The fact that political debates, which remind the public of the secular-religious debate of the past, have become more visible in recent days, is considered important as it allows the historical realities of Turkey to be remembered once again. At the core of these historical facts mentioned is that Turkey is pushed into a meaningless debate with cockfighting and that it is kept under the control of racist imperialists who do not want Turkey to develop and stand on its own feet.
While doing this, social segments are hostile to each other through their lifestyles. The most important handicap is that the masses fall into this trap from the very beginning and adopt it as if it were their own ideas, even if they are the victims themselves. In fact, being caught in a trap despite being aware of it is due to the vicious circle established by the racist imperialists. Those whose lifestyles are questioned feel obliged to do the same in order not to return to the old days when the opportunity for power comes to them.
And this situation continues in a vicious circle. The inadequacy of focusing on ideological divisions or economic problems such as the right-left divide in understanding Turkey's political history stems from this. In fact, the existing political division is based on lifestyle differences rather than ideological polarization. This separation, carried out over symbols, becomes much more evident in the heated political environment, especially during election periods. It is a situation preferred by the majority to focus on how similar the managers are to themselves rather than what they do.
It is known by the majority that relatives, brothers and friends, who insulted each other during the election process, returned to the old days with the decrease in the heat after the election, but exhibited the same behavior in the next election period. The main division that marks the multi-party life in Turkey becomes understandable through the center-periphery relationship in the context of the ruler-administered relationship, rather than the class distinction existing in the West. Centre; While defining the military and civilian bureaucracy, which positions itself on the basis of its status due to being founders, the environment is; It includes the remaining segments of society and their beliefs and values.
The fiction of creating a nation and a citizen, carried out in the establishment process of Turkey, was reflected as the establishment of the power of the center and an effort to protect it against the environment. This created tension fields between the center and the periphery. Therefore, at the core of the separation lies this power struggle between the center and the periphery in the economic, political and cultural fields. As expected, this struggle is symbolized through lifestyle differences in daily politics. At this point, it would be useful to mention the conservatism debates that have come to the fore more recently in Turkey. It should be noted that there are two types of conservatism in Turkey. The first of these is political conservatism.
Political conservatism expresses the status quo in terms of protecting the existing. It involves being against change. It cares about the continuity of the existing system, in other words, the establishment. In this sense, political conservative parties in Turkey are CHP and MHP (including the Good Party and Zafer Party). As a matter of fact, this situation is evident when the discourses and reflexes of these parties are taken into account. Social conservatism, on the other hand, covers the preservation of the social. He draws attention to the fact that the main thing is the preservation of traditional values and institutions created by the experiences gained in the historical process. Social conservative parties, on the other hand, are centre-right parties from the Democrat Party to the AK Party.
The idea that the CHP is a conservative party may sound different to our readers. However, the political attitude of the CHP is related to the fact that the right includes left and left features, as in İdris Küçükömer's determination. Although there are many examples of this in political history, it will suffice to mention the current debates. For example, discriminatory discourses towards immigrants/foreigners in Europe are voiced by far-right parties, and while social democratic parties develop positive policies on immigrant rights, the opposite image emerges in Turkey. The fact that they develop enough discourse to promise to send the Syrians back to their countries when they come to power is a very natural result in terms of the politically conservative attitude of the CHP.
For this reason, it is not surprising that the statements of Özgür Özel and Süleyman Soylu, which have come to the fore in recent days, and their shaped by secular-religious symbols. As a result, the vicious debate in politics in Turkey is experienced among social and political conservatives. And unfortunately, this sterility brings Turkey to the point that the racist-imperialists want, and large segments of society are losing.