A matter of the zipper

We are going through an incredibly difficult period. Let's assume we are living inside a dystopia.

What are we to hold onto, and how? Everything we reach for slips through our fingers. There is almost no day when the mountains we trust are not left without snow.

Look at where the country has come from and where it has gone in 25 years. The poor have become poorer, the rich richer; the economy has collapsed, agriculture is finished or on the verge of it; there is neither industry nor production left. Our situation in education and healthcare is pathetic. Inflation, the high cost of living, retirees are half-starved, and minimum wage earners are in a miserable state.

The rabid minority that supports the government is eating all the cream of the country.

The great moral decay we are all living through is just the icing on the cake.

We all know very well who is responsible. But if an election were held now, 30 percent of the vote would be guaranteed. Within the comfort zone this provides, they can do whatever they want.

However, Turkey is often tested not by its economy, politics, diplomacy, or election results.

The real problem lies in the scales of character upon which those in effective and authoritative positions are weighed!

In Turkey, with the political Islamist mentality, almost nothing remains that has not rotted or degenerated.

Unfortunately, the opposition is not exempt from this either.

Let's not beat around the bush; we are being blended with such crises that they can neither be explained by numbers nor by graphs. It has nothing to do with inflation or foreign policy. But it touches the nerves of the people of my country in a terrible way. Because the point where these crises emerge is mostly the point where morality and state seriousness begin to erode.

Unfortunately, it has been a long time since the country passed that point.

This is exactly what we are discussing now!

The detention of Uşak's CHP Mayor Özkan Yalım, who is married and a father of three, in a hotel room with a girl 35 years his junior who is also a municipal employee...

And what happened afterward...

The issue before us is not an ordinary tabloid headline that starts with the opening of a hotel door. The issue is where the power entrusted by the public comes from, where it goes, and where it begins to degenerate.

Let's put on our reading glasses.

At first glance, we see two separate headings here. One is the private life of a politician, the other is an ongoing corruption investigation.

However, we have carefully entangled these two headings with each other.

That is why we should not see the resulting picture as an ordinary “scandal”; it is a photograph of this country's multi-layered decay.

First, let's acknowledge this fact.

No one's private life is a display area for the state or the media.

When a hotel room door is knocked on, if it is known who is inside and a camera is kept ready despite this, then it is not the law but another reflex that is in play.

There is no side to this to be debated.

Taking footage down to the towel on the person who opened the door, publishing the face of the other person in the room clearly, and so on...

These cannot be brushed off as investigation or routine detention techniques. A strategy of reputation destruction is being openly applied.

More painful and dire is that these images were quickly given to the government's registered hitmen and put into circulation. This should not be the natural course of an investigation. In countries where democracy has matured, the line is very delicate.

When we frame the picture this way, we can easily see that there was a strong organized perception management plan in the detention of the Uşak Mayor.

But we cannot stop here; let's continue.

Because if the issue is compressed only to the dimension of “violation of private life,” it remains incomplete. In fact, it creates a very comfortable escape area for some.

Then let's formulate the question as follows:

If a person representing a public office is in a relationship with someone in the same institution, and moreover, where the balance is clearly asymmetric due to age, is there really “only a private life” here?

This is exactly where the trouble begins.

Because public duty is not an ordinary profession. It is a delegation of authority, and likewise, a contract of trust. This contract sets moral boundaries not only in tender processes or budget usage but also in human relationships.

If a mayor is in a close relationship with a young person who works in their institution or is associated with the institution, even discussing this relationship through the concept of “consent” becomes problematic in itself. Because there are not just two individuals involved; on one side there is the power of the office, and on the other, a position vulnerable to the influence of that power.

When the line between public power and personal intimacy begins to blur, what happens becomes an issue not just for the bedroom, but for the city hall as well.

In short, this may not fall within the scope of criminal law. But it is clearly a moral issue.

Moreover, allegations that this relationship has been talked about in Uşak for a long time and has even been reflected in the local press are flying around. Then, we can say that there is not only a personal choice here, but also institutional blindness and political indifference.

If an entire city is talking about the immoral relationship of the Mayor, but his party and the party's officials do not see it and brush it off, one must stop and think.

No one can say “we didn't know.”

Then why were they silent?

Why were these allegations not handled with seriousness?

Why did internal party mechanisms not come into play?

Why was no satisfactory explanation given to the public?

This is where the color of the matter changes completely. Because the issue is no longer one person's choice; it becomes the moral reflex capacity of a political structure.

Let's speak more clearly:

Politics is not just the art of magnifying an opponent's mistake. It is the courage to see the decay within oneself and even to quickly cut off and discard the rotting organ. If a political structure turns a blind eye to a picture that will erode the trust of the people who vote for it in the shadow of personal relationships, the claim of “moral superiority” is seriously damaged here.

Before concluding the article, let's ask; perhaps he is too young for Hasan Fehmi Güneş, but did he not learn any lessons from what happened to Deniz Baykal?

Especially when the party he belongs to is going through such a difficult period, how did he become so reckless? Considering he has served as a deputy for three terms, he is not inexperienced either. Moreover, it is said that he has not one but multiple illicit relationships. We don't know how true it is, but even with this much, the damage he has done to both himself and his party is great.

In conclusion, those in office are obliged to control their hands, their tongues, and their loins—that is, their zippers. Because what they represent is not just their own lives, but the honor of the people who trusted them and voted for them.

More direly, in such incidents, it is usually not those in power who pay the heaviest price, but the young people who are left defenseless.

Unfortunately, it is inevitable that those who are labeled without even finding the opportunity to explain themselves are crushed on the ruthless front of political settling of scores, and with that, let us put a period to our article.