The Political Thought of Abdullah Öcalan: Kurdistan, Woman's Revolution and Democratic Confederalism

Ocalan is a huge influence on our world. He is currently jailed by Turkey for forming the current Kurdistan. He has brought democracy, practice of equality, i.e. sexual, religious, racial, to the Middle East. It is a privilege to be able to read his currant writings.

Very good book

One of the books "Must read" for understanding öcalan's thoughts.

Good introduction

"The ultimate victory of democratic society is only possible with women" The four essays in this book outline Abdullah Ocalan's political philosophy while also providing a unique window into the self-administration concept in action in Rojava (northeast Syria). These essays synthesize Leninist and nationalist ideas outside the constraints of the Westphalian state, with a heavy emphasis on women's freedom. The book is quite readable and presents the major elements of Ocalan's thought, which influences numerous Kurdish groups in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria in different ways. Arguably the most profound effect is the Self Administration of Northeast Syria, in which women and men govern equally over relatively cooperative societies designed to defend and provide for the people rather than for the state. Ocalan's ideas are formed through a very specific worldview that may be difficult for outsiders to fully grasp. His ideas of Middle Eastern society enslaving women and his solution of democratic confederalism both grew from a uniquely Kurdish experience during a particular period of time and in a specific context. The reader would benefit from first reading a broad Kurdish history, such as "Kurdistan: In the Shadow of History" by Susan Meiselas followed by the specific case of Rojava in "Revolution in Rojava" by Knapp, Flach, and Ayboga.

TL;DR I was frustrated and disappointed because the book is ostensibly and introduction to Odzhalan’s (Öcalan) worldview and his formulation of democratic confederalism, with him explaining these concepts and how they might amd/or why they can work, but instead it turned out to be 144 pages of introductory paragraphs. Romantic prose is not a thing i have a problem with, but I do when it is not accompanied by detail and elaboration. Hopefully his other work is not like this. And I see myself sticking only to free sources online for his work in the future, since this book has made me at least curious to see him write about the first two subjects more. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - While I have a fair amount of specific complaints with the book my main one is that I felt like I was reading an air sandwich. There was a lot of rhetoric and and writing about the ideals of systems were supposed to embody and the things they were supposed to solve, but nothing really explaining what those were or how they did so with any detail. This paragraph is, imo, fairly reflective of what the book’s content is like: “Democratic confederalism is open towards other political groups and factions. It is flexible, multicultural, anti-monopolistic and consensus-oriented. Ecology and feminism are central pillars. In the frame of this kind of self-governance and alternative economy will become necessary, which increases the resources of a society instead of exploding them and dust does justice to the manifold needs of society.” While typing this review, an apt phrasing comes to mind: it feels as if the book is written entirely in introductory paragraphs. There are gestures towards specific concepts but almost no elaboration. When I bought this book I thought it was going to be able to have an insight into why the Kurdish fighters in Rojava are for what they are and why Odzhalan (öcalan) is their man. As an introduction to his work i was left disappointed and frustrated. As for each essay, the first was more or less a history of the Kurds but I took it with a pinch of salt; The second was vague and had only some details in bits and pieces of 2 paragraphs (out of 144 pages of the book itself); The third was a strange formulation of a kind of benevolently sexist feminism and was disappointing but makes sense given his intersectional position.

A must read for anyone interested in revolutionary politics!

the book has many great theories and points that can lead to groundbreaking revolutions, its must read however the translation was done poorly, i recommend a re-write