Turks Protest AKP/Islamism, With Flags & Slogans Instead of Ideas
It's not between Islamists and Secularists. As Mustafa Akyol explains, the biggest gap is between globalists and nationalists. There are secularists and Islamists on both sides.
This is one of the most incisive observations about Turkey that I've heard in a while.
Too often, Turkey's political scene is described as "secular elites" who are pitted against a "rising conservative middle class." This is true, but often misinterpreted. The secular elites who most foreigners know are the cosmopolitans who study in elite American or British schools. But there is another segment of secular nationalists, much larger than the cosmopolitan secular class, which is heavily xenophobic.
Click "Read More" To Continue ---->
This is one of the most incisive observations about Turkey that I've heard in a while.
Too often, Turkey's political scene is described as "secular elites" who are pitted against a "rising conservative middle class." This is true, but often misinterpreted. The secular elites who most foreigners know are the cosmopolitans who study in elite American or British schools. But there is another segment of secular nationalists, much larger than the cosmopolitan secular class, which is heavily xenophobic.
Click "Read More" To Continue ---->
This class has led Turkey on a largely isolationist path for the past half century, and kept it weighed down by miserable neighborly relations. It was completely disengaged in the Arab world and had terrible relations with all the Balkan countries. Relations with the Soviet Union were, of course, also very poor. Economically, Turkey heavily regulated its international trade and followed a policy of import-substitution.
Some of this conflict was unaviodable. But Turkey's foreign policy was a reflection of a secular ruling class that feared and distrusted foreigners (the strong Cold War alliance with the U.S. notwithstanding). The seeds for change began in the 1980s, when Prime Minister Turgut Ozal privatized Turkey's economy.
The opening of the Turkish economy caused the opening of Turkish society. Goods from Europe and America saturated Turkish markets. Tourism took off. People began showing different patterns of consumption, especially Islamic ones.
Islamic socieities like the Gulen movement used privatized television, radio, schools, and a freer press to rise to power. A new class of "Anatolian tigers" began transforming politics- pious businessmen who owed their wealth to capitalism and their engagement with foreigners. After the Refah Party debacle, successful Islamic politicians recognized that they could appeal to the West by exposing Turkey's illberal qualities. Even better, by framing issues like the headscarf in terms of freedom and democracy, the Islamist AKP has been able to position itself somewhat as a liberal Islamic party.
And, in reality, "globalists Muslims" have been the leading liberalizing force in Turkey. Economically, Turkey has never be as stable or as open as it is now (the economic crises notwithstanding). Relations with its neighbors have never been better. The Turkish military appears to have lost its ability to control Turkey's politics. Kurds, though still seriously
maligned, have never been freer. Turkey even moved to the brink of a rapprochement with Armenia.
However, these moves, along with creeping Islamism in Turkey, only feed into a secular xenophobic backlash. But its nothing more than a backlash- the secular nationalist class does little more than scream and kick as the carpet is pulled out from under it. It has no new ideas. It can't create a secular liberal party, because there is no electorally significant secular liberal class in Turkey. As long as the status quo remains, Turkey is better off with Tayyip Erdogan, the Islamist-globalist Prime Minister, than it is with any of the current alternatives.
- Jon
Some of this conflict was unaviodable. But Turkey's foreign policy was a reflection of a secular ruling class that feared and distrusted foreigners (the strong Cold War alliance with the U.S. notwithstanding). The seeds for change began in the 1980s, when Prime Minister Turgut Ozal privatized Turkey's economy.
The opening of the Turkish economy caused the opening of Turkish society. Goods from Europe and America saturated Turkish markets. Tourism took off. People began showing different patterns of consumption, especially Islamic ones.
Islamic socieities like the Gulen movement used privatized television, radio, schools, and a freer press to rise to power. A new class of "Anatolian tigers" began transforming politics- pious businessmen who owed their wealth to capitalism and their engagement with foreigners. After the Refah Party debacle, successful Islamic politicians recognized that they could appeal to the West by exposing Turkey's illberal qualities. Even better, by framing issues like the headscarf in terms of freedom and democracy, the Islamist AKP has been able to position itself somewhat as a liberal Islamic party.
And, in reality, "globalists Muslims" have been the leading liberalizing force in Turkey. Economically, Turkey has never be as stable or as open as it is now (the economic crises notwithstanding). Relations with its neighbors have never been better. The Turkish military appears to have lost its ability to control Turkey's politics. Kurds, though still seriously
maligned, have never been freer. Turkey even moved to the brink of a rapprochement with Armenia.
However, these moves, along with creeping Islamism in Turkey, only feed into a secular xenophobic backlash. But its nothing more than a backlash- the secular nationalist class does little more than scream and kick as the carpet is pulled out from under it. It has no new ideas. It can't create a secular liberal party, because there is no electorally significant secular liberal class in Turkey. As long as the status quo remains, Turkey is better off with Tayyip Erdogan, the Islamist-globalist Prime Minister, than it is with any of the current alternatives.
- Jon
