"Social integration policies aim to reduce inequality, enhance the chances of obtaining basic social services, provide universal education and health care, maximize equal participation of all social strata, particularly the young, the elderly, those with special needs, immigrants, indigenous people, indigent people and gender equality. So as to address the challenges to social development posed by globalization and market reform in order that globalization may benefit all people in every country."
"(...) one of the goals of constitution-making for which, in East and West alike, we must steel ourselves. Let us face it. In ultimate analysis, the technique of democracy is the wise and skilful articulation of collective and individual freedoms: freedom from dictatorship, from want, from war - and civil war is the worst of all possible conflicts - freedom from isolation: democracy is the right and reason for each and all of us to live and grow together."Indigenous people, I want to take into account here as a reference for the Populism in Turkey. Sezin Öney, an academic studying Populism also suggests 'populist politics preserves an approach as a method to communicate with the communities by seducing their emotions on various political and mental segments for basis." It is a rational theory for the Populist politics but at the end all we can have with this approach is a Jungian inquiry for the archaic conscience of communities and aftermaths of their integrity with their state institutions in the shadow of their variable relations maintained with their populist politicians.
"the enduring success in social integration depends on effective work of all state organs and the willingness of individuals to live together. This ultimately requires a political culture that recognises the ontological status and rights of “other(s)”. "-Zühtü Arslan, President of the Constitutional Court of Turkey
National minority concept is not well clarified by the political scientists in Turkey and such terms "indigenous people" has to face prejudices. National minority is not a political but a legal concept for which can be paraphrased as any minor group of people for holding different belief, culture, language, but it is also a concept of the international law because its history dates back to the era of the empires and there are institutions inherited from that era preserved and also imperialised by the Empires and there's a historical and cultural (and in fact legal, if lucky) coherence between the past and the present for them which preserves their place to be recognised in the Nation States. Nevertheless, National Minority and Minority possess different legal contexts.
Alevi issue has been a disgrace for Turkey during the AKP era but also it couldn't be efficiently managed for a political integration since 1923. I don't want to quote here Recep Tayyip Erdogan for his discourses on Alevis. But I suggest İrene Melikoff, who can be read for the historical context.
Alevis belief has many connotations for a modern formation: from their history of communities, geographies and cultures, encounters and confronts etc. And this history is a rose and its thorn, for which we can best depict literarily. And all of this is an ontological status as a whole for the Alevis which also makes it very difficult for them to carry on with their identity especially in the face of populist politicians...
"In today’s increasingly globalised and fragmented world, social integration became an important political problem that must be resolved by the governments. As the European Court of Human Rights has suggested, the state authorities must act as a kind of “mediator” between conflicting groups with a view of ensuring these groups recognize and tolerate each other.
The integrative function of constitutional justice should not be exaggerated. It is true that constitutional courts can and in fact do influence social integration, but they are not the prevailing actors who determine the process of social integration. As Dieter Grimm states, constitutions “produce normative effects”, and “the process of social integration does not unfold on a normative ground”.6 Grimm has emphasised that “Integration takes place in the real world. It is a social process that can be promoted by the constitution but is not controlled by it.”
Zühtü Arslan, President of the Constitutional Court of Turkey
Populist politicians claim themselves as a maybe "judicial representation" among people under repression whereas being different and caught up into disintegration is not a crime but a beginning of a process for a better order and judiciary is not responsible only for the "crime and punishment" but to enrich the legal context of a democracy (civil code, constitutional norms and rights, administrative code) by the cases of social problems and concerns brought by the society through civil or political bodies: this is the main concern of an autonomous judiciary.
Populist or Far-Right Politics is also a violation of the non-mixing of powers principle which also harms the state institutions such as Supreme Courts to provide legal base for the people under repression or caught up into disintegration.
We can also understand the foundations of the populist politics by the words of Robespierre: "Le gouvernement de la révolution est le despotisme de la liberté contre la tyrannie." Apart from the social dichotomies and its expressions by delusive notions but with the contrasts revealed. Hopefully far-right politicians is not that far.
This also is a problem for the relation between the State and the ontological status of the individuals in a country and it seems to be a problem to integrate judiciary with the term ontological status in a legal context: in Turkey Circassians, people with an origin in the Black Sea regions attempts to have such claims of possession of an identity in the modern life (if we can separate the scope of the "modern" from the rural traditions serving as an order there) resembling to those indigenous people along with historical, cultural, racial, archaic attributes as a component of the individual mentality but with a lack of academic or literary reference, but more importantly "with contrasts to the others": and always a tendency for an "über-menschen" claim comes so forth. Culture when it is issued to represent a communal identity of a group of people has to be provisioned by social democratic (or legal) institutions otherwise it has more in common with Nazism than democracy: unless any cultural, political, or "existential" claims and demands are prescribed in a legal / constitutional context and a political (open and democratic) agenda, unless these claims are based on a purpose of progress, which calls also the status of individualism in the culture, politics and judiciary: there is always a tendency to regulate the progress trapped in a relation with "an other".
It is one way or the other an "Übermenschen claim" in Turkey where uneducated /or may be disintegrated people (either university graduate or not) begin to form their communal identity, and individualism in proportion to the former. A political and social debate has been held under "Cemaatçilik" but it didn't go as further as its legal context.
In the case of Alevis it is limited to a theological scope, so that they are more serene to approach such issues although they still couldn't find a way for the legal recognition of their worship places. And "über-mesnchen claims", have also tendency to instrumentalise the "Alevis rights cause" for their so-told "exceptional" individual or communal status, but it has to be clarified and known that such demands can only be proportional to Alevis in Turkey but not the others. And also, in contrast, but another example, for a better understanding: Hanefi Avcı in his book was complaining of "Leftist" prosecutors to provide a 'reasonable cause' to the politicisation of the judiciary and prosecutors, for a fight which must be given in offence.
Populism is also and in fact mostly by the individuals, such "exceptional identities" may be a subject of debate between the individuals which we witness very often in Turkey. Demands are like penalty shooting in the football sport and everyone according to the history of their identity wants to acquire a penalty shooting subjecting the society or another community or an individual as responsible for the "thorns of the history" through eg. populist politics in the media, in the streets, in the politics etc. but no one is concerned of the constitution, constitutional rights, judiciary and prosecutors and codes and acts.
If we were to observe the founding stones of populism we can begin with understanding the press and also its relation with the governments after the 1970's and being curious about the self-claimed identity attributes of the journalists and their familial and community based relations which is actually the concern for the politicians...
Diagram of Turkish integrity goes like this that's why even there is no journalism, investigative journalism in Turkey but there are too many journalists and newspapers still: politicians and journalists are sharing the same agency for the "integration" in Turkey, a communal/or divided and passive /or apolitical and "unlegal" participation of the masses.
Positive Segregation (?)
Nepotism has achieved to a different aspect of its meaning in Turkey. It is not only selfishness but also security concerns and confidence "demands" is measured on one's familial relations and also race, city of origin and as such.
I have written enough on the education in Turkey. I learned computer programming at the age of 10 and failed at the first grade in the high school and they also asked me to attend the National Science Examinations (TUBITAK) for them, and I was kicked out of the high school at the 3rd grade, I could draw very well and I had talent for the arts, but I had nothing with such education to represent my talent that I wasn't able to go to a foreign country to study and then I learned French myself and applied for membership to a few libraries of Istanbul. And I could hardly attend the Istanbul University only because I knew French. I would prefer born in a Russian village and learn to paint and live on as a painter and don't know where Turkish people are.
Turkey is already Russia. And it can be better hidden than it is in Russia.
No comments:
Post a Comment