💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › abdullah-ocalan-liberating-life.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:23:48. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Liberating Life
Author: Abdullah Öcalan
Date: 2013
Language: en
Topics: anarcha-feminism, feminist
Source: http://www.ocalanbooks.com/#/book/liberating-life-womans-revolution

Abdullah Öcalan

Liberating Life

Liberating life is impossible without a radical woman’s revolution which

would change man’s mentality and life. If we are unable to make peace

between man and life and life and woman, happiness is but a vain hope.

Gender revolution is not just about woman. It is about the five thousand

years old civilisation of classed society which has left man worse off

than woman. Thus, this gender revolution would simultaneously mean man’s

liberation.

I have often written about “total divorce”, i.e. the ability to divorce

from the five thousand years old culture of male domination. The female

and male gender identities that we know ŧoday are constructs that were

formed much later than the biological female and male. Woman has been

exploited for thousands of years according to this constructed identity;

never acknowledged for her labour. Man has to overcome always seeing

woman as wife, sister, or lover — stereotypes forged by tradition and

modernity.

Claiming that we first have to address the question of state then the

question of family.

Foreword by the International Initiative

The brochure before you is the third brochure of its kind prepared by

the International Initiative. These brochures have been compiled from

different books written by Abdullah Öcalan in order to give you a short

outline of his opinions on specific topics.

Before Öcalan‘s abduction and imprisonment in 1999, several books based

upon his speeches on sex and gender were published, among them three

volumes of Nasıl yaşamalı? (“How to live?”). The title of a book of

interviews with him, Erkeği öldürmek (“Killing the male”), became a

well-known saying among Kurds. Öcalan coined several slogans like “A

country can’t be free unless the women are free,” thereby redefining

national liberation as first and foremost the liberation of women.

In his prison writings, the liberation of women is touched on numerous

times as part of Öcalan’s discussions of history, contemporary society

and political activism. This brochure has been compiled from excerpts on

this topic from Öcalan’s work, especially his most recent, as yet

untranslated, works.

The practice he observed in real socialist countries and his own

theoretical efforts and practice since the 1970’s has led Öcalan to the

conclusion that the enslavement of women was the start of all other

forms of enslavement. This, he concludes, is not due to woman being

biologically different to man, but because she was the founder and

leader of the Neolithic matriarchal system.

Abdullah Öcalan is not only a theorist; he is the leader of a movement

that strives not only for the liberation of Kurdish people, but also to

find answers to the question of how to live meaningfully. This is why

his writings have such impact on the lives of so many. He has been

concerned with the issue of women’s liberation all his life, and

especially so during the struggle. He strongly encouraged women in the

movement to take up the struggle against male dominance, providing

inspiration through his critique of patriarchy. This approach and

conduct from such an influential leader contributed to major

developments.

For many years he spoke not only of the importance of surpassing

constructed roles for women and men; he also encouraged the

establishment of women’s movements and institutions so that women can

question and reshape themselves, their lives, men and society. Thus,

hand in hand with the Kurdish liberation struggle, there has arisen in

Kurdistan an untypically strong participation of women in all areas of

life.

In fact, the outstanding dynamic and vitality of the women’s movement in

Kurdistan often surprise the observer who does not expect this in a

region of the world that is regarded as rather patriarchal.

Over the years, Abdullah Öcalan often suggested that the level of

woman’s freedom determines the freedom level of her society. He stated

this yet again during a recent meeting with a BDP (Peace and Democracy

Party) delegation, “To me, women’s freedom is more precious than the

freedom of the homeland.”

This is how the idea for a special brochure on the question of women’s

freedom came about.

Introduction

The question of women’s freedom has intrigued me throughout my life.

While at first I viewed the enslavement of women in the Middle East and

in general as the result of feudal backwardness, after many years of

revolutionary practice and research I came to the conclusion that the

problem goes much deeper. The 5,000-year-old history of civilisation is

essentially the history of the enslavement of woman. Consequently,

woman’s freedom will only be achieved by waging a struggle against the

foundations of this ruling system.

An analysis of mainstream civilisation with regard to the freedom

question will make it clear that civilisation has been weighted down by

an ever-increasing slavery. This ‘mainstream civilisation’ is the

civilisation passed down from, and in return influenced by, Sumer to

Akkad, from Babylon to Assur, from Persia to Greece, Rome, Byzantium,

Europe and finally the USA. Throughout the long history of this

civilisation, slavery has been perpetuated on three levels. First, there

is the construction of ideological slavery (conspicuously, but

understandably, fearsome and dominant gods are constructed from

mythologies); then there is use of force; lastly, there is seizure of

the economy.

This three-tiered enchainment of society is well-illustrated by the

ziggurats, the temples established by the Sumerian priest-state. The

upper levels of the ziggurats are propounded as the quarters of the god

who controls the mind. The middle floors are the political and

administrative headquarters of the priests. Finally, the bottom floor

houses the craftsmen and agricultural workers who are forced to work in

all kinds of production. Essentially, this model has been unchanged

until today. Thus, an analysis of the ziggurat is in fact an analysis of

the continuous mainstream civilisation system that will enable us to

analyse the current capitalist world system in terms of its true basis.

Continuous, accumulative development of capital and power is only one

side of the medallion. The other side is horrendous slavery, hunger,

poverty and coercion into a herd- like society.

Without depriving society of its freedom and ensuring that it can be

managed like a herd, central civilisation cannot sustain or preserve

itself, because of the nature of the system according to which it

functions. This is done by creating even more capital and instruments of

power, causing ever-increasing poverty and a herd-like mentality. The

reason why the issue of freedom is the key question in every age, lies

in the nature of the system itself.

The history of the loss of freedom is at the same time the history of

how woman lost her position and vanished from history. It is the history

of how the dominant male, with all his gods and servants, rulers and

subordinates, his economy, science and arts, obtained power. Woman’s

downfall and loss is thus the downfall and loss of the whole of

civilisation, with the sexist society that resulted. The sexist male is

so keen on constructing his social dominance over woman that he turns

any contact with her into a show of dominance.

The depth of woman’s enslavement and the intentional masking of this

fact is thus closely linked to the rise within a society of hierarchical

and statist power. As women are habituated to slavery, hierarchies (from

the Greek word ἱεραρχία or hierarkhia, ‘rule by the high priest’) are

established: the path to the enslavement of the other sections of

society is thus paved.

The enslavement of men comes after the enslavement of women. Gender

enslavement is different in some ways to class and nation enslavement.

Its legitimisation is attained through refined and intense repression

combined with lies that play on emotions. Woman’s biological difference

is used as justification for her enslavement. All the work she does is

taken for granted and called unworthy ‘woman’s work’. Her presence in

the public sphere is claimed to be prohibited by religion, morally

shameful; progressively, she is secluded from all important social

activities. As the dominant power of the political, social and economic

activities are taken over by men, the weakness of women becomes even

more institutionalised. Thus, the idea of a ‘weak sex’ becomes a shared

belief.

In fact, society treats woman not merely as a biologically separate sex

but almost as a separate race, nation or class — the most oppressed

race, nation or class: no race, class or nation is subjected to such

systematic slavery as housewifisation.

The disappointment experienced due to the failure of any struggle, be it

for freedom or equality, or be it a democratic, moral, political or

class struggle, bears the imprint of the archetypal struggle for power

in a relationship, the one between woman and man. From this relationship

stem all forms of relationships that foster inequality, slavery,

despotism, fascism and militarism. If we want to construe the true

meaning of terms such as equality, freedom, democracy and socialism that

we so often use, we need to analyse and shatter the ancient web of

relations that has been woven around women. There is no other way of

attaining true equality (with due allowance for diversity), freedom,

democracy and morality.

But unambiguously clarifying the status of women is only one aspect of

this issue. Far more important is the question of liberation; in other

words, the resolution to the problem exceeds the importance of revealing

and analysing it. The most promising point in the current chaos of the

capitalist system is the (albeit limited) exposure of women’s status.

During the last quarter of the twentieth century, feminism managed

(though not sufficiently) to disclose the truth about women. In times of

chaos, the possibility of change for any phenomenon increases in line

with the level of progress or clarification available; thus, in such

times, small steps taken for freedom may amount to big leaps forward.

Women’s freedom can emerge as the winner from the current crisis.

Whatever has been constructed by the human hand, can be demolished by

the human hand. Women’s enslavement is neither a law of nature nor is it

destiny. What we need is the necessary theory, programme and

organisation, and the mechanisms to implement them.

2. Women’s Revolution: Neolithic Era

Patriarchy has not always existed. There is strong evidence that in the

millennia before the rise of statist civilisation (roughly before 3000

bc) the position of women in society had been very different. Indeed,

society was matricentric — it was constructed around women.

Within the Zagros-Taurus system, Mesolithic and subsequently Neolithic

society started to develop at the end of the fourth glacial period,

around 20,000 years ago. This magnificent society, with its

well-developed tools and sophisticated settlement systems, was far more

advanced than the preceding clan society. Tis period constituted a

wondrous age in the history of our social nature. Many developments that

are still with us can be traced back to this historical stage: the

agricultural revolution, the establishment of villages, the roots of

trade, and the mother-based family as well as tribes and tribal

organisations.

Many methods, tools and equipment we still use today are based on

inventions and discoveries most likely made by the women of this era,

such as various useful applications of different plants, domestication

of animals and cultivation of plants, construction of dwellings,

principles of child nutrition, the hoe and hand grinder, perhaps even

the ox-cart.

To me, the cult of the mother-goddess in this age symbolises reverence

for woman’s role in these great advances. I don’t see it as deification

of an abstract fertility. At the same time, the hierarchy based on the

mother-woman is the historic root of the mother-concept, by which all

societies still respect and acknowledge the mother as an authority. This

authority she demands because the mother is the principal life-element

that both gives birth and sustains life through nurturing, even under

the most difficult conditions. Indeed, any culture and hierarchy based

on this acknowledgement cannot help but revere woman. The true reason

for the longevity of the mother-concept is the fact that the mother

concretely forms the basis of the social being, the human; it is not due

to an abstract ability to give birth.

During the Neolithic period a complete communal social order, so-called

‘primitive socialism’, was created around woman. Tis social order saw

none of the enforcement practices of the state order; yet it existed for

thousands of years. It is this long-lasting order that shaped humanity’s

collective social consciousness; and it is our endless yearning to

regain and immortalise this social order of equality and freedom that

led to our construct of paradise.

Primitive socialism, characterised by equality and freedom, was viable

because the social morality of the matriarchal order did not allow

ownership, which is the main factor behind the widening of social

divisions. Division of labour between the sexes, the other issue related

to this divide, was not yet based on ownership and power relations.

Private relationships inside the group had not yet developed. Food that

had been gathered or hunted belonged to all. The children belonged to

the clan. No man or woman was the private property of any one person. In

all these matters, the community, which was still small and did not have

a huge production capacity, had a solid common ideological and material

culture. The fundamental principles sustaining society were sharing and

solidarity — ownership and force, as life-threatening dangers, would

have disrupted this culture.

In contrast to mainstream society, Neolithic society’s relationship with

nature was maintained, both in terms of ideological and material

cultures, through adherence to ecological principles. Nature was

regarded as alive and animated, no different from themselves. This

awareness of nature fostered a mentality that recognised a multitude of

sanctities and divinities in nature. We may gain a better understanding

of the essence of collective life if we acknowledge that it was based on

the metaphysics of sanctity and divinity, stemming from reverence for

the mother-woman.

What we need to understand is this: why and how was it possible to

supersede the matriarchal system of the Neolithic age?

Since the earliest social groupings, there had been tension between

woman’s gathering and man’s hunting, with the result that two different

cultural evolutions developed within society.

In the matriarchal society surplus product was, although limited,

accumulated. (This was the start of economy — not as a concept but in

terms of its essence — and it is here that we find the roots of the

different types of economies, such as capitalist and gift economies.) It

was woman, the nurturer, who controlled this surplus. But man (quite

possibly by developing more successful hunting techniques) bettered his

position, achieved a higher status and gathered a retinue around him.

The ‘wise old man’ and shaman, previously not part of the strong man’s

band, now attached themselves to him and helped to construct the

ideology of male dominance. They intended to develop a very systematic

movement against women.

In the matriarchal society of the Neolithic age, there were no

institutionalised hierarchies; now they were slowly being introduced.

The alliance with the shaman and elderly, experienced men was an

important development in this regard. The ideological hold the male

alliance established over the young men they drew into their circle

strengthened their position in the community. What is important is the

nature of the power gained by men. Both hunting and defending the clan

from external dangers relied on killing and wounding and thus had

military characteristics. This was the beginning of the culture of war.

In a situation of life and death, one must abide by authority and

hierarchy.

Communality is the foundation on which hierarchy and state power are

built. Originally, the term ‘hierarchy’ referred to government by the

priests, the authority of the wise elders.

Initially, it had a positive function. We may perhaps even view the

beneficial hierarchy in a natural society as the prototype of democracy.

The mother-woman and the wise elders ensured communal security and the

governance of the society; they were necessary and useful, fundamental

elements in a society that was not based on accumulation and ownership.

Society voluntarily awarded them respect. But when voluntary dependence

is transformed into authority, usefulness into self-interest, it always

gives way to an uncalled-for instrument of force. The instrument of

force disguises itself behind common security and collective production.

This constitutes the core of all exploitative and oppressive systems. It

is the most sinister creation ever invented; the creation that brought

fourth all forms of slavery, all forms of mythology and religion, all

systematic annihilation and plunder.

No doubt, there were external reasons for the disintegration of

Neolithic society, but the main factor was the sacred state society of

the priests. The legends of the initial civilisations in Lower

Mesopotamia and along the Nile confirm this. The advanced Neolithic

cultures combined with new techniques of artificial irrigation,

providing the surplus product required for the establishment of such a

society. It was mostly through the newly achieved position and power of

man that the urban society which formed around the surplus product was

organised in the form of a state.

Urbanisation meant commodification. It resulted in trade.

Trade seeped into the veins of Neolithic society in the form of

colonies. Commodification, exchange value and ownership grew

exponentially, thus accelerating the disintegration of Neolithic

society.

3. The First Major Sexual Rupture

In the vein of the revolution/counter-revolution scheme of historical

materialism, I suggest that we term the remarkable turning points in the

history of the relationship between the sexes sexual rupture. History

has seen two of these ruptures and, I predict, will see another in the

future.

In the social ages preceding civilisation, the organised force of the

‘strong man’ existed for the sole purposes of trapping animals and

defence against outside danger. It is this organised force that coveted

the family-clan unit that the woman had established as a product of her

emotional labour. The takeover of the family-clan constituted the first

serious organisation of violence. What was usurped in the process was

woman herself, her children and kin, and all their material and moral

cultural accumulation. It was the plunder of the initial economy, the

home economy. The organised force of proto-priest (shaman), experienced

elder and strong man allied to compose the initial and longest enduring

patriarchal hierarchic power, that of holy governance. This can be seen

in all societies that are at a similar stage: until the class, city and

state stage, this hierarchy is dominant in social and economic life.

In Sumerian society, although the balance gradually turned against the

woman, the two sexes were still more or less equal until the second

millennium bc. The many temples for goddesses and the mythological texts

from this period indicate that between 4,000 and 2,000 bc the influence

of the woman- mother culture on the Sumerians, who formed the centre of

civilisation, was on par with that of the man. As yet, no culture of

shame had developed around the woman.

So, we see here the start of a new culture that develops its superiority

over the mother-woman cult. The development of this authority and

hierarchy before the start of class-based society constitutes one of the

most important turning points in history. This culture is qualitatively

different from the mother-woman culture. Gathering, and later

cultivation — the predominant elements of the mother-woman culture — are

peaceful activities that do not require warfare. Hunting, which is

predominantly taken up by man, rests on war culture and harsh authority.

It is understandable that the strong man, whose essential role was

hunting, coveted the accumulation of the matriarchal order. Establishing

his dominance would yield many advantages. Organisation of the power he

gained through hunting now gave him the opportunity to rule and to

establish the first social hierarchy. This development constituted the

first usage of analytical intelligence with malignant intentions;

subsequently, it became systemic. Furthermore, the transition from

sacred mother cult to sacred father cult enabled analytical intelligence

to mask itself behind sanctity.

Thus, the origin of our serious social problems is to be found in

patriarchal societies that became cult-like — that is, religionised —

around the strong man. With the enslavement of women, the ground was

prepared for the enslavement of not only children but also of men. As

man gained experience in accumulating values through the use of slave

labour (especially accumulating surplus product), his control over and

domination of these slaves grew. Power and authority became increasingly

important. The collaboration between the strong man, experienced elder

and shaman to form a privileged sec- tor, resulted in a power centre

that was difficult to resist. In this centre, analytical intelligence

developed an extraordinary mythological narrative in order to rule the

minds of the populace. In the mythological world composed for Sumerian

society (and passed down through the ages with some adaptations), man is

exalted to the point that he is deified as creator of heaven and earth.

While woman’s divinity and sacredness is first demeaned and then erased,

the idea of man as ruler and absolute power is imprinted on society.

Thus, through an enormous network of mythological narratives, every

aspect of culture is cloaked in the relationship of ruler and ruled,

creator and created. Society is beguiled into internalising this

mythological world and gradually it becomes the preferred version.

Thenit is turned into religion, a religion into which the concept of a

strict distinction between people is built. For instance, the class

division of society is reflected in the story of Adam and Eve’s

expulsion from paradise and condemnation to servitude. Tis legend endows

the Sumerian ruler-gods with creative power; their subjects are

recreated as servants.

Sumerian mythology knew the story of creation out of the rib of an

anthropomorphic god — only, it was the goddess Ninhursag who carried out

the act of creation in order to save the life of the male god Enki. Over

time, the narrative was changed to benefit the man. The repetitive

elements of rivalry and creativity in the myths of Enki and

Ninhursag-Inanna had the twofold function of, on the one hand, demeaning

woman and diminishing the importance of her past creativity and, on the

other hand, symbolising the forming of a human that is but a slave and a

servant. (I believe that this last conception of the Sumerian priests

has played a role in all subsequent god- servant dilemmas. To determine

the truth of this is vital; nevertheless, religious literature either

refrains from doing so or rejects the notion out of hand. Is this

because theologians feel the need to disguise the truth and hence their

interests in the matter?)

The divine identities designed in Sumerian society are the reflections

of a new approach to nature and of new societal powers; more than that,

they are almost deployed for the purpose of conditioning the mind anew.

Hand in hand with the decreasing influence of the natural dimension, the

societal dimension gains importance; women’s influence gradually

decreases; and there are striking developments in the matter of

identifying the human being as subject, as servant. While growing

political power in society results in the prominence of some of the

gods, it also results in the loss of some identities and a significant

change in the form of others. Thus, the absolute power of the monarch

during the Babylonian era is reflected in the rise of the god Marduk.

This last phase of Sumerian mythology indicates that the threshold of

the birth of monotheistic religions had been reached.

In an order like this, where men owned the children, the father would

want to have as many children as possible (especially male children),

for attainment of power. Command of the children enabled him to seize

the mother-woman’s accumulation: the ownership system was created.

Alongside the priest-state’s collective ownership, the private ownership

of the dynasty was established. Private ownership too necessitated the

establishment of fatherhood: fatherhood rights were required so that the

inheritance could be passed on (mainly) to the male children.

From 2000 bc onwards, this culture became widespread.

Woman’s social status was radically altered. Patriarchal society had

gained the strength to make its rule legendary. While the world of the

male is exalted and hero-worshipped, everything female is belittled,

demeaned and vilified.

So radical was this sexual rupture, that it resulted in the most

significant change in social life that history has ever seen.

This change concerning woman’s value within Middle Eastern culture, we

can call the first major sexual rupture or counter- revolution. I call

it a counter-revolution because it has contributed nothing to the

positive development of society. On the contrary, it has led to an

extraordinary poverty of life by bringing about patriarchy’s stiff

domination of society and the exclusion of women. This tear in Middle

Eastern civilisation is arguably the first step in its progressively

deteriorating situation, as the negative consequences of this rupture

just keep on multiplying as time goes on. Instead of a dual-voiced

society, it produced a single-voiced, male society. A transition was

made to a one-dimensional, extremely masculine social culture. Te

emotional intelligence of woman that created wonders, that was humane

and committed to nature and life, was lost. In its place was born the

cursed analytical intelligence of a cruel culture that surrendered

itself to dogmatism and detached itself from nature; that considers war

to be the most exalted virtue and enjoys the shedding of human blood;

that sees the arbitrary treatment of woman and the enslavement of man as

its right. This intelligence is the antitype of the egalitarian

intelligence of woman that is focused on humanitarian production and

animate nature.

The mother has become the ancient goddess; she now sits in her home, an

obedient and chaste woman. Far from being equal to the gods, she cannot

make her voice heard or reveal her face. Slowly, she is wrapped in

veils, and becomes a captive within the harem of the strong man.

The depth of woman’s enslavement in Arabia (intensified in the Abrahamic

tradition by Moses) is linked to this historical development.

4. How Patriarchal Authority became Deep-Rooted

A hierarchical and authoritarian structure is essential for a

patriarchal society. Allying authoritarian administration with the

shaman’s sacred authority resulted in the concept of hierarchy.

The institution of authority would gradually gain prominence in society,

and as class distinctions intensified it would transform into state

authority. At the time, hierarchical authority was personal, not yet

institutionalised, and thus did not have as much dominance over society

as in the institutionalised state. Compliance to it was partly

voluntary, commitment determined by society’s interests.

However, the process that was set in motion was conducive to the birth

of the hierarchical state. The primordial communal system resisted this

process for a long time. Respect and commitment to the authority of the

alliance was shown only if they shared their accumulated products with

other members of society. In fact, accumulation of surplus product was

seen as wrong; the person who commanded the most respect was the one who

distributed his or her accumulation. (The revered tradition of

generosity, which is still widespread in clan societies, has its roots

in this powerful historical tradition.) From the very beginning, the

community saw accumulation of surplus product as the most serious threat

to itself, and based its morality and religion on resisting this threat.

But, eventually, man’s accumulation culture and hierarchical authority

did defeat that of woman. We must be very clear that this victory was

not an unavoidable, historical necessity. There is no law that states

that a natural society must necessarily develop into a hierarchical and

subsequently statist society. There may be a propensity towards such a

development, but equating such a propensity with an inevitable,

incessant process that has to run its full course would be an erroneous

assumption. Viewing the existence of classes as fate has become nothing

but an unintended tool for class ideologists.

After this defeat, damaging tears appeared in woman’s communal society.

The process of transforming into hierarchical society was not an easy

one. This was the transition phase between primitive communal society

and the state. Eventually hierarchical society either had to

disintegrate or result in statehood. Although it did play some positive

role in the development of society, its form of socialisation, the

alliance between the male powers, provided the strength for hierarchical

patriarchy to develop into statehood. It was really the hierarchical and

patriarchal society that subjugated women, youth and members of other

ethnicities; it was done before the development of the state. The most

important point is how this subjugation was accomplished. The authority

to do this was not attained through laws, but through the new morals

that were based on worldly needs instead of sacredness.

While there is a development towards the religious concept of an

abstract and single god that reflects the values of the patriarchal

society, the matriarchal authority of natural society with its myriad

goddesses resists. In the matriarchal order, the essential rules are to

labour, produce and provide in order to keep people alive. While

patriarchal morality legitimises accumulation and paves the way for

ownership, the morality of communal society condemns accumulation of

surplus as the source of all wrong-doing, and encourages its

distribution. The internal harmony in society gradually deteriorates and

tension increases.

The solution to this conflict would be either returning to the old

matriarchal values, or escalating patriarchal power inside and outside

the community. To the patriarchal faction there was only one choice. The

foundations for a violent, war-like society based on oppression and

exploitation were established.

Trough this process of conflict the state phase, the phase of

institutionalised authority based on permanent force, began.

Without an analysis of woman’s status in the hierarchical system and the

conditions under which she was enslaved, neither the state nor the

class-based system that it rests upon can be understood. Woman is not

targeted as the female gender, but as the founder of the matriarchal

society. Without a thorough analysis of woman’s enslavement and

establishing the conditions for overcoming it, no other slavery can be

analysed or overcome. Without these analyses, fundamental mistakes

cannot be avoided.

5. All Slavery is Based on Housewifisation

Ever since the hierarchical order’s enormous leap forward, sexism has

been the basic ideology of power. It is closely linked to class division

and the wielding of power. Woman’s authority is not based on surplus

product; on the contrary, it stems from fertility and productivity, and

strengthens social existence.

Strongly influenced by emotional intelligence, she is tightly bound to

communal existence. The fact that woman does not have a visible place in

the power wars based on surplus product is due to this position of hers

in social existence.

We need to point out a characteristic that has become institutionalised

within civilisational societies, namely society’s being prone to power

relations. Just as housewifisation was needed to recreate woman, society

needed to be prepared in order for power to secure its own existence.

Housewifisation is the oldest form of slavery. The strong man and his

entourage defeated the mother-woman and all aspects of her cult through

long and comprehensive struggles. Housewifisation became

institutionalised when the sexist society became dominant. Gender

discrimination is not a notion restricted to the power relations between

woman and man. It defines the power relations that have been spread to

all social levels. It is indicative of the state power that has reached

its maximum capacity with modernity.

Gender discrimination has had a twofold destructive effect on society.

First, it has opened society to slavery; second, all other forms of

enslavement have been implemented on the basis of housewifisation.

Housewifisation does not only aim to recreate an individual as a sex

object; it is not a result of a biological characteristic.

Housewifisation is an intrinsically social process and targets the whole

of society. Slavery, subjugation, subjection to insults, weeping,

habitual lying, unassertiveness and flaunting oneself are all recognised

aspects of housewifisation and must be rejected by the freedom-morality.

It is the foundation of a degraded society and the true foundation of

slavery. It is the institutional foundation upon which the oldest and

all subsequent types of slavery and immorality were implemented.

Civilisational society reflects this foundation in all social

categories. If the system is to function, society in its entirety must

be subjected to housewifisation. Power is synonymous with masculinity.

Thus, society’s subjection to housewifisation is inevitable, because

power does not recognise the principles of freedom and equality. If it

did, it could not exist. Power and sexism in society share the same

essence.

Another important point we have to mention is dependence and oppression

of the youth, established by the experienced elderly man in a

hierarchical society. While experience strengthens the elderly man, age

renders him weak and powerless. This compels the elderly to enlist the

youth, which is done by winning their minds. Patriarchy is strengthened

tremendously by these means. The physical power of the youth enables

them to do whatever they please. This dependency of the youth has been

continuously perpetuated and deepened. Superiority of experience and

ideology cannot easily be broken. The youth (and even the children) are

subjugated to the same strategies and tactics, ideological and political

propaganda, and oppressive systems as the woman — adolescence, like

femininity, is not a physical but a social fact.

This must be clearly understood: it is not coincidence that the first

powerful authority to be established was authority over woman. Woman

represents the power of the organic, natural and egalitarian society

which had not experienced oppressive and exploitative relations.

Patriarchy could not have been victorious if she was not defeated;

moreover, the transition to the institution of the state could not have

been made.

Breaking the power of the mother-woman thus was of strategic

significance. No wonder that it was such an arduous process.

Without analysing the process through which woman was socially overcome,

one cannot properly understand the fundamental characteristics of the

consequent male-dominated social culture. Even awareness of the societal

establishment of masculinity will be impossible. Without understanding

how masculinity was socially formed, one cannot analyse the institution

of state and therefore will not be able to accurately define the war and

power culture related to statehood. I stress this issue because we need

to expose the macabre godlike personalities that developed as a result

of all later class divisions, and all the different types of

exploitation and murder they have done. The social subjugation of woman

was the vilest counter-revolution ever carried out.

Power has reached its full capacity in the form of the nation- state. It

derives its strength mainly from the sexism it spreads and intensifies

by the integration of women into the labour force as well as through

nationalism and militarism. Sexism, just as nationalism, is an ideology

through which power is generated and nation-states are built. Sexism is

not a function of biological differences. To the dominant male, the

female is an object to be used for the realisation of his ambitions. In

the same vein, when the housewifisation of woman was done, he started

the process of turning men into slaves; subsequently the two forms of

slavery became intertwined.

In short, the campaigns for excluding women and for manufacturing

reverence for the conquering, warrior male authority structure were

tightly interwoven. The state as an institution was invented by males

and wars of plunder and pillage were almost its sole mode of production.

Woman’s societal influence, based on production, was replaced by man’s

societal influence, based on war and pillage. There is a close link

between woman’s captivity and the warrior societal culture. War does not

produce, it seizes and plunders. Although force can be decisive for

social progress under certain unique conditions (e.g. the way to freedom

is won through resistance to occupation, invasion and colonialism), but

more often than not it is destructive and negative.

The culture of violence that has become internalised within society is

fed by war. The sword of war wielded in state warfare and the hand of

the man within the family, which are both symbols of hegemony. The

entire class-based society, from its upper layers to its lower layers,

is clamped between the sword and the hand.

This is something that I have always tried to understand: how is it

possible that the power held by the woman fell into the hands of the

man, who is not very productive and creative. The answer lies of course

in the role that force has played. When the economy was taken from the

woman, atrocious captivity was inevitable.

6. The Second Major Sexual Rupture

Millennia after the establishment of patriarchy (what I call the ‘first

major sexual rupture’) women were once again dealt a blow from which

they are still struggling to recover. I am referring to the

intensification of patriarchy through the monotheistic religions.

Te mentality of rejecting the natural society deepened in the feudal

social system. Religious and philosophical thought constituted the new

society’s dominant mentality. In the same way that Sumerian society had

synthesised the values of Neolithic society into its own new system,

feudal society synthesised the moral values of the oppressed classes

from the old system and the resisting ethnic groups from the remote

areas into its own internal structures. The development of polytheism

into monotheism played an important part in this process.

The mythological features of this mindset were renewed with religious

and philosophical concepts. The rising power of the empire was reflected

in the multitude of powerless gods that evolved into an omnipotent,

universal god.

Te culture concerning women that was developed by the monotheistic

religions resulted in the second major sexual rupture. Where the rupture

of the mythological period was a cultural requirement, the rupture of

the monotheistic period was ‘the law as God commands’. Treating women as

inferior now became the sacred command of God. The superiority of man in

the new religion is illustrated by the relationship between the prophet

Abraham and the women Sarah and Hagar.

Patriarchy was at that point well established. The institution of

concubinage was formed; polygamy approved. As indicated by the fierce

relationship between the prophet Moses and his sister Mariam, woman’s

share in the cultural heritage was eradicated. The society of the

prophet Moses was a total male society in which women were not given any

task. This is what the fight with Mariam was about.

In the period of the Hebrew kingdom that rose just before the end of the

first millennium bc, we see, with David and Solomon, the transition to a

culture of extensive housewifisation. Woman under the dual domination of

the patriarchal culture and the religious state culture plays no public

role. Te best woman is the one who conforms most to her man or

patriarchy. Religion becomes a tool to slander woman. Primarily, she —

Eve — was the first sinful woman who seduced Adam, resulting in his

expulsion from paradise. Lilith does not subjugate herself to Adam’s god

(a patriarchal figure) and befriends the chief of the evil spirits (a

human figure who rejects being a servant and does not obey Adam).

Indeed, the Sumerian claim that woman was created from man’s rib was

included in the Bible. As pointed out earlier, this is a complete

reversal of the original narrative — from women being the creator to

being the created. Women are hardly mentioned as prophets in the

religious traditions. Woman’s sexuality is seen as the most wretched

evil and has continuously been vilified and besmirched.

Woman, who still had an honoured place in Sumerian and Egyptian

societies, now became a figure of disgrace, sin and seduction.

With the arrival of the period of the prophet Jesus, came the figure of

Mother Mary. Although she is the mother of the Son of God, there is no

trace left of her former goddess-ness.

An extremely quiet, weeping mother (without the title of goddess!) has

replaced the mother-goddess. The fall continues. It is quite ironic that

a mere woman is impregnated by God. In fact, the trinity of Father, Son

and Holy Spirit represents the synthesis of polytheistic religions and

monotheistic religion.

While Mary too should have been considered a god, she is seen as merely

a tool of the Holy Spirit. This indicates that divinity has become

exclusively male. In the Sumerian and Egyptian periods, gods and

goddesses were almost equal. Even during the Babylonian era the voice of

the mother-goddess was still heard clearly and loudly.

Woman no longer had any social role bar being the woman of her house.

Her primary duty was looking after her male children, the ‘son-gods’,

whose value had increased greatly since the mythological period. The

public sphere was closed off to her. Christianity’s praxis of saintly

virgin women was in fact a retreat into seclusion in order to find

salvation from sins.

At least this saintly, cloistered life offered some deliverance from

sexism and condemnation. There are good and strong material and

spiritual reasons for choosing life in a cloister above the hell-like

life at home. We can almost call this institution the first poor women’s

party. Monogamy, which had been well established in Judaism, was taken

over by Christianity and sanctified. Tis praxis has an important place

in the history of European civilisation. A negative aspect is that women

are treated as sexual objects in European civilisation because Catholics

are not allowed to divorce.

With the coming of the prophet Muhammad and Islam, the status of women

in the patriarchal culture of the desert tribes improved somewhat. But

in its essence, Islam based itself on the Abrahamic culture; women had

the same status during the period of the prophet Muhammad as they had in

the period of David and Solomon. As then, multiple marriages for

political reasons and numerous concubines were legitimate. Although in

Islam marriage is restricted to four women, in essence it is unchanged

because the owning of harems and concubines became institutionalised.

Both the Christian and Muslim cultures have become stagnant in terms of

overcoming sexist society. The policies of Christianity towards women

and sexuality in general are what lie behind the crisis of modernist

monogamous life. This is the reality behind the crisis of sexist culture

in Western society.

This can also not be solved by celibacy as it is demanded from priests

and nuns. The Islamic solution, giving priority to male sexual

fulfilment with many women in the position of wife and concubine, has

been just as unsuccessful. In essence, the harem is but a privatised

brothel for the sole use of the privileged individual. The sexist social

practices of the harem and polygamy have had a deterministic role in

Middle Eastern society falling behind Western society. While the

restraining of sexuality by Christianity is a factor that has led to

modernity, encouraging excessive sexual fulfilment is a factor that has

led to Islam regressing to a state worse than the old desert tribal

society, and to it being surpassed by the society of Western modernity.

The effect of sexism on societal development is far bigger than we

assume. When analysing the growing gap between Eastern and Western

societal development, we should focus on the role of sexism. Islam’s

perception of sexism has produced far more negative results than Western

civilisation in terms of the profound enslavement of woman and male

dominance.

Societal servitude is not just a class phenomenon. There is an order of

subjugation which is more deeply hidden than the slave-owning system

itself. The softening of this truth contributes to the deepening of the

system. The fundamental paradigm of society is a system of servitude

which has no beginning and no end.

7. Family, Dynasty and State

I have mentioned the intense relationship between the power relations

within the patriarchal family and the state. This deserves a closer

look.

Te cornerstones of dynastic ideology are the patriarchal family,

fatherhood and having many male children. This can be traced back to the

understanding of political power in the patriarchal system. While the

priest established his power through his so-called ability to give and

interpret meaning, the strong man established his leadership through the

use of political power. Political power can be understood as the use of

force when leadership is not adhered to. On the other hand, the power of

priest rests on ‘God’s wrath’ when not abided; it is spiritual power and

thus has a stimulating effect. Te true source of political power is the

military entourage of the strong man.

Dynasty, as ideology and in practice, developed as a result of turning

this system upside down. Within the patriarchal order, patriarchal

governance became deep-rooted as a consequence of the alliance between

the ‘experienced old man’, the ‘strong man’ with his military entourage

and the shaman who, as the sacred leader, was the forerunner of the

priest.

The dynastic system should be understood as an integrated whole, where

ideology and structure cannot be separated. It developed from within the

tribal system but established itself as the upper-class administrative

family nucleus, thereby denying the tribal system. It has a very strict

hierarchy. It is a proto- ruling class, the prototype of power and

state. It depends on man and male children; owning many is important in

order to have power. A consequence of this has been polygamy, the harem

and the concubine system. Creation of power and the state is the

dynasty’s first priority. More importantly, dynasty was the very first

institution that ensured its own clan and tribes, as well as other

tribal systems, became accustomed to class division and slavery. In

Middle Eastern civilisation it has become so deep-rooted that there is

almost no power or state that is not a dynasty. Because it constitutes a

training ground for power and state, it is continually perpetuated and

very difficult to overcome.

Every man in the family perceives himself to be the owner of a small

kingdom. This dynastic ideology is effectively reason why family is such

an important issue. The greater the number of women and children that

belong to the family, the more security and dignity the man attains. It

is also important to analyse the current family as an ideological

institution. If we are to eliminate woman and family from the

civilisational system, its power and state, there will be little left to

constitute the order. But the price of this will be the painful,

poverty- stricken, degraded and defeated existence of woman under a

never-ending, low-intensity state of warfare. The male monopoly that has

been maintained over the life and world of woman throughout history is

not unlike the monopoly chain that capital maintains over society. More

importantly, it is the oldest powerful monopoly. We might draw more

realistic conclusions if we evaluate woman’s existence as the oldest

colonial phenomenon. It may be more accurate to call women the oldest

colonised people who have never become a nation.

Family, in this social context, developed as man’s small state.

The family as an institution has been continuously perfected throughout

the history of civilisation, solely because of the reinforcement it

provides to power and state apparatus. First, family is turned into a

stem cell of state society by giving power to the family in the person

of the male. Second, woman’s unlimited and unpaid labour is secured.

Third, she raises children in order to meet population needs. Fourth, as

a role model she disseminates slavery and immorality to the whole

society. Family, thus constituted, is the institution where dynastic

ideology becomes functional.

The most important problem for freedom in a social context is thus

family and marriage. When the woman marries, she is in fact enslaved. It

is impossible to imagine another institution that enslaves like

marriage. The most profound slaveries are established by the institution

of marriage, slaveries that become more entrenched within the family.

This is not a general reference to sharing life or partner relationships

that can be meaningful depending on one’s perception of freedom and

equality. What is under discussion is the ingrained, classical marriage

and family. Absolute ownership of woman means her withdrawal from all

political, intellectual, social and economic arenas; this cannot be

easily recovered. Thus, there is a need to radically review family and

marriage and develop common guidelines aimed at democracy, freedom and

gender equality.

Marriages or relationships that arise from individual, sexual needs and

traditional family concepts can cause some of the most dangerous

deviations on the way to a free life. Our need is not for these

associations but for attaining gender equality and democracy throughout

society and for the will to shape a suitable and common life. This can

only be done by analysing the mentality and political environment that

breed such destructive associations.

The dynastic and family culture that remains so powerful in today’s

Middle Eastern society is one of the main sources of its problems,

because it has given rise to an excessive population, with the power and

ambitions to share in the state’s power.

The degradation of women, inequality, children not being educated,

family brawls and problems of honour are all related to the family

issue. It is as if a small model of the problems integral to power and

state are established within the family. Thus, it is essential to

analyse the family in order to analyse power, state, class and society.

State and power centres gave the father-man within the family a copy of

their own authority and had them play that role.

Thus, the family became the most important tool for legitimising

monopolies. It became the fountainhead of slaves, serfs, labourers,

soldiers and providers of all other services required by the ruling and

capitalist rings. Tat is why they set such importance in family, why

they sanctified it. Although woman’s labour is the most important source

of profit for the capitalist rings, they concealed this by putting

additional burdens on the family. Family has been turned into the

insurance of the system and thus it will inevitably be perpetuated.

Critique of family is vital. Remnants from past patriarchal and state

societies and patterns from modern Western civilisation have not created

a synthesis but an impasse in the Middle East. The bottleneck created

within the family is even more tangled than the one within the state. If

the family continues to maintain its strength in contrast to other,

faster dissolving social bonds, this is because it is the only available

social shelter.

We should not discount family. If soundly analysed, family can become

the mainstay of democratic society. Not only the woman but the whole

family should be analysed as the stem cell of power; if not, we will

leave the ideal and the implementation of democratic civilisation

without its most important element.

Family is not a social institution that should be overthrown.

But it should be transformed. The claim of ownership over women and

children, handed down from the hierarchy, should be abandoned. Capital

(in all its forms) and power relations should have no part in the

relationship of couples. The breeding of children as motivation for

sustaining this institution should be abolished. The ideal approach to

male-female association is one that is based on the freedom philosophy,

devoted to moral and political society. Within this framework, the

transformed family will be the most robust assurance of democratic

civilisation and one of the fundamental relationships within that order.

Natural companionship is more important than official partnership.

Partners should always accept the other’s right to live alone. One

cannot act in a slavish or reckless manner in relationships.

Clearly, the family will experience its most meaningful transformation

during democratic civilisation. If woman, who has been stripped of much

of her strength and respect, does not regain this, meaningful family

unions cannot be developed. There can be no respect for a family that is

established on ignorance. In the construction of democratic

civilisation, the role of the family is vital.

8. Women’s Situation in Kurdish Society

Thus far, I have described some general characteristics of sexist

society. Let me conclude this analysis with some remarks on the specific

conditions of Kurdish women.

The transition from the Sumerian to the Hittite civilisation (during the

second millennium bc) pushed the proto- Kurds to strengthen their tribal

existence. Because a premature statehood would have caused their

elimination, they seemed to have preferred a semi-nomadic,

semi-guerrilla lifestyle. As more and more states were established

around them, they felt an increasing need to strengthen their tribal

structures. Kurdish tribalism resembled the lifestyle of a guerrilla

group.

When we take a closer look at the family within the tribal organisation,

we see the prominence of matriarchy and freedom. Women were quite

influential and free. The alertness, strength and courage of present-day

Kurdish women originates from this very old historical tradition.

However, a negative aspect of tribal life is that opportunities to make

the transition to a more advanced society are restricted.

It is not a coincidence that among the peoples of the Middle East the

Kurds have the best-developed sense of freedom. We see this in their

historical development. The prolonged absence of the ruling and

exploitative classes and their inability to generate any positive value

for their community, plus the fact that throughout their history Kurds

have had to fight nature and foreign incursions, have all contributed to

the development of this characteristic. The fact that women in Kurdish

society are more prominent than in other Middle Eastern societies is due

to this historical reality.

However, the present situation of women in Kurdish society needs to be

analysed thoroughly. The situation of women throughout the world is bad,

but that of Kurdish women is nothing but terrible slavery and is unique

in many respects. In fact, the situation of both women and children are

appalling.

Although in Kurdistan family is considered sacred, it has been crushed —

especially as a result of a lack of freedom, economic inability, lack of

education and health problems. The phenomenon of so-called honour

killings is the symbolic revenge for what has happened to society in

general. Women are made to pay for the obliteration of society’s honour.

Loss of masculinity is taken out on women. Except for women’s honour,

the Kurdish male, who has lost both moral and political strength, has no

other area left to prove his power or powerlessness.

Under the present circumstances, it may be possible to resolve the

family crisis if there is a general democratisation of society.

Education and broadcasting in the mother tongue can partially eliminate

identity impairment. Marriage, the relations between husband, wife and

children, has not even surpassed that of the old feudal relationships

when capitalism mercilessly besieged them and turned their life into a

complete prison.

In its freedom struggle for the Kurdish people, the PKK did not only

fight against the crippling effects of colonialism; above all, it

struggled against internal feudalism in order to change the status of

women and end the enslavement of society in general. Women were

attracted to the struggle in great numbers — not only to resist

colonialism, but also to end internal feudalism and to demand freedom.

Since the 1980s, this has caused Kurdish women, whether within or

outside the organisation, to organise themselves as a movement and to

take and implement decisions that concern not only them as women but

also society in general. I have tried to support them in any way I can,

both theoretically and in practice.

9. Capitalism

A realistic definition of capitalism should not present it as a

constant, created and characterised by unicentral thought and action. It

is, in essence, the result of the actions of opportunist individuals and

groups who established themselves into openings and cracks within

society as the potential for surplus product developed; these actions

became systematised as they nibbled away at the social surplus.

These individuals and groups never number more than 1 or 2 per cent of

society. Their strength is in their opportunism and organisational

skills. Their victory relies not only on their organisational skills but

also on their control of the required objects and fluctuation of prices

at the point where supply and demand intersect. If official social

forces do not suppress them — if, instead, these forces borrow from

their profiteering, giving their continuous support in return — then

these groups who exist on the margins of all societies may legitimise

themselves as the new masters of society. Troughout the history of

civilisation, especially in Middle Eastern societies, these marginal

groups of broker-profiteers have always existed. But because of

society’s hatred of them, they could never find the courage to come into

the daylight from the fissures they resided in.

Not even the most despotic administrators had the courage to legitimise

these groups. Tey were not just scorned, but seen as the most dangerous

corruptive power; their ethics were considered the root of all evil. And

indeed, the unsurpassed wave of wars, plunders, massacres and

exploitation originating from Western Europe over the last 400 years is

largely a result of the capitalist system’s hegemony. (But then, the

biggest counter- struggle also took place in Western Europe, hence it

cannot be considered a total loss for humanity.)

Capitalism and the nation-state represent the dominant male in its most

institutionalised form. Capitalist society is the continuation and

culmination of all the old exploitative societies. It is continuous

warfare against society and woman. To put it succinctly, capitalism and

the nation-state are the monopolism of the tyrannical and exploitative

male.

Breaking down this monopolism will perhaps be more difficult than

breaking down the atom. A main objective of capitalist modernity’s

ideological hegemony is to obliterate the historic and social facts

concerning its conception and its essence. This is because the

capitalist economic and societal form is not a social and historical

necessity; it is a construct, forged through a complex process. Religion

and philosophy have been transformed into nationalism, the divinity of

the nation- state. The ultimate goal of its ideological warfare is to

ensure its monopoly on thought. Its main weapons to accomplish this are

religionism, gender discrimination and scientism as a positivist

religion. Without ideological hegemony, with political and military

oppression alone, maintaining modernity will be impossible. While

capitalism uses religionism to control society’s cognisance, it uses

nationalism to control classes and citizenship, a phenomenon that has

risen around capitalism.

The objective of gender discrimination is to deny women any hope of

change. The most effective way for sexist ideology to function is by

entrapping the male in power relations and by rendering woman impotent

through constant rape. Through positivist scientism, capitalism

neutralises the academic world and the youth. It convinces them that

they have no choice but to integrate with the system, and in return for

concessions this integration is assured.

As with all oppressive and exploitative social systems, capitalism could

not rise without establishing a state. Whereas the dogmatism of the

feudal system had a religious character, that of the archaic

slave-owning society had a mythological character. One god was embodied

in the king and dynasty; but today God is presented as the invisible

power in the state’s noble existence.

When capitalism saw the opportunity to become a system, it started off

by eliminating all societies based on the mother-woman culture. During

early modernity, the strength of female sociality that was still trying

to maintain itself was burnt on the stake of the witch-hunter. In order

to establish its hegemony over woman through her profound enslavement,

these burnings were very useful tools. Woman is at the service of the

system today partly because of the widespread burning of women at the

onset of capitalism. The embedded fear of the stake has put women in

Europe under the total servitude of men.

After eliminating women, the system mercilessly demolished agrarian and

village society. As long as the communal democratic character of society

stands, capitalism cannot attain maximum power and profits. Thus, this

kind of sociality was inevitably targeted. In this way, the complete

entrapment of the oldest slave, woman, became the model for all other

enslaved lives — that of children and men.

Political and military power play an important role in maintaining the

capitalist system’s hegemony. But what is crucial is to possess and

subsequently to paralyse society via the culture industry. The mentality

of communities under the influence of the system has weakened and its

members have become gullible. Many philosophers claim that society has

been turned into a society of the spectacle, similar to a zoo. The sex,

sports, arts and culture industries, in combination and in sequence,

bombard emotional and analytic intelligence incessantly by means of a

diverse spread of advertisements. As a result, both emotional and

analytical intelligence have become completely dysfunctional; the

conquering of society’s mentality is thus complete.

What is of grave concern is society’s voluntary acceptance of its

captivity by the combined cultural and sex industries, and moreover,

perceiving this as a burst of freedom! This is the strongest base and

tool of legitimisation the rulers have. Capitalism can only reach the

empire phase with the aid of the culture industry. Therefore, the

struggle against cultural hegemony requires the most difficult struggle

of all: mental struggle. Until we can develop and organise the essence

and form of a counter-struggle against the cultural war waged by the

system through its invasions, assimilation and industrialisation, not a

single struggle for freedom, equality and democracy has a chance of

succeeding.

Capitalist modernity is a system based on the denial of love. Its denial

of society, unrestrained individualism, gender discrimination in all

areas, deification of money, substitution of God with the nation-state

and turning woman into an automaton that receives no or little wages,

mean that there are no material grounds for love either.

10. Economy

Economy has been turned into subject matter that ordinary people are not

supposed to understand. It has intentionally been made complicated so

that the plain reality can be disguised. It is the third force, after

ideology and violence, through which women, and subsequently the entire

society, was entrapped and forced to accept dependence. Economy

literally means ‘householding’, originally the women’s domain, along

with other fundamental sections of society which I will discuss later.

In the woman’s order, there was accumulation too, but this was not for

the merchant or the market. It was for the family. This is what

humanitarian and real economy is. Accumulation was prevented from

becoming a danger by widespread use of the gift culture. Gift culture is

an important form of economic activity.

It is also compatible with the rhythm of human development.

As woman was ousted generally from the history of civilisation but

specifically from capitalist modernity, big men had the opportunity to

distort the functioning of economy and thus turning it into a mass of

problems. This was done by people with no organic link to the economy

because of their excessive lust for profit and power. They thus placed

all economic forces, especially woman, under their own control. The

result is that the forces of power and state have grown excessively,

like a tumour on society, to the extent where it can no longer be

sustained or maintained.

The economic problem actually begins as the woman is ousted from the

economy. In essence, economy is everything that has to do with

nourishment. It may seem peculiar, but I believe that woman is still the

real creator of economy, despite all attempts to overrun and colonise

her. A thorough analysis of the economy will show that woman is the most

fundamental force of economy. Indeed, this is clear when we consider her

role in the agricultural revolution, and how she gathered plants for

millions of years. Today, she not only works inside the home but in many

areas of economic life; she is the one that keeps on turning the wheel.

After woman, those who can be classified as slaves, serfs and workers

would be second in line to the claim of being creators of economy. They

have been kept under control continuously and cruelly so that the

civilisational powers can seize their surplus product and value.

Third in line are all the artisans, small merchant-shopkeepers and small

landowner-farmers who are, admittedly, a little freer.

To this category we can add the artists, architects, engineers, doctors

and all other self-employed people. This just about completes the

picture of those who create and constitute the economy.

The most brutal period for woman was when she was ousted from the

economy during the process of capitalist civilisation.

This leaves the woman destitute of economy, which has become the most

striking and profound social paradox. The entire female population has

been left ‘unemployed’. Although housework can be the most arduous work,

it is seen as valueless. Although childbirth and child rearing are the

most exacting tasks of all, they are not always regarded as valuable but

often as a mere nuisance. On top of being an unemployed childbearing and

child raising machine that is inexpensive to purchase and can be run

cost-free, woman can be used as scapegoat, carrying the guilt for all

that is wrong. Throughout the history of civilisation, she has been

placed on the ground floor of society where she does her unpaid

housework, raise the children and keeps the family together; duties that

form the actual basis of capitalist accumulation. Indeed, no other

society has had the power to develop and systemise the exploitation of

woman to the degree that capitalism has.

During the capitalist period woman has been a target of inequality, with

no freedom and no democracy, not only at the ground level but at all

levels. Moreover, the power of the sexist society has been implemented

with such intensity and so deeply that woman has been turned into object

and subject of the sex industry. The male-dominant society has reached

its peak in capitalist civilisation.

Woman and economy are interwoven components. Because she generates

economy according to fundamental needs only, a woman-driven economy

never experiences depression; it never causes environmental pollution;

and it never poses a threat to the climate. When we cease to produce for

profit, we will have achieved the liberation of the world. This in turn

will be the liberation of humanity and life itself.

11. Killing the Dominant Male: Instituting the Third Major Sexual

Rupture against the Dominant Male

Although male dominance is well institutionalised, men too are enslaved.

The system is in fact reproducing itself in the in- dividual male and

female and their relationship. Therefore, if we want to defeat the

system, we need a radical, new approach towards woman, man and their

relationship.

History, in a sense, is the history of the dominant male who gained

power with the rise of classed society. The ruling class character is

formed concurrently with the dominant male character. Again, rule is

validated through mythological lies and divine punishment. Beneath these

masks lies the reality of bare force and coarse exploitation. In the

name of honour, man seized the position and rights of woman in the most

insidious, traitorous and despotic manner. The fact that, throughout

history, woman was left bereft of her identity and character — the

eternal captive — at the hands of man, has caused considerably more

damage than class division has. The captivity of woman is a measure of

society’s general enslavement and decline; it is also a measure of its

lies, theft and tyranny. The dominant male character of society has to

date not even allowed for scientific analysis of the phenomenon of

woman.

The fundamental question is why is man so jealous, dominant and

villainous where woman is concerned; why does he continue to play the

rapist? Undoubtedly, rape and domination are phenomena related to social

exploitation; they reflect society’s rape by hierarchy, patriarchy and

power. If we look a little deeper, we will see that these acts also

express a betrayal of life. Woman’s multifaceted devotion to life may

clarify man’s societal sexist stand. Societal sexism means the loss of

wealth of life under the blinding and exhausting influence of sexism and

the consequent rise of anger, rape and a dominating stance.

This is why it is important to place on the agenda the problem of man,

which is far more serious than the issue of woman. It is probably more

difficult to analyse the concepts of domination and power, concepts

related to man. It is not woman but man that is not willing to

transform. He fears that abandoning the role of the dominant male figure

would leave him in the position of the monarch who has lost his state.

He should be made aware that this most hollow form of domination leaves

him bereft of freedom as well and, even worse, it forecloses reform.

In order to lead a meaningful life, we need to define woman and her role

in societal life. This should not be a statement about her biological

attributes and social status but an analysis of the all-important

concept of woman as a being. If we can define woman, it may be possible

to define man. Using man as point of departure when defining woman or

life, will render interpretations invalid because woman’s natural

existence is more central than man’s. Woman’s status is demeaned and

made out to be insignificant by male-dominant society, but this should

not prevent us from forming a valid understanding of her reality.

Thus, it is clear that woman’s physique is not deficient or inferior; on

the contrary, the female body is more central than that of man. This is

the root of man’s extreme and meaningless jealousy.

The natural consequence of their differing physiques is that woman’s

emotional intelligence is much stronger than man’s.

Emotional intelligence is connected to life; it is the intelligence that

governs empathy and sympathy. Even when woman’s analytic intelligence

develops, her emotional intelligence gives her the talent to live a

balanced life, to be devoted to life and not to be destructive.

As can be seen even from this short discussion, man is a system. The

male has become a state and turned this into the dominant culture. Class

and sexual oppression develop together; masculinity has generated ruling

gender, ruling class and ruling state. When man is analysed in this

context, it is clear that masculinity must be killed.

Indeed, to kill the dominant man is the fundamental principle of

socialism. This is what killing power means: to kill the one-sided

domination, the inequality and intolerance.

Moreover, it is to kill fascism, dictatorship and despotism. We should

broaden this concept to include all these aspects.

Liberating life is impossible without a radical woman’s revolution that

would change man’s mentality and life. If we are unable to make peace

between man and life and life and woman, happiness is but a vain hope.

Gender revolution is not just about woman. It is about the

5,000-year-old civilisation of class-based society which has left man

worse off than woman. Thus, this gender revolution would simultaneously

mean man’s liberation.

I have often written about ‘total divorce’, i.e. the ability to divorce

from the 5,000-year-old culture of male domination.

The female and male gender identities that we know today are constructs

that were formed much later than the biological female and male. Woman

has been exploited for thousands o years according to this constructed

identity; never acknowledged for her labour. Man has to overcome always

seeing woman as wife, sister or lover — stereotypes forged by tradition

and modernity.

Claiming that we first have to address the question of state then the

question of family, is not sound. No serious social problem can be

understood if addressed in isolation. A far more effective method is to

look at everything within the totality, to render meaning to each

question within its relationship to the other. This method also holds

when we try to resolve problems. Analysing the social mentality without

analysing the state, analysing the state without analysing the family,

and analysing the woman without analysing the man would render

insufficient results. We need to analyse these social phenomena as an

integrated whole; if not, the solutions we arrive at will be inadequate.

The solutions to all social problems in the Middle East should have

woman’s position as their focus. The fundamental objective for the

period ahead of us must be to realise the third major sexual rupture;

this time against the male. Without gender equality, no demand for

freedom and equality can be meaningful.

In fact, freedom and equality cannot be realised without the achievement

of gender equality. The most permanent and comprehensive component of

democratisation is woman’s freedom. The societal system is most

vulnerable because of the unresolved question of woman; woman who was

first turned into property and who today is a commodity; completely,

body and soul. The role the working class once played must now be taken

over by the sisterhood of women. So, before we can analyse class, we

must be able to analyse the sisterhood of women — this will enable us to

form a much clearer understanding of the issues of class and

nationality. Woman’s true freedom is only possible if the enslaving

emotions, needs and desires of husband, father, lover, brother, friend

and son can all be removed. The deepest love constitutes the most

dangerous bonds of ownership. We will not be able to discern the

characteristics of a free woman if we cannot conduct a stringent

critique of the thought, religious and art patterns concerning woman

generated by the male-dominated world.

Woman’s freedom cannot just be assumed once a society has obtained

general freedom and equality. A separate and distinct organisation is

essential, and woman’s freedom should be of a magnitude equal to its

definition as a phenomenon. Of course, a general democratisation

movement may also uncover opportunities for women. But it will not bring

democracy on its own. Women need to determine their own democratic aim,

and institute the organisation and effort to realise it. To achieve

this, a special definition of freedom is essential in order for woman to

break free from the slavery ingrained in her.

12. Jineolojî as the Science of Woman

The elimination of women from the ranks and the subjects of science

requires us to look for a radical alternative.

We first need to know how to win within the ideological arena and to

create a libertarian, natural mindset against the domineering,

power-hungry mentality of the male. We should always keep in mind that

the traditional female subjugation is not physical but social. It is due

to ingrained slavery.

Therefore, the most urgent need is to conquer the thoughts and emotions

of subjugation within the ideological arena.

As the fight for woman’s freedom heads towards the political arena, she

should know that this is the most difficult aspect of the struggle. If

success is not attained politically, no other achievement will be

permanent. Being successful politically does not entail starting a

movement for woman’s statehood. On the contrary, it entails struggling

with statist and hierarchical structures; it entails creating political

formations aiming to achieve a society that is democratic, gender equal,

eco-friendly and where the state is not the pivotal element.

Because hierarchy and statism are not easily compatible with woman’s

nature, a movement for woman’s freedom should strive for

anti-hierarchical and non-statist political formations.

The collapse of slavery in the political arena is only possible if

organisational reform in this area can be successfully attained.

The political struggle requires a comprehensive, democratic organisation

of woman and struggle. All components of civil society, human rights,

local governance and democratic struggle should be organised and

advanced. As with socialism, woman’s freedom and equality can only be

achieved through a comprehensive and successful democratic struggle. If

democracy is not achieved, freedom and equality cannot be achieved

either.

The issues related to economic and social equality can also be

successfully resolved through an analysis of political power and through

democratisation. A desiccated juridical equality means nothing in the

absence of democratic politics; it will contribute nothing to the

achievement of freedom. If the ownership and power relations which

dominate and subjugate woman are not overthrown, then free relations

between woman and man cannot be achieved either.

Although the feminist struggle has many important facets, it still has a

long way to go to break down the limitations on democracy set by the

West. Neither does it have a clear understanding of what the capitalist

way of life entails. The situation is reminiscent of Lenin’s

understanding of socialist revolution. Despite grand efforts and winning

many positional battles, Leninism ultimately could not escape making the

most precious left-wing contribution to capitalism.

A similar outcome may befall feminism. Deficiencies weakening its

contention are: not having a strong organisational base; inability to

develop its philosophy to the full; and difficulties relating to a

militant woman’s movement. It may not even be correct to call it ‘the

real socialism of women’s front’, but our analysis of this movement has

to acknowledge that it has been the most serious measure to date to draw

attention to the issue of woman’s freedom. It does highlight that she is

only the oppressed woman of the dominant man. However, woman’s reality

is much more comprehensive than just being a separate sex; it has

economic, social and political dimensions.

If we see colonialism not only in terms of nation and country but also

in terms of groups of people, we can define woman as the oldest

colonised group. Indeed, in both soul and body, no other social being

has experienced such complete colonialism.

It must be well understood that woman is kept in a colony with no easily

identifiable borders.

In light of the above, I believe that the key to the resolution of our

social problems will be a movement for woman’s freedom, equality and

democracy; a movement based on the science of woman, called jineolojî in

Kurdish. The critique of recent woman’s movements is not sufficient for

analysing and evaluating the history of civilisation and modernity that

has made woman all but disappear. If, within the social sciences, there

are almost no woman themes, questions and movements, then that is

because of civilisation and modernity’s hegemonic mentality and

structures of material culture.

Moreover woman, as the prime component of moral and political society,

has a critical role to play in forming an ethic and aesthetic of life

that reflects freedom, equality and democratisation. Ethical and

aesthetic science is an integral part of jineolojî. Because of her

weighty responsibilities in life, she will no doubt be both the

intellectual and implementation power behind developments and

opportunities. Woman’s link with life is more comprehensive than man’s,

and this has ensured the development of her emotional intelligence.

Therefore aesthetics, in the sense of making life more beautiful, is an

existential matter for woman. Ethically, woman is far more responsible

than man. Thus, woman’s behaviour with regard to morality and political

society will be more realistic and responsible than man’s. She is thus

well suited to analyse, determine and decide on the good and bad aspects

of education, the importance of life and peace, the malice and horror of

war, and measures of appropriateness and justice. It would thus be

appropriate to include economy in jineolojî as well.

13. Democratic Modernity: The Era of Woman’s Revolution

Woman’s freedom will play a stabilising and equalising role in forming

the new civilisation, and she will take her place under respectable,

free and equal conditions. To achieve this, the necessary theoretical,

programmatic, organisational and implementation work must be done. The

reality of woman is a more concrete and analysable phenomenon than

concepts such as ‘proletariat’ and ‘oppressed nation’. The extent to

which society can be thoroughly transformed is determined by the extent

of the transformation attained by women. Similarly, the level of woman’s

freedom and equality determines the freedom and equality of all sections

of society. Thus, the democratisation of woman is crucial for the

permanent establishment of democracy and secularism. For a democratic

nation, woman’s freedom is of great importance too, as liberated woman

constitutes liberated society. Liberated society in turn constitutes

democratic nation. Moreover, the need to reverse the role of man is of

revolutionary importance.

The dawn of the era of democratic civilisation represents not only the

rebirth of peoples but, perhaps more distinctively, it represents the

rise of woman. Woman, who was the creative goddess of Neolithic society,

has encountered continuous losses throughout the history of classed

society. Inverting this history will inevitably bring the most profound

social results.

Woman, reborn to freedom, will amount to general liberation,

enlightenment and justice in all upper and lower institutions of

society. This will convince all that peace, not war, is more valuable

and is to be exalted. Woman’s success is the success of society and the

individual at all levels. The twenty-first century must be the era of

awakening; the era of the liberated, emancipated woman. This is more

important than class or national liberation. The era of democratic

civilisation shall be the one when woman rises and succeeds fully.

It is realistic to see our century as the century when the will of the

free woman will come to fruition. Therefore, permanent institutions for

women need to be established and maintained for perhaps a century. There

is a need for Woman’s Freedom Parties. It is also vital that

ideological, political and economic communes, based on woman’s freedom,

are formed.

Women in general, but more specifically Middle Eastern women, are the

most energetic and active force in democratic society due to the

characteristics described above. The ultimate victory of democratic

society is only possible with women.

Peoples and women have been devastated by classed society ever since the

Neolithic age. They will now, as the pivotal agents of the democratic

breakthrough, not only take revenge on history, but they will form the

required anti-thesis by positioning themselves to the left of the rising

democratic civilisation. Women are truly the most reliable social agents

on the road to an equal and libertarian society. In the Middle East, it

is up to the women and the youth to ensure the anti-thesis needed for

the democratisation of society. Woman’s awakening and being the leading

societal force in this historical scene, has true antithetic value.

Due to the class characteristics of civilisations, their development has

been based on male domination. This is what puts woman in this position

of anti-thesis. In fact, in terms of over- coming the class divisions of

society and male superiority, her position acquires the value of a new

synthesis. Therefore, the leadership position of women’s movements in

the democratisation of Middle Eastern society has historical

characteristics that make this both an anti-thesis (due to being in the

Middle East) and a synthesis (globally). This area of work is the most

crucial work that I have ever taken on. I believe it should have

priority over the liberation of homelands and labour. If I am to be a

freedom fighter, I cannot just ignore this: woman’s revolution is a

revolution within a revolution.

It is the fundamental mission of the new leadership to provide the power

of intellect and will needed to attain the three aspects crucial for the

realisation of a democratic modernity- system: a society that is

democratic as well as economically and ecologically moral. To achieve

this, we need to build a sufficient number of academic structures of

appropriate quality. It is not enough merely to criticise the academic

world of modernity — we have to develop an alternative. These

alternative academic units should be constructed according to the

priorities and the needs of all societal areas, such as economy and

technology, ecology and agriculture, democratic politics, security and

defence, culture, history, science and philosophy, religion and arts.

Without a strong academic cadre, the elements of democratic modernity

cannot be built. Academic cadres and elements of democratic modernity

are equally important for attaining success. Interrelationship is a must

to attain meaning and success.

The struggle for freedom (not only of women but of all ethnicities and

different sections of the community) is as old as the enslavement and

exploitation history of humanity.

Yearning for freedom is intrinsic to human nature. Much has been learnt

from these struggles, and from the battle we have been waging for the

past 40 years. Democratic society has existed alongside different

systems of mainstream civilisation. Democratic modernity, the

alternative system to capitalist modernity, is possible through a

radical change to our mentality and the corresponding, radical and

appropriate changes in our material reality. These changes, we must

build together.

Finally, I would like to point out that the struggle for women’s freedom

must be waged through the establishment of their own political parties,

attaining a popular women’s movement, building their own

non-governmental organisations and structures of democratic politics.

All these must be handled together, simultaneously. The better women are

able to escape the grip of male domination and society, the better they

will be able to act and live according to their independence initiative.

The more women empower themselves, the more they regain their free

personality and identity.

Therefore, giving support to women’s ire, knowledge and freedom of

movement is the greatest display of comradeship and a value of humanity.

I have full confidence that women, irrespective of their different

cultures and ethnicities, all those who have been excluded from the

system, will succeed. The twenty-first century shall be the century of

women’s liberation.

I hope to make my own contributions — not only by writing on these

issues, but by helping to implement the changes.

On the Author

Abdullah Öcalan, born in 1949, studied political sciences in Ankara. He

actively led the Kurdish liberation struggle as the head of the PKK from

its foundation in 1978 until his abduction on 15 February 1999. He is

regarded as a leading strategist and one of the most important political

representatives of the Kurdish people.

Under isolation conditions at İmralı Island Prison, Öcalan has written

more than ten books, which have revolutionised Kurdish politics. Several

times he initiated unilateral ceasefires of the guerilla and presented

constructive proposals for a political solution to the Kurdish issue.

The so-called “peace process” started in 2009 when the Turkish state

responded to Öcalan’s call to resolve the Kurdish issue politically.

This process broke down in April 2015, when the Turkish state

unilaterally terminated the talks and returned to a policy of

annihilation and denial.

Since 27 July 2011, Öcalan has been held again in almost total isolation

at Imrali Island Prison. Since 5 April 2015, the whole prison has been

completely cut off from the rest of the world.

On the International Initiative

On 15 February 1999, the President of the Kurdistan Workers‘ Party,

Abdullah Öcalan, was handed over to the Republic of Turkey following a

clandestine operation backed by an alliance of secret services directed

by their corresponding governments. Disgusted by this outrageous

violation of international law, several intellectuals and

representatives of civil organisations launched an initiative calling

for the release of Abdullah Öcalan. With the opening of a central

coordination office in March 1999, the International Initiative “Freedom

for Abdullah Öcalan — Peace in Kurdistan” started its work.

The International Initiative regards itself as a multinational peace

initiative working for a peaceful and democratic solution to the Kurdish

question. Even after long years of imprisonment, Abdullah Öcalan is

still regarded as an undisputed leader by the majority of the Kurdish

people. Hence, the solution of the Kurdish question in Turkey will be

closely linked to his fate. As the main architect of the peace process,

he is viewed by all sides as key to its successful conclusion, which

puts Öcalan’s freedom increasingly firmly on the agenda.

The International Initiative is committed to play its part to this end.

It does this through disseminating objective information, lobbying and

public relations work, including running campaigns. By publishing

translations of Öcalan’s prison writings it hopes to contribute to a

better understanding of the origins of the conflicts and the possible

solutions.