Let me just say that I did not set the title to criticize or underestimate anyone. Just as if the government has taken action to do what it is, it is immediately called "the work of the century".
Or perhaps because the election has come to the fore now, it has become the "Choice of the Century". Are we building a bridge, the evaluation is ready immediately, “The bridge of the century”…
In other words, what is meant to be said in summary is, "There is no precedent for what we have done, we are doing it for the first time or we have done it". Especially as we approach the end of the election campaign, it has become the election of the century in the elections. Do not ask what is the measure in this. If the owners of power say so, it is necessary to say that it is so.
We are going through a period in politics where it is important not what you do, but how you present what you do to the society and get it accepted. As such, it is more important how you direct the public, not what you do when creating public opinion.
For example, President and AK Party Chairman Mr. Erdoğan, while presenting all his works as the best of 100 years, in his speeches during the election campaign, by saying "We will solve the existing problems, we will solve the existing problems," on the one hand, he accepted the existence of some problems. He also claims that they can solve the problems themselves.
Then, involuntarily, one cannot help but say, "Since you are able to solve the existing problems, then you would have prevented these problems from the beginning and they had not been transmitted to the present day".
Because it is difficult for people to understand the logic of those who have been in power alone for 20 years and want votes from the electorate by saying "We will solve it again". Because the important thing is to solve the existing problems as soon as possible and not to cause new problems. I think the indicator of how a country is governed is to remove the problems from the agenda instead of bringing up some problems and saying that we will solve them.
In the meantime, it is necessary to explain to the society to what extent the next elections are brought to the agenda as the election of the century. Because the claim is huge. Isn't it necessary to say that the May 14 elections are more important than all the elections held in the past hundred years? Another question that comes to mind at this point is whether the Nation Alliance has announced that the current one-man system will be changed, making the elections the election of the century, and it would be an incomplete assessment.
If the opposition election campaign brought the change of the presidential system as the number one agenda item, it obviously pissed off those in power.
Another point that needs to be emphasized is that it is difficult for people to understand that the ruling wing persistently accuses the opposition of "being arm in arm with the separatists and FETO members" several times a day.
If there are separatists and terrorists in a country, and moreover, if there are political parties cooperating with them, shouldn't it be the duty of those in power to be imprisoned as the members of these illegal movements are caught?
Isn't it the job of state institutions to hold accountable for this? If such a step is not taken, that is, if terrorists and separatists cannot be held accountable, wouldn't the fact that some political parties are persistently accused of collaborating with terrorists every day, make those who accuse rather than those who are accused responsible before the law?
Finally, another point I would like to draw attention to is the presentation of the AK Party's announced election manifesto as the good news of growth. It may not be politically strange to say that the country will take off with some promises, but shouldn't it be necessary to answer the question of why you dragged the country into the economic quagmire into which it is now plunged, since you had a magic wand in your hand?