Dancing on Quicksand

Economic crises are rare moments that allow economic systems to be understood very clearly.

Social crises are also rare moments that reveal the fabric of the social structure. Unfortunately, the period we are going through is such a period of social testing.

I do not know who benefits from such a division of society! However, it appears that society has not only been split down the middle, or perhaps even along several lines, but the sides have also become, or have been made, sharply hostile toward one another. "Foreign powers" are cited as the reason for everything, but I can say with certainty that without any involvement from foreign powers in our country's slide into today's sociopathology, all malicious forces, primarily politicians, have worked with all their might on the people of the country, have left nothing undone, and truthfully, have been quite successful in creating a social unity that is "compatible in fate and in pride." It is a great pity! Let us hope that the possibility of a war does not appear on the horizon in the short or medium term!

It seems that the issue is not just about political parties, media outlets, or other groups, but that we are facing a pathology related to the entire social structure. It could be said that if the social base were healthy, such unthinkable, sick behaviors could not be exhibited in politics, in the media, or even on the streets. Yes, they could not be exhibited, because an artist who does not receive enough applause from the audience at any concert cannot remain on stage. If we can see society when we adapt this view to our country by looking at politics, the media, and general street behavior, it means the situation is dire. What does it mean to use the arrogance of "hitting below the belt" in a very ugly way during a political dispute to say false and slanderous things about the family structures of the figures on stage! The value and sanctity of a family structure are not defined by the position and rank of the figure at the front. The family structure of any citizen, a party leader, or even the highest-level politician is equally sacred and worthy of respect, with no difference between them.

The impulse to hit below the belt is the resultant of both the psychopathology of the person performing the act and the sociopathology of the society that applauds it. Naturally, when society is corrupt, the individual, who is its natural product, is also corrupt. This is true, but let us please not overlook this in the relationship here. It is this: in periods of social and political crisis, the role of certain community leaders in guiding shaped societies is extremely important. In this regard, people from segments that can have varying degrees of influence on society, such as politicians managing the situation, artists who can be influential, or members of the scientific world, come to the fore.

After making this determination, in the second stage, we need to look at what kind of approach the people or groups we think are influential take in their statements or defenses, and which concepts they use. Here, we must put forward two important golden rules. The first of these is that, absolutely, without hiding behind any excuses, lies and untruthful statements should not be used. The second is that one should not make paradigm-shifting statements that lead to the distortion of the subject with meaningless disparagement of the other side or meaningless defense. The fundamental approach that combines these two rules should not be to disparage and meaninglessly suppress the other side, but to reveal the truth. This task is possible with sincere and constructive approaches, far from the mentality of street fighting.

My dear readers, please think within the context of these very fundamental and equally simple rules that must be followed: while recent events were taking place, were you able to see both sides, or even multiple sides, taking a stance and/or developing discourse aimed at a reasonable solution to the problem? My answer to this question is, unfortunately, negative. What is important in such a struggle is not who comes out on top, but that the country comes out on top. It is known that in wars, the winning side is right because it is strong. Well, is the situation we are going through a war such that the result is determined by strength rather than the righteousness of the parties? This, unfortunately, is the situation to which the AKP has brought the country. As in the recent events, in the Gezi protests, the political power tried to resolve the issue not through mutual discussion and consensus, but through violence and suppression by using the power of the government.

If we look at the issue from a little further back to see the whole picture, we unfortunately witness interventions in almost all political and social issues that transcend the domestic dimension. A meaningful analysis can only be made by looking at a wide-angle perspective and the historical background. I wonder, which power, and why, took the mass called the AKP group out of its main party and carried it to power on the back of Fetullah, and then, at some point, seeing that Fetullah's time had expired, he was deactivated, and the new elements wearing shrouds were given the 2000 IMF–Derviş program and sent onto the field? To whom and under what conditions were the issues of Middle East co-presidency, the Israel issue, the Kurdish issue, the Cyprus issue, the issue of the Middle Easternization of Turkey, and the removal of Islam from its philosophy by turning it into formal worship under the guise of modernizing it, auctioned off? Whenever we encounter each of these hypothetical issues, we leave the stage in a hurry, making decisions with protocol-like expressions, satisfied with the momentary image, without researching the history of the issue or its place on the international plane. What I mean is, could it be that they are easily realizing their ambitions over Turkey by pitting us against each other and keeping politicians who serve imperialists on the stage? While we should be united in the face of such an international strategy, for what reason do we see no harm in dividing the country's people with the crippled mentality of either being on one side or being neutral? In the environment of darkening world capitalism, we can resolve our issues not by clashing with each other, but through much deeper and more rational analyses.

İZZETTİN ÖNDER