Conservative Country Losing Its Culture

It was the 1980s. It was the Özal government period. The country was in the gloomy atmosphere of the September 12 martial law days. On the other hand, it was trying to open up to the world. While Özal was making efforts to integrate Turkey to the world, he said, “There will be no village left without a telephone.” The ANAP government had embarked on major infrastructure projects. The neoliberal atmosphere of the period, which was also blowing around the world, had also affected Turkey.

The developments of the 1980s were evaluated as Turkey opening up to the outside world with a new mink. This was a correct assessment. The economy was shifting from an import substitution model to an export-oriented growth model. Turkey was opening up to the outside world, trying to embrace the world.

There was certainly nothing objectionable about opening up to the outside world, not leaving a village without a telephone, and infrastructure investments when the conditions of the 1980s were considered. However, the investments were creating high budget deficits and causing high inflation. The foundations of Turkey’s short-term capital dependency were also being laid in those years. These are the economic aspects of the issue.

While significant developments were being made during the Özal government, was Turkey's social vision expanding? Was a social understanding developing that would make renewal and progress traditional? Was society acquiring the equipment that would make development continuous? Values that society did not internalize would make every development short-lived and could not provide sustainability.

It is possible to seek the foundations of the political, social and cultural negativities that Turkey is experiencing today and the process that led it to the conditions of a "failed state" primarily in the 1980s.

During the ANAP government, important innovations were taking place, Türkiye seemed to be opening up to the outside world and gaining a new vision. However, on the other hand, it was suffering serious cultural wounds that it would pay the price for for years to come.

Özal was putting into practice the vision he personally had, but instead of injecting society with a vision, he was injecting into society a philosophy that would prevent the development of social values that would prevent it from gaining vision in the coming years. His vision on one front, which was claimed to be changing Turkey, was potentially darkening Turkey's vision on another front.

Source: https://www.indyturk.com/node/178171/t%C3%BCrkiyeden-sesler/1980-sonras%C4%B1-t%C3%BCrkiye%E2%80%99de-ekonomik-ve-politik-d%C3%B6n%C3%BC%C5%9F%C3%BCm

The points where the vision was darkened were especially in law and the understanding of management. A period was being experienced in which the law was ignored and the principles of correct management were violated at the expense of progressing rapidly and completing the projects on the agenda as soon as possible. The reflection of the rule-breaking experienced within the political institution in society was cultural degeneration.

Özal saw no harm in the constitution being violated once. After becoming president, his efforts to continue to manage ANAP by bypassing Prime Minister Mesut Yılmaz reached points that would cause tension between them. The fact that every means was seen as permissible to achieve a result was setting a bad example for society. Degeneration in law, morality and administration was literally penetrating the cells of society.

Lawlessness and the destruction of healthy governance principles were adopted as a method of finding a chance for life among various interest groups in society. Developments were causing the emergence of kleptocracy in the political world and the spread of this immoral behavior in society. The creation of moral decay and the masses that were proud of this moral decay was alarming. Özal was dreaming of a transition from the provincial bourgeoisie that Turkey had seen up until that day to the urban bourgeoisie. He was successful in this, but by causing serious damage to the philosophical development of society.

In addition to the suspension of democracy and the disastrous days we were in after September 12, there was also a regression in education. Whatever the state thought was right. The ideology the state had was right. Other ideologies could not be given a chance to survive. Therefore, the innovations brought to education aimed to shape the thoughts of those receiving education under a political domination, and a process was working that led to the emergence of generations that were increasingly disconnected from the rules of science and did not question.

Throughout history, Anatolia has hosted not only states and societies, but also many states and societies that had the power to create civilization. The states and societies that flourished in the geography of Anatolia inherited the power to create civilization from the states and societies that existed on these lands before them and took their place in the Anatolian crucible.

The practices of the Özal era caused a serious cultural degeneration, transformation and collapse, but this was not perceived by society. Cultural degeneration created a generation that was increasingly disconnected from science and depoliticized due to the damage caused by September 12. Özal was also able to hold on to discourses that ignored the foundations of democracy to the extent of saying that he could run the country with a newspaper and a television channel. The objection to this transformation was voiced by a very limited segment of society.

The enlightened person questions. He protects his rights, the taxes he pays, justice, education, and cultural values. Societies with these characteristics develop the ability to renew their vision in accordance with changing conditions. In other words, continuity is possible. The politics of the Özal period after September 12 and the point that politics brought society to was the creation of a society that had the potential to block social development.

A visionary leader cares about the development of the vision of the society, and Atatürk is a leader who put forward his vision by prioritizing social development. The leader contributes to the formation and development of a philosophy that will ensure the permanence of social development. The opposite of this causes the positive developments recorded by the country to be short-lived and temporary, and leaves the society unresponsive and helpless in the face of possible bad governance. The result is social regression. The worst part is that the masses within the society who will detect the regression have also decreased over time.

The weakened quality of education and the reflexes of a depoliticized society that seeks justice, asks for account, and questions have weakened. It is not difficult for a strong political formation or politician to manage and guide a society that has reached this point. The foundations of the ground that prepared the conditions of Turkey's 2000s were laid during the Özal period together with September 12. Turkey did not lose its ability to create civilization or belong to a civilization tradition only in the 1980s, but it has rapidly moved away from the hope and potential to reach that power under the conditions of the age.

The projects that Özal put forward as the product of a brand new vision were important. However, these were overshadowed by other practices that would destroy or greatly weaken the continuity of society in creating a vision.

As societies sustain development, creation, and production in economy, art, sports, music and every branch of culture, they can claim the power and tradition of creating civilization. As a result of processes that violate the law, disregard the principles of governance, transform kleptocracy into a social disease, distance education from scientific knowledge and ignore democracy, a lack of vision is created in society. The essential factor for the continuity of social development is the ability of a society to create a vision. Otherwise, the fate of a society depends solely on how good or bad the political power that comes to power is. Because, the dynamics of society to renew itself have almost diminished to a level where it is almost non-existent. A society may lose its ability to sustain and protect its own civilization and the culture that civilization is based on due to cultural degeneration. In fact, Turkey has come to such a point.

Institutionalization is the basis of social development. Many institutions established with the reforms at the foundation of the Republic of Turkey and created in the following years have been able to make significant contributions to Turkey. However, the social philosophical stance disorder that was established during the Özal period led to the formation of a social culture that paved the way for the erosion of institutionalization. Serious wear and tear on legal and administrative principles, moral erosion, and cultural degeneration accompanied the infrastructure projects of the Özal period.

The developments mentioned in the above lines became even more negative with the unstable political atmosphere of the 1990s. In addition, the discourses of today's government in the 1990s were telling the point that Turkey would reach today. Because, after coming to power, when the time came, the democracy tram would be exited. Secularism and Islam could not coexist. A person was either a Muslim or a secular.

The process that has led to today has been supported to a great extent by the second republicans, especially in the academy and press circles in the 1990s, and later by those who clung to the idea of “not enough, but yes”. In addition to a social structure that has been so consciously destroyed and traditionalist that it cannot even protect its own culture and values, the discourses of these segments, which have a high potential to influence society, have made significant contributions to the process in which the law has been destroyed, the principles of correct governance have been turned upside down, kleptocracy has prevailed, moral corruption has reached a level never seen in the country’s history, and institutions have been destroyed.

The Second Republicists and a significant portion of those who later clung to the “not enough, but yes” approach were representatives of the intellectual and enlightened segments of the country that were considered intellectuals for the children and youth of the 1990s.

Being equipped with a lot of information is an important but insufficient condition for being an intellectual or an intellectual. Being an intellectual or an intellectual requires being consistent. Consistency requires that information be put through an analytical process and that the goals and at least the expected results are close to each other.

There is no consistency in defending democracy, institutionality, morality, law, and the principles of correct governance, evaluating the founding principles of the Republic of Turkey without considering the conditions of the period, and serving today's result by knowing the example of the democracy tram of the 1990s. Moreover, there is no consistency in explaining the fact that those who laid the foundations of these ideas even advised the leaders of the coup attempts. In this sense, these segments, perceived as intellectuals or enlightened in the eyes of the children and youth of the 1990s, have nothing to do with intellectuality or enlightenment. Including those who wrote articles of regret. The situations of those who are among this segment and have taken official positions close to the government can only be explained with other analysis results.

Turkey is currently experiencing the consequences of a serious moral collapse under an increasingly autocratic administration. Democracy has been severely damaged by institutional collapse. Society has been steadily becoming ignorant and unconscious under years of weakening and changing education policies. For example, instead of demanding an economic order in which the wheels work healthily, it has accepted to live on grants. The business world, as part of society, has accepted short-term capital dependency instead of demanding a healthy economic structure and reform.

The problem of not being able to form a consensus or social contract has always existed in Turkey's social structure. However, the polarization that emerged as a result of populist policies - a process supported by the moral decay and cultural erosion of society - has eliminated the possibility of forming a social contract. At this point, we have a society that can fight with each other even in the event of a terrorist attack, cannot rejoice together even in a national success in sports, does not have the ability to act together even in forest fires, and has lost the reflex to protect its cultural values.

Politics and the politicians who have separated themselves from society and turned themselves into a separate group are responsible for this point. On one side, the government, and on the other side, the opposition that has no success.

Note: In every society, there are people and groups who want to contribute to the society they come from. However, the values that society has in general do not give a chance to people who have ideals for their society. I recommend Tolstoy's story titled A Landowner's Morning. Many people find something of themselves in this story.