Mahir Çayan is a revolutionary leader

Oligarchy, the oligarchy was not satisfied only with killing Mahir Çayan and other revolutionaries of the period, for 50 years it has been trying to erase the memory of them. Over the years, many campaigns have been organized to empty the revolutionary essence that materialized in Mahir Çayan’s thoughts and life and to poison the mind of the people’s masses.

“What would happen if Mahir Çayan had not taken a weapon in his hand and dared to start a war in which he would take human lives. What would have happened if Mahir Çayan had not died?

If he lived in our times, would Mahir Çayan become an urban guerilla again?


Maybe he would become an academician, maybe a famous politician, or a talented journalist, and why not a businessman! Regardless of his job, he would be a husband and a good father, devoting his life for the future of his wife and children.

Because of the psychological condition in which he had fallen into his youth, Mahir Çayan had refused all these values of life.” – Taha Akyol

Mahir Çayan and other youth like him, who were turned into public enemies, are wounds in the soul of this country. Many young people whose hearts were filled with enthusiasm and desire to do something in the name of the people, sometimes as a result of their youthful impulses and ignorance, at other times, under the influence of agents and provocateurs, were turned or became terrorists.” (Melih Aşık, 28 October 1997, Milliyet / Nation / newspaper)

Did Mahir really sacrifice his entire life, just “because of the psychological state in which he fell out in his youth?” Did the “fire” of his young age burned him?

Of course not… The bourgeois writers and counter-revolutionary ideologues who serve the oligarchy have very different goals. Their aim is to denigrate the armed revolutionary struggle of 1971 which is identified with the personality of Mahir Çayan, and to prevent the revolutionary spirit of that period from reaching the people. They used all their power and means to achieve these goals. They came to the point where they began to come up with scenarios in which they opposed to each other Deniz Gezmiş and Mahir Çayan, who are two revolutionaries, contemporaries, and by senseless criteria, they were competing between them.

Deniz Gezmiş was a naive romantic. While Mahir Çayan,was a ruthless rationalist.

One’s revolutionary activity ends where human life begins. And for the other, the revolutionary struggle began where human life was taken away.

One is the embodiment of the romantic side of the 1968 generation, and the other is the embodiment of the cruel and ruthless side of that generation.

Two different types of youth, two different identities, two different impressions.

(Ertuğrul Özkök, 26 Ekim 1997, Hürriyet / Freedom / newspaper)

It is no coincidence that, a person like Ertuğrul Özkök who sold his body, soul and personality to the oligarchy utters these words. On the one hand, he pretends to be defending Deniz Gezmiş, writing down good words about him, and then attacking Mahir Çayan. But in fact, people such as Ertugrul Ozkök would not say a good word about a revolutionary like Deniz Gezmiş,, who is filled with revolutionary spirit and faith, continued his life fighting against imperialism and fascism, sacrificing himself for his people and his homeland.

In addition to such lackeys as Ozkok, some groups and individuals who define themselves as revolutionary, leftist, and human rights defenders speak similar words about the revolutionaries. For these groups trying to present Denise Gezmiş as “innocent” with words such as “he was filled with love for man”, “he did not kill anyone”, “and he even do not harm the ants”, the revolutionary struggle, the revolutionary spirit and faith are valueable for such people.

In fact, reality is completely different, and it has been sealed forever in the minds of our people. Mahir Çayan, Deniz Gezmiz and Ibrahim Kaypakkaya remain in history as the three revolutionaries who created the 1971 line of armed struggle.

There is only one reason why Mahir Çayan is more vilified, insult and swearing uttered at his address by the oligarchy and its servants, and it is because: he is the revolutionary leader who determines the path of revolution not only in Turkey, but in all neo-colonial countries, and he laves as his heritage this theory to all oppressed peoples of the world. It drew the strategy of the anti-imperialist, anti-oligarchic popular revolution, valid for all neo-colonial countries, and thus took its place next to the revolutionary leaders who contributed to scientific socialism.

Mahir Çayan is a whole with his personality, with his actions, with his ideological and political line, with his ideological systematic. Defining his personality means defining the revolutionary struggle. He is no longer just one person, he has become a symbol of the political line that shows the way to the liberation of the peoples in our country.

In this line of thought, even though it had physically killed him, the oligarchy had not been able to completely destroy him. Those who have inherited his inheritance continue to fight, rising to new heights in their quest to breathe life into all his qualities and to fulfill his ideal.

This is the real reason for their fears. These fears are not only inherent in the oligarchy but also in some parties, organizations and individuals who call themselves revolutionary, communist, Marxist.

The oligarchy’s lackey

“It is one thing, to speak about the ideals of Mahir Çayan, in the beginning of his path and generation 1968, and his freedom-loving utopia sharply opposed to the status quo. But it is quite another thing to be idealized and to make him flag of a political movement, not to mention that he kidnapped and killed Ephraim Elrom (Consul of Israel in Istanbul in 1971), that he took Sibel Erkan hostage, that he kidnapped and killed the British technicians, that is, it is now something entirely different, something to approve of acts of violence and terrorism.

(Hasan Cemal – Kimse Kızmasın Kendimi Yazdım, page: 65-66)

“THKP-C made this criticism by burning and self-destructing after a period of leap. Taking that step, it completed its mission. The desire to recreate such a movement would be nothing more than a comedy.

Yes, Mahir Çayan is the flag and leader of a movement. He achieved this with all his life, struggle, faith and determination. He is an example of the fact that Leadership is not a right given to anyone without doing nothing, but a right that must be deserved and won. It is science, history, and our people that attributes this right to Him. No power can p prevent this …

Source: Bağımsızlık Yolunda Kurtuluş(Liberation on the Road to Independence) magazine, special issue 1, March 2000.

, , , ,