In common with many other countries, Turkey鈥檚 socialist movement has been marked by the dominance of men in positions of leadership and authority.
The patriarchy is a social order that has become dominant globally over the course of millennia and which connects with oppressive conceptions of the family, exploitation and inheritance 鈥 in short, with social class. Socialists cannot stand by as it recreates itself in the very structures we claim exist to overturn social stratification and oppression.
It is by now well known around the world that the Kurdish liberation movement is playing a leading role in questioning the role of gender in society in general, and its reflection in political structures in particular.
Historic Kurdistan is divided between four modern states 鈥 Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. The liberation movement in all states is united in the Kurdistan Communities Union, which supports overturning the oppression of women in all spheres.
HDP example
Many socialists are working closely with this movement, mostly found in the Peoples鈥 Democratic Party (HDP), which united Kurdish forces with Turkish leftists, or at least closely support it. These socialists are showing an observable tendency to follow the example of the Kurdish liberation movement in consciously creating autonomous structures for women and promoting women to leading positions.
The HDP鈥檚 particular manifestation of this approach, which is found in all four parts of Kurdistan in ideologically linked groups, is 聽having leadership positions shared between one male and female co-leader. This provides women with a structure to 鈥渧eto鈥 gender oppression, which insidiously reproduces itself even in revolutionary movements. Around the world, leftists have observed this tendency again and again through their own experience.
But it is not merely that Turkish socialists mimic the Kurdish liberation movement, or follow it. The diversity of Turkish left groups, too numerous to easily count, reflects a diversity of intellectual and practical approach.
Some groups support the Kurdish liberation movement on the grounds of supporting the Kurdish right to national self-determination, while criticising their social practice 鈥 including the Kurdish movement鈥檚 commitment to radical feminism. Such groups maintain a traditional 20th century approach to labour organising, sadly assuming women鈥檚 labour is identical or, worse yet, subordinate to men鈥檚.
This is a theoretical and practical error, as women鈥檚 labour is in many ways primary in terms of social production and reproduction.
The role of gender in reproducing division of labour in society may be invisible to many Marxist men, particularly older ones whose social position in society and their organisation may let them stand aloof from deserved criticism.
However, it is anything but invisible to poor and oppressed women, who know and clearly state, if men are willing to listen, that the bulk of toiling falls on their shoulders.
Some socialist groups have internalised these critiques from the perspective of women鈥檚 liberation, and have begun a protracted process of trying to undermine patriarchal ideas within the socialist movement. A key way of doing this is promoting women to leading positions in organisations which claim to stand for the liberation of the foundation of social life: labour.
Of course, many groups, such as the social chauvinist Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) may attempt to use prominent women to legitimise what are basically unchanged politics, mere tokenism and window dressing.
Autonomy and collective struggle
But it is our assertion that in spite of the widespread phenomenon of using women to cover up for groups that are still essentially 鈥渂oys鈥 clubs鈥, there are real advantages to promoting women's leadership in the socialist movement. This reflects not only the individual power of women but their collective struggle.
One example of strong women鈥檚 leadership is the Social Freedom Party (T脰P). The specific organisational model of the party provides the basis and backbone for this. Instead of imposing itself on struggles and communities, it prefers to work within various social dynamics to strengthen those dynamics.
For instance, its women鈥檚 organisation Purple Solidarity seeks to organise women who do paid or unpaid labour, independently and according to their specific needs and demands. The same goes with a different organisation for woman students.
Purple Solidarity acts independently, yet maintains an organic tie to the party. T脰P maintains the model of the 鈥渃adre party鈥, but its main objective is to help the people to become subjects of their own fate and to organise themselves and an alternative to the current system.聽
This is reflected in the internal dynamics of the organisation, with young women in particular playing strong roles. T脰P has an advantage in this area over many older socialist groups due to being a relatively new organisation that began small.
This put disproportionate power in the hands of young people, whose critical eye towards gender politics in聽Turkey聽is sharper. Also, younger women and gender oppressed people stand on the shoulders of decades of social struggle and resistance within聽Turkey聽by the feminist and LGBTI movements.
Another example is the Socialist Party of the Oppressed (ESP, or PSB in Kurdish). It has played a disproportionate role in building the HDP, given its relatively small size next to the Kurdish liberation movement. In contrast to the system of 鈥渃o-chairs鈥, the ESP has for some time been led by women, choosing to promote women to the exclusion of men in a policy of positive discrimination.
Figen Y眉ksekda臒, the ESP chair at the time of the HDP鈥檚 formation, was promoted to HDP co-chair 鈥 partially on the recommendation of the jailed Kurdish liberation movement leader Abdullah 脰calan. Her vacant position in the ESP has been subsequently filled by a series of women, currently 脟i莽ek Otlu who has been jailed for almost a year.
Despite being led by women, the group also organises autonomous women鈥檚 groups, such as the youth organisation Free Young Woman (脰GK).
Beyond promoting socialism in the women鈥檚 movement, groups such as 脰GK have actively intervened against men鈥檚 violence on the left. Examples of such violence include the beating of a woman by the group known as 鈥淧opular Front鈥. The 脰GK declared Popular Front to be 鈥渆nemies of women鈥.
Further, the ESP provoked the ire of more conservative socialist men by sending their male cadres out as 鈥淓SP men鈥 to condemn a form of 鈥渕anhood鈥 that stands for nothing more than violence against women, and in defence of abortion rights and other women鈥檚 issues.
Class and oppression
The purpose of this was to actively respond to the concerns of women cadres鈥 concern that socialist men were aloof from their own social role in recreating women鈥檚 oppression, even if only by their silence.
An underlying emphasis on class as a social division among all groups, including women, has meant that groups such as the ESP have not been appropriated by bourgeois feminists. Such feminists largely ignore the huge significance of a defiant, struggled-tested leader like Y眉ksekda臒, while on the other side, macho elements of the socialist left have declared the ESP has descended into 鈥渋dentity politics鈥.
This contradiction shows that all socialists, men and women and all gender oppressed individuals, have a duty to draw closer the various fronts of struggle, such as the feminist, LGBTI, national and labour movements.
This can be done only by continued struggle with the masses themselves to turn the poor, workers, women, LGBTI peoples and all the oppressed into political subjects.
[[Muhsin Yorulmaz is a writer and translator with聽, a Marxist internet magazine. Mazlum Zafer聽is co-editor of Toplumsal 脰zg眉rl眉k, the newspaper of T脰P.]