Historical consciousness, national identity, and republicanism

There are many sayings regarding the science of history. Such as “History is the battlefield of ideologies,” “History is the mathematics of social sciences,” “History is the field of nations.” According to Ibn Khaldun, history is the mother of all sciences.

Possessing strong historical knowledge is a necessary condition for historical consciousness. However, it is not a sufficient condition. More is required. From economics to geography, sociology to philosophy, politics to law. Conceptual awareness, ideological clarity, and political consistency are important.

History is decisive, formative, and guiding. It primarily influences politics. It is one of the fundamental elements that guide a nation. It also shapes the understanding of nationalism. The fact that the nationalism of some societies is race-based, others culture-based, and others economy-based is directly related to historical conditions.

Nationalism can change from person to person, from society to society. It differentiates. It can be based on ideological, political, cultural, or intellectual foundations. While these are different, there is also a strong interaction between them. They feed each other and are fed by each other.

Some adopt one of these approaches to nationalism, while others adopt all of them. There are those who embrace it rigidly, and those who embrace it more flexibly. Among these nationalisms, there are those that are more secular, and those that have more religious or conservative tones. There are those who interpret nationalism more rigidly in an ideological sense, and those who adopt it with more popular tones and cultural motifs. There is right-wing nationalism and left-wing nationalism (nationalism/ulusalcılık).

Nationalism in developed, industrialized, capitalist, and imperialist countries is colonial. By its nature, it is imperialist. Moreover, fascist parties are strong in these countries. Nationalism in underdeveloped, developing, colonized or semi-colonized countries that have experienced occupation is anti-imperialist, favoring national liberation and national independence, because the overwhelming majority of the people are poor and oppressed.

Therefore, it is wrong and misleading to put all nationalisms in the same category. Because historical, political, social, economic, cultural, and geographical conditions affect both the nation and nationalism. There is a very rich collection of literature in our political and intellectual life on this subject, from Ziya Gökalp to Yusuf Akçura, from İsmail Gaspıralı to Zeki Velidi Togan, and from Sadri Maksudi Arsal to Sultan Galiev. In addition, there are many successful scientists, experts, researchers, and journalists who have worked and are still working on these topics.

As for Turkish nationalism, although it had a precursor, and despite experiencing a great leap in consciousness during the defense of the homeland, especially in the 1915 Gallipoli Campaigns, the process in which it was truly shaped is the War of Independence. The War of Independence is a just war supported by the people. It is an epic anti-imperialist war. When one considers some very important concepts and institutions associated with the War of Independence, such as Kuvayı Milliye (National Forces), Hâkimiyeti Milliye (National Sovereignty), İrade-i Milliye (National Will), Müdafaa-i Hukuk (Defense of Rights), and İstiklal-i Tam (Full Independence), the sensitivity regarding full independence and national sovereignty is better understood.

During the War of Independence, Atatürk first prepared the nation, then the parliament, and then the army for war. Since the war was a total war, meaning the nation fought with all its means, capabilities, and strength, it was also a war of existence or non-existence. That is why Mustafa Kemal Pasha would make the following definition regarding the Turkish Nation a few years later: “The people of Turkey who founded the Republic of Turkey are called the Turkish Nation.”

The Republic, which is the product, work, result, and peak of the War of Independence and the Turkish Revolution, both established a state and created a nation. Since the war and the revolution were carried out simultaneously and were intertwined, it is natural that the bond between the nation and the state is strong. During the War of Independence, the Turkish people became a nation while on the battlefields, and became a state while becoming a nation. The nationalism of the Turkish nation, which united in the founding of the Republic—that is, Turkish nationalism—is therefore a nationalism of the homeland. It is an anti-imperialist and republican nationalism. It is a populist, revolutionary nationalism. It is the nationalism of an oppressed nation, a nation defending its homeland, independence, honor, and labor against occupying imperialists.

It is natural that the understanding of nationalism of the Republic, which was established through war and revolution, is unique. Furthermore, every understanding of nationalism is inevitably directly related to the definition of a nation. It must be reiterated that every nationalism is the product of its own historical, political, social, economic, class, and cultural accumulation and experience. It is the result of its own experiences and needs. Therefore, European nationalism is not the same as African nationalism, and the nationalism of a wealthy, industrialized, capitalist country is not the same as that of a poor, oppressed, occupied country. There is not only a difference between their nationalisms, but there is also a difference between their left-wing movements. This is also natural.

Therefore, it is wrong for some liberals and some socialists—who do not even mention the concepts of labor, exploitation, class, or imperialism—to call everyone they encounter a fascist and to view every nationalist as a racist. Because fascism has a political economy. It has certain ideological characteristics. It requires advanced capital accumulation and a developed capitalist order. Whether in production, property, or distribution relations, or in the need for markets, raw materials, and cheap labor, it is necessary to have a developed, robust domestic market and to set one's sights on foreign markets.

Let us come to the Republic… The Republic; every true republic is by nature participatory, egalitarian, and democratic. It is wrong to pit the republic and democracy against each other, to adopt a discourse as if the republic does not include or even pushes away democracy, or to make statements about “crowning the republic with democracy.” Democracy cannot be increased by diminishing the republic. The republic and democracy cannot be portrayed as opposites, rivals, or alternatives to each other. Every true republic is democratic. But not every democracy may be a republic. Indeed, England and Sweden are such countries.

The Republic aimed for by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk also rises, like every true republic, on the principles of equality, freedom, participation, justice, and solidarity. It is Enlightenment-based. It takes reason and science as its basis. On the economic plane, it is public-oriented, collectivist, and planning-oriented. Two of the six arrows, namely populism and statism, are economically based arrows. This is why Atatürk said, “The Republic is especially the protector of the helpless.”

Therefore, just as it is not surprising that imperialism, by taking ethnic separatists, liberal fake-republicans, and political Islamists along with it, attacks the Republic, it is also not surprising that neoliberalism and postmodernism target the Republic the most while attacking reason, science, and morality.