Nationalism, populism, statism, and imperialism

The poor state of the economy, developments in the global economy, and the debates surrounding economic science worldwide require us to reflect more deeply on the economic policies of the early Republican era. This is because the most accurate economic program for Turkey stands before us as the economic program of the Republican Revolution: Populism and statism. Regarding planned industrialization, planned and holistic development, production, investment, employment, exports, foreign trade, the sensitivity toward a balanced budget, fiscal discipline, the protection of the Turkish Lira, and all other topics, the early years of the Republic provide us with both inspiration and lessons for today.    

Let us emphasize from the start that in the policy pursued by Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, two concepts are very important: Full independence and national sovereignty. Economic policy, naturally and inevitably, must also reinforce this idea. 

What are the conditions for being national?

Let us state that there are two fundamental conditions for being national in politics: The first is that the decisions taken must be for the benefit of the vast majority of the nation, and the second is that these decisions must be taken with the broad participation of the nation. This means that decisions must be taken with the participation of and for the benefit of broad segments of the people, primarily workers, civil servants, farmers, peasants, and the low-income, laboring, and oppressed segments. When discussing investment, production, and employment, it means looking out for these classes and these segments. 

Being national, being a nationalist, being a patriot, and being a nationalist requires, especially and primarily, being populist, communal, and public-oriented. It requires providing more welfare and transferring more resources to broad segments of society. It requires protecting one's own laborers, peasants, and farmers against foreigners, and preventing them from being exploited, oppressed, and robbed. 

Defending the national interest is also done through action, not just words. It is done by strengthening the people economically and by protecting and supporting the producer and the national industrialist against the world. Without criticizing capitalism, where profits are privatized and losses are nationalized, and without taking a stance against the free-market economy, one cannot be a patriot or a nationalist. 

Let us look briefly at European history. Let us go back to before World War II… 

In Italy, Mussolini, and in Germany, Hitler, took steps in favor of big capital during their rule and carried out radical and comprehensive privatizations. They looked out for large landowners. They closed down or neutralized labor organizations and unions. The result was war profiteers, the death of millions of poor people and laborers on the front lines, and the burning and destruction of a significant part of the world, especially Europe. 

What did the young Republic aim for?

The young Republic, on the other hand, did the exact opposite. It turned toward nationalization. It took steps toward state ownership. Although it did not go exactly as desired and faced serious resistance in politics, it tried to provide land to landless peasants. It expanded workers' rights. It strove to break feudalism, create a modern society composed of citizens, and build a social state against the savagery of capitalism. 

The year 1980 and the following years are in our memories with the globalization process accelerating in the world, the January 24, 1980, decisions in Turkey, the US-backed September 12, 1980, coup carried out to implement these decisions with the butt of a rifle, and the actions of Turgut Özal. With globalization, privatization, free markets, free trade, and free competition, localization also came to the fore. Identity politics, ethnic, religious, sectarian, and regional sensitivities began to replace national identity, citizen identity, and class identity. Those who objected to this or opposed it were called "backward" or "dinosaurs." The state's abandonment of the national, public, social, and class-based aspects, the forgetting of development, the discrediting of planning, and the liquidation of the social state were presented as a requirement of democracy and freedom. 

However, the freedom understood by savage capitalism and desired by unlimited liberalism is the freedom of capital. In this understanding of freedom, there is no place for laborers. For the oppressed, there is only the freedom to die of hunger. In those years, while underdeveloped and developing countries were being persuaded to adopt this savage liberal program, the following words were frequently used: We are integrating with the world, our economy is growing, we are getting rid of the state's clumsiness, and the markets and bazaars are overflowing with imported products and foreign goods.  

In those years, when production, savings, and investment were excluded and import-substitution economic policies were abandoned, consumption rather than production, imports rather than exports, growth rather than development, and privatization rather than public-orientedness were brought to the fore. Public administration was commercialized, trivialized, and devalued. Public-orientedness was discredited and humiliated. The privatization and liquidation of State Economic Enterprises (SEEs) were celebrated as if with drums and pipes. The public sector was portrayed as unqualified, incompetent, dysfunctional, unnecessary, and inefficient; widespread and powerful propaganda was conducted claiming that they were all losing money, were cumbersome, and had turned into sources of patronage. 

The Republic defends public-orientedness and planning

Public interest, public benefit, and social utility were discredited, and the principle of the supremacy of the administration, which prioritizes and looks out for the state and the public against the private sector, was liquidated. Planning gave way to project-based approaches. The State Planning Organization (DPT) was closed, and regional development agencies were established in 26 regions in its place. Hundreds of thousands of subcontracted and contract-based personnel were employed instead of public employees and civil servants. Non-governmental organizations replaced democratic mass organizations. 

Centralism in state organization disappeared, and in its place came decentralization, governance, empowered local governments, and devolution—concepts much loved by the government and the opposition, right-wing and left-wing liberals, liberal democrats, and social democrats. 

The result is the weakening of the central state, the weakening of the nation-state, and the liquidation of the social state. It is the march toward federalism through feudalism. Let us not forget that the phrase "we will shrink the state," which was constantly on Turgut Özal's lips, began with the belittling of the state and continued with the liquidation of statism. 

What has been experienced since that day is in line with the preferences of imperialism.