Intellectual deficiency

Taxation is, according to some definitions, a technique of plucking the goose without making it squawk, and according to others, a technique of the government reaching into the citizen's pocket to take a portion of their money. Both definitions are descriptions of bourgeois capitalism and are incorrect.

When asked why such a title, it is because both the justification for the tax and the desperate attitude of some politicians in trying to explain the tax to the public are, in my opinion, a clear indicator of intellectual deficiency! Because in a state system, there is taxation, but there cannot be a tax like this that is not based on any theoretical justification and/or logical foundation. Therefore, I am not going to list the details of this absurdity that occupies some public officials and the pages of the Official Gazette, because this is a 'Deli Dumrul' tax; it has no quality other than expressing the helplessness of the administration. After a government that cannot rein in the 'gang of five,' cannot give up on mega-project shares, and has committed future generations to obligations similar to the Ottoman Public Debt Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye) without asking the citizens, has brought things to this stage, it is impossible for it to leave the state (I am not saying the government, mind you!) or to get off the public's back! However, this situation is the fate that the people have drawn for themselves with their own hands. Our people, who determine their own fate, are now rushing to banks to try to lower their credit limits. Let's say that because the limit was not exceeded this year, we were saved from the Deli Dumrul tax; since prices will rise next year, won't raising the limits on cards become a necessity?

Everyone knows that in a sound state administration, taxes can be levied on income, wealth, or expenditures. In all three cases, the primary source upon which the 'Income Taxation System' is based is realized, that is, obtained nominal values. Can a credit card be accepted as evidence of such wealth? Yes, a credit card can be accepted as evidence of spending potential, but firstly, the expenditure may not be certain, and the moment the expenditure is made, since VAT or SCT has already been paid on the items involved in the transaction, the tax turns into a Deli Dumrul tax.

My dear readers, there are two situations where capitalism as a system can be clearly understood. One of these is periods of crisis, and the second is financial world practices or tyranny. I am not talking about financial theory with the concept of financial tyranny (which is not very acceptable either!), but I want to talk about an incident I personally experienced regarding credit agreements made with extraordinary (I don't know if it's intentional!) complex contracts that resemble 'ant prayers' (tiny, illegible text).

In the past, I had applied for a small amount of consumer credit from a bank. Some deductions were made, and the balance was transferred to my account. When I came home, my late wife (who was always more careful and guiding than me!) examined the receipts and saw that in addition to some necessary items deducted from the loan amount, an insurance premium had also been deducted. If the credit transaction is a risk for the bank and not for me, the principle that the one bearing the risk should also bear the insurance cost should be valid in the logic of the system, I thought. Because the demand for the insurance transaction is not related to the borrower, but to the lender who carries the risk on the transaction.

I also looked at the receipts and, to be honest, I couldn't understand this absurdity. The next day I went to the bank, explained the situation politely, and said that the insurance amount should be added to the loan received. My banker friends did not accept the situation at first. After quite a bit of argument, a high-level employee at the bank turned out to be my former student, and the mistake was corrected with great embarrassment. If this process is applied to every citizen in such a distorted way, shouldn't they have turned to more honest behavior in all credit transactions instead of embarrassment! In Turkey, it is not the laws that are valid, but mostly the procedures set by the powerful. I think the same situation applies to title deed fees. Although it is written in the law who will pay the fee, a custom has been developed, and the fee can be split between the parties like brothers! In such a country, an established parliament, that is, a parliament structure that has sworn according to the current constitution, can set out to make a new constitution as it sees fit.

Our Kurdish citizens also develop mind-boggling statements, such as that the current staff should first comply with the existing constitution, instead of arguing that a new constitution should be made not by a parliament that has sworn on the existing one, but by a Constituent Assembly that should be established for this purpose. Procedure is always a guide and should not be skipped! Because trying to reach the goal with a narrow-minded shopkeeper mentality harms everyone and the country. Unfortunately, the opposition does not loudly proclaim, with similar refrains, that a new constitution can only be made by a Constituent Assembly. It seems everyone deserves everything!

How interesting it is that our people, who are still unconsciously attached to those they put in power with their own hands despite everything that has happened, like Kerem's love for Aslı, somehow come to their senses when it comes to money. There was bound to be a penalty for falling for impossible promises before elections, because it was very clear that there would be such a reward for bringing a political structure that had dragged the country into this state back to power with great love! While even a smart racehorse throws its rider, with whom it cannot get along, to the ground without carrying them even two steps, I honestly find it difficult to understand why those who draw their own fate with their own hands are complaining these days.

Israel is supposedly going to attack Turkey, and that's why the tax is necessary! Don't let the crows hear! If this is the case, why fear an Israeli attack on Turkey, which is touted at every opportunity as having the second-largest army in NATO? Would Israel want to attack a NATO country? If Turkey's involvement in the Gaddafi incident in the wake of NATO and its participation in the separatist movement in Syria as a supporter of the US was the path that brought the Middle East and us to these days, it was inevitable that we would arrive here as a result of bypassing the 'monşer' (old-school) diplomats and doing things with a single mind. Did we just come to our senses today, and are we starting to pluck the geese under the pretext of an Israeli attack?

Would Israel attack Turkey, whose approval is awaited for Sweden's admission to NATO? But it could do this: It could mobilize the millions of immigrants poured into Turkey and cause internal chaos. I don't know what the effect and/or intervention of NATO would be here! But in any case, Turkey could suffer serious damage in such an attempt. Now, if the validity of this thought is true, whose idea could it be to stuff so many immigrants into the country, or whose assigned task could it be while being brought to power, I wonder! Shouldn't those who carry the title of Co-Chair of the Greater Middle East Project, while being the elected leader of a country, by proudly accepting the assigned duty of imperialism, think about this? This is the difference between coming from a state tradition and being promoted from a shopkeeper mentality; it can drag countries into such troubles.

Yes, the Middle East, and even the whole world, is in turmoil; as sides are separating, they are also becoming clearer! So, what is Turkey doing in this chaos? It is heating up the issue of clothing; it is still not understood that the headscarf is a veiling of the brain; the murder of an 8-year-old innocent is being covered up by recklessly sacrificing it to politics; attacks on women continue every day with a veiled order that essentially says, 'Go back to your homes, what business do you have in the streets and workplaces!'

Atatürk clearly stated that the Ottoman administration used foreign policy to suppress internal chaos. Today's government is as skilled as a spice shopkeeper in the Egyptian Bazaar at producing internal material from every foreign event it finds. Atatürk also speaks of all fortresses and all ports falling into the hands of the invaders. I think it is time to think deeply about what these words correspond to and where. The big game being played on Turkey is becoming clear; Turkey is silently screaming while being dragged by the hands of this political staff, which is perhaps cunning but integrates with a 'not enough, but yes' (yetmez ama evet) cadre of intellectual deficiency!