Camaraderie criticism, criticizing the comrade

Click to read the article in Turkish

* This article has been written by members of the Platform for Political Wellness

Camaraderie is not an identity, it is a form of political relation. Putting solidarity against competition, it goes beyond the notion of security that is limited to blood relations or material support. It prioritizes remedies for damaged relations, nurturing and growing, deepening them, empowering the comrades through healing, and not exhausting them. In doing so, it builds first an alternative space for breathing in the face of the form of being that is normalized by capitalism, and then a safe space for living. Together with our comrades, whether we know them personally or not but with whom we share the hope for a more just and liveable world we can take on responsibilities, which we cannot carry on our own. This relation enables us to recognize the political face of our being, to embrace it, to continue it, and hence, to enliven the collectivity of our species. impossible to carry on one's own.

Sometimes, we might reproduce those aspects of public politics that we oppose in our relations, and in our approach to producing together or to problems that we deem important. We focus on the public signs of politics, we reduce it to political promises and/or struggling with our 'rivals'. Therefore we come to know politics merely as a serious, faultfinding, uncompromising action; disregard criticism as a means by which we can empower ourselves, our comrades, and/or our organizations, locking ourselves to the false paradox of "Exclusion or Silence".

What about freeing criticism from the constructive/destructive equation, and considering it in relation to political subjects? Is there a difference between criticizing our comrades and criticizing our 'opponents'? What kind of a difference? How shall we approach to the disagreements with those we agree?

Marginalizing our comrades leads to a politics that constantly moves within politically correct boundaries; in the final analysis, it precludes criticism. An overt or covert undercurrent is formed in organizations. Organizations find fault in each other, while inside, an obligation to like everything about the organization's rules. Through time they implode; they stand by means of human circulation, not by joy, hope, mistakes, and resilience. We are hurt deep just where we need to feel safe when we are not on guard, and hence we take a distance.

Then, now, when we are soaked in contemporary politics let's touch not only Turkey's political agenda but also the way we engage in politics, our organizational politics, and our camaraderie. Let's not turn the commonalities that get us together into barriers against critical reflection. Let's exchange experiences of camaraderie that preclude masculine and/or moralistic styles. Let's encourage those political figures that are not masculine, which inhere in life/living. For criticism, to be proved to be right is not important; let's consider criticism to ourselves and to our comrades as a means for political empowerment. Besides, let's not forget that MPs, political party representatives, and rights defenders are all individuals and that there are mistakes that can be repaired together. Let's empower and reinforce the relations where we try to understand each other, where we speak in action, too, rather than getting caught in the passion of the word, where we guard each other's political labor. Let's not leave all the burden on a couple of people and then exhaust them with loads of criticism. Let's not leave to silence those who can take on less burdens. Let's broaden the sphere of politics. (PE)