Reddit reviews Democratic Autonomy in North Kurdistan: The Council Movement, Gender Liberation, and Ecology
We found 2 Reddit comments about Democratic Autonomy in North Kurdistan: The Council Movement, Gender Liberation, and Ecology. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
Books on the subject are somewhat hard to come by, but here is one related by TAORT Kurdistan (translated by Janet Biehl), about the organization of north kurdistan, which later inspired the organization of west kurdistan, or Rojava:
http://www.amazon.com/Democratic-Autonomy-North-Kurdistan-Liberation/dp/8293064269/
Declaration of Democratic Confederalism by Öcalan:
http://www.kurdmedia.com/article.aspx?id=10174
Kurdish Communalism:
http://new-compass.net/article/kurdish-communalism
A Case for Communalism in Kurdistan:
http://new-compass.net/articles/communalist-alternative-capitalist-modernity
Libertarian Socialist perspective (from August):
http://roarmag.org/2014/08/pkk-kurdish-struggle-autonomy/
Edit: Fixed info on sources.
>These are horrible reasons to do anything. It's an irrational reason.
It's not irrational at all when you consider the fact that centralized nation states are oppressive by their very nature and should be abolished.
>So you don't think they act as a state when they kill Kurds and impose orders and laws on Kurdish villages they control?
Conflict rarely begets freedom. It's what comes after the conflict is over that matters.
But just for an alternate perspective on that
http://www.amazon.com/Democratic-Autonomy-North-Kurdistan-Liberation/dp/8293064269
> Why? One Turkish prime minister had Kurdish ancestry did you know?
I think liberal democracy is organized theater. Liberation is never going to come from politicians. The economic and political structures of society make sure of that.
>it's not. They are both violent terror organizations. THERE IS ZERO difference except in terms of their religious beliefs.
If being violent puts one on the same level as Al Qaeda then literally the entire world should be a designated terror organization.
>But what they want to create is violence and imposing their will on others.
No, that's what they do. But that's not why they do it.
>No you don't. Nothing justifies killing the innocents. NOTHING.
No, but there's no going back and if you can gain something positive out of it then you should. That means breaking with the past for the sake of the future.
> A legitimate cause is for example fighting oppression or fighting unfairness.
Which they are in many ways. It's not a secret that the Turkish government has treated Kurds like shit.
>The PKK is replacing it with their own oppression and unfairness and are killing innocent Kurds and other civilians along the way.
See above. It's not black and white. That isn't to excuse anything, but it is more complicated, even morally, then you're describing.
> It was war against a manufacturing center.
Which killed a massive number of people over what was actually a completely negligible production center.
>Would you say that if your family was murdered by the PKK?
I'd be pissed off and depressed. But I could easily flip that around and say what if your family was killed by the Turkish military?
Should we dwell on this and destroy peace in the future or should we try to move past it?
>A country forged out of violence in order to satisfy their power hungry greed for authority?
You really haven't read anything I've posted have you?
The PKK is indeed brutal towards it's political opponents, but their ultimate goal, at least on the surface, isn't ruling the place with an iron fist.
>Just like Ocalan professed hatred of Turks.
The guy's not a saint, but what little I've read from him didn't give that impression at all. More then anything else he just wants the Turkish government out of Kurdistan, seemingly.