Turkey’s EU stance is the biggest bellwether. If we see them wanting not to join then let’s be afraid. Although I’m sure some think it’s a nefarious plot by the AKP to “sneak” more Muslims into Europe.
The akp is the most corrupt party in Turkish history…even more corrupt than Erbakan’s of not too long ago. They paid naive voters in the country side to vote for them just like Erbakan’s people did. My maid was even approached…offering money for fuel, offering money for food, offering money for the islamic dress (which she didn’t wear). Don’t ever buy into the front that the akp has put up to join the Eu…don’t buy the good economic numbers…..they have cooked the books just like klintin did!! This is surely a sad day in Turkish history. Whatever happened to Ataturk’s principals???????
Comment by Linda Scharff — Sunday, July 22, 2024 @ 7:06 pm
[…] Right-wing bloggers unable to cope with Turkish election results 23 07 2024 From the Poliblogger, Dr. Steven Taylor: I rarely go to Malkin’s blog, but I noted via Memeorandum that she was commenting on the Turkish elections, so I was curious. Her post was pretty much what I expected: Which way, Turkey?: Turkey is holding parliamentary elections today. The importance of the vote there can’t be emphasized enough. The choice in the minds of many Turks is this: sharia or secularism? East or West? […]
I suspect there is almost no risk that the AKP will stop its desire to join the EU as long as the door is not completely closed. On the other hand, I would hope that the EU would actually hold Turkey to democratic and secular principles and not use such criteria flexibly. The country has a very long way to go in terms of democracy (some of which Linda alludes to and then there is the electoral system and the military involvement in politics) and there has indeed been backsliding on the secularism under the AKP.
While I agree completely with the main thrust of Steven’s post, I would note that once the AKP has the presidency (which is not powerless, despite being mostly ceremonial) it will be unchecked by any political institution, including the courts (which are subject to presidential appointment). And it would even be able to stack the military and National Security Council in its favor, assuming no military coup (or credible threat of a coup) to stop it from doing so.
Thus the record of the previous almost five years of AKP governance is only a rough guide to where it might go in the next four (the constitutional term parliament is being shortened). And while military “guardianship” is obviously by definition not democratic, it is valid to note that the Turkish military has checked tendencies of Turkish politics to drift away from secularism in the past. Whether democracy and Islamism can yet be reconciled will be a big test over the coming years, and if Turkey does not turn out well in this regard, what other country would?
While it’s not the best model in the world, many Third World countries do in fact use the military as the guarantors of democracy. The majority does not have the right to trample on the rights of the minority. If the majority elects someone who will run a dictatorship of the majority, the military steps in.
It’s better than the alternative: elected despots. Not all societies are like the US, where right from the start people understood at least in theory that government existed to protect the rights of the individual, not to grant the majority absolute power. In many countries, democracy is understood to be that the side who win, gets everything, including the losers’ life and liberty. I’d prefer military rule in that case.
Comment by Adam Herman — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 12:58 pm
@MSS
The reports I’ve read (Economist I think) suggest that the AKP will look to install a ‘conciliatory’ president.
More generally:
To my mind, this is a wonderful result. The AKP effectively
asked the Turkish public if:
1) They like a fast growing, stable, low inflation economy (the result of AKP policies in their last term)
2) They want their democratically elected governments to be periodically overthrown by the military
3) Implicitly (maybe explicitly - I don’t know enough to say) whether they support the right of Turkish women to wear the veil etc. (NOT - to force women to wear the veil).
The public answered positively to the first (this was a positive election despite being called in response to threats from the military) and they sent an emphatic message to the military that the days of repeated coups are over.
The answer to the third position is more complex but probably the most interesting. I wonder how many of the people decrying this result would feel about the wearing of crucifixes being banned in all public places. I imagine that there would be outcry against ‘those interfering secularists (atheists)’. In Turkey, that’s the situation today. The AKP would allow professional Turkish women to wear the veil and provided that doesn’t interfere with one’s ability to do a job, I fail to see the problem.
Frankly (and this is hardly a minority view), the AKP are starting to look like the old Christian Democratic parties of Europe. To me, what we’re seeing in Turkey is an extremely positive process of democratic maturation (horrible phrase - can’t think of a better one right now). The growing strength of a pluralist Turkish democracy able to accommodate both secular and religious Turks without suffering the sine wave of democracy and coup is an example to the Middle East.
If you want to guarantee an ever strengthening islamist movement in Turkey then stifle the voices of effective progressive political parties like the AKP. If the Turkish secularists want to beat them, they’d better just pull their socks up and make themselves electable.
Comment by Matt — Wednesday, July 25, 2024 @ 7:52 am
Taylor writes, “Of course, Ed’s logic on why Turkey has been a “singular success in the region as a Muslim democracy” is strained (to be polite)”:
Morrissey writes, “That success comes from the constant threat of a military coup; the army has taken control of the government on several occasions when it felt that the secular nature of modern Turkey was threatened. That threat keeps Islamists like Tayyip Erdogan from attempting to create an Iran-like state at the juncture of Europe and Asia”.
I write, “Morrissey, writes the truth”. It is the rule of Constitutional law the Army is authorized to impose martial law and take over the government…
“Some analysts have suggested that among national institutions, only the armed forces retain the public trust and respect. Since the end of single-party rule in 1950, they have intervened directly three times in the country’s politics. In each instance, civilian control was restored after a transition period during which purported problems were addressed, justice meted out, new constitutions adopted, and economic growth accomplished”.
“On 12 September 1980, the newly elected government of Demirel was overthrown. Five days later, Chief of Staff General Kenan Evren declared that the military was responding to domestic political anarchy. He reinforced this message by laying out the new regime’s program, which included civil order, national unity, and a secular state based on social justice and human rights. Planned months in advance, the coup was welcomed by most Turks as an answer to the preceding years of economic and political stagnation. The delay in overthrowing the government seemed to reinforce the claims of the Turkish military that they were sincere in their desire to prevent civil war and preserve the Kemalist republic”.
You miss the point: if the only way that “democracy” is possible in Turkey is for the military to take over whenever it thinks it has to “protect” it, then ultimately it isn’t a democracy at all.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 9:43 am
It’s a democracy…most of the people are not democratic and this is the reason their Army steps in. When Americans become unruly…the law steps in and/or martial law is imposed to calm the unruly.
If the military is given the ability, codified or otherwise, to act as the “guardian” of “democracy” then you don’t have democracy you have, at best, praetorianism.
By definition one cannot have democracy if the government can be seized by a non-elected, non-responsive entity.
A military coup is not the same thing as the police arresting you for being drunk and disorderly.
And you lead sentence is a non sequitur:
It’s a democracy…most of the people are not democratic and this is the reason their Army steps in
First, to assert that “it is a democracy” yet “most of the people are not democratic” is rather contradictory. How can one simultaneously assert that a given polity is “democratic” yet most of the people in it “are not democratic.”
For that matter, what does “being democratic” mean in the context of your sentence? More Turks voted in the recent elections than American ever do in ours, for example. Are they “not democratic” in your estimation because 47-ish% of them voted for the AKP?
Realize, too, the military has stepped in more to protect secularism than democracy.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 10:23 am
Thank you, Dr. Taylor. “Everyday is a school day and every night is night school”- Jason Leverette, Patriot
Turkey’s EU stance is the biggest bellwether. If we see them wanting not to join then let’s be afraid. Although I’m sure some think it’s a nefarious plot by the AKP to “sneak” more Muslims into Europe.
Comment by Sean Hackbarth — Sunday, July 22, 2024 @ 5:00 pm
The akp is the most corrupt party in Turkish history…even more corrupt than Erbakan’s of not too long ago. They paid naive voters in the country side to vote for them just like Erbakan’s people did. My maid was even approached…offering money for fuel, offering money for food, offering money for the islamic dress (which she didn’t wear). Don’t ever buy into the front that the akp has put up to join the Eu…don’t buy the good economic numbers…..they have cooked the books just like klintin did!! This is surely a sad day in Turkish history. Whatever happened to Ataturk’s principals???????
Comment by Linda Scharff — Sunday, July 22, 2024 @ 7:06 pm
[…] Right-wing bloggers unable to cope with Turkish election results 23 07 2024 From the Poliblogger, Dr. Steven Taylor: I rarely go to Malkin’s blog, but I noted via Memeorandum that she was commenting on the Turkish elections, so I was curious. Her post was pretty much what I expected: Which way, Turkey?: Turkey is holding parliamentary elections today. The importance of the vote there can’t be emphasized enough. The choice in the minds of many Turks is this: sharia or secularism? East or West? […]
Pingback by Right-wing bloggers unable to cope with Turkish election results « pixelisation — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 6:45 am
I suspect there is almost no risk that the AKP will stop its desire to join the EU as long as the door is not completely closed. On the other hand, I would hope that the EU would actually hold Turkey to democratic and secular principles and not use such criteria flexibly. The country has a very long way to go in terms of democracy (some of which Linda alludes to and then there is the electoral system and the military involvement in politics) and there has indeed been backsliding on the secularism under the AKP.
While I agree completely with the main thrust of Steven’s post, I would note that once the AKP has the presidency (which is not powerless, despite being mostly ceremonial) it will be unchecked by any political institution, including the courts (which are subject to presidential appointment). And it would even be able to stack the military and National Security Council in its favor, assuming no military coup (or credible threat of a coup) to stop it from doing so.
Thus the record of the previous almost five years of AKP governance is only a rough guide to where it might go in the next four (the constitutional term parliament is being shortened). And while military “guardianship” is obviously by definition not democratic, it is valid to note that the Turkish military has checked tendencies of Turkish politics to drift away from secularism in the past. Whether democracy and Islamism can yet be reconciled will be a big test over the coming years, and if Turkey does not turn out well in this regard, what other country would?
Comment by MSS — Monday, July 23, 2024 @ 3:27 pm
While it’s not the best model in the world, many Third World countries do in fact use the military as the guarantors of democracy. The majority does not have the right to trample on the rights of the minority. If the majority elects someone who will run a dictatorship of the majority, the military steps in.
It’s better than the alternative: elected despots. Not all societies are like the US, where right from the start people understood at least in theory that government existed to protect the rights of the individual, not to grant the majority absolute power. In many countries, democracy is understood to be that the side who win, gets everything, including the losers’ life and liberty. I’d prefer military rule in that case.
Comment by Adam Herman — Tuesday, July 24, 2024 @ 12:58 pm
@MSS
The reports I’ve read (Economist I think) suggest that the AKP will look to install a ‘conciliatory’ president.
More generally:
To my mind, this is a wonderful result. The AKP effectively
asked the Turkish public if:
1) They like a fast growing, stable, low inflation economy (the result of AKP policies in their last term)
2) They want their democratically elected governments to be periodically overthrown by the military
3) Implicitly (maybe explicitly - I don’t know enough to say) whether they support the right of Turkish women to wear the veil etc. (NOT - to force women to wear the veil).
The public answered positively to the first (this was a positive election despite being called in response to threats from the military) and they sent an emphatic message to the military that the days of repeated coups are over.
The answer to the third position is more complex but probably the most interesting. I wonder how many of the people decrying this result would feel about the wearing of crucifixes being banned in all public places. I imagine that there would be outcry against ‘those interfering secularists (atheists)’. In Turkey, that’s the situation today. The AKP would allow professional Turkish women to wear the veil and provided that doesn’t interfere with one’s ability to do a job, I fail to see the problem.
Frankly (and this is hardly a minority view), the AKP are starting to look like the old Christian Democratic parties of Europe. To me, what we’re seeing in Turkey is an extremely positive process of democratic maturation (horrible phrase - can’t think of a better one right now). The growing strength of a pluralist Turkish democracy able to accommodate both secular and religious Turks without suffering the sine wave of democracy and coup is an example to the Middle East.
If you want to guarantee an ever strengthening islamist movement in Turkey then stifle the voices of effective progressive political parties like the AKP. If the Turkish secularists want to beat them, they’d better just pull their socks up and make themselves electable.
Comment by Matt — Wednesday, July 25, 2024 @ 7:52 am
Taylor writes, “Of course, Ed’s logic on why Turkey has been a “singular success in the region as a Muslim democracy” is strained (to be polite)”:
Morrissey writes, “That success comes from the constant threat of a military coup; the army has taken control of the government on several occasions when it felt that the secular nature of modern Turkey was threatened. That threat keeps Islamists like Tayyip Erdogan from attempting to create an Iran-like state at the juncture of Europe and Asia”.
I write, “Morrissey, writes the truth”. It is the rule of Constitutional law the Army is authorized to impose martial law and take over the government…
“Some analysts have suggested that among national institutions, only the armed forces retain the public trust and respect. Since the end of single-party rule in 1950, they have intervened directly three times in the country’s politics. In each instance, civilian control was restored after a transition period during which purported problems were addressed, justice meted out, new constitutions adopted, and economic growth accomplished”.
“On 12 September 1980, the newly elected government of Demirel was overthrown. Five days later, Chief of Staff General Kenan Evren declared that the military was responding to domestic political anarchy. He reinforced this message by laying out the new regime’s program, which included civil order, national unity, and a secular state based on social justice and human rights. Planned months in advance, the coup was welcomed by most Turks as an answer to the preceding years of economic and political stagnation. The delay in overthrowing the government seemed to reinforce the claims of the Turkish military that they were sincere in their desire to prevent civil war and preserve the Kemalist republic”.
Comment by FromTheTop — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 9:27 am
You miss the point: if the only way that “democracy” is possible in Turkey is for the military to take over whenever it thinks it has to “protect” it, then ultimately it isn’t a democracy at all.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 9:43 am
It’s a democracy…most of the people are not democratic and this is the reason their Army steps in. When Americans become unruly…the law steps in and/or martial law is imposed to calm the unruly.
Comment by FromTheTop — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 10:07 am
Well, no.
If the military is given the ability, codified or otherwise, to act as the “guardian” of “democracy” then you don’t have democracy you have, at best, praetorianism.
By definition one cannot have democracy if the government can be seized by a non-elected, non-responsive entity.
A military coup is not the same thing as the police arresting you for being drunk and disorderly.
And you lead sentence is a non sequitur:
First, to assert that “it is a democracy” yet “most of the people are not democratic” is rather contradictory. How can one simultaneously assert that a given polity is “democratic” yet most of the people in it “are not democratic.”
For that matter, what does “being democratic” mean in the context of your sentence? More Turks voted in the recent elections than American ever do in ours, for example. Are they “not democratic” in your estimation because 47-ish% of them voted for the AKP?
Realize, too, the military has stepped in more to protect secularism than democracy.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 10:23 am
Thank you, Dr. Taylor. “Everyday is a school day and every night is night school”- Jason Leverette, Patriot
Comment by FromTheTop — Thursday, July 26, 2024 @ 11:53 am