Whose budget?

Budget debates, which begin toward the end of every year and continue for a while at the beginning of the following year, eventually fade away, and life continues as it always has. This cycle is an incredibly deceptive image of the social perception regarding a social phenomenon. So, let us begin: what is the issue, and where does the problem lie?

All budget proposals are presented to the public with expressions claiming that the budget will provide employment, control and lower the general price level, and in short, increase general social welfare. Indeed, such flowery expressions adorn the beginning of the 2026 budget as well. But what could be the harm or error in using such expressions? There may be no harm in using such language, but these are not statements written with sincere convictions and intentions, nor are they guaranteed to be implemented. One cannot help but wonder if these expressions might have a different function. By looking at who puts such unrealistic expressions into the budget, one can understand what is meant to be conveyed. To explain this subject thoroughly, let us take a tour of the 2026 budget.

The discussions to be held while the 2026 Public Budget is being debated must have been designed to revolve around the goal of the budget, which is why such flowery expressions were placed at the beginning. While such a method of introduction appears exceptionally meaningful, it is understood from an examination of the budget items that, unfortunately, this method has never been applied in any period's budget—just as it is certainly not applied in the 2026 budget—for two fundamental reasons: one technical and the other ideological. The technical reason is that the annual budget is not based on a serious economic plan. While the new year's budget should either be created as marginal increases to budgets that have been made in line with a long-term or at least medium-term economic plan, or involve a new budget structure adapted to new requirements through a "zero-based budgeting" method in accordance with economic plans determined each year, unfortunately, both methods are virtually ignored. Instead, without any planning beyond empty rhetoric, the new year's budget is being created with small increases from the previous year's budget in accordance with the Medium-Term Program imposed by the financial sector. As for the ideological reason, although it is assumed that the parliament approving the budget consists of representatives of the people, within the framework of the dominant nature of the bourgeois state, the representation of various social groups in parliament has not been realized with the necessary weight and free from bourgeois ideology. Therefore, just as there can be no transformative idea regarding the structure created by the ruling class, there can be no question of a new, socially-oriented budgeting system that targets fair resource distribution for the benefit of the people.

Contrary to the flowery expressions in the "Introduction" section of the budget bill, both the developments observed in the economy and the examination of the budget items suggest that the existing political cadre has pursued a policy of consolidating its political base through the "impoverish and support" method. As far as we can understand from the budget, the political cadre, happy with this method, appears to have decided to continue the same policy. We can observe how this mechanism works in the budget items of various years. The ratios of Social Security and Social Assistance Services expenditures to national income have hovered in the 4.5% to 5% range over various years, individually exceeding both health and education services, and even remaining at a level almost equal to the sum of those two expenditure items. Seeking malice in this situation might not seem scientific, but processes that can be seen even by the blind reveal the opposite. How can we say otherwise when the poverty line is approaching 92 thousand and the hunger line is nearing 28 thousand? Regardless of which definition you believe, while unemployment never falls below 30%, social support naturally opens a door for some, while driving others into the illness of the psychology of falling in love with one's executioner, and the politicians just go about their business!

The trend of health expenditures is similar to that of education expenditures. Specifically, while a portion of our people, divided in terms of income distribution, cannot benefit from public hospitals because at least part of their public social security rights are not covered, a small portion can be fleeced with the most comfortable services in private clinics. While we open our arms to people entering our country as they access public resources, we also open our noble hearts to the fullest to make room for foreign interns, almost as if pushing our own citizens aside.

The essence of the matter is this: in the capitalist parliamentary system, the opposition, just like the ruling party, is a feature of the system's superstructure. Because the government and the opposition are similar in their class nature, very fundamental issues such as the dominance of capital or the exploitation of labor are not brought to the agenda during budget bill negotiations; discussions and conflicts do not go beyond fighting for seats and offering greetings to voters. Although the parties may be different in budget negotiations, they are not opposed or contradictory to each other in a way that could provide economic democracy in terms of class. In this situation, the interests of the working class and the general public are not properly brought to the agenda in discussions, and the extraordinary privileges granted to capital cannot be made a subject of serious criticism. As a result of discussions trapped in a power struggle between similar groups, the capital-state apparatus, despite its virtual size, is defeated by the concrete power of the system. Through a budget that is enacted without going beyond simple and performative struggle, the power of capital is recognized at the state level, and its interests against the workers and the public are legalized and placed under state supervision and protection.