For some reason in our country, it seems that a differentiating and polarizing language is preferred in politics since it seems to be easy to use. Thus, politicians saved themselves from the trouble of presenting the problems of the country and providing programs for the solution of the problems. This distinctive political attitude has been continuing since the 1950s. In politics, we have not been able to get rid of the illness of identifying traitors. The fact that the parties were in power or opposition did not affect the outcome of this distinctive attitude. While this dissociative, polarizing attitude has been in opposition for many years, sometimes it has been seen that the ruling parties have embraced this cheap and dangerous attitude. For a long time, a certain segment fought with the belief of the society. They accused those who did not think and believe like themselves with qualifications such as reactionary, bigot and enemy of the Republic. As a result of this distinctive attitude, coups came to the agenda. Coup plotters also fought a battle against a front of traitors and enemies. However, this attitude has not been beneficial to our country and it has not been treated yet.
Although there are various reasons for this distinctive and polarizing attitude, I think that it is mainly due to an imposing background that everyone in the society should think and believe the same. However, democracy, which is not everyone's language, requires enduring differences in society. If uniform thinking is desired in politics, then it is necessary to stop singing this song of democracy first. Because to talk about democracy and human rights and to want all sections of the society to think uniformly, when this is not the case, to try to condemn a part of the society with some accusations is the least insincerity.
Besides, there is no uniform thought in any society, whether the name of the political regime is democracy or anything else. Even though the one-minded thinkers are power from time to time, there is a difference in societies. The voices of different thinkers can be reduced in a variety of ways, people can be digested, but it is not possible to put a society in a single form on the basis of thought. As such, it becomes important to be able to turn the differences into wealth. The way to do this is through tolerance to differences.
It should not be forgotten the fact that political movements, which in the past disaggregated and constantly invented enemies, had not been in power for many years. However, it is difficult for people to understand that yesterday's accused have the same style and attitude after being in power. More precisely, it is understood that the responsibility of being in power, the obligation to find solutions to the problems of the country forces the politicians, pushes them into the bustle of being caught unprepared, and embraces an easy and cheap but dangerous style. Because when the attention of the society is turned into traitors who have occupied the country, it may be easier to miss the problems of the country. However, long-term maintenance of this road will not bring anything to the political and ideological cadres that have followed the same path in the past, and it will not be possible to gain it, and the country will suffer. Moreover, political cadres often speak of the necessity of the common mind, when they take power with the votes they receive from those who believe in these promises, they may prefer to be stuck in one mind, forgetting the importance of the common mind. However, this path is not healthy. In particular, the rulers are not only the rulers of those who vote for them. For politicians, power is of course a success, but the solutions they bring to the problems of the country after power are much more important. By suppressing the voice of a part of the society, turning what they say to the dominant voice saves the governments temporarily, but it is not possible to hide the growing problems like avalanche by declaring half of the society as traitors after a while. In this respect, our country needs politics that does not polarize, but embraces.