Statism debates at the 7th CHP Congress and the first crossroads for the CHP

In reality, Atatürk has not been sufficiently understood or embraced in Turkey. Despite all the ceremonies, all the statues, and the artificial displays of affection, Atatürk is a person whom some in Turkey wish to be forgotten.

Many of our citizens are supposedly Kemalist, yet they do not know Atatürk. There are even complaints about why Atatürk saved Turkey and their ancestors.

So, why was Atatürk not embraced by these certain citizens?

In my opinion, there are 3 reasons for this:

1- It was not embraced due to class-based reasons. The NATO supporters, the pro-Americans, and the pro-EU advocates did not love Atatürk. They did not understand him; they only looked at him from the perspective of military victories, and they even belittled those military victories. Personally, I feel sad and ashamed when I think of Atatürk. A people could only be this ungrateful toward Atatürk. 

The class structure upon which the Republican People's Party (CHP) relied did not fully embrace Atatürk either. We can understand this better by looking specifically at the seventh congress.

When we look at the member organization and voter structure of the CHP during the Atatürk and İnönü eras, the situation becomes clearer.

All of the CHP deputies were large landowners, self-employed merchants, civil servants, soldiers, and members of the local gentry. The roots of the Koç and Sabancı families in those years lie in this class structure.

When we look at the congress delegates, the same class structure was reflected in them. Well, the delegate structure at the 7th Congress is written in the congress documents. The class of the wealthy—that is, the bourgeois-feudal mixed class structure of that period—perfectly encompassed the 7th Congress delegates as well.   

The crossroads with Atatürk surfaced clearly at this 7th Congress. In any case, the majority of the congress delegates consisted of deputies. The bourgeois-feudal mixed class structure completely dominated both the congress and the parliament.

2- Discomfort with the principles of statism and secularism. Because this class wanted the state to shrink. But Atatürk was openly against liberalism.

3- Scientific governance and the rule of law.

This foundation did not please the class that formed the CHP.

Statism

Secularism

Science 

These were the things the 7th CHP Congress wanted to change.

They were entering a crossroads with Atatürk.

They were doing this by exalting Atatürk and reducing him to statues and ceremonies.

The 7th Congress of the CHP was held between November 17 and December 4, 1947.

The purpose of the congress was presented as adapting the CHP to the competitive environment that the multi-party political life would bring. The changes made to the bylaws and program were intended to achieve this goal. The most intense debates of the 7th CHP Congress took place during the discussion of the draft program, within the scope of the "principle of statism." The congress delegates argued that the party administrators' debates on statism or public-mindedness were wrong. They were futile. In fact, the error also lay in the basis of these debates, in the purpose of the congress as determined in the congress agenda.

Actually, the story is that the wealthy, landowners, and civil servants of those days, who formed the base of the CHP, did not find statism suitable for their class interests. In my opinion, this is what happened. 

It is not a correct view that the debates were held for the CHP to redefine itself within the competitive environment of multi-party political life. It is understood that in the aforementioned debates, the delegates associated a significant portion of the inconsistencies in party principles and policies—which they saw among the main reasons for the CHP's failure—with the interpretation and implementation of the principle of statism. For this reason, statism came to the fore at the 7th CHP Congress as an important subject of competition in multi-party political life. According to the delegates, the current interpretations and applications regarding the principle of statism were weakening the CHP in political competition; in the face of this situation, it was necessary to urgently move toward a new interpretation of statism and, at the same time, to reorganize the practices related to statism. (Hilal Akgül)

The intellectual foundation of the Revolution is statism, that is, public-mindedness.

“After the military victory, two different lines struggled with each other regarding statism. One was the 'Statism' line in the 'Populism' understanding of the Republican People's Party under the Chairmanship of Gazi Mustafa Kemal. The other was the 'pro-private sector' line of the 'Progressive Republican Party,' founded by Mustafa Kemal's comrades-in-arms, which had a liberal understanding in its program, stating: 'we will consider personal freedom sacred in every field' and 'the duties of the state will be reduced to the lowest limit.' (AYDIN ÖMEROĞLU)

After Atatürk's death, the competition between these two lines continued within the CHP.

The CHP administration took the first step away from the populism that formed the yeast of the Turkish Revolution at the 7th Congress on November 17, 1947, where the Six Arrows were re-evaluated. While the principle of "statism" was being redefined, an understanding that prioritized private enterprise was adopted. With this approach, the CHP administration of that time turned its back on the people who had brought the anti-imperialist National War of Independence to victory.

As documented below, from this date on, CHP administrations, like a person who has lost their way, began to struggle in the swamp of seeking to be in power at congresses. For example;

At the congress on January 12, 1959, the "Declaration of Initial Goals," which was in the nature of a "program for changing the order,"

At the congress on August 24, 1961, a serious conflict between İsmet İnönü and Kasım Gülek and the "Declaration of Fundamental Goals,"

At the congress on October 16, 1964, the "Our Ideal of an Advanced Turkey" declaration, and at the congress on October 18, 1966, the "Center-Left" view,

The 7th Congress of the CHP was held between November 17 and December 4, 1947.

The purpose of the congress was to adapt the CHP to the competitive environment that the multi-party political life would bring. The changes made to the bylaws and program were intended to achieve this goal. The most intense debates of the 7th CHP Congress took place during the discussion of the draft program, within the scope of the "principle of statism." The congress delegates argued that the party administrators' debates on statism or public-mindedness were wrong. They were futile. In fact, the error also lay in the basis of these debates, in the purpose of the congress as determined in the congress agenda.

Actually, the story is that the wealthy, landowners, and civil servants of those days, who formed the base of the CHP, did not find statism suitable for their class interests. In my opinion, this is what happened. 

It is not a sufficient or correct view that the debates were held for the CHP to redefine itself within the competitive environment of multi-party political life. It is understood that in the aforementioned debates, the delegates associated a significant portion of the inconsistencies in party principles and policies—which they saw among the main reasons for the CHP's failure—with the interpretation and implementation of the principle of statism. For this reason, statism came to the fore at the 7th CHP Congress as an important subject of competition in multi-party political life. According to the delegates, the current interpretations and applications regarding the principle of statism were weakening the CHP in political competition; in the face of this situation, it was necessary to urgently move toward a new interpretation of statism and, at the same time, to reorganize the practices related to statism. (Hilal Akgül)

In light of this information, let us move on to answering the question of why updating the "Statism" arrow is of vital importance for the survival of Turkey and the welfare of its people. It is a proverb frequently used among the people: "State property is an ocean, he who does not eat is a pig (a fool)." By adopting an understanding that "prioritizes private enterprise" at the Seventh Congress of the Republican People's Party, they actually paved the way for the development and spread of this microbe found in human nature. In the process extending from that date to the present, the statist mixed economy turned into a capitalist economy that could not internalize the law, under the grip of imperialism. The roots of the survival problem that Turkey faces today extend back to that date when the "Statism" application in Gazi Mustafa Kemal's "Populism" understanding was abandoned.

In the harsh competition of imperialism and globalization, neither Turkey's survival nor the welfare of the people can be guaranteed with today's economic structure. For this reason, updating the "Statism" arrow of the Six Arrows to "public-mindedness" is indispensable for Turkey's survival and the welfare of its people.

G. Atatürk's opening speech to the Grand National Assembly, November 1, 1937:

". . . The basis of the national economy is agriculture. That is why we attach great importance to development in agriculture....

Industrialization is among our greatest national causes. We will establish and operate all kinds of large and small industries whose economic elements exist in our country for their operation and survival. Starting with national defense, this is a necessity to evaluate our products and to reach the ideal of the most advanced and prosperous Turkey by the shortest path.

With this conviction, it is necessary to rapidly complete the remaining few factories of the first five-year industrial plan, for which all preparations have been finished, and to prepare for the new plan.

Parallel to our decision and action for industrialization, there are some changes to be considered in our current laws and some new provisions to be added. We can summarize the main ones as follows: (he lists them) ...."

(Regarding the importance Atatürk gave to the idea of planning), it is stated as 'Atatürk's definition of statism' as follows:

"While giving place and opportunity to private enterprise, it is to attach importance to the fact that all the work that the individual cannot do is carried out by State institutions in order to reach rapid development as a nation."...

In light of this information, why is updating the "Statism" arrow of vital importance for the survival of Turkey and the welfare of its people? 

Actually, our intellectuals, our scientists, and our pro-labor parties need to think about public-mindedness and produce political projects. Otherwise, we may be left too late.