Bahçeli's nobility, Erdoğan's lifespan, and the state of Turkey

Sırrı Süreyya Önder loves to share parables and tell stories from the past. He has a witty way of speaking, as if he wants us to draw striking conclusions from those brief narratives. To give him his due, that is often the case. For instance, in one of his articles, he recounts the meeting between Imam Hussein and the poet Farazdaq on the way to Karbala. Farazdaq tells Hussein, "Do not trust the people of Kufa; their tongues speak of Ali, but their eyes look toward Muawiyah." It is, of course, a striking anecdote for those who wish to understand. One must wonder if any part of this anecdote applies to Önder himself. If we bring this narrative into the present, who are those whose tongues speak of Ali while their eyes look toward Muawiyah; who are those who simultaneously set the agenda with Muawiyah's politics while speaking with the tongue of "Ali"? I am certain that the events of today will also be carried into tomorrow in the form of parables and narratives.

The praise recently heaped upon Devlet Bahçeli could be one such historical parable, for Bahçeli is a significant figure; he is not the head or manager of an ordinary structure, but the chairman of a party with historical memory, actions, and an ideology. Naturally, his party will also share in the words spoken about him. Party leaders represent their parties and find existence in their language.

From Sırrı Süreyya Önder to Selahattin Demirtaş and Yılmaz Erdoğan, many names these days are reminding Devlet Bahçeli of how valuable and important he is, and are expressing their gratitude to him. Sırrı Süreyya explains to the microphones how noble and elegant Bahçeli is; Yılmaz Erdoğan, who learned to derive hammer-and-sickle figures from the letter 'Ş' from his elders, conveys his thanks to the Nationalist Movement Party leader; and finally, Demirtaş wishes Devlet Bahçeli a long life.

It is clear that a process is underway whose details and outcomes we do not yet know, but should we treat these praise-filled discourses toward Bahçeli as "normal," ignoring the entire history, memory, and social reality? Should we call what is happening "politics"? An atmosphere is being created as if we are talking not about the MHP Chairman we know and the tradition he represents, but about the head of a Canary Lovers Association. It is said how elegant and noble he is. Yet, when we open the pages of Turkey's history today, we are faced with a party that is alleged to be at the very center of bloody events, street clashes, and unsolved murders. Moreover, this is not a situation that remains merely at the level of allegations. Look, there is no need to go back very far; did Sinan Ateş's wife, Ayşe Ateş, not say that Sinan Ateş told her, "İzzet Ulvi Yönter and Semih Yalçın gave instructions to Olcay Kılavuz and Ahmet Yiğit Yıldırım to have me killed. They are looking for a hitman"? Are all these names he mentioned not individuals who hold high-ranking positions in that noble person's party? Think about it; it is not an outsider, but someone who served as the President of the Idealist Hearths (Ülkü Ocakları) who says these words to his wife before being murdered.

Let us continue.

Was it not Rahşan Ecevit who, some time after the capture of Abdullah Öcalan, when the MHP-DSP partnership was on the agenda, said, "I have doubts about this partnership," and directed these words toward the MHP: "They organized the youth, put them under pressure, and even armed them. They said, 'You will either be with us or you will lose your life.' For years, they burned countless lives and took lives. Is it easy to forget the pain of these?"

Ecevit then continued her words as follows:

"Normally, a political party is established to bring relief to society in social and economic terms, and bases its work and disagreements on this. But those who attempt to engage in politics with brute force, under the claim that 'We descended from the wolf named Asena, we came here from Central Asia, and sovereignty in this country is our right,' can neither be considered a 'party' in the democratic sense nor strengthen national unity."

Many more examples can be given regarding the aforementioned party and its tradition. Let us remember, did even Erdoğan not once say to them, "You practiced racism, tribalism, and clannishness. You served a satanic understanding"? Let alone the response Bahçeli gave them. Who were the ones waving nooses in their hands, calling Demirtaş a terrorist, and lying in wait on street corners to beat up journalists and writers?

What shall we do now? Shall we, as always, forget our memory, our history, all the pain and conflicts experienced, and the crimes committed, and continue on our way with the argument that has become the most internalized trope of establishment politics: "Yesterday is yesterday, today is today"? Yet, there is neither a yesterday left behind nor a today lived in a healthy, dignified, and virtuous manner. If it were otherwise, Turkey's democratic dynamics would be working, the public would not be intimidated by various pressures and policies, and the law would be applied not only to dissidents but to themselves as well. Statutory decrees would not turn into edicts and fatwas, and we would not be governed by a freak presidential system. But who are we talking to? Ahmet Türk, who was removed from office on the grounds of being linked to terrorism, is taking part in an official delegation with a "terrorist label." Are we to understand that the other side of the threshold is terror, and this side is a negotiator? Should we accept this process as normal without a shred of thought?

When it comes to the threshold, one must return to history. In the context of the presidential system and constitutional debates, the results of which we feel deeply today, Erdoğan said in 2015: "Give 400 deputies and let this matter be resolved in peace." Peace? We have been searching for it ever since that day. This is not our topic, however. The issue is the politics and strategies lying behind that "peace" rhetoric. It was as clear as day that the blood being sought was not peace, but one-man rule and absolute power. That is why, in those same days, Selahattin Demirtaş was telling Erdoğan, "We will not let you be president." Moving from there to a point of wishing him a long life must certainly be discussed. And at this stage, Turkey's democratic forces, the country's memory, and those who are still subjected to injustice and oppression will expect an explanation. While the country is experiencing one of its worst days, from corruption reports to legal seizures, from conditions of hunger and misery to nepotism, on what grounds shall we make such wishes to the government and its partner? Is this how peace, tranquility, and trust will come to the country? Is this how our sense of belonging to the homeland will be reinforced? We want to hear this with explanation and reason.

If the goal is peace, why have detentions and arrests become a routine practice today, why is freedom of expression and thought under threat, and why are we, as a people, breathing poison instead of freedom? If there is no answer to these questions, there is no hope for peace. Then, if the goal is not peace, the goal is the expansion of the necessary alliance, the strengthening of the authoritarian structure, and the redesigning of ally politics according to the developing new conditions. At least in domestic politics, this is what is desired.

When it comes to peace, I would also like to share that one of those who wrote best about what the relationship of AKP politics with peace, democracy, and human rights essentially is, was Professor Kadir Cangızbay, whom we lost in recent years. The professor's writings are very valuable in terms of keeping our historical memory alive. I recommend them. For example, in one of his articles, he said the following regarding the situation the country is in: "...to strike terror into the souls of people, to make them unable to do what they would do, unable to say what they would say, unable to write what they would write, in short, to make them paralyzed/crippled in a human sense and to intimidate/break/suppress them: Never mind the ordinary citizen, [they are doing this to] tens of thousands of police officers, judges, and prosecutors, sending them into exile, dismissing them, and putting them in prison overnight, without saying 'it is winter,' 'they are sick and receiving treatment,' 'they have a child in school,' etc."

The result?

Do not do it.

Do not castrate the memory, history, and values of this country; do not try to cover up a structure that has rotted from within with makeup and packaging. It is ancient values that have brought humanity and the struggle for rights to this day and keep them alive, not the bargains made in the moment and so-called agreements.

Do not make things worse while trying to fix them; do not open a thousand wounds while looking for a solution to one. Everything is happening right before our eyes. While the country is crying out from poverty, lawlessness, and exploitation, do not be blind and deaf and talk about nobility, elegance, and birthday-themed messages. If you have something to say, say it again; if there is a path you will walk, walk it again. But do not lose sight of the forest while dealing with the tree; do not turn your back on social truth with its yesterday and tomorrow.

Do not hurt the words, the soul of the country, or its future.