Can he be a source of hope?

The 13-year Kılıçdaroğlu era in the CHP has come to a painful end.

At the 38th Ordinary Congress, Özgür Özel, who represented the "demand for change," took the lead and became the 8th chairman of the CHP.

Especially when looking at the media that defines itself as opposition, there is a spring-like atmosphere—as if it weren't the CHP that suffered a major defeat on May 14-28. It feels more like a victory celebration than the enthusiasm of a party congress!

Let us establish that this is a manifestation of the CHP base's effort to break free from 13 years of learned/taught helplessness, call it a "subject of psychopolitics," and continue.

So, has Özgür Özel truly opened the doors to a new era?

First, let us frankly acknowledge that he has created significant momentum within the CHP base with his youth, energy, oratory, and strong demand for change. However, it is still too early to say whether he has opened the doors to a new era. Although the choices he made in the Party Assembly list show signs of change within the CHP, it is not very possible to predict in which direction this change will go.

If a process of change is to begin, the damage Kılıçdaroğlu inflicted on the CHP over 13 years must first be identified. Then, rational policies must be created to remedy that damage. But this is not easy!

Let us write it without beating around the bush!

For the CHP to march toward power, it is imperative that it strongly re-embrace the founding principles of the Republic and adopt an approach that prioritizes enlightenment, reason, and science!

Likewise, secularism and worldliness must be defended uncompromisingly. Unfortunately, Kılıçdaroğlu did not show sufficient sensitivity to the issue of secularism during his time in the chairman's seat. He remained silent as the country was pushed toward medieval darkness in an effort to appease the Islamist segment. He legitimized the religious and sectarian approaches of political Islamists.

Will Özgür Özel adopt a strong and uncompromising approach to this issue? We do not know for now. In the coming period, the wounds opened by the identity politics that have subtly held the CHP base captive for 13 years must be treated without wasting time.

While it is not very prominent today, there is a "sectarian" fracture occurring within the CHP base. Within the party and among its voters, there is a group that believes the opposition toward Kılıçdaroğlu is due to his Alevi identity.

Let us underline with a thick pen that it is extremely dangerous to ignore the fact that he lost more than half a dozen elections, contributed greatly to the formation of the most reactionary parliament in Republican history by gifting 39 deputies to political Islamists, and tried to manage the party with a cadre of self-proclaimed advisors, and instead treat the matter solely as a sectarian perception.

Within this group, there are even those who view the issue as an Alevi-Sunni confrontation within the CHP and go so far as to want an Alevi party to be established under Kılıçdaroğlu's leadership.

Let us once again strongly emphasize that the antidote to political Islamism is not Alevi sectarianism, that freedom of religion and conscience can only be ensured through secularism, and the importance of removing religion from the public sphere and leaving it to the consciences of individuals.

Before the congress, Özgür Özel had said, "If I am elected, the CHP will pursue class politics from now on." Will he stand behind this promise, or for how long?

However, it is still important for the masses that the AKP has deliberately and willingly condemned to poverty and deprivation that the main opposition party makes commitments based on rational approaches against neoliberal banditry! Finally, we must say that in the statements he has made so far, he has experienced confusion regarding some important concepts.

Özgür Özel may be well-versed in current political discourse due to his involvement in politics since 2011, but that is not enough. He needs to know the content of the concepts he uses very well and think carefully about the consequences that could arise if they are used haphazardly.

If he does not want to make mistakes, he must weigh every concept he uses in his statements with a jeweler's scale.

In other words, sending a nod to "ethnicism" through identity politics while simultaneously sending a message that we prioritize class politics naturally brings question marks with it.

Is this a conscious choice, or is it the careless use of political concepts without much thought?

We will learn in time!

In closing, let us advise him to find a qualified academic advisor to learn the critical difference between the concepts of "equal citizenship" and "equality of citizens," and put a period to our article.