Is it the spirit of 1950 or a new occurrence?
Forcing the electorate toward a ‘democratic’ or ‘republican’ dilemma may further increase polarization in the country.
To force the electorate into a ‘democratic’ or ‘republican’ dilemma may further increase polarization in the country. Mind-boggling news about the July 22 elections is pouring in from Anatolia and Thrace. Sources from the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) say countrywide discussions over presidential elections added so much to the sympathy for them that according to a politician: “The spirit of 1950 almost came back”.
The intension to mention the spirit of 1950 is the late Prime Minister Adnan Menderes’ coming to power with an overwhelming majority. Or rather, voters faced with a multi-party election system for the first time had a big appetite to claim the right to vote and use the supremacy of the right to vote – that was the spirit of 1950. People making such an analogy think the conservative electoral body equates the current situation with the liberation of voters in 1950 from the pressure they were kept under by single party rule.
They mean conservative voters, who do not want political powers being obstructed by the judiciary, political and social opposition and the armed forces, will cast their vote for the AKP on July 22 no matter which party they favor. Some AKP administrators exaggerate this so much so that they fail to realize international views on Turkey are getting more blurred. Without mentioning a name, I will give an example.
An expert from a serious think tank in Europe visited Ankara lately. Conducting research on Turkey and its region, the expert met with a prominent name from the AKP in Istanbul. “They have the overwhelming support of the voters. The ruling party might win 400 or perhaps 450 seats. Would this be correct?” This European official asked me with worry, because pluralist mentality in western Europe already knows that such an outcome can lead to a disaster though the AKP official represented it as something to be praised. However, I already have the information that the most optimistic evaluations among top AKP officials indicate the party might surmount barely 300 seats.
Today and 1950
The important thing here is members of the AKP truly believe the spirit of 1950. But a few characteristics distinguish today from 1950.
First of all, the AKP is not the opposition party like the Democrat Party (DP) of that time. It has been in power for almost five years. After the General Staff’s military warning on April 27, the AKP tried to show that it has no intention to swallow that lash out the way former governments did so far. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is an experienced politician, so he knows very well that incapacity can be a reason for constant complaints and not a grievance in power.
Secondly, all the signs coming from Anatolia and Trace do not indicate the voters’ influx to the AKP. They actually indicate the opposite. I am not just talking about millions of Republic rally goers championing the laic and democratic life style of the Republic. There are people who are distressed by the farming policies in rural areas and are unemployed in cities. They do not equate championing democracy with voting for the AKP. Their voices are heard in Ankara as well.
Therefore, to regard the July 22 elections as a sign indicating whether or not the Republic will come to an end is awfully wrong, but it is equally wrong to view these elections as the sign indicating whether democracy will be saved.
For the last few months, Turkey has gone through experiences that it has never experienced before.
After four full years of legal reforms, now the rules of the political superstructure are changing.
However, no body is prepared to accept these changes; they are not planned unfortunately. In an environment of political disputes over failing to elect a president, we are game; we learn while we go through it. This is part of the difficulty.
It is easy to foresee that our real woes will loom after the July 22 elections when the presidential election will rule the agenda. We are heading toward general elections amid a polarized atmosphere. To leave voters in a republic-democracy dilemma can only pave the way to short-term reactive votes. It is wrong if long-term benefits are expected. The wind blowing is not that of 1950.