is he The Reasons fo r the Necessity of National-Democratic ic d p n t1c· £ rces (ibid.). a t Revolution for Turkey Avc10glu formul a a t ted he immedi te t sks hus: ( t t n t o 1. he � tai men o n n tatf econ mic i depende n t not at a o 2 �he implemen on o a ce' · . I his wri ings Avc10glu ed th while Turkey h d won p litical · to a a a ani f l nd reform possible c ll ol o , which it might be n n tat a t a ot a o t at gron ri rev uti n i dependence u der A iirk's le dership, i h d n been ble t achieve 3. h� an ot o ,· ° o realizn i d pr . t an . t ono emb o t t t o ecti n f all ngh s d . ec mic independence. died i the c ns i u i n. liber ies

t at on a n a no a a t a Unlik e he l l at Induso riaatliz a i a wans realizedo t o i very small met alsure, a r w os TLP le ders, Avc10g t a a a u be ieved th he a dem cr ic gr ri rev lu i n - the essen i 'b sis for ur not t o t immedi te t sk £ cmg o nt o t a o t o Tur k ey w s at. onal o devel pme - br ugh b u . Therefore n real shifts in he s cialis b t t h e a o on o o o o n o t t o t na on � -dem cr tic rev called it a � o � n luti (he favo urt f pr gressive forcesat on ccurred i the sociala s ruc ure f he " ti al-libe / ' t l o n wn rev lut10 ). o s cie y... Turkey n i alized foreign c mp nies under a o on o � Therefore, he eftist tat t a t on o the c u at o t a o forces f try h d t c s lid a na . nal o A iirk, bu f er the Sec d W rld War it made t e n he b sis f at not o o o t a o a o a t a social la t10 -dem cr ic, c mpr mises:a na the tdvi a ceo f America no experts,n t t r tct is , p tform. foreignn t oprivt te c pi al ai d ptednt l wst pr tectio g this capio al o In a ta i he ac un ry, signed a greeme ans wi h the g vernmentsa a anf the t sho rt, t the present o . o nt nt t a o os f the ec o USA nd the Feder l Germ Republic, nd �u r teed he c u a omic develt pme n a ta n t t at on ry hea w y t s cif�s':n f; o at f n on o n t 1 e d ! �gh he dem foreig c pi l i ves men " (202, 12 Sept. 1962, p. 20). o i atal-liber ti o t cra ic an t m anveme . � c1ali� o d gm ism t t ts must v id n o d aspli s d us o o nt o t t a t a n o a at o an genui a a ory t� uru e pr p ne believed nat on e dem cr cy �d rf t a tos af Avc10glu ermed hese greemen s ki d f "c pitul i ns," d i at on on t s fr m differen cl sses t at on n t n t o o o al-liber i fr t.�ibid in h "foreign aid ly stre g he ed he Turkish b urge isie and br ught it �) TURKISH SOCIALISM OF THE " Yon" GROUP 97 CHAPTER FIVE 96 iberation) Front a n t m e sm and ud s e nt ned t at o as de a the National-Democratic (L g� s i p riali fe ali m. Th y mai ai h nly wi The Issue of on as oss e of t e at ot and de o at. r s o so et on a uru p ibl h p ri ic m cr 1c fo ce f ci y ema st at ou d rea t e om ador ou eo e and t e uda sts o e t st es o mat on o a u n K li pl form c l b k h c pr b rg isi h fe li . uest on o t e f l f i forc f n t e s t e for i f nio lead su a ont a mo e . uent o e and or a ed h q i f h so st m ement o I h 1960 n t e e t n and f T� ch fr r mfl ial , p w rful, g niz political as d de ated g ciali ov t e u t b i h l f -wi emo rat r e t an e a our a as needed so st s o ans o t e n ry w wi ely o t es nat on fo c h th L b p r t Y w · The ci"a li l g f h h co as en a a et al-d c ic, e ont f ti l : i o d ten t e ro ress ve se t on o t e s ur e e a a e giv v ri y e rmat on o . .. y. Th fr w e s e sted on t TLP c ul frig h h p g i c i f h Turki h b o g o1S1 w y Turk on et o h fo i f e at on nat w xi om t o n and ea en t e se ond nat ona erat on o ement at on al, c. Tw vi stated t at ib r i , i a art and fr he fr t w k h c i l-lib i n i al-l as e d t e h in m v by a ont e s L bour P y, ri n t o o ent es e e t e sa ee ent t een e and u t w h l by h t e as t ch fr . !Tii fa or n ass and dep vi g i f p t ial alli H r h di gr m be w th TLP s le t st r e t e h TLP he s a u on o w ki g cl e Yon s and t e o e e o e o t e s e ts e t - f i fo c s, h rom t e se ond . uch ni f t e lea n o e th ocialists h S;C v r t h r l f h RPP c1"a lly i l f nte ests m st a . F h c half e e o o ts pl y h di g r l t n t e re o ut na o e s f nte est e ; !ade ne ated i i r u deman to t s on { xpr ssi n f e an to ad a ne di io : wing, in h v l io ry pr c ss, i o i r . Th T rs g t e lea e s d hi c o t e de ade b g d w o t e ro ress e otent t a e e a te . t rodu ed e s s o an h TLP d r o e ad not f h c t e a t at on nly o th p g iv p ial of his v n f r i p c Ec vit' l g e t st es t f th TLP h :. an u on o h p r icip i o t eft entre t e an: � v uated t e e t a t end o t e f l f i forc wi h e t e n s t y ni ut a so to e o y f he of "l -of---<: "· h SSC o � h l f w rd r f h t e a o a t gniz h i divi ibili :� e le b ur P r y b l r c os e a d sa t as a t a e en e ea de of e b d by h L o s u e RPP p itiv ly � w i puwn i l-atly, v th 1 r, th nat on emo rat so st and ic g al for T rk y. e a t on e o at ont u o. ted out t a e re . s. n . s i al-d c t es o ts de t ciali as e d so p r y, nati al-d m cr ic fr Avcwg vl p m h t "th al divi 10 i ond e circl u i h · . e se w h l by cialis as a t et een t e su rters a d t e o onents o t e u t e een Th c vi w, which a t at as e no b w h ppo n h pp f h RPP b b t w / so ts a d t e Turk y w f cing u n t e Yon h SSC, w s h o ess e and rea t o a es a e as to e und o ress. e cialis n tas s t e ro ramme / incl di g h and t so st of pr gr iv c i n ry forc A P 1 c h b fo for pr g iv nat n emo at k , h p g · e ent l ic no ciali t e es t at at e t a e n t e ns . ve o . t. a t es e y io al-d cr a nst de en en e on ss ial a to e e ted a h West forc h pres n r i h co ervati p li ical p r i j (202, 12 S pt. o o le t t r e g i p d c an u c s h d b dir c e deman o e . o t n e o u t of e st or es ud n y ni n f f is fo at at on o o et 1962, N . 39) . Th imp r a c f ni y all 1 ffi f c , incl i g to a ds t e demo y. Th d by a d ud sm and cr iz i f s ci o sts as sta ed n t o e Forum t e u st a w r h as a e ta le . n fe ali emo rat ont non-s ciali , w t i O c b r 1968 m by h p blici Ilh rni n a nat o a w un cc p b to t e emon l-d c ic fr a y i i n n t e o on o t he TLP for h g e ountr ess he Soys l: atriot es o t i g h pini f mo t e t t and ic forc f h c y. Expr s l f is p e o t e eaders e e e e t a e t s r es an o t e . ed . o Tiirk solu t e on t e stan l hip, Avc1oglu W b li v h t l f i t fo c c n b di Yon o a ts and h c f h TLP t e na e of a o rn e entrevid somt sts s ci lis h SSC I h m j u al _ 1. 1. ] , ,1 ft-of� ,, ciali , TLP, e t a non a t t sts a e one t ou ote f RPP, nd - r 1:t L i r , al h gh wr : a a n t em t e e e o o a e o e oderate o o e o t e n e ents t es la d n t e i essmo g h a h er s riaye t at t sese w o o r atm tr e me t st esr e do at eor l f h i ttualligt on n p y ow ementh r ut t e l ir gm ic thn t ei t mo i i ma . e You m yst bn uron h ett heeo wt e c mboderatesh l f ani forct e Tha d t e ut . B eh sia est and t h socialis a v u on on t k no di i cti b w n '� ' d h n h yo e hs tatesi a m d on m rom on ft s must reate a e ne for ni nh t broe nea tu e c s i fors ul e el e e t at 'n ---<:o p isers' am (��g\· ts c Turk rey e entat e a i h r tfu utr te o t a n t t s a1 o mo t si . W b i vat ho de e o me � t s pr s eiv nb to t e so st n . B uni d fr n gai s righ i t , c 968, N . 348, p. 11) u e mo p h f v erl p d o t me · · v o h e cialies a en t T rk y lwilln o o p iQ f i to. t e quir l ganshy t ne essa e as anot e a o a st to oo t t e su o t di g f s cialisma nr s st slo h erebui e stea o g , i is ca t nry Ther w h r f o ali l o h RPP for pp r . f w vi g ocialiont a a le o att � � Th for , in md a o a u ted r c i g all Yon so sts t e ; � ::e;e� an e t a t to esent t e or o t a fr c p b es onf t e a to :: ; : for ul f n nia de t e o sta The ciali S mflu n ial p r y pr h ir w kes ua a le o ast cl h w ys n r g si h e bt e on t on and on e r e f e e e ea er o n t s r e t e e t c p b f derc ni o rai i g foso c m n c iv c di i roleta---5., riat views fight th i b hal . Th y w r g t fi d hi fo c in h l f i g �Y-1e o ))jt e as t e cialis ... nCo o tsi e ea - o t e d e e s as t e e ms a te ted er en t e ue t f h _ cl s [e h p on t e f h l clingt rol ted ont wing f h RPP v�n mor o h r for t mp und Biil t h � i9e re e t on o W call h tTLPe · f he uni fr o. m to a t and a ;.. r of t e s e e o t e nd t at ii:p.pli _! cevei t e tor o h ir I.L.ea � e s o cialis , t pply Ecevi Tur � half h 1960 w r f h ki h in h vic ayt onsf s o s l r , wh eo� a me a d s. (202, 28 u u �: �;: : n t se o and u nds to t m n c i f ocialis Avc1 0gl favo red. :::\ d o fulfil the h pes Avc10gl 's mi h o progr o n t r . . n o e t u t e m tar and an N v. 1962, N . 50) group bega o conside att ai g p w r hro gh h ili y civili and t e e ents o e ent e ne e ar o a e n t e Yon ts lieved a o . � a u a t lead h SSC b intellig ia , wh w uld imp m th c ss y s cial nd co omic e t e r y ers, h socialis d Unlik h L bo r P e m nd rial s . e u t e s n ud n middle in ust re£ n o e i g th s all a le orm m th co n ry. • ssiv force , i cl a s o t e st unio f all progr e essa on t e rugg ot os e and si f h o o e a n c ry h b b urge isi , w s b h p sibl CHAPTER FIVE 98 TURKIS H SOCIALISM OF THE " GROUP . Yon" 99 . x_out The Motive Forces of the Revolut10nary Process in Turkey 1k._w ho in his opinio l n were a dynamic p ay an and progressive force important role in equipped to The Wor k.mg Class and the Peasants indepe/.dence. the fight for d o He placed still g,e democracy an ate, hopes in the ec nomic z d a,my and l d t . z d emphasi e i_ts Tudcish Avc10g u an his adheren s recogm e the important role of the working distinction from d the armies of the Wes u l · d t an So th America. class in the revo ut10nary P rocess , but th ey believe that the Turkish The army, who t d se o ranks are o impoverished made up of tro o proletariat was not th en able o become the 1ea ing force in the revolutionary and p or families, is ps fr m o d d elements in the one of the most pro m vement. "The wor ki ng class " Avc10g vl u no te "is a ynamici easily stro uggle for progres t mising ' ' .Turkey. So o sivet developm niz d d d u me f our pr t o en of our · . _,, recognize o gressive ac ivis s ch orga e an progressive social group.·· " b ut "it woul be naive to s ggest,< d this maj r difference ose not to t d arme forc between our too es of the West. T army and the tha the working class cons t"tutesi the avant gar e in the struggle for into a l of o here the armies have o d d the bourge isie. beet n made s cialism. The worki ng c1 a ss is only begmmng. . to awaken an to become have fille up t The bourgeoisie of t the army wi h their o t he Wes o niz d trained to protect o children, wh m hey ho bourge is inte l dhav e rga e " (120, P · 2 80)· It was to the peasan t s, w in the 1960s accounted way to an arm trests; they have b o O t d y career before ocke the ' . peasants ... It is he children of wor d for alm st 75 percent f Turkey s populat10n, hat Yon socialists an the t the same in South u kers an • t • o it is a Kem America too. . . alis army, which has B t in Turkey SSC ascribed maJor sigm"fi cance m he impending struggle· for s cial and It would be a t arisen from within the l o o t d t o great mistake o peop (;!_,_ obedient t ol suggest that this arm ec nomic transformat" ions in the c un ry. A vcwg vlu asserte hat lithe of the ruling classes (20 y is the l . o t o . l 2, 12 Sept. 1962, No. national- iberat10n m vemen ·i s. p ssib e onl Yo n- the basis of a union of the JI 39 ). o d t . d The Bourgeoisie w rking class an he p easants." Yet, he pornt e out that the traditional o t d d d l c nservatism of the peas an , their epen ence on lan owners money endert ' t t d . o CI. d d Avc10glu denied he t o an middlemen, theu rem exis ence of rev o t t teness from the large t"i es an the wi e dispersal bourgeoi olu i nary p ten ial in l d d . . d z t sie. Howeve t he Turkish . I o r, he asserted of the vil ages ren ere theu awakerung an organi a ion extremely difficult hom that " he bourgeoisi t d . d geneous class" an t o e is not a For hat reason A vc10gvl u an his cohorts pmne great hopes on agranan. . d therefore he local b an inte l t urgeoisie should not . , o d l . o d gral who e; the in ere be seen as reform, which w u l era dicate both the po itica 1 p ower f the lan owners and t sts of the industr diffe o ialist and the t . d o ld ren . He regarde o importer were d the c mmer t heu agent s, an w u prepare the peasan t s for the transition to the u cial bourge isie as the d its influence, b t mos powerful in foresaw that in t o non-capitalist path of evelopment. the near future contra o between this group dic i ns w uld arise and the rapidly growing t othe t o indus rialist bourg The Middle Strata. The r hand, con radicti eoisie. On the Army ns existed between ind', o the big an ustrialist bourge isie. d the middle u d lo . l o t d A vc10glu believe Avc10gl a� his fol wers a eading r le in he Turkish of the d that in the long run o in ustrialist bourg o the secti n t o o t eoisie pposed to t o na i nal-liberat1 0n m vement to �:::�e strata. Avc10glu wrote that "at support nati unrestric ed imp rts onal forces. The o might t t o . . o d refore he called the stage of he strugg 1 e for na i nal hberat10n w hether we like it or not the the cons o for a p licy that wou li ati n of the entire o ld prevent . . . ' class ar und the big bou intelligentsia wil1 assume leadership. There are no serious grounds ior 1962, p. 20). rgeoisie (202, 12 Sept. t . . o . . d t suggesting hat the Kemalist patn tlc mtelli g entsia will not a op the go als I The o o . . o I Dictatorship f the nati nal liberat10n fr n t . In cont ras t to the Kemalists, who denied of the Proletariat d d the existence of c1 asses an the class strugg 1 e, the Yon socialists an the SS C t 1 The o niz d l d o . theore icians ssible and f Turkish socialis d recog ed classes an the class strugg e . They believe it p dictators o m rejected the i t . 11 o l d hip of the pr leta ea of the necessary to es abhs h a u ar state" where power w in the hands riat. They believe t P p oul be Power by d that after the at ain o l l tu o t d d o the military and ment of f eading inte lec als, wh ·m urn woul be supporte . by the br ad popu] ar civilian intellig z necessary d o entsia and the real l o l t d . social an eco i ation of d ent n mic reforms t ab uring masses. Avc10g v u at ribute great sigm"fican ce to the stu soci u o , the transiti alism m t on from capi alis st be br ught abou m to only by peaceful t t means. It is no ewor hy 100 CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALI SM OF T I HE II IOnv·· " GROUP 101 e e e e e e e that v n Sadun Ar n, who, until h join d th TLP in 1963, w.as of all th n Avc10glu a d hi s group sought e r . Yo n e e e re e e e . to bl nd pa liame . socialists and th SSC clos st to Marxist-L ninist positions, j ct d th particular feat e e ntansm, which ur of W ste rn d em . was a e e e ee e e . ocracy ' with . e way of arm d struggl for socialism. In his vi w, this had b n possibl and of th e r th e prmc1 pl s m ans of p od uc . of socialization e e e e e t"wn, which w e . . n c ssary only in the circumstanc s of the Octob r R volution, as Tsarist e as ch aract nst1c e countri s. In combini ng of th socialist ee e e e e e . wh at they e e e .. Russia had b n a d spotic r gim that could be ov rthrown only by forc . . n consid r d th \ capitalism a d socialis y;··on . . positive aspects of m ' th e soc n e e e e e e e e . I ialists a d th r e In Turk y conditions wer diff r nt, and a "d mocratic l ad rship" had eclectic "third I SSC p oduc d their way ' whi ch th ey e own arisen. "For us socialism is not a way of sowing discord among the classes. call d "Tur ki sh Turkish socialis er socialism. " m had oth e 11 Actually e e e . . t"tl1 s, too ' namely e • You will not build it through a r volution. In Turk y r volution cannot be a soc1 al1 sm, " ' n w stat1 sm, " n "local soc1· alism· " and "natio al way of building socialism" (202, 6 Feb. 1963). "socialism o f the e (122, p. 277). dev loping countries" e On of the en propo n ts of Tur . .. The Ideas of the Yo n Group and of the SSC on Socialism The kish socialism ' Hil e . book Experience of Tu rk. mi Ozg n, proVIded zsh voc, czalz. . 1 in his sm 1 • 11 e e e e r 11 n (119) a mag r Although Avc10glu b li v d that "socialism is an int g al whole, would produce i e e . ic fo mula its ntirety th . e that e r socialism h beli e e e e e e e e e T h £o mula n e eved Tu r k y should ee socialism, in th sens h und rstood it, cov r d a fairly wid rang of co sist d of fi e en s k. . v compon ts: r e . e e ag arian r £or m e e e e e e for ign trad ; n ; nat10naliz n id ological and political curr nts, at tim s diff ring consid rably from ach nationalizatio of b atio of n . . anks; nationalizati on . . other. The unity of socialism and of socialists, in his opinion, lay only in its an d at10nalization e . o f social msurance of h avy md r n n '· . n . . ust y a d mi .. e e e e e e scathi g m es (119 ' p. 42 ) . Ozgen common, singl goal: "To cr at a social syst m in whi�h all p opl will be his criticism of Tur . . . was . kish condit10ns an e re e e e e e capitalist de e e d o f th "horrors e assu d the b st possibility of life on th basis of th principl s of lib rty, v lopm nt of e n " of th . Tur k y, a e e e e d analyz d th equality, and fraternity" (202, 22 Aug. 1962, p. 3). "Socialists believe that soci ty. H believe flaws of capitalist d that th e way out e e of th moras s was e this ideal may be achieved in a classless society. But this will be possibly the conomy, whi w th socialization . . ch ould hav e to of n come about th e only with the socialization of the means of production" (ibid.). Avc10glu particularly i the e . . rough coop rat villag s It is e e .. ion ' e · o f mt r st tha o e ere e e e e e exampl of a e t zgen gav Israel found diff nc s among socialists only in th ir id as of th practical m thods d mocratic social" e as an . . ist stat . He w e · re re e e e e e e e r e n th e e rot WIth g at e of alizing th on purpos . H d fin d th ways of p actical r alizatio of actiVIties of th Society . . nthusiasm of for Soc1 a 1ist Cultu e n r concepts r a d was outrag e unita y socialism as of socialism were e ed wh n such . desc n"b d as commun e dogu sosyalizmi); In The ism l. "East rn socialism" ( his book Ways of Socza zsm and . . z· th e Tur k zsh. Reality e e (batz sosyalizmi); Said Barlas e e (96) e 2. "W st rn socialism" gav a mor e e e r. C mil . d ta1 "I d d sc e 1. azgeli§mi:i iilkelersosy alizmi). soc e iption of th r 3. "Socialism of the developing countries" ( , iali s . He mph e e d eas of Tu � asiz d th following: kish e e e r e e e 1. socia!ism sho n e As Turk y was a d v loping �ount y, Avc10glu b li v d that it should follow uld ot b confused . with commurus e e 2. socialism . m and bolsh vism; th third way. was not a th t 1 e wner s p e e re e e e e 3· socialis m ::r� :�:: ::� � vk t Sii yya Ayd mir d"efin d th ways to socialism som what had various �e � '. e e n mg goal. liberty, e differently: w ll-b i g; quality and social 4 l. "Local socialism of developing countries" ( azgeli§mi§ iilkelerin, memleke�i · statism was one e of th princip· 1 es of . e e socialism; sosya lzzmz.) ; 5. th W s t- Euro pean socialist r e e e e n pa ti s w r by n e e er e batz demokratisi); Peopl , ot e n ow parti s of e e 2. "W st n d mocracy" ( of th worki g c1 ne th ntire 6 ass alo '· · the posit e 3. "Communism" (202, 30 Jan. 1963, p. 15). ion of th conte mp w . th . . orary orking e . e Yon.. . . . e . . e e ositi n e class difiired w Th socialists, whil notmg the diff rent ways towards a urutary / P o of oth r strata e . lil no ay from · . . of th labour mg p e e e e . 7. soc n eopl · socialism, in fact (lik M.A. Aybar) r cognized various mod ls of socialisJll. ialism a d soc ialist partie s were e bo lshev th most active e ist communism'· oppon nts of 102 CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALISM OF THE" Yon" GROUP \ / 103 e e c s 8. Turk y must striv for this kind of so iali m. Planning Barias stressed that this concept of socialism could be taken in the same e e e c s e e s ns as th ommuni m of the nineteenth and arly tw ntieth century only. The e s theor tician of Turkish · s . e e e s s c s socrali m enVIsaged c · R vi wing class r lations in modern We tern o iety, Baria argued that ' compulsory planning e n tr ali zed and for both the state and . ce c e c c sse e ss e s ec . the pnva te sector xp a pro ss of onv rgen e of the la s and of l velling of cla diff rence was e s c e . E laining t h n e sity for entraliz d planning, e e c cc ss s e Ar n wrote: curr ntly taking pla e. As an example of su e ful ocialization h cited the c E onomic developme e c e e e e e e e e c ses c c nt is Ii� k d t� e e c ountri s of � st rn Europ , wh r "th re ar no longer las of apitalists a cumulation. s . th probl m of At the am e ce s apital c e it ne ary and workers... These two classes, having grown closer to each other, have apital in th most produc It i_ to. invest this c ec fi;��ranc es. . � class s s on politi al onomy s . c ical tudie formed a new society - the consumer society" {96, p. 113). Barias define e atte t in a apitalis e d und rtaking of ' . es t conomy the . new capital mv tments c socialism as "an international movement of all mankind," which anyone may P ro fits is by no means with. a eumu l ated e automatIC.· Ther e e c und rdeveloped c es s £ore m conomi ally e e c s e e ountri it i ne join, "b h by onviction a Marxi t or a follower of oth r r ligious or of capi s e o gulate the proc ss tal inve tm nt and ����ii t fh e e e e to � o� s e s c s s s c economy wh r e 1 area of the humanist principl s" (96, p. 110). Thi approa h to ociali m wa in a cord e e investm nt of ca · s e e e s e p tal i r qUir d. c d v lopm nt i possibl e Economi with the concepts of ideologists of the Socialist International, who as distinct ce se only th rnugh th planning es pro s s. (90, p. 227) of all th e form the communists paid for less attention to the form of ownership and the s e e c e c e s Th t propos s e natur of produ tivity r lations. Barlas indi at d the path that ocialist � f a yst m of e cee � � � planning did not x es c 1 d the boundari of e e e s s capitalist produ t VIty e e parti s must tread if th ir int ntion wa to build socialism. Hi programme r lations but th ro1 e e e . s ' o f th stat m this planrung · s e c c c c e e e e sub tantially enlarged • . wa for th onstru tion of so ialism onsist d of th following el m nts: 1 Throu gh P 1 anrung, the e s 1• • s s adher nt of Turkis e e e e e e c soc ali m ought es s h l. th d v lopm nt of th stat se tor; _ to tablish area of c e apital inv stment based no to c . . e e e e e c e e of maximum c n ntena 2. th d v lopm nt of th ooperative mov m nt; gain but of "so ial benefit". 3. a proportional system of taxation, whereby it would be possible to The PrivateSector correct production and ensure social justice (96, pp. 113-4). s e c e e s c e c e s Barias' plan was to ov r om th o ial and conomic ba kwardn s of e e c s Th theor ti ian of ur s T kish sociali m did c e .. e e e e ec e e not all £or th abolit10n Turk y by m ans of th stat s tor, without waiting for this to tak place privat enterprise c . . of "A a t delin e e e e e e e e e eat0n of th boundarie e e through privat nt rpris . He point d out that th stat s ctor was state secto ece s ; e::; :: 1 s of th stat r is n s ar , " Ar o . socialism, and consequently, a policy of statism was a policy of socialism. Howeve e e e e e e c c e c s r, it will not ncom s e . e 1 In th ir tr atm nt of th qu stion of demo ra y und r so iali m, man s e pas th e ntu nat ec y Stati m of th e e 0nal onomy e e typ , bas e s c s ese e s e d v e e d on the pr dominant proponent of Turkish so iali m pr nt d it a classical d mocracy with lopm nt of th/:�t c e e sec s no x l�de e . tor. If private e e c s the privat e c e es s e c nt rpri:: t�� !� J � 1s e some diverg n i s in the inter t of soci ty as a whole. Miimtaz Soysal was the ce c n ab! through on ntration of apital e e t e e sec to und t;a arge ec s e of the opinion that these provisions should cover such rights as private th priyat tor will proJ t ? th n e grow ff 1 plish e ' e c e c e e s e e ; d only through th state e own rship, omm r e, and th lik . Soysal tat d: "In ord r that as a result �%) s cfo�� (2t1���\a: �96t of class conflicts the foundations of society are not undermined and thus all As e e e e e e e e s e s th ir guide r e e lib rti s liminat d in on f ll swoop, it i ssential - and thi is the only garding th pnvat sector, so the ideologists of Turkis e c e e e e e e ec omic cialism too k the Frankf e h solution - to r stri t som lib rti s, and abov all lib rti s of an on urt D claration of e s e h th Sociali t Int rnational whic c c e ad been adopted e . . ' h hara t r" (116, p. 10). on 30 Jun 1951 . S oc.1 1 s t alizat0n wa not obligatory he means e for all of production, e e e th docum nt d stat e e s eco d · I n som ar a of the nomY , £or example c e e _ agri ultur , th crafts, retail llle s trade ' and small dium mdu try the e and ' r was room for private e e nterprise. Th state should I 104 CHAPTER FIVE TURKISH SOCIALISM OF I THE I Yon" GROUP 105

nt o at on o a n r o d n o cond t o t preve the expl it i f priv te e te prise t the etrime t f the The se on to t a a n view of he s lu i t o o c n t o o t o d s t n t a n a t a ro on t a he gr ria ques i teres s f s cie y. It sh ul as is i he utiliz tio of priv te ini i tive for a o s t i n , wh se hief p p en w s Miimt at r t a n c a n o ct on and a n t a cono z S y al, was h fi t t d a n t a an st i w s esse tial to in re si g pr du i welf re withi he pl nned e my. t c a a on dis ribu e lan mo g he pe s ts, o t or d an ur par i ul rly s e o o a a and f he maj em ds T kish s ci t a nt f the The Agrarian Question lists w s "L for he Pe cco n to o an . . n to co ct sa s!" rdi g at on and t t and f S ys al, th e tr s1t10 lle iviz i 1t too o d oc he ime for · nd on o o s a d t at . and cono d k w ul depe the s ial e o nt o t a c Alm st all the supporters f Turki h socialism gree h Turkey mic evel pme f he gn· on a d n t d d a c ar n o rad ca t o d o on o n and ultur al regi· s n o level f c sci r dn o t a an he nee e r di al agr ia reform t e i te the ves iges f feu alism. The us ess prepa e s o o d a tr ess f he pe s ts� . Yon o a ts nd t d d n s r t n n o a n on o and a on t · ysal rec gruze s ci lis a he SSC eeme ece sa y he ge eral e c ur geme t th t the dis ibuti f l a an o of roduct1 m g he pe s ts w c d o n o t oo a o n n a . and o d n uld reVI·tali ze small-s p 0n at oc a at ca ale the evel pme t f he c per tive m veme t i the vill ges. They w ul ge er e s i l str ifi on 1n a cr d s n a on o a rar n t con d r t s n ti · the pe er a cu s santry. iticize exi ti g legisl ti n g ia reform, which hey si e ed Nev hele s, he maintai ed t d t a d th t the diffi ltie n nad a as o d t ndo n to n t o c a o o n n o t o hat woul meVI· · bl a d o c on y e sue i equ te, it all we he la w ers retai o mu h l nd. T gether w � result � a e� r t w o ortan d r s c lle tivizati . t s o r o t ons t o a on a nt to a It was m st imp t, he believe , immedi a an nd c with he e ve all p si i , here were tw views m g the dhere s of tely give the pe s ts la , t o d o c a n o t a a an t on a to o t whi h h ey w ul w rk (202, 5 Sep . 1962, a o d Turkish so i lism o h w he gr ri ques i w s be s lve{ The first p. 20). This view w s supp o d a n d ad o a on and at t a rte by Ne�e Deri� an oda n t ad , wh sai s w the ee for gr ual c llectiviz ti the removal of small-scale th " he Turkish pe s t co c a on asant t y is o re y for t a o n s c a o s o n o a d a ca t n an and lle tiviz ti . Firs p� n t a o the priv te w er hip. Av 10glu w s f thi pinio . F r the r pi er di tion mus be give l d, d o d asant n the he st te sh ul o a c ra o o s ro o a on o t asa c ar a s o rod pr vi e the pe s f the gri ultu l b urge i he p p sed the unific ti f he small pe nt with the e es� y me n f p n d c uctio " (202, 5 Sept. r n o od c coo and t n o a ant o a a r s 1962, p. l4). Deri� suggeste re tmg d o 1 fa ms i t "pr u tive peratives, he traini g f the pe s s t work st te "cent e for the evelopment a 1 and n o on a d n d d o t s n s f the vill ge, which woul ffer and r a the l i c mm " (202, 21 M rch 1962, p. 8). Avc10glu efi e three he pea a t technical expe t ons c o o at on r t s t o t u a on assist nce. Thus altho r n o s s c e utive stages f c llectiviz i . The fi s wa he l wes level of gh m g the adhe c a t a no na e ts f Turki h o so a on o a o n a n r o too o d t on o on i lism here w s t complete u nimi a ar a o cializ ti f l b ur, i which priv te ow e ship f ls w ul be y the s luti to the ods d a gr i n pr blem, the r n d a a a d a n o o o t and they suggeste d o ar meth etai e . At this st ge the pe s nts woul le r t w rk t ge her use h rdly differe fr m M xist-L on n n o on acco o d t n d o eninist positi s. their impleme ts i c mm to mplish s me pre e ermi e j b. The cond ta o d o on n r and a on o and se s ge w ul be the c mm ow e ship exploit ti f l . The n an o a u u d n s o r o a a "Islamic Socialism" remaini g me s f l bo r wo l remai a the pr pe ty f the pe s nts. t rd t o d a on o a an o odu The hi s age w ul be the socializ ti f ll the me s f pr ction n s oc c o ou d t t d acco d n to ra In 1965-1966 o Yon o s (impleme ts, live t k, et .). Pr fits w l be dis ribu e r i g work seve l f the nd r t an c s ciali ts a membe s and t r d n adv ced o so (Islam of he SSC he sha e pai i . the oncept f "Islamic sosyalizmi). o o cialism" an o n d o o d a a a r s d o In s cial econ nuc· · . d r s d The views f Hilmi Ozge differe . He pr p se th t immedi tely fter t e m this di n t o s n s iffer from Tu ki h t ac s on o t t an t on to coo at on on t a a . n r a s ciali m. Amo g the s reas o� give fo o t s r on o he qui iti f power he r si i per i am g he pe s nt the formul tion f hi ve si s o s o d n d and s a nt o o a n a d f Turki h s ciali m the w ul be impleme te , that only the e t blishme f c operatives fol!owmg m y be e umer at n te : o c co d kulaks, on nd r a d dd a o r 1. � ttemp n n r a n e ul remove the m eyle e s n mi lemen, increase . t t p eve t co se v o a n o n tive circles fr m m ki rod c and n so us o a n os d a religiou o a s g use f the p u tivity, bri g cial j tice t the vill ges. Ozge prop e t king s feeli gs of the p pular m sse d s o for political en s · on o t r o s a moshav a od r coo a r o ' This 2 . the wi· h t depa o a s d s c a e f he fo ms f the I r eli s the m el fo the per tive. t from the positi n f eclude a ro and o o oo a n s d o o n and or n an s e t ri n g up d find support a on ad a t form f c per tive e vi age c mm n ow ership w ki g the l d an fortheir view m g the o o a on an a bro m sses f the p pul c c o rs r d n ac n a d oc . a us c ti . the same 3 r ttempt to use ssar a and olle tive wne hip of fa m buil i gs, m hi ery n livest k. At Isl m to j tify ne e y r dical o o d o n o and s ss s o n n re1o social econ mic time each family w ul w its own h me pos e it w belo gings. rms; n o an n 4. the i fluence a o a d o f exter al £ ct r o o a ·. the spre f th e ries f "Isl mic TURKISH SOCIALISM OF THE " Yon" G.ROUP CHAPTER FIVE 107 106 the e ut r at u h parties of W st. B it would be w ong to fully equ e T rkis socialism 11 the ra c u tr e ci i a h er de cra ture ur h a t n A b o n i s. t the e so alism a ave e e Isl mic wit West n social mo cy. 0� fea of T kis socialism w s i s e a d a t ssion o conc pt of C hi T nyol g xpr t e er c t ther a t at h u h th e ed Hilmi Ozg n n the c nti-W st n onten . Ano w s i s n ionalism, alt o g is diff r he tre u Qur'an for equali y, a c i u ss pon all in the r he t he a a d a c a at rkey. T y laid s a d t so ialism n T he e r u d y sha ply from t na ionalism of t ·p n-Turkic n Isl mi org niz ions of a d u ce a d s indic te the proximi of r therh , n on t s g o n a e he de t ur h c ed r a t u e a t o ood n j sti he r a c Turk y. T i ologis s of T kis so ialism call fo s r ggl gains all b h r t he socialism w s an a ci t o y of Isl mi e at ra a chau T e p omo ion of t a u t a Isl m to so alism. the c t nif st ions of cism nd vinism. c t c e t t ions of . co n ry m a te ad t p s o specific ondi he t ed tha a the a d ec c ur e t mpt to jus so ialis onc T y main ain t s social n onomic onditions of T k y u e ch a a r e e t h e the e u t h r c u t s T rk y. a c su r the a a a ce . w s the diffe ed ss n ially from t os in W stern co n ries, t ei so ialism m s the rea ppe r n of Isl mi socialism e te c i e th r r e a a r son fo c tra t h e A fur a t r c et a d diff r from Wes rn so ial sm. On of ei p incipl s w s r pid a u i ature n its on s wit W stern e ce ve of E s e n so i y ta e r n t a i at h the a ded a a c e e tru e ly bsol t st n a c ci t x ssi the r e t o k oot i dus ri l z �on, whic y' reg r s a b si pr mis in the s ggl for ati e v e Isl mi so alism, _ i i w of p opon n s of u der .c de e de c et e a u the the d ec l z on. In th i a th e t had economi m p n n e. Y , lik Ayb r's gto p in TLP y lai sp ial civ h e ve a ce , · to n go a h a ci pro n n w s e W s ha i the ec at re ur e a d re e ed the a e st, so alism, w os r te i e er c in t e E ch had ee e a so iety, emp s s on sp ial fe u s of T k y n j ct M rxist-L ninist cha e ar bo a d n W st n ar ed 1 whi b n l a e r t a i ng . M xism, e th ature the m k a a Isl blu p in forbuilding soci l sm. acce a e the ' w, e n of mic a u E st. In T nyol s vi h he adhe e h c e e a r tha e a n pt bl in uda t c a , w s he t a wit out a All t r nts of Turkis so ialism w r g eed t K malism w s t ie d er t lism o so i lism h ir te et a tha the i e ere h a c u t m o p ss from fe er a n n r s woul p mi i rivate of t e n s, nd t pr ncipl s of Kemalism w also t e b sic o 11 ict ea i there own ship nd o e ev ut a here ly sp k ng s no p 11 e u h h e a a t a the e ion, s str c ect r d cti r ol e a e ra i on (202, principl s of T rkis socialism. T eir chi f t sk w s o pply s a e ver the of oll ive p o u e , r r t dit ons the a e t c e rar u h a d ar t the a c a t xploit tion. Mor o e a e ted that principl s o ont mpo y T rkis reality n to imp t o m so i lis a i e n, ss r E stern . T nyol, l k Ozg ci at the a a ec eve he d t a t Aug. 1965, p. 16) a a e t 13 the r c e alism. In orient ion on soci l nd onomic l l. T secon mos import n ch a ed m, w s clos o so p in ipl s of Isl i n ce u h c a the de ca a d ica ce t the ology, b s on t e a c cia psy e cert a c l sm did ot sour of T rkis so ialism w s i ologi l n polit l con p s of e e e oun ri s, Isl mi so i i te a a e d d e er e e ce unlik ain Ar b h a y, how v r, var ati ur Soc al st In rn tional. Finally, M rxism-L ninism i x t som influ n Turk d e a ed a soci lism. The ec e d r ad a i on of T kis r u at the the e u h he u e n r m in only t e h i b om wi esp e th the r c a in the fo m l ion of ori s of T rkis socialism. T se three so rc s i t h r a a ed n ly mp as zed Yo n a d ci p op g t is o y onst h de c e e t c h d e e t SSC so al s s w o a ea t c u te n r the re tha r the of Turkis socialism also explain its i ologi al cl c i ism, in whic iff r n a c c a a n w pon o o n tha s fo m no mo t ar ca e ve t e e Isl mi so i lism w ive irc e ad t e e e t va ion, the positions of M xismbe m interwo n wi h K malism - one of th forms at a t t c l s. In di e b n fi of conser e h at a a th e e t a c ion of Isl m o th e th te e xploit i a c trar t K malism, of Turkis n ion lism - nd wi pr c pts from Wes Europe n so ial ce t a i on of e n ts of c sm w s on y o ec cra r c ur i h c e e a e d t a u on p of Isl m c social u ed t a e e emo cy. The p in iples of T k s so ialism w r bl n of i s v rio s a d there re c d ff t among � a e e ari be s o ny r al c urce a a t e ter a t c h r h c t ed n fo oul not the uardian n m ly, s cul sm, d ide ed i e ideologi al so s: n n i-w s n sl n , whi h t e Tu kis so ialis s call · e t a h ch a g of i i e y cons r ts lf a t a a a t a i the sh nt llig n si , w i as bo Turk "anti-imperialism/ n i-feudalism, st tism, nti-c pi alism, n t onalism' the e t taturk. u t he e ti e u h a a a prec p s of A and an f1-comm rusm.· A t s�m m , T rkis soci lism w s not . . r a ed ide c trea t a he e t e e d thei distmctly fo mul t ologi al s m. I s d r n s, d p n ing on r c v ct ad uate a ed a e a of Turkish Socialism of the per onal politi al con i ions in eq ly nalyz its b sic principl s nd An Evaluation of the Concept � their r a de the e a e Yon Socialists and of the SSC meaning fo finition of id ological nd political essenc of a Turkish soci lism. I'." sses ;, o l proce e on u a d he h e a e a h e s econontlc and p libca Th Yi"" e analys;s of th ocial, gro p n t SSC, w os progr mm w s Turkis socialism ( In th h use m . d h ht c a t r th r a t e a CC:,: s so sm often made con eo o s s of Turk; h cial; siste of bot rig so i lis s, known fo ei n i-communist vi ws n� ey, the ;d l �; t l ' - ) Turk y of c c e t ar h ue c the att ca d t e e t h u h he t n left so 1· ali s t s, 1 os r o M xism. T e infl n e of l er use h t i a c t y cons a � I a t e nd onc p s, alt o g . he e ve h e ha a t r a d rxis -L ninist erm nology d e .1c kish SS C In t '\ M e e ed t c . all , Tur 1960s to vol to t e l ft, emp sizing n i-Weste n n ' e ed a e ommumsm. I o1 og Y t t y w r oppos o c1 e anti-<: str ss th t th th 1 a d . mocratic api alis positions . \ a re ect e t . so al-d cia i a i s clos o e soc ali st n " so l sm w s n m ny sp CHAPTER FIVE I 108 . The fore1gn · policy sect10n of Tur kish socialism also lacked clearcut . outli nes. The ideologists agreed that the foreign polie y of Turkey's rulers did Yon . . not meet the national interests of the country. S ome of the socialists and . . CHAPTER SIX th e SSC demanded that Turkey 1 eave NA TO , calling for the country t o Join . . the non-aligned movement; oth ers cons1dered it necessary to achieve greater . THE md epen d en ce from the North Atlantic alliance, taking a stand only agai. CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL- nst DEMOCRATIC REVOL . IN THE UTION excessive dependence on th e USA and the countries of Wes t em Europe. TURKISH SOCIALIST MOVEMENT ·r IN THE In general, Turki s h socialism was fundamentally a en ique of the 1960S AND EARLY 1970S caP italist path of development for Turkey and promot �d the "third " "non-capitalist" path. In fact, however, the adherents of this concept called . . The Turkish only for radical social and economic reforms within the cap1tal1st yst em. socialist movement in � the second half of the 1960s on.. f:£ early 1970s developed in and the The Turkish socialism of the Yi group and the S SC di ere d from circumstances of a clash between . . and political concep two ideological Ay bar 's Turkish and democratic socialism in the followmg respects. ts. The first was the indivisibility nal-democratic of socialist and l. It had a less marked anti-capitalist slant; natio goals in Turkey and the second national-democratic revolution was the 2. it was closer to Kemalism; (NDR). The former, propounded . . Aybar, became the official by M.A. 3. it held that the leading role m the revolut10nary p rocess should be played strategy of the Labour Party pursuit of a and signified the not by the working class but by the middle strata; socialist revolution (SR) that l at the same time would · :�w fulfil national democratic have to 4. t reJ·ected the peaceful, constitutional path t o er and favoured tasks. The latter revolution, envisaged a two-phase revolution through the leftist section. of t h e rm 1 ta ry and civilian the first phase being I the NDR and only the second Initially the NDR concept being SR. intelligentsia; was put forward by Turk a leading activist of the 5. it regarded the programme o t" ish socialist movement and f the "non-capitalist path of developmen former member of the Communist . . . . . Mihri Belli. As a Party, not as a trans1 ·t·10n al period from cap1tal1 sm t o soci alism but as an aim m member of the Labour Party, propagating whose chairman was itself - "the third path.'' his own doctrine of the indivisib ility of NDR and SR, Yon obliged to publish his Yon, Belli was The Turkish socialism of the group and of the SSC was even farther theories in which he NDR did in August 1966. The from Marxism than the theories of Ay b ar on "Tur kish" and "democra t1c· " concept thus became current in the Labour Party even . . Second TLP Congres prior to the socialism. \'.!'he lack of an adequate scientific basis in �heoretical t nd s, which was held in November of that year. However, : ::�� ts neither at the Second nor of a c1 ear political line in the programme of this group o c s at the Third and the Extraordinary . held in 1968 did Congresses exacerbated the ideological disarray in Turkey's soc1 ali s t m ovement . the adherents of the NDR influen in the party enjoy any ce or constitute a threat real to the Aybar and the Aren-Boran the party leadership. groups in Only in 1969, with the the p deepening of the crisis within arty and its election failure, s did the number of NDR ocialist movement adherents in the rise sharply. But the idea Labour was decisively rejected by Party, and at the Fourth the re TLP Congress, held solution was in October 1970, a adopted on the inconsiste Propag ncy of party membership ation of the theory with We of NDR for Turkey. Although re expelled NDR proponents from the party, their theories among won support and wide currency socialist groups and organizations outside it. 110 CHAP,T ER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL-DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION 111

h t � T e NDR concept put forward by Belli was a reaction by a group of democra ic Turkey. On the other, its existence is linked to the continuation h t t t th Turkish socialists to t e TLP leaders' at achment o parliamen arism and of e system of capitalist exploitation and therefore it is opposed to h t eir underestimation of Turkey's social and economic backwardness and the socialism" (98, p. 14). Belli believed that if Turkish socialists did not h h Aydinlik t h political immaturity of t e country's working class. T e journal succeed in attrac ing t e national bourgeoisie to their side, they would at ht th h (Lig ), founded in November 1968, publicized e views of Belli and his least ave to neutralize it. Thus, Belli's position on the national bourgeoisie h h t th th colleagues on t e necessity of NDR for Turkey. The journal also publis ed was close o e views of one of e TLP ideologists in the early years of the t h t articles by Muzaffer Erdos , Va ap Erdogdu, Munir Aktolga, Dogu Perin!;ek, party, Fethi Naci, and i coincided with the line of the Turkish Communist �ahin Alpay, Giin Ziieli, Erdogan Gii!;bilmez and other proponents of the Party. h Tiirk solu h NDR. The opinions of Belli and his group were also publis ed in Anot er NDR ideologist, Muzaffer Erdost, divided the Turkish h t h t t t t (Turkis Lef ), whic firs appeared in 1967. Objec ing o being called bourge?isie into hree sections: the comprador bourgeoisie, linked to t h th h th t "NDRs" af er t e concept ey advanced, Belli and is like-minded imperialism; e na ional bourgeoisie, opposed to . imperialism; and the Tiirk solu h t th colleagues observed in in July 1969 t a "We are not NDRs. We bourgeoisie at was not opposed to imperialism but was not comprador h t h are revolution?'ries, w o in end to carry out a social revolution - not at t e bourgeoisie (106, p. 108). He also maintained that the Turkish national Proletarian Revolutionaries." h t t stage we are now, but after it. We are (195, 29 bourgeoisie s ould ake i s place in the overall union of leftist and patriotic h July 1969). forces - t e national-democratic front (NDF), in which, however, it would not play a leading role. h h T e views of t e NDR ideologists on the Turkish national bourgeoisie The NDR Concept of the Proletarian Revolutionaries h determined t eir attitudes to the Republican People's Party. The socialists were willing to support this party if it presented anti-imperialist slogans; th t h t h h Belli, e ideologis of t e Proletarian Revolu ionaries, maintained t at t ey particularly welcomed the appearance of a new current in the RPP_ , h t ortanin solu). Turkey ad los its political and economic independence and was dependent known as "left-of-centre" ( "I evaluate the 'left-of-centre' th h th h th h h on the Western powers, primarily e USA. On t e o er and, wi in t e , movement in t e RPP as a return to the Kemalist roots of the party and I h country "feudal'' forces predominated, w ich obstructed social and economic welcome it," Belli stated. He noted that "the RPP is a party of the h t h tt development. T erefore, Turkey faced two fundamental asks: "T e pe y-bourgeois bureaucracy, which holds in its grasp key positions in the t h t t t attainment of na ional independence and t e liquidation of feudalism." · army and s a e appara us" (98, p. 45). Therefore, he called for coordination h t t th t th T ese asks could be fulfilled only by an "anti-imperialis " and of e stra egy of e "proletarian revolutionary movement" with the "anti-feudal" revolution, which Belli (like many other socialists) called the national principles of h Kemalism. / This approac was fully supported by t th t h h national-democra ic revolution. Regarding e mo ive forces of t is Erdost, w o considered it necessary to place the emphasis first on h th t h t h revolution, e believed a practically t e entire people could par icipate,, t11ationalism, and only t en on internationalism. "It is not socialism but h h th h t th th t wit t e exception of e t e feudal mas ers and e compradors. He defined1 imperialism a will lose out from the development of nationalism, 11 Erdost th t th t e "urban and rural prole ariat, e urban and rural petty bourgeoisie, and asser ed (106, p. 129). For the socialists the position of the Proletarian . th t t h e mili ary and civilian in elligentsia" as revolutionary forces (98, p. 63) . . Revolutionaries regarding t e class or social stratum that should take the. h h h t h t Unlike Aybar, he eld t at t ere was a na ional bourgeoisie in t e coun ry, lead in Turkey's revolutionary process was particularly significant. On this h h h h but t e latter occupied a secondary position as compared wit t e comprador t e view of Belli, the chief ideologist of NDR, underwent considerable th h h t bourgeoisie. However, Belli noted e dual nature of t e national c ange. In the firs years after advancing his views (1966-1968) he believed h t h th t h bourgeoisie: "On t e one h�nd, it is suppressed by imperialis�, and o t at -.,, a "w oever is stronger will win hegemony over the revolution ... " (98, extent may be close to revolution and to the slogan of an independent,

L 112 CHAPTER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL-DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTIONI 113 p. 48). Belli did not exclude the possibility that the leading force of reform and nationalization of various branches of the Turkish economy as NDR might be the left-leaning section of the military and civilian tasks of the democratic, not the socialist, revolution. He pointed out the intelligentsia, which he defined as "the most conscious part of the petty inconsistencies and contradictions in Aybar's theories and asserted that bourgeoisie" (98, pp. 131, 15). But later, in 1969-1971, he stated whoever put forward the slogan "An end to internal exploitation" must unequivocally that "hegemony in the national-democratic revolution must logically renounce the slogan of agrarian reform, which envisaged distribution belong to the proletariat and the poor peasants - the most revolutionary of land among the peasants, and call for collectivization. So as not to forces of the society." In Belli's thinking, national-democratic contradict himself he must demand not only nationalization· of foreign transformations were merely a historical stage on the way to the socialist commerce, the banks and insurance, but also of all the means of production. revolution (SR) that must follow NDR, if Turkey were not to swing back and Nevertheless, like the TLP leaders, the proponents of the NDR rejected counter-revolution to triumph. Here he was in accord with Aybar, who also the "non-capitalist path" of development, which the Yon socialists and the believed that all national-democratic transformations not reinforced by the SSC proposed; they held that such a path was possible only for countries struggle for socialism would inevitably be under threat. But for Aybar these even less developed than Turkey, for example Ghana, Somalia, etc. theories lay at the foundation of the concept of the indivisibility of NDR and Belli, a TLP member, differed from the majority of the NDR supporters SR; for Belli the necessity of the two-phase revolution was self-evident, as in socialist circles outside the party in his ambiguous attitude towards the he assigned great significance to the vestiges of feudalism in the country and Labour Party's strategy and tactics. On the one hand, he defended the its dependence on the West. He observed that the difference between his party's policy, pointing out the very narrow limits within which it was views and those of the TLP leaders was in essence that the latter omitted the obliged to operate. On the other, he severely criticized the party leadership, obligatory stage of NDR and called for the struggle for socialism, even accusing the Aybar and Aren-Boran groups firstly, of mixing the tasks of the though the Labour Party programme adopted in 1964 erected national­ NDR and SR and thereby losing important allies for the socialists, and democratic tasks. He believed that the subjection of national-democratic secondly, for aspiring to attain power in a peaceful and constitutional aims to socialist goals might drive from the socialists "forces capable of manner. Belli maintained that there was no real distinction between the supporting the national-democratic revolution, but distant from socialist views of Aybar and the Aren-Boran group, and dubbed them "the aims." Erdost also drew attention to this eventuality. He objected to the opportunist Aybar-Aren clique" (98, p. 192). Regarding the sfgnificance of presentation of anti-capitalist slogans: "For imperialism and feudalism to parliamentarism in contemporary Turkish conditions, Belli was close to the lose the support of the urban and rural bourgeoisie only one slogan is Yon and SSC ideologist Avc10glu; for him parliamentarism was a "secondary possible: national-democratic revolution" (106, p. 88). problem." In his view, the TLP had, by the end of the 1960s and early In his analysis of Aybar's concept of the indivisibility of NDR and SR, 1970s, become one of the elements of Turkey's narrow bourgeoi� Belli correctly observed that in practice the proponents of this line were parliamentarism. The only way the Labour Party differed from the other . putting forward the same demands as the · adherents of the NDR. In bourgeois parties was, Belli believed, the presence in it of a strong economics they agreed on the nationalization of foreign capital, foreign trade, "proletarian revolutionary opposition," composed of his own colleagues. the banks and insurance, the need for agrarian reform and priority to the Criticizing the wary attitude of the party leadership to the anti-American development of the state sector. In internll,l and foreign policy these demonstrations of the student youth, Belli charged the Aybar and demands were reflected in the slogan "A fully independent and truly Aren-Boran group that "as a result of their opportunist position regarding democratic Turkey." Belli said that "the TLP programme is generally a revolutionary activity, the centre of gravity in the socialist movement is programme of national-democratic revolution. Even if this programme is located outside the TLP" (98, p. 237). Nevertheless, Belli thought that the fully realized, Turkey will become not a socialist but an independent and TLP programme answered the needs of the NDR, and therefore he instructed democratic state" (98, p. 123). He rightly regarded the demands for agrarian his adherents inside and outside the party on the necessity of replacing the

_ .... . CHAPTER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL-DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION I 114 115

PDA Adhering to the positions of the NDR, the PDA, like their colleagues leadership and altering the form and methods of party work. He believed Aydznlik,. that the absence of their own political organization was a disadvantage to the on believed that activity of the Proletarian Revolutionaries. Unlike Boran, who held that in a 1. Turkey was a semi-feudaland semi-<:olonial country; country like Turkey, where the petty bourgeoisie predominated, it was 2. capitalist relationships were weakly developed; impossible to create a purely proletarian party, Belli endorsed the idea that 3. the chief contradiction was that between imperialism and the "enslaved" it was possible to form a proletarian party, but only after realization of the Turkish people; NDR, in conditions of greater democracy. 4. the impending revolution must be of a national-democratic character Belli attributed great importance to Kemalism, which he described as and would be directed against imperialism and feudalism. "petty-bourgeois radicalism." He was of the opinion that the victory of the Together with these precepts, which were common to all NDR supporters, the ideological and political line of the PDA group also had its own special Democratic Party in the 1950 elections and its rule until 1960 meant Aydznlik features. Unlike the socialists, who continued to spread the views of "anti-Kemalist counter-revolution in the country; therefore he regarded the P.D. Aydznliklaid Kemalists as his natural allies in ·the struggle for national democratic Belli, the emphasis on the following: revolution. In this context he sought to approximate other socialist groups, 1. the Turkish working class was weak and as yet not capable of political Yon which at first congregated around and the SSC and later, towards the struggle. Therefore objective and subjective conditions for the hegemony of Devrim end of the 1960s, began publishing the newspaper (Revolution). The the proletariat in the NDR were absent in Turkey; supporters of the NDR in the Turkish socialist movement approached Islam 2. the leading role in the revolutionary process would belong to the most circumspectly. Belli frequentlyemphasized that genuine socialists must revolutionary-democratic section of the military and civilian intelligentsia; respect the religious sentiments of people and not oppose them. However, 3. the fundamental motive force of the revolution would be the peasantry, like many Marxists in Turkey he believed that in certain conditions Islam as it was the largest exploited class. The central issue of the revolution was played a reactionary role and in others a progressive one {98, p. 317). the land question. P.D. Aydznlik On the Kurdish question the position of the NDR supporters hardly explained the ideological platform of the Proletarian differed from the TLP. For example, Belli held that the Kurdish problem Socialists thus: would automatically be solved after the realization of the NDR and the Our analysis of the class structure and contradictions in granting to the Kurds of the same rights as the Turks. Like the Aybar and Turkey shows us that the theory of national-democratic revolution elaborated by Mao Dsetung and Lin Piao is suitable the Aren-Boran groups in the Labour Party, Belli did not envisage the for our country also.J In Turkey, which is a semi-<:olonial and granting of autonomy to the Kurds within the framework of the Turkish semi-feudal country, the main contradiction is that between the peasant masses· - the fundamental motive force of the state. revolution - and the semi-feudal elements... The revolution will move from the rural areas to the town. As the peasantry The PDA (Proleter Devrimci Aydznlik) Group will become the chief motive force of our revolution its primary base will be the rural areas. This means that all I • forces, including all arms, must be directed precisely to the rural areas. It is also necessary in the interests of the At the end of 1969 a split occurred in the Proletarian Revolutionaries. Aydznlik: development of the popular struggle to propagate the ideas of Several people left the editorial board of the paper, they were Dogu Marx, Lenin and Mao Dsetung. (190, No. 26, p. 119) Perin<;ek, �ahin Alpay, Edrogan Gii<;bilmez, Omer Ozerturgut, At1l Ant, Such were the basic features of the "popular struggle" and the "revolution" Giin Zileli and Qengiz Qandar. This group, which called itself the Proleter devrimci that in the view of the PDA had to be undertaken by contemporary Turkey. Proletarian Socialists, began publishing its own paper, aydinlik The PDA group accused the Belli supporters of revisionism, and the latter, (Proletarian Revolutionary Light). The Proletarian Socialists in turn, termed the PDA "new opportunists," criticizing them for themselves soon came to be' known by this name in its abbreviated form, I 116 CHAPTER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL -DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION 117

r ro o o r o u o o o o u ou unde estimating the le f the pr leta iat in the rev l ti nary pr cess and the s cialist and left m vement was cr shed and paralyzed, the PDA gr p o r r u o r o o our o r o u o u r o u o o o for ve rating the evol ti na y p tential f petty b ge is adicalism. c ntin ed t b sy itself with ev l ti nary demag gy and incitement t o o o urr o The members f the PDA (the Pr letarian S cialists), like the Belli ins ecti n. rou o o u o o r o o u o o o o o r o g p (Pr letarian Rev l ti naries), held c nt adict ry views n the iss e f An examinati n f the ide logical and p litical platfo m f the PDA o u o rou o r a variation of the concept of NDR; o the founding of a "pr letarian" party in T rkey. On the ne hand, they g p sh ws that fi st, it was and sec nd, r o u o u o o u o o u o ob maintained that for the ev l ti nary str ggle t realize nati. nal-democratic it was fo nded n the ideas of Ma Dset ng and Lin Pia and jectively ou u o r o o r o u Maoist o r ou u aims it w ld be s fficient t fo m a single fr nt f leftist fo ces. The c nstit ted the tendency am ng the Ma xist gr ps in the T rkish r I9ci-koylii or r o P.D. Aydinlik o ro u newspape (W ke -Peasant), which, t gether with socialist m vement. The PDA p gramme later became the la nching pad ro o o o r ro o o o o o o o p pagated the c ncept f the PDA ideol gists, Pe irn;ek and Alpay, w te forthe rise and devel pment f ther leftist rganizati ns f Ma ist leanings, o u o r r o o o r o o o rou ou o o o r n the fo nding f their own pa ty: "Why should we sepa ate ff as a which the to "m de ate" p siti ns f this g p c ld n w n l nge satisfy. r our o r o ro r rou o pa ty.. . ? Why must nati n be split.. . ? Our pa ty is the Nati nal In fact, with the P leta ian Socialists (PDA g p) the furthest extent f o r ur r u r o o o r o Liberati n F ont. O pa ty leader is M stafa Kemal. Our pa ty is the legality f the left wing f the socialist m vement was eached; bey nd it o o o o r r o o r r o o c mp sed f the entire nation, wh se inte ests a e h stile t American began the clandestine ext eme left cur ents and rganizati ns. These o o o u or o o ou imperialism" (185, N . 1, p. 7). On the ther hand, the same paper, in an engaged in terr rist activity and ca sed en m us damage t the still y ng r o o r o r r o o u a ticle entitled "A Th usand and One Nati nal-Libe ati n Wa s," insisted and impe fectly formed dem cratic system f T rkey. or ou u o u r o that "the w kers and lab ring peasants m st f necessity fo nd thei wn or o u r o o o ganizations." S nclea and inc nsistent a positi n f the PDA may r o u o o u appa ently be explained as the intr d cti n of s me adj stments into the The Interpretation of the NDR Concept in the Turkish o o o ro r u o ide l gy f the P letarian Socialists es lting fr m experience. Concerned Student Movement in the Late 1960s and Early 1970s u o r o o o for the s ccess f their activities, they we e bliged t rec gnize the necessity o u o r or o r o o r u r f fo nding their wn party even p i t the ealizati n of NDR. H weve , � I The NDR concept p t forwa d by Belli and o o u or r o o o o o b m dified in a Ma ist · o like the s pp te s f Belli, they failed t establish any stable rganizati nal recti n y Perinc;ek and Alpay exerted a maj u o u o r infl ence n the st dents, u u r o or r o o o o str ct res in the late 1960s and ea ly 1970s am ng the w ke s r peasants. wh formed the m st active element f the s cialist o ro r rou o ur and leftist m vement in On the p blem of attaining powe , the PDA g p ad pted an even less T key in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In the o o o o r o o o u o 1960s a rapid pr cess f c mpr mising and mo e extreme p siti n than Belli and his c lleag es on political p larization was taking place, as a result o u Aydinlik. r r r o r u o b f which the T rkish st o o r Pe inc;ek, Alpay and thei adhe ents c nsidered taking powe only dent b dy ecame divided into tw h stile camps - ight r o r r u o and left. The left, incl u r o o by fo ce f a ms. "We reject all reformist and pa liamentary ways," the ding the s cialist-inclined st dents, formed into the Fede ro o or r o r ati n f P letarian S cialists stated. "W ke -peasant p wer may be established Idea Clubs (FIC). The u r u fi st "idea club" had been fo nded in 1956 by a g o p o ou o u o o r or o o rr u u o o nly thr gh rev l ti n, and this p we can be b n nly fr m a rifle ba el" of intellect als r o in the Fac lty f P litical Science at the Unive sity o o o o u f (190, N . 40). The PDA ide logists did not c nceal that Ma ism was the Istanbul. At u u or r o that time the cl b was infl enced by the s pp te s ou o o o o ou oo o o r f the s rce f their ide l gical and p litical tl k. They called Ma ism "the Republican Pe ple's Pa ty and its activity was r our r o u o r directed against the r o Ma xism-Leninism of e a" and believed that "Ma Dset ng is the living Dem c atic Pa ty, then in power. After the rev lutio o o or r u o o o n f 27 May 1960 and o o or o r o Lenin, the leader f w ld evol tion" (190, N . 22, p. 268). H wever, in the ad pti n f the new, m e dem c atic c nstitu o o u r rou o r ro ti n f 1961, the cl b b o p actice the PDA g p went n furthe than the p paganda of shifted considerably leftwards and egan t incline o o ub t wards s cialism. In the �d-1960s u r o neo-Kemalism and anti-Americanism. In all their p lications the the Sad n A en group in the TLP took ver the leadership o o o u o o o b o of the Pr letarian S cialists c mpletely disregarded the act al s cial, ec n mic and,, cl� In 1965 ub o u . the s cialists directing the Idea Cl decided t p blish o o r ou o Donii iim u a p litical situati n in Tu key. Even after the c p f 12 March 1971, when ' journal called 9 ou o o (T rning) for y ng s cialists. The j urnal CHAPTER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE NATIONAL-DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION 118 119 appeared for a year and a half, albeit irregularly as it had no firm material which "unions associated with the Federation will consist of members who base. In fact, Donii�iim propagated the strategy and tactics of the Labour regard socialist studies as the guide to action" (187, 24 July 1971). The Party and was the organ of university students who held views similar to the ideological leaders of the Federation were named as Marx , Engels , Lenin , TLP. Stalin, Mao Dsedung, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. The NDR became the In the second half of the 1960s the leftist students began to coalesce into ideological and political platform of the Dev-Gene;, and the Proletarian Idea Clubs not only in the faculties of the University of Istanbul but also in Revolutionaries and Proletarian Socialists seized its leadership. In February other institutions of higher education in Turkey. Later, the FIC was 1970 Dev-Gen<;'s chairman gave an outline of the aims of the organization, established. In 1967 the FIC, then under the influence of the TLP, accepted stressing that "the immediate revolutionary task is the national-democratic the new strategy of the party on the indivisibility of socialist and revolution" (168, 3 Feb. 1970, p. 8-9). Dev-Gene; did not support the national-demotratic goals in Turkey. The student leaders declared their Labour Party and refused any ties with it. Omer Giiven, member of the solidarity with the struggle of the Labour Party for replacement of the Executive Committee of the Federation's Istanbul region, asserted that Turkish regime and supported its slogan of "a second national-liberation "there can be no alliance with the opportunism of Aybar and Aren, who are struggle". The leftist students stood not so much for university reforms as for the leading cadres of the TLP ." Cooperation would be possible only with the radical social and economic transformations in the country and against the rank-and-file Labour Party members who were pursuing the struggle within American presence in Turkey. The first demonstrations and meetings of the framework of the NDR concept (168, 10 Feb. 1970, pp. 8-9). At the students in 1967-1968 were held under slogans of the struggle against "the same time, within Dev-Gene; the various groups of students held poorly dominance of American imperialism"; through the influence of the TLP developed ideas of the' tactical measures and methods for conducting the leadership they were peaceful, as the Labour Party emphasized constitutional struggle for NDR in Turkey. The disputes among them resulted in forms and methods of attaining power. However, the wariness and fear in Dev-Genc;'s splitting into several factions, which although formally operating the party leadership of providing the authorities with grounds for accusing within the framework of this legal federation in fact formed their own the TLP of disrupting social order led to the ejection from the Labour Party clandestine organizations. Of these, the following were regarded as the most of the student movement and the growth of the influence of NDR adherents vigorous: within it. In 1969 the main body of the leftist student movement abandoned 1. the Turkish National-Liberation Army (TNLA). Its leader was Deniz the Labour Party and came under the control of the Proletarian Gezmi�; Revolutionaries and the Proletarian Socialists I Among the factors that 2. the Turkish . 1 Popular-Liberation Party - Turkish Popular-Liberation prompted the students to break away from the TLP the following may be Front (TPLP-TPLF). Its leaders were Mahir Qayan, Munir Aktolga, listed: Ertogrul Kiirkc;ii; at first TPLP-TPLF belonged to TNLA; 1. the crisis in the TLP resulting fromthe conflicts between the Aybar and 3. the Turkish Revolutionary Workers and Peasants Party (TRWPP). the Aren-Boran groups; This was based on the PDA group. Its leaders were Dogu Perinc;ek, �ahin 2. the failure of the party in the 1969 elections, which was seen by the Alpay, Qengiz Qandar, At1l Ant, and Gun Zileli. In 1972 this organization students as the bankruptcy of the Aybar position on the attainment of power split. Some extremists led by Ibrahim Kaypakkaya founded a pro-Albanian peacefully and through elections; Maoist organization called The Marxist-Leninist Communist Party 3. the passivity of the TLP leadership in a period of mass anti- American (CPT/ML). In time this party formed its own military organization, The protests by the youth in 1968-1969 Turkish Workers . and Peasants Liberation Army (TWPLA - "TIKKO"); The Fourth Congress of the FIC held in October 1969 adopted a 4. the Belli group; resolution renaming the organization "the Federation of Revolutionary 5. the H. K1V1lc1mh group. Youth of Turkey" (Dev-Gene;) and affirmed a new charter according to All these organizations - except the Belli group were illegal extreme leftist CHAPTER SIX THE CONCEPT OF THE I 120 NATIONAL-DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION 121 groupings, which operated on the basis of the ideological and political revolution and which classes and social strata should compose the single precepts once· advanced by the Proletarian Revolutionaries and the national-democratic front together _ . with the workers and peasants. Proletarian Socialists. Although the total number of members of these Differences also existed regarding the methods of the struggle for power, terrorist organizations did not exceed a few thousand, they succeeded in although all NDR adherents were convinced that the existing regime in destabilizing the political situation in the country and in jeopardizing Turkey might be eliminated only by armed force. Belli came to the Turkey's foreign policy obligations within the NATO framework; this was concl sion that the working class : alone should lead the revolutionary process; one of the chief causes of the military coup of 12 March 1971. Avc10glu and the Turkish Maoists, particularly Perinc;ek and Alpay, pointing By the beginning of 1973 the army, all the forces of security, had to the political immaturity of the proletariat, assigned this mission to the completed the elimination of most of the Proletarian Revolutionaries and left-inclined-section of the military and civilian intelligentsia. On the other Proletarian Socialists belonging to the five groups listed above and other hand, Avc10glu favoured the "thir d," "non-capitalist" path, while Belli, smaller extreme left organizations. The activity of Dev-Gene; and all student Erdost, Perinc;ek, and the leaders of the extremists Qayan and Gezmi� had associations, societies and federations was suppressed. only the struggle for socialism in mind. In general, the presentation of the NDR concept for Turkey was the result of the evident over-evaluation . The Meaning of the NDR Concept fo r Turkey of the social, economic, and cultural backwardness of Turkey and of its dependence on the West In regarding Turkey as a semi-feudal and semi-colonial Asiatic count�y, the The. NDR concept exerted a powerful effect on the development o( the Marxist-Driented socialists sought to apply models of revolutionary entire Turkish socialist and radicaj left movement in the late 1960s and early development of backward states of this continent to their own country. But . 1970s. While some socialists in organizations and groups outside the party it was inevitable that what had proved possible in China would fail in were guided by this concept in their actions, others who were members of the Turkey. The attempt to apply to Turkey of the 1970s a variation of the· Labour Party directed their efforts at combatting it. On several major issues 1 national-democratic revolution that Yon had been conducted successfully in the theories of socialists of the group, particularly Avc10glu, coincided China in 1949-1950 led only to the collapse of the leftist and socialist with those of the Proletarian Revolutionaries and the Proletarian Socialists. movement in Turkey. On the other hand, the model of the Egyptian. All agreed on the necessity for Turkey of a national-democratic revolution, revolution of 1952, to which A vc10glu's "national-revolutionary" path and rejected the socialist revolution as premature in that the objective and objectively led, was also inapplicable. The parliamentary system in Turkey, subjective preconditions for it had not yet ripened. Avcroglu, Belli, Erdost, constructed on the basis of the liberal constitution of 1961, differed sharply Perinc;ek, Alpay, Gezmi�, <:;ayan and other NDR adherents believed that from the King Faruq's despotic regime in Egypt, and the Kemalist-inclined Turkey was a semi-feudal, semi-colonial country, extremely dependent on Turkish army, unlike the Egyptian "F ree Officers," saw it as its duty to international, primarily American, imperialism - a country where the support that self-same established democratic regime in Turkey and to fulfil capitalist relationships were at the very beginning of their development. For the obligations of the country within the NATO framework. that reason they maintained that for Turkey the goals of the national-democratic rather than of the socialist revolution took precedenc.e, these being the struggle against imperialism and feudalism and for Turkey's independence. All NDR supporters agreed that the working class and the peasantry would become the fundamental motive forces of the revolution, and that this would be directed against the landowners and the compradors. At the same time, they held different views as to who should lead this