'Let Us Know the Difference Between Us'

In 1956, İsmet İnönü, the chairman of the main opposition party of the time, the CHP, addressed the Democrat Party, which was increasing its anti-democratic practices, by saying: “Let us know the difference between us. We came from absolutism to the present day, whereas you are going from the present day to absolutism.” The “democrats,” who started by saying “Enough! The word belongs to the nation!”, had taken things as far as considering closing down the main opposition party of that period. It would not be the “democrats” who would carry this out, but the 1980 coup regime in 1981, and if we do not count its successor parties, the CHP would only reopen in 1992.

The Republic of Turkey and the CHP both seem to have reached another significant turning point. In short, we are experiencing a new “let us know the difference between us” moment. As everyone has expressed, the trustee appointed to the Istanbul Provincial Presidency and what happened afterward is a rehearsal for the decision likely to be made in the CHP congress cancellation case on September 15. However, it is useful to see it as a rehearsal for yet another step. The ruling power, whose political parties from the movement it emerged from have been closed down many times, may want to close the CHP. At the very least, some comments made in the press and on social media are in this direction. It would be somewhat mistaken to view this desire only as a discussion or imagination of today's authoritarianism. To me, this is a culmination point reached by a struggle, fight, or reckoning that has lasted for about 100-plus years for a certain segment... This is also the reason why I think the issue will sooner or later move beyond the much-discussed idea of a “domesticated opposition” and arrive here. Of course, it must also be said that this reckoning is not just with the CHP, but essentially targets republicanism. As a result, at the point we have reached today, we are talking about the possibility of closing down the founding party, which has a lifespan of over a century despite interruptions, the party founded by Atatürk despite having gone through many changes in its essence, and the party that received the highest number of votes in the last election as a very important phenomenon in terms of current politics. Let us write here, not as a piece of information but as an emphasis, that the presidential candidate of this party, which received the highest number of votes in the election, is currently in prison.

On the other hand, this is not just a “let us know the difference between us” moment in terms of the relationship between the government and the opposition. The events surrounding former chairman Kılıçdaroğlu and the provincial trustee Tekin, and what is expected to happen in the coming days, point to a similar dynamic within the main opposition party. Truth be told, the vast majority of the opposition segment has tended to analyze all political failures experienced over the last two decades as a lack of foresight or well-intentioned incompetence. Now it is seen that we are actually talking about a group of people who are, at worst, a controlled opposition faction and, at best, do not care about anything other than their own seats. Moreover, some of this group is in a kind of hibernation within the party, waiting to wake up when the time comes. In this regard, I would like to repeat here what I have said on another platform. Turkey needs a new historiography that re-evaluates the past 14 years and puts everyone in the place they deserve. If possible, a version that is far from kitchen allegories and, again if possible, one that does not start with a Michelangelo quote. (By the way, I must state that I could not find the work related to Kaftancıoğlu's quote).

Meanwhile, the main opposition could easily say another “let us know the difference between us” remark to other groups in the opposition. Imagine an opposition framework where one group invites the main opposition, whose provincial presidency is surrounded by police, to act with common sense, while the other can post about the national football team. I suppose we have to just call it an eclectic political structure forced by circumstances and move on.

In closing, I would like to state that the situation Turkey is in cannot be understood by looking only at Turkey. I have written here before that the job of the main opposition is more difficult than before, considering the transformation and trends in the world. I still think the same. However, I would also like to state that I do not think an approach that disregards Turkey's historical experience and accumulation, which it has acquired through trial and error, and its place in the eyes of society, will be successful in the final analysis. Indeed, in our country, it has always been the people who “knew the difference between us” over the last century. It will be the same from now on...