According to a commonly held view, these debates have demonstrated once again how some circles abuse Atatürk and his revolutions under the guise of speaking up for them.Zaman's Mümtaz'er Türköne agrees with Fırat that Turkish society was shaken by the life-changing revolutions of the 1920s -- but he notes that in time society internalized what these revolutions had brought to it and began to express itself within the limits of democracy. "Moreover, society managed to perpetuate this despite the military coups that turn all of civilian life upside-down," says Türköne. In his view, those revolutions actually had a traumatizing effect on the bureaucratic elite, because today they represent the social segment that does not comply with the requirements of these eight revolutions, which are stated in Article 174 article of the Constitution. "History makes its own judgment. Turkey made a correct choice. It realized big miracles. Let's take a look not at the revolutions themselves but at who used them as a tool of abuse. Were they not the gravest series of traumas we encountered during the course of the republic's history, created by those who used Atatürk revolutions to hijack power and impose authoritarian rule? Nobody has any objections about the Atatürk revolutions. But isn't each and every day marked with news about military tutelage and fears about a military coup? Can there be any bigger trauma than society living with the fear of a military coup?" asks Türköne.
Sabah's Nazlı Ilıcak says some circles in the country who always make a fuss over secularism being in danger use Atatürk and his revolutions as a propaganda tool. "Unfortunately, Atatürk is being abused. He is presented as a common value and a political instrument. This is as bad as the abuse of religion and carries the potential to polarize and divide society," Ilıcak asserts. In consideration of this, she thinks the reason Fırat's remarks have caused such uneasiness in society is societal polarization making everyone suspicious about each other's intentions. "There are two kinds of love for Atatürk in Turkey. One is closed to any criticism, has reached the level of adoration and is like a divine love. The other is the love felt by those who criticize some of Atatürk's actions but never deny his services to this country. Let's give up deifying Atatürk and using him as a weapon against each other," suggests Ilıcak.
Referring to the immediate reactions and harsh criticism by some circles of Fırat's remarks, accusing him even of being an enemy of Atatürk, Bugün's Ahmet Taşgetiren associates this with the fact that some circles in Turkey are still unready to talk about the pains Turkish society went through during the revolutionary period. "More interestingly, some circles never give up on keeping the revolutions on the agenda as a tool of intimidation. Turkey should be able to talk about its traumas. The repercussions of these revolutions should be examined and the system should take measures to heal the wounds and traces of these traumas," says Taşgetiren.
