#Women anzac day t shirts | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cuckadoodledoo1453-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Atatürk: A Liberal Authoritarian

An Essay on Authoritarian and Turkish Politics

“Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.” This quote from president Abraham Lincoln may be good for a T-Shirt or campaign slogan, but it lacks nuance. To me, representative democracy is the supreme, and only viable form of governance in the modern world. However, it is not without flaw. The two largest problems with democracy is that change comes slowly, and bad ideas are often what is more popular. Is it morally justifiable to do wrong simply because it is popular? No. Ironically, if democracy and liberalism is to survive, authoritarianism (specifically democracy with few checks and balances) is often justified, even necessary.

Take for example Switzerland. Switzerland is the closest any country has ever gotten to being a true democracy. Practically everything is voted on. As a result, women’s suffrage did not come into place until 1971. This is morally inexcusable, and not egalitarian; a fundamental principle of liberalism. Democracy can be bureaucratic and regressive. As a result, power sometimes has to be put into the hands of only a few people in order to achieve real progress.

* * *

The Ottoman Empire was ruled by a absolute monarch, the sultan, for hundreds of years. In the 19th century, the Empire began Tanzimat, which was a period of reformation and modernization. A group of Ottoman/Turkish intellectuals created an organization known as the Young Ottomans (predecessors to the Young Turks). They took issue with Tanzimat, believing it did not go far enough. A constitution was introduced in 1876, and the first national election was held the following year. Sultan Abdul Hamid II suspended the constitution in 1878, in favour of absolute monarchy, and the idea was destroyed.

Several decades later, in 1908, The reform-oriented Young Turks began their ‘revolution,’ creating a second constitution. For the first time, a semblance of multi-party democracy existed within the Ottoman Empire. The Young Turks were devoted to pushing the Empire into the twentieth century. The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) was the umbrella party for the Young Turk movement, but people began to distance and even seperate themselves from the party in favor of more liberal, secular, and decentralized politics. Nonetheless, the CUP seized power in 1913, led by Talaat Pasha. He ruled alongside Enver Pasha (the Minister of War), and Djemal Pasha (the Minister of the Navy and governor of Syria) until 1918. The “Three Pashas” controlled the Empire like a triumvirate, with absolute control; abandoning their former liberal ideals. This may seem to counter my defence of authoritarian democracy, but in reality; the Three Pashas practiced totalitarianism, something very different.

The Ottoman Empire entered the first World War on the side of the Central Powers in late 1914. During the war, the government carried out unspeakable atrocities, especially to the Christian, Assyrian, and most famously, Armenian populations within the country. These crimes betrayed the supposedly secular values of the Young Turks, and would ultimately bring the death of the nation. The Ottoman Empire was an backwards, islamist, genocidal empire. If it hoped to achieve greatness, it would need a revolution - or a reform so radical it could easily be mistaken for one. In 1919, it would get just that.

* * *

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was born in 1881, in Salonika in the Ottoman Empire (modern day Thessaloniki, Greece). He excelled in school, and began his military career in 1905. He was briefly imprisoned for his liberal politics and joining of the Young Turks, but was released because of his connections in the army. After the Young Turk Revolution, he initially supported them, but after watching the country spiral into just another dictatorship, he focused on his military career instead of politics. He was sent to Libya to fight in the Italo-Turkish War of 1911-12. He also fought in the Balkan wars from 1912-13. It wouldn’t be until the Gallipoli campaign in 1915, however, when Mustafa Kemal became world renowned for his military prowess.

The battle for Gallipoli was arguably the Entente’s biggest failure in the Great War, and would leave even Winston Churchill with a dubious reputation for many years. With the hopes of landing in the Dardanelles, the British hoped on taking the Turkish capital, Istanbul, by surprise. Mustafa Kemal led a strong and resilient defence, and held the British and ANZAC forces back attack after attack. After this decisive Turkish victory, Mustafa Kemal became known as the ‘Hero of Gallipoli.’

After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, the non-Turkish parts of the Empire (namely Arabia) would be swiftly divided up between the British, French, and new Arab State. The partition also included plans for European colonization of all of Turkey. The western Aegean Coast, as well as Istanbul would be given to Greece, the South-West be given to Italy, the South-East to France and the East to the new state of Armenia. The remainder would be controlled by the former sultan’s government as a western rump state. The Turks, opposed to this, rose up in rebellion in May, 1919, beginning the Turkish War of Independence. Mustafa Kemal would be elected in September as the leader of this resistance, with his makeshift government in Ankara. Atatürk would fight a war on three fronts; defending from the Greeks in the West, the French in the South and the Armenians in the East. Armenia was swiftly annexed by Lenin, and the Bolsheviks supplied the Turks with lots of weapons and supplies. The Turks beat the Greeks at the Battle of Sakarya, causing France to lose hope and give up on the war. The British prime minister Lloyd George pushed for war with Turkey, but was soon voted out of office in favor of an anti-war government. The British advised Greece to withdraw from Turkey.

Peace talks were held in Switzerland in 1922-23, with the Turkish government in Ankara being recognized as the official Turkish government. This would spell the end of the Ottoman Empire, as well as European dreams of colonizing Turkey. On October 29th, 1923 (Turkish Independence Day), Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was elected as the first president of the Turkish Republic.

* * *

Atatürk had tactical skills on and off the battlefield. He would remain president from 1923, until his death in 1938. Despite being democratically elected, Atatürk ruled more or less as a benevolent dictator. The “Early Republican Period” in Turkish history, (1923-1950) is also widely known as the “One Party Period.” He was loved by the people, and is considered a hero even in Turkey today, but he did rule as an authoritarian. The real question here is not ‘was Atatürk an authoritarian?’ The question is ‘did he do the right thing?’ To any Western, liberal-minded person the answer is: yes. Most of his reforms were objectively good, and necessary. Atatürk’s policies led to the Westernization of the country, and Turkey’s modernization.

Atatürk’s greatest accomplishment was the secularization of Turkey. He took a deeply religious, fundamentalist theocracy and turned it into a liberal, thriving, “democracy.” He described any man who needed to use religion to rule as an ‘imbecile.’ He made a distinct separation between religion and government, even going so far as to ban the headscarf and fez from being worn by civil servants. Until only recently, most women in Turkey did not wear a veil of any kind, in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. Atatürk was also called on by supporters and opponents alike to make himself Caliph, essentially the leader of Islam across the world. Delegations from India and Egypt came making this request, but he refused. Atatürk was a man of principle, and he knew that in order for Turkey to become Western, the Caliph and the House of Osman would have to go. To quote Atatürk, “Those who use religion for their own benefit are detestable. We are against such a situation and will not allow it. “Those who use religion in such a manner have fooled our people; it is against just such people that we have fought and will continue to fight.”

This is of course, a very large contrast to the late Ottoman Empire, who committed genocide against religious minorities within the nation. Without being an authoritarian, Atatürk never would have been able to accomplish the secularization of Turkey, because the conservative, fundamentalist people within the country would have removed him from power, and reversed his accomplishments. This is what has happened within Turkey ever since his death in 1938. The current president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, seemingly wants to undo all the secular policies that make his country great, and puts Turkey above other fundamentalist, islamist nations like Saudi Arabia or Iran.

Another difference between Turkey and countries like Saudi Arabia is the treatment of women. Not only were Atatürk’s policies on women’s rights very progressive, but they again set him aside from other majority Muslim countries in the world. Women gained the right to vote in Turkey in 1930, far ahead of other European countries, including France. In 1926, Sharia Courts were abandoned in favour of more a egalitarian Swiss Code. Another quote from Atatürk is as follows, “Humankind is made up of two sexes, women and men. Is it possible for humankind to grow by the improvement of only one part while the other part is ignored? Is it possible that if half of a mass is tied to earth with chains that the other half can soar into skies?” Again, this could never have been achieved, at least not in such a short span of time, if Atatürk had used more conventional, small-government politics. It could have never been achieved.

* * *

According to Turkey’s constitution, the nation is a secular, democratic republic. It derives sovereignty from the people. Erdoğan, the current president, wants to undo all this. In April, 2017, a referendum in Turkey was held. The referendum will allow Erdoğan to edit the constitution to give himself new powers and privileges. It ‘won’ very narrowly, and suspiciously. Erdoğan has been criticized for this, saying that Atatürk would have been adamantly opposed to this; after all, he was the one who designed Turkey’s constitution. Erdoğan has insisted that Atatürk would have voted yes. Atatürk would be disgusted by almost everything Erdoğan stands for, but Atatürk did put a lot of power into his own hands. Atatürk almost certainly would have voted no, but there is something in modern Turkish politics that he may have supported.

On July 15, 2016 an attempted coup took place in Ankara, trying to oust the current government, including President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. This was Erdoğan’s excuse for increasing his power, but there are theories that he could have organized this failed coup himself, as an attempt to increase support. The West generally have bad feelings about any coup d'etat, with good reason. However, if Turkish democracy is going to prevail, Erdoğan must be removed from power. It very well may be impossible for him to lose via election, because there is evidence of voter fraud and election rigging within Turkey. But even if Erdoğan truly is as popular as he seems, democracy sometimes has to be overruled to preserve democracy in the long-term. Atatürk was no stranger to this.

Turkey is no longer a Western nation, because the conservative movement in Turkey, and people like President Erdoğan, want to regress the country, and embrace religious fundamentalism. Erdoğan’s administration has stopped teaching evolution in schools, blatantly ignored the country’s rules against using religion for votes, and even proposed to allow marriage between men and underage girls. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk had this to say on religion and politics; “He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government; it is as if he would catch his people in a trap.” Erdoğan has this to say instead; “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers.” (a famous Islamic poem).

* * *

Government must be strong enough to preserve and maintain progressive ideals. In order for liberalism, secularism, democracy to survive, government authority must be maintained. There must of course be checks and balances, but not so many so that progress is inhibited. There is no justifiable excuse for dictatorships in the modern, Western world; but in other parts of the world, authoritarianism ironically may be the only way to maintain liberty.

"There are different cultures, but only one civilization. The European one. We Turks have always gone from east to west." -Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

*A note on the naming convention of Atatürk:

Throughout this essay I use the name ‘Mustafa Kemal,’ and ‘Atatürk�� interchangeably, but in reality; Atatürk was not called Atatürk until he was given the name in 1934. Atatürk in Turkish means, “Father of the Turks.”

1 note · View note