Political classes

The concept of class in Marxist literature was introduced in the context of exploitation and income distribution. In Marx's fundamental approach, the definition of classes is based on the ownership of the means of production at one end, and the ownership of only the labor power that can be sold to make a living at the other. As is known, the existence of these two classes is mutually necessary for the capitalist system to form. Although Marx's basic class definition is based on the criterion of exploitation occurring in the production process and the resulting different income groups, class concepts and definitions differentiated according to different criteria have also been used in economics and sociology literature over time. While different in all types of usage, the concept and definition of class, in its most common usage, has been made as exploiters and the exploited as two opposing classes/sides. In our discussion today, within the scope of this article, I would like to talk about the social and economic pathologies that formations/clusters based on the criterion of political affiliation/dependency can create, by handling the concept of class differently from its use in economic and social contexts. The reason I am extending to such a different dimension in the definition of the class concept is to point to the relationships between politics and capital, politics and poverty, and politics and religious sects in societies like Turkey that have not been able to fully capitalize and where poverty is becoming increasingly widespread.

The origin of the political class/cluster concept is formed by organizational systems that enable people to be in a relationship with political structures as if worshipping them. Namely, political parties register members to their organizations, which they establish under the names of youth branches and various other names, in order to create, expand, and consolidate their voter bases. People who become members of various party organizations at a young age remain loyal to the organization with great devotion and sacrifice unless an extraordinary situation occurs. Individuals who register with the organization at a young age enter into an emotional bond with the organization and establish a sense of belonging. When we look at the issue from the organization's perspective, the organization also sees and perceives the organization's base as a guaranteed political voting base without needing to spend much effort. The candidate system applied by political parties in their various organizations is seen by political parties as the foundation of democracy in terms of the management of society, and in this way, it is thought of as a guarantee that individuals can be effective in social decisions on the one hand, and that they can maintain management with political maturity by mastering political procedures when they come to the decision-making position.

The candidacy system for political organizations, whose advantages can be determined in this way, carries some disadvantages for both the organization and the candidate in other respects. A very fundamental disadvantage in this regard is the individual's reinforcement of their personality with the political organization they are a candidate for and the blinding of their perception of the organization as impartial. In this case, the individual cannot see every decision of the party they are affiliated with as impartial, acting without criticism or with bias, and approves them. The individual even perceives the mistakes they see as temporary or acceptable, and generally cannot raise objections to the organization. Such situations where the organization disciplines the candidate clearly reduce the accuracy of the organization's decisions and weaken the national utility of the decisions. The most dire aspect of the organization-individual relationship is that if the individual gains personal benefit from some of the organization's activities, they prioritize personal benefit over national interest and cannot aim for social benefit in their decisions. In the event that such an organization-candidate relationship intensifies, the objectivity of the organization's decisions may move away, and results where personal interests are preferred over social interests in the decisions taken may emerge.

An individual who establishes a bond of belonging with a political party, especially if they gain direct personal or familial benefit, naturally finds it natural to criticize opposing parties and work against them in parallel with supporting the party they are affiliated with, even if it is morally wrong. In the competition between political parties, opposing parties aiming to expand their candidate base also construct their programs not according to objective criteria, but with the aim of harvesting candidates and votes from the strengthening party. As a result of such competition between parties, social-public decisions and practices are determined not by what is most suitable for society across a wide spectrum of opinions and decisions, but by the weight of the cluster that provides political gain. Such decision tendencies diverted from social goals can occur in the context of party-based social state policies, as well as in the context of investment-supported policies.

The negative consequences that can arise as a result of political party candidacy developing to a level that blinds a person's thought and judgment can intensify depending on the number of candidates. As a rule of physics, the magnitude of the gravitational force of large masses also applies to political parties. Namely, when a political party grows for any reason, its attractiveness to attract candidates increases depending on its dominance over public administration and its power to provide political gain to its candidates. For example, the political organization that has been in power in our country for over twenty years does not see any harm in using its chance to remain in power with the capacity to produce and implement projects even against the country's interest by growing its political voting base depending on the attractiveness of attracting candidates. This situation, which can be defined as the cancerization of politics and bourgeois democracy, leads to the deterioration of not only democracy but also the country's economy. In periods of economic collapse where unemployment and poverty are widespread, the implementation of Keynesian social state policies not as a citizen's right but under the umbrella of a party constitutes a very important obstacle to the implementation of democracy and rational economic policies.

The fact that a dominant party in a country enters this path implicitly leads to the shelving of democracy and the formation of a dictatorial regime. In such formations, the candidates who make up the base go to the ballot box as if experiencing 'future blindness', with their foresight tied, and use their voting preferences in the direction they are convinced or suggested. When this is the case, the possibility of a political party with a strengthened voting base moving away from the democratic lane also arises. The reason for this is that a political party with a reinforced large voting base, in addition to not seeing the need for beneficial changes for the country in its program, tends to make decisions against the country in the long run in order to please its supporters.

As the community of individuals who flock to the organizations of political parties increases, the average general education and decision-making capacity of the community tends to decrease. In such cases, while going to the polls, the political party is supported as if one were in a family council, without even reading the party programs. In handling the political party-candidate relationship in a manner similar to a family council, the sect-politics relationship also comes to the fore. Sects that support in exchange for dependence on public execution, as if performing the social duty of the state, can create a deep sense of belonging in the individual through the capital-sect-politics relationship.

Let us expand on the topics of the corruption of politics in the contexts of political classes, bourgeois democracy, capital-sect-politics relations, and in this context, imperialist relations, and address them in future articles.