Interview: Anarchists in the Turkish Uprising

What preexisting organizations have played a role in this new explosion of social 
struggle? ---- The important thing about this rebellion is that there was no political 
organization leading the movement. No leader, no party. The explosion appeared on the 
third day of the protests about the park and trees. People went to the streets because of 
the violence and brutality of poli?e?that is, the violence of the state. There were also 
some other motivations driving people into the streets, but none of them is related to any 
political organization. It is an autonomous movement. ---- What tactics have been most 
important in the conflicts? Where did those tactics originally develop? How did they 
spread? ---- Although there is no political organization directing people, there are 
anarchists, leftists, and other people who were already organized.

It is important to have experience in clashes; individuals from these political groups 
talk with the others about how to act in the streets, and everybody decides what to do. 
There were some important initiatives?like building barricades, and behind them people who 
supported the effort with first aid, cooking, and discussing what to do next. People were 
eager to talk more about what to do. This is a new thing here. ??Information was shared 
via fliers on the street and via social media about how to keep up with the movements of 
the police, how to respond to the gas bombs, and the rights of people who are arrested. I 
have to admit that people used Facebook and twitter in a useful way.

Compare the beginning of the Taksim Square occupation with previous protests, such as the 
demonstrations of May Day 2013. In both cases, who were the organizers, and what were 
their original goals? Why did the Taksim Square occupation in particular spark so much new 
participation?

OK, we have to clarify the starting point of the protests. This year has been the most 
repressive year yet for the social opposition. The government banned demonstrators from 
the square for May Day. That was the starting point, I think. There were also clashes on 
May Day. And after May Day, we are not allowed to protest anything in Taksim. The 
government banned any kind of demonstration. So this made people angry. We were on streets 
after May Day to protest various things, but mainly this situation.

The new thing about this occupation is not about demands or ideas. The new thing is the 
reaction of the people who saw the violence of the state. Before the rebellion, things 
like ?barricades,? ?gas masks,? and ?throwing stones at the police? seemed like bad 
notions for the people. This has changed a lot. Now the people are cheering for tear gas 
and singing songs about the barricades.

How have the Greek social struggles since December 2008 shaped the imaginations of people 
in Turkey? What about the recent uprisings in North Africa, and the Occupy movement in the US?

I think there are some similarities between the 2008 rebellion in Greece and 2013 in 
Turkey. There are some economic facts in both cases, but these are not the real reasons. 
The situations are, rather, the expressions of the people against the terror and violence 
of the state. When the police murdered Alexis [Grigoropoulos], the situation changed. The 
legitimacy of the state disappeared. People understood the real purpose of the state. This 
is the situation in Turkey now. The legitimacy of the state has disappeared.

The events of 2008 in Greece attracted the attention of anarchists in Turkey. There were 
solidarity actions (in which we were directly involved). It gave us an opportunity to talk 
about anarchism with the people. I don?t know if this had any role in self-organizing our 
society. But at least I can say this: the rebels in Greece shaped the imagination of 
anarchists in Turkey.

After 2008, another rebellion occurred in Greece in 2010. We attribute more importance to 
this rebellion, because it was then that anarchists especially started to organize life 
and shape its context. This is important for anarchism and also for society as a whole. 
All analyses will be deficient without experience of possible future ways to organize our 
lives.

Our group, Revolutionary Anarchist Action, had the chance to discuss the similarities and 
differences with the comrades who came from Thessalon?ki who were in the rebellions of 
2008 and 2010. We organized an assembly in Taksim Square with the comrades who came for 
solidarity.

As for the Occupy movements, they seemed to attract people. But I have to say this: the 
Turkish rebellion is more than some reformist demands like the Occupies all around the 
world. The ones who embrace the Occupy movement in Turkey are liberal groups who are 
mostly talk about humanism, state democracy, and environmentalism and other issues like that.

Do participants in the protests see a connection between opposition to Erdo?an?s power in 
Turkey and the ongoing struggles against the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? How 
strong is the dialogue between protesters in Turkey and Egypt?

There is no strong relation between the movements in Turkey and Egypt. We have some 
anarchist contacts, and we shared our thoughts on the rebellion in Egypt, and they shared 
theirs about the recent rebellion in Turkey. But it is really difficult to organize a 
common struggle. We have to organize the societies first.

Some people who are in streets use Turkish flags and Kemal flags, which are the symbols of 
the Kemalists. The main opposition party wants to direct the movement, but it is really 
difficult for them, because they do not have any logical perspective to mobilize the 
movement. Sometimes they are using the same language as the government?especially about 
the people or groups who clash directly with the police.

The demands of the people who are in streets cannot be limited by any kind of election, or 
referendum. The people who hold the Kemalist symbols are in the streets with Kurds, with 
leftists and anarchists. They are now understanding the situation and changing their 
minds. They are understanding what ?politics? really is.

But as I stated, there are also people from the main opposition party in the streets who 
wanted to change the way of action.

What is the effect of widely reported rhetoric like ?we are not activists, we are the 
people? or ?I am not a radical, I am a law-abiding citizen? from protesters?

Now, I have to separate these two expressions. ?We are not activists, we are the people? 
is a very powerful way to express the spirit of the actions. The state tried to 
marginalize the actions from the beginning. This is the general strategy of the 
government: because they have the votes of the majority for 11 years, they are trying to 
define all the rest as the ?marginal.? The opposition on the streets was completely 
ignored and described as marginal in the mainstream media?for example, on May Day as I 
mentioned above.

Nevertheless, the Taksim revolt has changed this concept. The people on the streets were 
very diverse. Different groups of people had been oppressed in different ways. Through the 
government of AKP, many amendments affected different groups such as workers, women, 
LGBTs, Alevis, minorities. So ?the marginal? lost its meaning, because everyone had become 
?marginal,? so ?the marginal? became ?the people.? The prime minister called the 
people?who were included in the actions??a few looters.? The people embraced this rhetoric 
against those attempts to marginalize the actions. For example, when the actions were 
reported on a TV channel as ?marginal actions of the marginal groups,? one man among the 
protesters appeared in the frame, slapped the reporter, and asked ?Who do you say is 
marginal?? On a similar broadcast, a woman came into the frame and asked ?Who is marginal??

On the other hand, the Kemalist media emphasizes the depoliticized character of the people 
in the streets. This is important for them to control the movement. But the reality is not 
like this. ?I am a law-abiding citizen? is not common rhetoric among the protesters. The 
anarchist character of the movement is clearer. But this does not mean every person in the 
rebellion is an anarchist. Other rhetoric is like ?We are people on the street and against 
all police, ACAB.?

Have there been debates about violence versus non-violence? What do most demonstrators 
feel that they have the ?right? to do in protest? How has this changed? And how have 
people reacted to those who take more militant action?

Self-defense against violence is not even an issue during the clashes. But some leftist 
and Kemalist groups wanted to shape the movement as a non-violent thing. Yet, for example, 
two days ago there was a commemoration in the square for the people who were murdered by 
the police. The action for the commemoration was just to put flowers in the square?but 
police used violence again. So these situations change people?s minds in favor of 
?self-defense? against the violent forces of the police.

Through the riot, many banks and global corporations were damaged, but also some local 
shops which are known to belong to fascists, or that belong to the mayor of ?stanbul or 
people who have a close relation with the government. The rage of the people was concrete 
and the spirit of the riot has effected a militant character. A slogan on one of the 
banners can help to explain: ?We are going to take back our freedom with interest, which 
you have taken in installments. ?Interest Lobby.?

It was signed ?Interest Lobby,? because Erdo?an tried to present these actions as ?the 
game of the external powers? and blamed the ?interest lobby.?

What has been the role of social media in spreading the movement, and in limiting it?

When TV channels, newspapers, and mainstream media sites censored the actions, people used 
Facebook to inform each other?not just about the news, but also the information which was 
necessary for the next actions. Twitter was also another good resource for the protesters. 
People were sharing news about the situation at the barricades and the positions of the 
police, but also announcing the addresses of the infirmaries and the needs of the people. 
People used the ?new media? to organize solidarity and support as well as actions. Even 
today, there is a lot of material circulating, like photos or videos of police violence. 
The people are reacting to the mainstream media and still effectively using the social 
media for communication.

Which of the repressive strategies of the authorities have failed, and which have succeeded?

They are still using violence. Now resistance is more legitimized. People?s values have 
changed. The government is now talking about asking the people about every political 
strategy. But now people are trying to talk about political strategies that they want to 
realize without the state.

On the other hand, the state is going on in the same way. They have started a witch hunt 
on the social media. People?s Facebook profiles or tweets are used to accuse people. Other 
than that, there have been many raids on political spaces, offices, newspapers, radio 
stations, and on the houses of the political people. Many people have been taken into 
custody and many of them are still in jail. Through the raids, the cases are made 
secret?which means that you cannot see your lawyer for 24 hours, and you don?t know what 
you are accused of?and many irrelevant things are taken as ?proof? in order to invent 
evidence or hide the evidence of the actions of the police. The state is using this riot 
to suppress all social opposition. Erdo?an has congratulated the police department for 
their conduct throughout the actions, despite the people they murdered. The police officer 
who shot Ethem Sar?s?l?k?he died after being shot in the head?was judged and released by 
the court pending a trial. While this oppression is growing, the people are getting more 
and more full of rage, because of the state and injustice.

How will this change the future of social struggles in Turkey?

This depends on the organized groups, I think. Because, to resist, it is important not 
just to continue the actions, but to think collectively, act collectively, and shape our 
lives collectively. The experiences we got from this rebellion will help in the next 
struggles, like in Greece in 2008 and 2010.

After the state?s loss of legitimacy, if this is combined with anger against the 
capitalist process and resistance against social repression, and if this makes people 
self-organize the whole of life, then we are not afraid to talk about social revolution. 
But it is too early. These are the first steps for the social revolution in the future.

As our comrades said, ?our century has been started.?

With revolutionary solidarity,

Anarchists in Turkey