Those who are leftists abroad and rightists in Turkey

When the issue of Turkey sending troops to Korea came to the agenda in 1950, the country's socialists and communists opposed it. The Peace Lovers Association (Barışseverler Cemiyeti) operated openly and sent telegrams to the Parliament. They took an anti-imperialist stance by drawing attention to American pressure.

In contrast, the nationalist associations of the period and right-wing politics in general sided with the Democrat Party government. They supported sending troops to Korea. So much so that the head of the Religious Affairs Directorate at the time tried to give this policy religious legitimacy by declaring that the soldiers who would die in this war would be martyrs.

In the end, thousands of soldiers were sent to Korea. Hundreds lost their lives thousands of kilometers away, and dozens of soldiers went missing. Korean soil became filled with the graves of soldiers from Turkey.

So, what happened to those who objected to this?

The communists were once again declared traitors. They were marginalized. Their associations were closed, and their founders were arrested.

Let us come to the present day.

Iran is currently under the target of US and Israeli attacks. Spain has been one of the countries that opposed these attacks, not out of any identity affiliation, but from a perspective of justice, democracy, and conscience.

In the European Parliament, Spanish MP Irene Montero gave an extremely harsh speech and described Donald Trump as the "Hitler of the 21st century." Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez also took a clear stance in the name of international law and humanity.

These individuals had one thing in common: They were all socialists.

Just like the Behice Borans and Adnan Cemgils who opposed sending troops to Korea years ago.

Today, millions of right-wing and nationalist people living in Turkey appreciate this stance of Spain and applaud this attitude. Yet, the historical predecessors of the same mentality were declaring those who opposed sending troops to Korea as traitors.

This situation is not just a historical irony. It is also a striking picture that shows the intellectual impasse of a mentality.

This mentality does not confront itself.

It does not engage in self-criticism.

It does not learn from what has happened.

It looks at life on the basis of identity; it pushes class, values, and principles into the background.

That is why a strange contradiction emerges:

The same people who migrate to Europe defend the social state there, support immigrant rights, keep their distance from nationalist parties, and vote for left-wing parties. But when they return to Turkey, they support right-wing parties again.

Because identity-centered politics produces intellectual blindness.

Where the politics of religion, race, and affiliation are decisive, thought retreats; partisanship replaces questioning. Political attitudes cease to be the product of reason and labor and turn into the automatic reflex of cultural heritage.

The mind settles into a comfort zone.

Questioning ends.

Third-rate slogans replace intellectual will.

Yet, for those who want to see, the truth is much clearer.

Even in Israel, the Communist Party of Israel has been conducting fierce opposition against the Netanyahu government for years and openly criticizing the occupation policy.

A similar situation is exhibited by the Communist Party USA in America.

This simple truth shows us this:

The problem is not with the peoples, but with the right-wing, imperial, and occupying mentalities that govern them.

And this mentality works in a similar way everywhere in the world.

What must be opposed is not names, but mentalities.

Not just outside, but inside as well.

It is necessary to display the same oppositional stance everywhere against racism, those who feed on the politics of exploitation, and the subcontractors of imperialism.

But alas, humanity often fails this test.

It becomes a prisoner of its identity.

It looks at the perpetrator, not the act.

It judges according to its proximity, not according to principle.

It focuses on the hand holding the weapon, not the war itself.

It does not question the imperial capitalist order; it only speaks up when its own interests are harmed.

And that is exactly why the fire is growing.

Because as long as people choose to remain loyal to identity rather than justice, this world will see more wars.

More graves will be dug.

And more people will continue to applaud wars where other people's children die.

Am I wrong?

While the world is burning, aren't people still arguing about who is holding the match, rather than the fire itself? 

Then how can this fire be extinguished!