What Kind of Republic?

My column this week coincides with Turkey's greatest national holiday. Happy Republic Day to us all…  

I have spoken and written about the meaning and significance of this day on many Republic Days to date. In all these speeches and writings, I have analyzed many events, institutions, and actors, from the founding period of the Republic to Atatürk, and from domestic politics to foreign policy. Since last year marked the 101st anniversary of the Republic, I think the question I encountered most among those directed at me was “What Kind of Republic Do We Want?” and I tried to provide an answer. This year, however, I believe it is meaningful to speak from the opposite perspective. In short, I would like to answer this question: What Kind of Republic Do We Not Want? 

For instance, we do not want an administration where the citizens of a Republic—which has “Justice is the foundation of property” written in every courtroom and is defined as a state of law in its Constitution—have their trust in justice shaken. In a regime whose greatest achievements include the idea of “equal citizenship,” we consider it an insult not only to live in, but even to contemplate, a system where the weak cannot seek their rights against the strong…

Equality cannot be limited to equality before the law alone. If the Republic is “especially the protector of the unprotected,” then we do not want a Republic where equality of opportunity has vanished. Because a system where any concept, institution, or socio-economic order favors only a certain group is, above all, contrary to the essence and philosophy of the Republic. Just as we cannot accept masses condemned to poverty in a regime that has the goal of being the protector of the unprotected and is also positioned as a social state in its constitution. 

In a country that has two holidays dedicated to children and youth, we do not want a Republic where children cannot be fed properly, are forced to leave school to work, and where young people make plans to leave the homeland entrusted to them because they cannot imagine a hopeful future for themselves. For the Republic was not founded with the goal of sacrificing its “free-thinking, free-conscience, free-wisdom” generations to brain drain. Just as it was not designed to be an open-door country or a buffer zone for uncontrolled migration. 

In a country where, just two years after its founding, the President could say, “Human society is composed of two types of people, called men and women. Is it possible that we can advance one part of this mass while neglecting the other, and still have the whole mass progress? Is it possible that while one half of a body remains chained to the ground, the other part can rise to the skies?” we do not want a Republic that, in its 101st year, has the potential to position women as second-class citizens. We certainly do not accept a country where women (and children) are subjected to all kinds of violence or where their safety cannot be ensured. 

We do not want a Republic where the same answers are given to the same problems by the same actors, yet different results are expected—in short, a Republic that cannot break its own vicious cycles. We deserve better. 

Epilogue: In this 101st-anniversary column, I chose to answer the question “What Kind of Republic?” that is always directed at me from the reverse. However, I celebrate every holiday with a quote from Atatürk. This time, I would like to conclude this piece with a quote that is both dark and bright, fitting the spirit of both the article and the holiday. 

“Despite everything, we are definitely walking toward a light. The strength that keeps this faith alive in me is not only my infinite love for my dear country and nation, but also the fact that I see a youth trying to scatter and seek light with pure love for the homeland and truth amidst the darkness, immorality, and charlatanism of today.”

Happy Republic Day.