Village Institutes and the fate of the country

Human health does not deteriorate all at once; many factors, from psychological distress and dietary habits to air pollution, contribute to this outcome. The same applies to societies. The truth is not composed of "moments"; to understand reality, one must look at the process.

One of the phenomena that left its mark on that process in Turkish lands and bears witness to why the country is in its current state is, without a doubt, the Village Institutes. 

In the words of the President of the time, İnönü, "The most valuable among the works of the Republic were the Village Institutes", and in this respect, "the National Chief"would become one of the most valuable legacies of the country. However, unfortunately, that value was gradually pushed aside during the İnönü era as well. Under pressure from the conservative/nationalist politicians of the time, those rare institutions were discredited. First, their tools and equipment were taken away, then the schools were gradually closed, and their areas of activity were weakened. And finally, after an intense smear campaign, the final nail was driven into their doors, and they were officially closed in 1954. 

In those years, İnönü would speak as follows:

“I cannot describe the pain I feel over the closing of the Village Institutes. I feel it like the pain a father feels when losing his child.”

So, how were these institutions, which İnönü directly owned and saw as his success, closed down?

Let us return to İnönü then: “A movement against the Institutes began at the party congresses. I determined that these were not true by going to the sites myself, but it intensified so much  that it influenced the parliamentary group. The vast majority of the group turned against the Village Institutes. Among the ministers, those who took a stance against the Village Institutes increased.”

How painful, isn't it? He is talking about CHP ministers, about CHP deputies. Even though most of them later became members of the Democrat Party, they were CHP members at that time. Therefore, unfortunately, the process leading to the closure of the Village Institutes bears the signature of a group within the CHP after 1946.

So, apart from them, who else tried to uproot the Village Institutes?

As we would not be surprised to find, the right-wing, nationalist figures of the era were at the forefront of this. And what didn't they say...

İlhan Darendelioğlu, one of the right-wing writers of the period who also served as the president of the Association for the Struggle Against Communism and held positions in parties such as the Justice Party and later the MHP, and served as a member of parliament, wrote the following about the Village Institutes:

“The greatest provocations and red activities were intended to be carried out at the Hasanoğlan Village Institute, which was turned into a higher education section to train teachers for the Village Institutes... In the libraries established at the institutes, the reading of works by red, godless, and soulless individuals, as well as communist magazines such as Yurt ve Dünya, Adımlar, Pınar, Gün, and Ses, was ensured.”

Fevzi Çakmak, the Chief of General Staff of the era, asked İnönü: “When will you close these communist nests?” he said. Furthermore, “While I was still in office, I officially warned the government due to the actions of a former Minister of National Education who supported this activity. No one paid any attention, and later they spoke of the communist nest at the Hamidiye Village Institute.” Çakmak gave a statement to the newspaper in this vein. Upon this, Hasan Ali Yücel demanded that he clarify whether he was the minister in question. The response did not come from Fevzi Çakmak, but from Kenan Öner, the Istanbul Chairman of the Democrat Party, “Yes, you are that minister” he said. Subsequently, Hasan Ali Yücel filed a lawsuit against Öner. In this case, Öner made very serious accusations. So much so that, “he claimed that the institutes were managed by Stalin, that a revolution was being planned in Turkey as well, and that these places were communist organizations” he stated. Following this, he began to engage in politics within the Democrat Party, and that is precisely when the final Institutes were closed down. 

It is, of course, impossible to read the history of Turkey's right-wing shift and cultural desertification independently of him. I am referring to Necip Fazıl Kısakürek.

These words also belong to him:

“The issue of the Village Institutes, whose veil has been lifted in recent days and for which grounds are being sought for their revival according to certain trends, marks the jugular vein of the infiltration of communism into our country.”

Let us continue with Peyami Safa.

He speaks as follows:

"There is no conscious Turkish intellectual who does not know that the Village Institutes, which made children memorize Nazım's poems, had lectures given on Marxism, and published articles about Marxism in their journals, were communist nests... If you are not a communist, are you a reactionary?"

We come from a history where the word communism was brandished like a sword, used to oppose every idea and every phenomenon one wished to destroy, and used to accuse and blame those seen as adversaries. These years are quite productive in terms of seeing the source of today's communism weapon. 

Yet what did the Village Institutes actually do? Other than training thousands of students and teachers, turning schools into centers of science and art, and gifting dozens of poets and writers to this country, what crime did they commit! If this is communism, then take it and keep it. If it is not, then this is clearly hostility and malice toward a society.

Let us continue with another example of that malice, if you wish.

Again, one of the Democrat Party ministers of the era, Tevfik İleri, expressed all the slanders we have listed so far in a speech he gave in Parliament, claiming that during his inspections of the Village Institutes, he supposedly heard:"The sanctity of the family is nothing but nonsense. Nature has made no distinction between your wife and my wife." that these words were uttered. They might as well have "these are Hashashins" said; after all, it is not a discourse absent from their tradition.

The Village Institutes, which were opposed and criticized with intense opposition in parliament by figures such as Celal Bayar, Emin Sazak, Refik Koraltan, and Adnan Menderes, were the pride of this country. They were the name for bringing villages together with different cultures, music, literature, and art; for learning by doing, education through work, growing Anatolia on its own soil, and the power to prevent potential population movements. They were the name for turning every village into a city, a civilization; the name for stopping migration and opening doors for jobs and employment. If they had continued, we would likely have encountered exactly such a Turkey, and we would have seen how barren lands became fertile and how the transition from gray to green was achieved.

They did not allow it, and we are all living through the consequences together. 

Now let us move on. To the facts about the Village Institutes. Why was this system built, and what was the intended goal? İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, one of the architects of the Village Institutes, answers this question as follows:

"The village issue is not, as some imagine, a mechanical rural development, but a meaningful and conscious revitalization of the village from within. The village person must be so revitalized and made conscious that no force can exploit them solely for its own benefit and mercilessly. No one should be able to treat them like a slave or a servant. Villagers should not become mindless, unpaid beasts of burden. Like every other citizen, they should be able to attain their rights at all times. The village issue, including the educational problems within the village, means this..." 

"From the villager, starting from the village and reaching all the way to the Kamutay [Grand National Assembly of Turkey], 

to involve them in the administration of all branches of the state, without seeking any conditions other than the qualifications they possess today, and in this way, to nourish state affairs with elements that draw strength from reality, bringing them into a form suitable for the true structure of the country... it is necessary to awaken the consciousness of Republican citizenship in peasant citizens... in a way that can turn into action...”

If the Village Institutes are to be defined through an ideology, that ideology is precisely these words. The issue is not so much the discourse of ideology, but rather its content, direction, and the results it creates.  Otherwise, an "ideological” discourse cannot be made a subject of accusation on its own. In this context, it should be remembered that while Ziya Selçuk, one of the Ministers of National Education of the period, commemorated the aforementioned schools with respect in a message, today's Minister of National Education, Yusuf Tekin, was sharing the words of Tonguç's son in those days, trying to condemn the Village Institutes for their so-called ideological identity. So, what was that ideological mission in the words of Engin Tonguç: “…It was a revolutionary strategy and tactic undertaken to raise the consciousness of the laboring classes and accelerate the revolutionary process.”

If this is the problem, not only Tonguç and his staff, but millions of people would sign under these words. Because raising the consciousness of the laboring classes is also the wish of this people and the world. 

Professor Celal Şengör "If the Village Institutes had not been closed, Turkey would have become an Austria" they say. Unfortunately, they were closed. Those who gathered around anti-communism, the country's right-wingers, bigots, and narrow-minded nationalists destroyed these distinguished schools. And naturally, Turkey could not become an Austria or a better country. They created an education system drowned in rote learning, preparing for exams like a horse race, where students are unaware of what they are learning and why. And naturally, they created masses, millions, who think this way. 

We do not know if this was their goal, but this is the Turkey they created. As I said, the issue is not so much the ideology itself, but its spirit and the results it produces. Every ideology proves itself through its results. We can see the meaning of the ideology they carry from the results they have caused. With this ideology, let alone quality education, children cannot even buy a toast from the canteen.