Atatürk's Land Law or the struggle to liquidate feudalism

“The Murder of Narin, Feudalism and the Law of Silence” In my article titled, I tried to express that the problems being experienced in the Southeastern Anatolia Region and the Eastern Anatolia Region are linked to feudalism.

If you wish, let's rewind the film a bit and go to the Early Republican Period.

In terms of understanding the present day, let's look at the legacy left by the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of the Republic in terms of land distribution.

Let's make three observations in summary.

· Land distribution was extremely negative. 5 percent of families owned 65 percent of the land, while 95 percent owned 35 percent of the land.

· The dominance of feudalism was observed in the Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia Region, and the dominance of large farm ownership in Western Anatolia. Peasants were working almost for mere subsistence. In these places, the landlord and farm owner was also the state.

· Enterprises known as small peasant holdings, which owned little land, could not even earn a minimum subsistence income. Some of the peasants were also landless. A portion of the peasants with little or no land were sharecropping or tenant farming for large farm owners.

In short, it can be said that; in the years when the Republic was founded, the peasants, who made up the vast majority of the population, were masses working for mere subsistence, with uncertain futures, and without education and health services.

Under the mentioned periodic conditions, one of the primary issues Atatürk focused on was the “Land Law or the Liquidation of Feudalism”.

Atatürk's Land Law or the Struggle for the Liquidation of Feudalism

It is observed that Atatürk attached special importance to the land distribution of peasants, especially in his Opening Speeches to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) from 1928 until the last one in 1937.

Let's give examples.

November 1, 1928, TBMM Opening Speech

“The general inspectorates established in some of our eastern provinces have been accurate and beneficial. The understanding that the laws of the Republic are the only place to take refuge with security is an essential starting point for peace and development in this region. In our new period of activity, you will deal significantly with the issue of providing land to farmers who do not have land, both in this region and in other parts of the country.”

November 1, 1929, TBMM Opening Speech

“Giving land to the farmer is also a matter that the government must constantly follow. Providing the working Turkish peasant with as much land as they can cultivate is one of the main ways to enrich the country's production.”

November 1, 1936, TBMM Opening Speech

“I expect the high services of the Assembly for the Land Law to reach a conclusion. It is absolutely necessary for every Turkish farmer's family to own the land they can live on and work on. The solid foundation and faith of the homeland lie in this principle.”

November 1, 1937, TBMM Opening Speech

“First of all, there should be no landless farmers left in the country. What is more important than this is that the land that can support a farmer's family must be made into an indivisible asset for any reason or manner, and the size of the land that large farmers and farm owners can operate must be classified according to the population density and soil fertility level of the region where the land is located.”

With Atatürk's guidance, some laws aimed at making peasants landowners were accepted in the founding years.

In this context, it is known that land was distributed to a portion of landless and small-landholding peasants. The government, which received authority with the 1925 Budget Law, distributed land to immigrants and some landless peasants based on the previously enacted Law No. 716. The Agricultural Bank (Ziraat Bankası) was also used in this context.

For example, a 7 thousand decare farm was purchased in Ankara and distributed to 89 peasant families. To make peasants landowners, a clause was also added to Article 74 of the 1924 Constitution with this law enacted in 1937. The clause stated, “The expropriation prices of lands and forests to be expropriated to make the farmer a landowner and to be managed by the Ottoman State, and the manner of payment of these prices shall be determined by special laws.”

After Atatürk's death, when the negative effects brought by the Second World War were added, the issue of providing land to farmers remained on hold until almost 1945. In 1945, the “Farmers' Land Settlement Law No. 4753” was accepted in line with Atatürk's speeches.

The law included the transfer of the lands of large landowners to public ownership, the distribution of a portion of these to landless and small-landholding peasants, and radical changes in rural areas.

However, this law could not be implemented.

There were initiatives on this subject later on, but the Land Law did not materialize.

Why did the Land Law not materialize?

There are two fundamental reasons why a Land Law that could touch the essence of reactionary production relations and improve social peace by correcting income distribution could not be implemented.

First; the obstruction of the implementation of the land law, or more generally the “Land Reform”, by large landowners, land lords, tribal leaders, sheikhs, and the political institution that profited from them, who dominated politics and the economy.

I would like to remind you. In my article titled “The Murder of Narin, Feudalism and the Law of Silence”, I wrote, “Didn't the junta that carried out the September 12 Military Coup host the feudal lords of Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia in Ankara and put them on television to get a vote of confidence before the Constitutional referendum?”

A second reason that should be focused on is at least as important as the first.

Among these;

· “The demands of the poor landless peasant masses being very insufficient and the absence of their organization in this direction. In other words, the existence of a strong popular movement and the lack of pressure coming from the grassroots.

· The dominance of the culture of allegiance passed down from generation to generation among the poor peasantry.

· The poor peasants accepting as a fact that a system dominated by landlords is unchangeable instead of state organization. The despair of the phenomenon of immutability” are issues that can be counted.