CENTRAL NEWS– When language began to replace symbolic language tens of thousands of years ago, we opened our eyes to a whole new world as a species. To honour this groundbreaking development or change, we have called it the “language revolution.” Our ability to think took a qualitative leap. Blessing by naming all beings was one of the important achievements of the language revolution. In the context of those who benefited from the revolution, it was a rare revolution in which we were on the same side with the entire human family. In all the time that has passed, the word revolution has never crossed your lips. But if you stop and ask, “What is a revolution?” If you were to ask, most languages would have difficulty lifting that burden.
If you approach the subject from the perspective of what a revolution is not, you must first say that revolution is not just a change of power. From this insight grew the greatest misfortune of the revolution. A perspective that emerged from looking at society from the perspective of power and the state thinks that every formation in society is characterized by power. Therefore, it is foreseeable that all radical changes desired can be realized through power. And even though this foresight aims at a classless, stateless society, paradoxically the understanding of revolution is still based on seizing power.
Especially in the last two hundred years, one can encounter such revolutionary attempts.
When the subject is reduced to an event such as overthrow and seizure of power, it is inevitable to develop a perception of time that can express this. In this case, time can be divided, narrowed or even compressed into one day. For example, “Day of Revolution” is the product of such a creation. This day has absolute supremacy over all other days. Compared to the sacrifices made before this day, the efforts made and the dreams consolidated for the future, the result contains disappointments and serious contradictions rather than a radical change. The idea of this day reminds us of the Day of Judgment in the holy books. The false coding by the image of the apocalypse in the minds leads to confusing the revolution with rebellion or insurrection. The error of attributing the revolution to power also opens the door to other distortions. Now, without waiting for the participation of the people, the way is open to call the work done from the top down a revolution. Coups d’état are the first of these. It is commonly said that when the conquest of political power by the soldiers is complete, a revolution has been carried out to impose this coup on society. Moreover, any reform, revision or a newly written constitution is immediately adorned with the word revolution. From this also derives the habit of capitalist modernity to make everything an object of consumption. As if it were not enough to empty the concept of revolution, it also becomes an advertising package. As soon as it happens, any innovation or the slightest change is immediately called a revolution. When we say technology, medicine and communication, revolutions (!) explode everywhere, even in clothing and even in recipes.
All these forms of use are undoubtedly the result of efforts to undress the revolution. The will of the system to dehumanise, shrink, erode, hollow out or steal the revolution so that nothing happens can be understood within its own logic. But despite all these attempts, the concept of revolution retains its power to inspire humanity with its freshness from day one. Of course, we should not forget the considerable discomfort it has created among those in power. Therefore, it is the responsibility of those who are uncomfortable with the given life to explain what they understand of the revolution.
Women and youth are at the forefront of the most fundamental social dynamics in the recovery of life. The attempt to define the role of youth in the originality of our subject can be seen as an urgent necessity. Trying to define youth with a specific age group and seeing it with its physical or biological characteristics can lead us to overlook that the subject is a social phenomenon. Uncovering the social role of youth is possible by seeing their relationship and contradiction with the system. The concept of gerentocracy, which expresses the dominance of the old man, later became the identity of the state civilization. The old man’s life experience and the centralizing acquisition of knowledge make him increasingly competent in experience and ideology. In relation to this, he is constantly losing his power to do what. The formula of staying at the top of the hierarchical pyramid is established by getting the youth hooked. The habituation to the patriarchal order begins in the family under the name of education. This educational situation is continued by the state taking over at the earliest possible age. All dreams in the child’s world are stolen and replaced by a grinding machine that can digest the grossest contradictions of life. The child, who grows up learning by heart that the king is not naked, continues his “education” until he becomes a skilled employee who carries the system. The control mechanism thus operated ensures the continuity of the system. In order to maintain the existing hierarchical-state order and to prevent possible changes or revolutions, a complete dependence and control of the youth is essential. However, not everything always goes as planned. It is very difficult to keep youth under control and try to lead them without changing anything. On the other hand, the experience and ideological superiority of the gerentocracy over the youth is a constant source of conflict. From here, the youth’s desire for freedom is nurtured. Ali Fırat said, “It is difficult to keep a youth on the way to freedom. Youth is the most problematic part of the system.” This is because youth are “game changers.” In property relations, they are on the side of the dispossessed. They are something that has not yet fit into a container or mold. The attempt to describe them as “toys,” “young man,” is the product of a deliberate search for discredit. In fact, the conscientious and moral qualities they display remind us of the natural society for which humanity has always yearned and sought. From this point of view, the ongoing struggle between the old man and the youth is, in a sense, the struggle between the patriarchal state civilization and society. If the lines are sharpened here as revolution and counterrevolution, the revolution will express itself in the youth and the youth in the revolution.
The revolution cannot be postponed just like the youth
The drying up of its moral-political tissues and organs creates a society that cannot think for itself, cannot decide, and is impractical. This is accompanied by the disintegration, dissolution and eventual slumber of society. The revolutionary approach to get out of this (according to the slogans of the 68 youth movement) should be in the style of “In person, right now”. What should be changed should be implemented without waiting and without delay. Especially in the context of the organization of society, enlightenment, opening paths of consciousness, creating decision-making and implementation mechanisms are basic life functions. Self-management and survival without participating in power and creating new centers of power means revitalizing society. A living society is an evolving society. At the same time, one definition of youth is “developing.” When “young societies” or “young nations” are mentioned, it is emphasized that this society or nation is developing. The development of this society can only be possible by opening its channels of freedom. Finding the good for oneself and gaining the will to implement that is possible by actualizing morality and politics. A society functioning in this way initiates the processes of development, awakening and renewal within itself, which means overcoming the old and building something new every day. This is the way to live the revolution, freed from all delays and revolutionize the whole life. So, in summary, the society whose moral-political characteristics are revived is the liberated society. The liberated and renewed society is a society undergoing revolution. Ultimately, “the developing youth society is the society undergoing revolution” can be said. Any situation where there is no revolution is an irreparable loss. It is like the youth that cannot be postponed or lived later. Here, the youth and the revolution meet once again with their characteristics that cannot be postponed.
Postponing the revolution is like ageing young.
Given that youth is not a physical but a social phenomenon, the need for a reinterpretation of the overall picture of the subject arises. The roots of the current power elite of science conquering society go back to the old smart man’s condemnation of society based on his own experience. While current science and technology are capable of meeting all of humanity’s basic material needs, they are, on the contrary, increasing hunger and wars. Science-government circles that claim to have made the fourth industrial revolution with artificial intelligence are not much different from the priests in the ciggurats. Detached from society, they base the strengthening of power against society. This is possible as long as the information and application tools that are considered strategic are kept away from the youth. All systems that contain the energy of the youth feel safe. However, society’s yearning for freedom and equality manifests itself throughout history, albeit in the form of various explosions. Ali Fırat said “All revolutions are the work of peoples.” and continues to reveal the sad history of how revolutions have alienated peoples from their aspirations. These explosion moments are when the youth, who are the conscience of society, stand up against injustice with their own identity despite all the constraints and dependencies. To the extent that it is socialized, youth identity spreads to the whole society. The society that experiences the revolution mentioned above takes place. This short period, when democracy is most developed in the management of society itself, is also the time when the old power is destroyed and the new one has not yet been formed. As it was repeated many times later, it is a state in which the fire of revolution is replaced by the inertia of the state. The freezing of the vitality of society is essentially the displacement of the poles young-old. The hierarchical class society with the state is a cold, boring and static system, just as it is old.
The state and the bureaucracy that represents them are not afraid to show themselves always different, very sophisticated. On the one hand, they absorb the entire monopoly of information and prevent the formation of a similar, on the other hand, they also present a dense cloud of mystery that the work done on behalf of the state is very complex and difficult. No one can see exactly what is under this cold and dull face. What the “mystery party” is about are life values that have been fraudulently stolen from society. Vitality, mobility, energy and dynamism are the main characteristics of youth. Rejection of the existing with the desire for constant change is one of the problems of youth with the system. In this regard, the state in which the youthful characteristics of the society are displayed is the most uncomfortable and dangerous situation in relation to the system. It is vital for the system to “order” the society in a static way, as well as to force or prepare the youth to grow old all the time. From this point of view, it is possible to see that youth is a social event and not just people in a certain age group. “The claim to be revolutionary is the claim to stay young.” When this is said, a statement is made on the ground.
An important aspect that stands out when thinking about the revolution and youth is leadership. It is well known that throughout history, women and youth have responded to all calls for revolution and movements for change in that direction, gaining rapid momentum and showing the sacrifices they have had to take on. This role they assume is related to the historical-social roots of the contradictions they experience with the system. Although this is the reality, however, there has been a seminal debate that touches this reality, especially in the last two centuries. “Will workers or peasants lead? Or will workers and peasants lead together?” The debate has led to contradictions, contrasts and even conflicts, and finally to endless divisions among those who want to make a revolution. In this context, it is necessary to see and reject the subject-object approach, which is a disease of civilization. It creates a constant savior-savior dichotomy with phrases like “emancipating people,” “saving the oppressed,” “giving women their rights.” The subject who will do all this work is, in particular, the worker. The fact that the worker, who took the role of digging the grave of capitalism, prolongs the life of the system by being supported by the bourgeoisie, was the most painful of the lessons of the last century. However, it is clear that the people, women or oppressed cannot achieve their ideals of freedom and equality at the hands of any savior other than themselves. It was also a mistake to place this burden on the worker. While all these technical activities are being carried out in society, it is also worth noting how women and youth, who are the main dynamics of society, are positioned. Organizations for the revolution are also organized in the form of women’s and youth associations, sectional structures, or as women’s and youth associations in revolutionary parties. What should be understood or explained here is the positioning of youth and women, which is an extension of the main body. This is clearly a subordinate organization. Although it is not necessary to participate in the discussion and decision-making processes, in practice it is the ready power that directs all the work. In trying to properly understand this false revolutionary fiction, the proposed solutions to the problem should not be simply to replace “workers” with “women and youth.” It is important to read history and society correctly while trying to answer the problem of pioneering in society in terms of change and transformation. It is known that the main contradiction is not in the form of the opposition between the working class and the bourgeois class, but is a power problem in a society that goes beyond that. Seeking a way out among women and youth, where the problem is most intense and tricky, and developing leadership outside the usual channels will be the model with the greatest chance of success.
As a result; To emphasize the contentedness of life with youth, a common folk saying “spring of life” is compared. This analogy refers to the characteristics of spring such as renewal, awakening, birth and beginning. Youth is a beginning in terms of participation in community life. The protective characteristics of childhood are gradually replaced by individuals who can stand on their own two feet and make their own decisions. Just like curiosity about every new encounter, youth is also curious about social life. However, the oppression of youth by hierarchical society and the ongoing demand for freedom against it creates cause for questioning. Contradiction and conflict with what exists create the reflex of not being what they see in the young individual, of not being like them and being different. Similar to the parents in childhood, the desire to imitate them is at the point of not being like the opposite reflex in youth. This situation is reflected in social life as the desire of youth for change. There is constant propaganda for reform and change to suppress or stop such possible reactions. Nevertheless, the youth’s interest in revolution is unstoppable. “We were revolutionaries when we were young, too.” In this vein, there is often an attempt to reduce the issue to a passing enthusiasm. It is essentially a confession of having lost youth and being integrated into the existing static, non-renewable old system. On the contrary, the youth is about to live the life that he will start anew. Ali Fırat said, “Revolution is the answer to the question ‘How to live?” and points out that maintaining a vibrant, dynamic and questionable life is a revolution. The answer that youth and revolution will meet must be sought and maintained in life.
Ferhat Önder
Source: Journal of Democratic Modernity
