The September 1980 defeat and the struggle against
liquidationism
However, the developments did not take place as assumed. As
everybody knows, the gang of generals of the 12 September 1980
coup launched its attacks in conditions when a link had not yet
been established between a small fighting section of the working
class and the majority of the masses; and when the fighting
section had not succeeded in overcoming internal divisions to
create a united force. Consequently, the mass movement was
stopped. The coup dealt heavy blows first against other
organisations and then against ours. The junta made good use of
the weaknesses of the workers' movement and of the reformist and
sectarian environment surrounding the left-wing organisations.
After the 12 September coup mass movement had been repressed,
opposition organisations were smashed, and the country was
silenced. Political currents disintegrated and melted away in
liquidationist divisions. Although our party protected itself for
a while from these developments, it could not stop the
liquadationist waves from emerging in its ranks with a
right-opportunist tendency at the centre of our party and within
the party circles. This right-wing opportunist influence
increased as the silence caused by the 1980 coup continued. The
year 1985 witnessed this right-wing opportunist current maturing
and bursting like the head of a boil.
It is known what had happened in the party from 1985-87, namely
the elimination of the liquidators in mid-1987 and the CC taking
the initiative into its own hands. It was not a coincidence that
the liquidationary attacks in the party took place at a time when
the silence caused by the military coup was being overcome. The
masses were heading towards a new awakening and all these
developments were having an impact on life. The transformation
into an overt liquidationism of the opportunism which had been
maturing over the years just at a time when the conditions were
emerging which could have ended this process, was to do with
escapism from the demands of open struggle. No matter how the
liquidators/opportunists justified their counter-revolutionary
actions (the blows our party had suffered, its mistakes, and the
defeat it had suffered were all given as excuses), the content of
their demands was enough to give away their escapism.
The liquidationary groups attacked our party and denied its
existence, basing their criticism on the defeat, the shortcomings
and the weaknesses it had suffered. However, the party can be the
guarantor for the victory of the revolution and socialism but it
cannot guarantee that it will not be defeated. On the other hand,
the weaknesses and shortcomings of a party cannot be the reason
for its liquidation, as any party which struggles might naturally
make mistakes. Also, it may not always be possible at every time
and in every situation for a young party to go far beyond the
stage of development of the society (of the class, people,
cultural and ideological environment, etc.) to which it belongs,
and beyond the views, understandings, traditions, and styles from
which it has just emerged. In fact, to demand perfection and pure
correctness from a young party indicates a lack of understanding
of sociological and political life.
The liquidators denied this, not wanting to understand these most
obvious facts. Their actual aim was to destroy the gains made by
the class through our party; to destroy our organisation and to
avoid the responsibilities of class struggle. Although, the
liquidators were using them against it, our party nevertheless
would not and did not cover up its shortcomings and weaknesses.
Our party would not and did not deal with its problems on the
liquidators'terms. In addition, throughout its history, it has
never been afraid of acknowledging its mistakes and shortcomings.
On the contrary, it has always considered it as a fundamental
task to fight these problems with revolutionary self-criticism
and in a revolutionary way.
Our Central Committee, when it started re-constructing the
organisation in mid- 1987, considered it a central task and
fundamental policy to advance the party in accordance with the
demands of the class struggle. This was the precondition for
success in all tasks, including tackling shortcomings and
weaknesses. Our organisation was led down the path of liquidation
through being diverted from class struggle. The only way to
reorganisation was through basing itself and its work on the
requirements of daily struggle, of the awakening and the
organisations of the masses. This was the line to be followed in
order to reveal, recognise and overcome the shortcomings and
weaknesses.
The task was to reposition the party forces on the basis of
factories, workplaces and residential areas; linking the agenda
of the organisations, which united and established a common party
life, with the demands and the requirements of the mass movement.
Tackling the shortcomings and weaknesses inherited from the past
were part of this agenda and of everyday political and
organisational work... This was the line followed by our party
which considered it the precondition for being revolutionary and
communist to protect what is communist in the character of our
party as its most precious achievement, making this a part of
everyday struggle.
The period which began in mid-1987 and continued until 1990 has
marked a period of real progress for our party. This period
witnessed not only the isolation of the liquidationist groups and
the recovery of our forces, but also the establishment by our
cadres and circles of closer links with the factories. It brought
our organisation to the centre of the workers' movement,
eliminating other groups. The 1988-89 workers' movement tested
the policies and the line of our party, also showing the way
forward for the criticism and correction of shortcomings and
weaknesses. Poor tactics and non-class-based approaches had
suffered heavy blows by the year 1990 as our organisation had had
significant experiences not only in teaching the workers but also
in learning from them.
The May 1990-91 struggle let advanced workers and public opinion
see the difference between other groups and our party. From 1987
to 1990 the development of the party continued, being marked in
1190 by one of the most significant events in our party history:
the February General Conference. In mid-1987 by the liquidator
"entrepreneurs" attempted to hold a conference but
later had to cancel it because there was no majority. Thus the
February General Conference was the first such event since the
First Foundation Congress of 1980.
This General Conference discussed, apart from theoretical and
programmatical problems of our party, all political and
organisational problems (making the balance sheet of the last 15
years in terms of political, organisational line and tactics),
and made revolutionary decisions and resolutions based on the
experiences of the struggles carried out over the years. The
Conference, taking all moral and organisational responsibility
for the mistakes in our history, analysed and criticised our
current political and organisational work. It was also a
many-sided, direct, revolutionary and proletarian declaration of
war against the Gorbachevist liquidationist tendency which had
risen after 1985 in the Soviet Union and had had a disturbing
effect on the "left" and " intellectual"
circles in our country.
When the working class and the theory and practice of its
revolutionary party were going through a very critical period
characterised by unprecedented counter-revolutionary attacks, the
February 1990 Conference took very important decisions,
re-emphasising our party's position. At a time when all other
currents were seriously shaken, our party renewed the decisions
of the 1980 Congress with regard to the revolutionary party of
the working class; and highlighted the task of re-constructing
the party and advancing towards the revolutionary mass party in
line with the developments of the class movement. In this way it
challenged all liquidationary orientations.
"The re-construction of the party organisation on strong
foundations and as a total of workers organisations; the
gathering into the party of the best, the most devoted and
advanced elements and their political leaders having unbreakable
links with the proletarian masses; the advance of our party
organisation towards a revolutionary mass party in line with mass
revolutionary development, all of these summed up the task ahead.
It was natural, therefore, that these ideas gave the meaning and
essence to the rest of the decisions and demands of the
Conference.
The essence of the liquidationist thesis was the declaration of
the "loss of importance" of class in society, and of
the "bankruptcy" of the Leninist Party. Under
conditions when revisionist liquidationism was at its peak, our
Conference did not limit itself only to taking this decision and
making its demands. It was also to set out a line which would
secure as far as possible the implementation of the decisions and
the calls. Under those conditions when irresponsibility towards
the workers and working people and open attacks on
Marxism-Leninism had become blatant, attention had to be drawn to
the necessity of putting into practice these decisions and
demands. These were as follows:
Firstly, it was imperative "to take part in the spontaneous
struggle in the most determined way, and with the most correct
tactics, and to correct our mistakes and shortcomings by
utilising the experiences of the workers".
Secondly, it was necessary to follow a revolutionary and
assertive path "which understood the urgency of defending
the theory of proletarian revolution, Marxism-Leninism, in the
face of the destructive campaign carried out by the imperialist
and revisionist bourgeoisie, by the bourgeois, revisionist,
Trotskyist and social democrat circles, and which also recognised
the urgency of launching a developing war on every front of
theoretical ideological struggle against the
imperialist-capitalist ideological offensive".
The Conference platform not only set the aim and task and the
line to be followed, but also concretised these and linked them
to a specific objective: "Our party's second congress will
be held as a congress of the organisations of the bravest and the
most self-sacrificing elements of the working class, and of an
organisation which, depending on the growth of the class
movement, has taken steps on the path towards being a mass
party".
Alongside other imperatives, it was necessary to recognise the
importance of the form of work and organisation in order to
achieve this objective. The Conference emphasised once again the
"illegal base" of our organisation, drawing attention
to the liberal "wave of legalism" resulting from the
regime's "comedy of liberalisation". The Conference
acted in accordance with the line and resolutions of the 1980
Congress, and based itself on the dialectic of illegal and legal
work. It underlined the task of "following a line based on
illegality, but making the best use of the 'legal' opportunities
provided by the dictatorship for its class collaborating
servants. It also emphasised the task of "strengthening and
deepening this line".
Our Conference underlined this task intentionally. This was
because, on the one hand there were some political currents in
our country which were completely isolated from the masses, as a
result of having based themselves on a so-called
"illegality" which was used as an aim rather than an
instrument, and of taking the path to terrorism and degeneration.
On the other hand there were other currents, defenders of
legalism, who denounced illegal work, limiting themselves to the
boundaries of "legality", and appealing to all other
currents to enter that arena. It was necessary for our party to
re-draw a line of demarcation between itself and these two
tendencies; and for our organisation to combine legal and illegal
work and organisation, to stand firm in the face of the wave of
legalism, and to make creative use of every opportunity and
platform.
Our party platform warned our organisation over the
"problems" which had never been a problem before: the
"rising values" of liberal legalist
"socialism" had denigrated values like "work
discipline" and "duty" which are the most
fundamental obligations of being a party and organisation. And
this was a threat to the work of the new generation and our
organisations, and to their revolutionary character. Our
platform, warning that "our analyses, line and plans should
not remain on paper or as a formula", called for the
"study of the tasks set forth by the platform we stand on,
and the implementation of the plans in every area and unit in a
creative way". This demand, while encouraging our
organisations to carry out their work within the class in a more
energetic and determined way, played a significant role in their
stronger stance vis-a-vis the revisionist and liquidationary
pressure and influence. (Above quotes are from the 1990
Conference documents)
In the post-Conference period, the struggle of our organisations
advanced, drawing attention to important shortcomings and
uncovering the degenerated petty-bourgeoisie elements. The
evaluations, criticisms, decisions and demands of the Conference
formed the platform of struggle and action of our organisation
and its fundamental material. Although the Conference had partial
traces of traditional style and approach, its evaluations,
criticisms, plans and resolutions were revolutionary and
proletarian. It was natural that the following period would
developed as it has -when the party's esteem has further
increased and our organisations' work and relations among the
workers have become stronger.