The 'Türkiyeli' issue...

This is most favored by Kurdish nationalists, Islamists, and 'Second Republicans.' Naturally, so too are the European Union-funded 'grant-journalist' types who occupy the intersection of these groups...

They are attempting to display a political approach through imperialist jargon.

In other words, they are implying that we are not Turkish, that we do not feel we belong to the Turkish nation, and that the name of the geography we live in is merely Turkey. Therefore, they suggest, the most we can be is 'Türkiyeli' (from Turkey).

By reducing being Turkish to an ethnic identity and attempting to portray 'nation' and 'ethnicity' as the same thing, they seek to legitimize their medieval, feudal, religious, and racist mentalities.

In their own way, they are serving the interests of their imperialist masters who are trying to dismantle nation-states.

This is precisely why, alongside the fancy phrases of Kurdish nationalists such as 'equal citizenship' and 'democratic republic', the terms that Islamists and Second Republicans have made a habit of repeating, 'Türkiyeli' (person from Turkey) and 'Türkiyelilik' (being from Turkey) become particularly popular, especially during election periods.

They represent the political wing of an organization like the PKK, which serves as a proxy for the US in the Middle East; naturally, they will defend the interests of those who nurture and sustain them.

To think otherwise would be naive.

Everyone knows that the strategic game-makers in Washington want to shape politics in Turkey based on religion, sect, and ethnicity, just as they did in Iraq after 2003. They do not care about democracy, human rights, or the rule of law in Turkey.

Kurdish nationalists, together with political Islamists, have been working for years to dismantle Turkey, the republican revolutions, the republican philosophy, and the country's unitary structure and political unity.

Regarding the 'Türkiyeli' issue, it is possible to understand them!

But why do leftists in this country, who should be defending class politics and the rights and laws of workers and laborers, go and tag along behind a primitive mentality that follows the lead of imperialism?

Most recently, TİP Chairman Erkan Başstated, 'The people of Turkey need an interlocutor to solve the Kurdish issue. As TİP, one of our goals is to become the interlocutor for peace for the people of Turkey.' he said.

No matter how you look at this statement, it is falling apart at the seams.

When defining the problem, why is the subject 'Kurdish' but the interlocutor 'Türkiyeli' instead of 'Turkish'?

Even this single sentence constructed by Erkan Baş reeks of racism. This mentality used to label those who defended the ideal of living together—arguing that this could only happen within the framework of republican citizenship and a nation-state, regardless of ethnic, religious, or sectarian identities—as: 'closet fascists'. Yet now, he is revealing his own subconscious with these types of sentences that carry no meaning from political, sociological, anthropological, or linguistic perspectives.

If we follow his own line of thinking, would we then have to define him as a 'Türkiyeli' Bosnian politician?

Why, for instance, is it 'Türkiyeli' and not 'Almanyalı' (from Germany), 'Fransalı' (from France), 'İtalyalı' (from Italy), or 'İngiltereli' (from England)?

This is a question that remains unanswered.

In this country, Kurds, Albanians, Laz, Circassians, Arabs, and Bosniaks live; so, instead of being honorable, equal, and respected citizens of a nation, are they to be placed under an umbrella term like 'Türkiyeli' that has no clear meaning?

This one is Japanese, that one is Spanish, the other is Hungarian; but what about you?

Türkiyeli!

For some reason, along with the hatred they have nurtured against the Turkish nation, both reason and common sense have vanished.

In Turkey, the left, or at least a segment of the left, has been left like a deer in the headlights since the second half of the 1990s in the face of 'identity politics' arriving from across the Atlantic.

They didn't know what to do.

They followed the nation- and republic-hostile politics dominated by the AKP, setting aside class politics to engage in either ethnicism or sectarianism.

They began to engage in politics within the comfort of this. They attempted to legitimize Kurdish racism and Islamist reactionism in the name of leftism.

Standing with and supporting the worker, the laborer, and the employee remained mere talk. As did anti-imperialism...

Instead of seeking the rights and justice for the poor Kurdish sharecropper, they try to pass off the defense of Kurdish nationalism—the ideology of those who exploit them—as leftism.

The Chairman of the TİP has clearly taken the lead here. Unfortunately, he is staining both his party's name and its history.

What was written in the TİP Handbook in 1969 is diametrically opposed to what Erkan Baş is saying today.

Here, 'What is nationalism according to the TİP' the answer to the question is given as follows:

'Nationalism means loving one's nation and prioritizing the interests of the working people who make up the majority of the nation above all else. Nationalism means wanting the Turkish nation to live independently. Nationalism means opposing all forms of foreign exploitation. Nationalism means our nation taking ownership of all its cultural values. True nationalism considers everyone bound to the Republic of Turkey by citizenship as Turkish and does not observe any discrimination or inequality among citizens based on religion, language, race, or sect. Atatürk's nationalism is a banner of war against Western imperialism. Today, those in our country who collaborate with foreign capital, hide the money they earn in our country in Swiss banks, aspire to live like the wealthy of Western capitalist countries, offer our country to foreigners on a silver platter, and—knowingly or unknowingly—serve this small minority, are trying to pass themselves off as nationalists to the public. These people have no connection to nationalism. True nationalists are the laborers who oppose all forms of exploitation and defend the political and economic independence of their homeland, and the socialists who stand on the side of labor.'

The difference between the politics of the TİP (Workers' Party of Turkey) at that time and the mentality of Erkan Baş today is unbelievable.

Such a deviation and regression will be written about in detail in political history books, but at the point Turkey has reached today, the TİP unfortunately seems to have taken on the task of dynamiting the foundations of the republic rather than being a source of hope for the country.

On the other hand, as the local elections approach, it is also alienating voters who have become disillusioned with the CHP and were looking at the TİP, wondering if it could be a source of hope.

In other words, they don't even know politics. All they know is 'Türkiyelilik' (being from Turkey) and a few rote sentences...

However, At the very least, the TİP could have had a chance in Çankaya with a candidate like İrfan Değirmenci. The residents of Çankaya, a large portion of whom are Halk TV viewers, could have carried İrfan, whom they are accustomed to seeing on their screens every evening, to the mayoralty.

But because it fell into the trap of trying to appease Kurdish nationalists, it will lose this chance as well.

Let us conclude our article by underlining in bold that Turkey needs socialist parties that do not feed on the decay of identity politics, are not ashamed of their national identity, prioritize class politics, and truly look at life from the left.