Their latest cries are complaints of civilian rather than military tutelage, civilian rather than military coup, civilian fascism, institutional clashes, the Putinization of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, internal civilian threat. The language they use to frame events grows wilder, the last throes of those wishing to maintain their interest in an undemocratic protectionist status.No one disputes the skill in their language use. However, the quality of the argument reveals the true intentions of the defenders of the protectionist, undemocratic status quo. The overwhelming majority of the people, journalists and intellectuals do not believe there is any clash between government or state institutions. They do, however, see a clear clash between democratic and despotic principles, a clash between civil society and governance and an authoritarian, class-based military-bureaucratic tutelary regime.
In the recent past, we heard these same opponents of democratization talk of threats to the regime, national security or state security; they spoke of fundamentalism, Shariah, neighborhood pressure, of examples from Iran and Khomeini or Malaysia. Now they are bandying about words like coup, fascism or Hitler. Their examples reveal how desperate they feel faced by likely European Union amendments, a civilian Constitution and further democratic developments. Rather than discussing the process of democratization and establishing the rule of law in Turkey or presenting constructive opposition for the betterment of projects, public services and governance, the defenders of the status quo are coming up with self-contradictory ideas and discourse.
Political power is generally understood to mean the capacity of certain groups to exert privileged control over the processes of political decision-making. Groups with political power make normative decisions in the name of society as a whole and impose those decisions where necessary. Political participation comes in the form of political demands: the first kind of demand is about how exchange is regulated between particular groups within the society; the second kind calls for the modification or adaptation of the rules of the political system so as to widen or restrict access to it; the third kind of demand is about maintaining or changing the mode of production and distribution of social resources. Political participation is also the defense of specific interests, an attempt to shift power relationships within the political system, to acquire influence over decisions.
The defenders of military tutelage and the status quo in Turkey know full well what political power is and how to use it but need reminding of the desirable properties of democracy.
Generally, if a political party comes to power through a democratic election, it is given the right to run and modify certain things within the law and Constitution in line with the majority vote and interests. However, in the case of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government and the election of President Abdullah Gül, the defenders of the military bureaucratic regime opposed the majority’s choice expressed through the vote and pushed Turkey into crises and a waste of time, energy and resources. In the current legal investigations of the formation of a military junta and the preparation of plots against the public within the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK), concerted efforts by opposition parties and deep-state elements in the judiciary and the media to block the investigation run completely counter to any democratic norms.
These elements oppose change through individuals nested in the bureaucratic cadre and through their voices in the media. For example, the latest remarks from the head of the Press Council about the legal intimidation and sentencing of a journalist who was investigating the Ergenekon and Cage plots are beyond all reason. Incredibly, in a national radio interview, he argued that journalists avail themselves of too much freedom in investigating and writing and that journalists are transgressing their boundaries.
While Turkey is trying to pass to democratic civilian rule, establish a new Constitution and recognize the cultural and human rights of all its communities and groups, trying to break the shackles which have made it an authoritarian and inward-looking country, trying to play an appropriate role in a volatile region and offer intellectual, academic and cultural richness to global society, we have only one request. Like Diogenes speaking to Alexander the Great, we ask the defenders of the military and bureaucratic exclusivist regime to remove their shadow from us and allow the people a place in the sun.
