It can be said that the main concerns of the Muslim peoples of the Middle East have been the problem of administration, and especially of power. Instead of addressing the problem of power in the context of their belief principles and cultural values with the dimension of human and society, they searched for traditional structures and practices before the date that belief principles rejected. Thus, a certain lineage, family, group and group, etc., which ignores freedom and is inequality. They have almost condemned themselves to an authoritarian or totalitarian, irresponsible and irresponsible understanding of power and administration based on their privileges. In this understanding, by not taking into account the inevitability of monopolization of power, and that this will inevitably destroy fundamental human rights and freedoms, equality, justice, security, development and welfare, and that oppression, privileges, poverty, backwardness and oppression will become commonplace, we will avoid strife, turmoil and conflict. It was hoped that it would prevent and ensure unity. For this reason, although some deficiencies, mistakes, perversions, and illegitimacy are not approved, it has been tried to be avoided with qualifications such as "the lesser evil". For example, instead of responding to the choice of whether to obey the oppressor or to rebel and resist in its own context, discussions have been made on completely different contexts such as "setting up strife". However, in the end, the “fitna” that he wanted to prevent and tried to avoid with great care, emerged in a heavier and wider dimension.
On the other hand, the Muslim peoples of the Middle East, with an incomprehensible attitude, resorted to perceiving their problems in an imaginary dimension instead of solving them according to their own means and power. They tried to identify what should ideally be conceived with what should be conceived as reality. They failed to realize that they lived in a timeless and spaceless world of reality, without taking into account the determinative nature of time and space. Moreover, they have been tempted to construct a timeless and placeless world. They saw this questioning as an aversion to their beliefs and values, as a deviation from the path.
However, their belief principles suggest and impose questioning on them as a requirement of their responsibility. For example, why does power belong to that person or family or group, dynasty? Why obey a power or administration that has become a source of strife, tyranny and oppression? With the control of power, will the possibility of realizing human rights and freedoms be less or more? In an environment where more rights and freedoms are experienced, wouldn't thought, science, art and trade provide more benefits to people and society?
In one way or another, the Arab Spring was an instinctive reaction to the economic, social and political conditions in which Muslim peoples lived, and it could provide the ability and opportunity to move to a stage of inquiry. Likewise, in Turkey, for example, the Gezi Park incident, which attracted public attention, was a warning to the brutality of the government, but it was almost condemned by taking the path of suppression. It can still be considered that this is within the limits of possibility. That is why the dissolute, destitute governments that keep the Muslim peoples of the Middle East under their dominance and tyranny are in search of ways to eliminate this possibility.
In reality, just as these administrations have ensured their existence with the support of imperialist powers, they see their survival only if they are collaborators of these powers. For this reason, the people's needs and desires to live in friendship and peace are kept in an environment of possibility and danger of war in order to be drowned by violence and bloodshed by the power that produces discord. For example, would it have been possible for the social tragedies that have come today to have been so cruel if they had only said "no" for the sake of the peace of the peoples against the invasion of Iraq and the plans to overthrow the government in Syria?
The problem is that these dissolute governments do not value the people they rule, even as the object of their power and debauchery, let alone the slightest respect for human beings in general. Even the most primitive, the most ignorant, the most insensitive being protects and takes care of a being that obeys it, which he needs for its survival, albeit in appearance. It feels compelled to do this, even if it's just out of its own selfish, ostentatious sense. The poor, miserable, ignorant, insecure, future-less life they see as favored by people is a dishonorable, dishonest, dishonest and disreputable personality. They reflect their pomp, extravagance, vanity, debauched life and personalities through what they see publicly, but they ignore that it is a reflection of their own existence and personality. They cover their debauchery with arrogance and indecency.