The codes of politics

In Turkey, the center and the core of the center is made up of the following factors: the military, civilian bureaucracy, justice, major capital, university and intellectuals. These five elements, which combined create the core of Turkey's center, are almost like an atomic nucleus. The center, however, is made up of centrifugal forces and showcases the desire to conduct politics based on religion.

Although unspoken, in Turkey and the Islamic world, only Islamist movements and parties conduct politics based on values. The others, let us take the nationalists as an example, conduct politics based on race, ethnicity, at times class, clan and family. There is a paradoxical situation taking place here; politics based on values encompass all classes and sees that all owners of rights, including the rich, are given their rights. It is based on justice and principle. For example, according to Marxist theory, the bourgeoisie never improve, they commit suicide. There is a suicide of class in Marxism. According to the Islamic perspective, everyone can attain value. And the highest value in politics is justice.

There is another issue as well: Neither the Ottomans nor the Islamic world experienced the Industrial Revolution, which took place in 1750. Therefore, there is no bourgeoisie class. When there is no bourgeoisie, there exists no corresponding politics or thoughts to liberal politics. There was also no feudalism in our history, either. The “sipahi-reaya” relationship, being the relationship between the military representative of the governor -- in charge of cultivating the land and training soldiers -- with the people, was never the same as the relations between “sires and serfdom.” In the end, because there was no industrial revolution, there was no working class. Certainly there was a demographic that worked; however, they didn't carry an awareness of themselves as proletarian or a knowledge of class structure. They did not experience a conflict based on class. They don't look at the world from a historic, materialist perspective. A working person is a Muslim and a workman. In a 1968 study in Turkey, workers were asked the question “Which one of the following defines you?” and workers answered this question with the following definitions in this order: “Muslim”, “their hometown,” “Turkish” and finally “workers.”

This tells us that there is a different situation from that of the West. So in a place where there is no working class, or awareness of a proletariat, there can be no socialist or communist party -- and even if they did exist, they cannot represent a given class. Similarly, because there is no class of industrialists, liberals or bourgeoisie, there is no meaning in a conservative, liberal or nationalist party, because there is no equivalent of these political identities in society.

One of the factors which has become organized within the state and exists within the nucleus is large capital. The wealthy, who make up 20 percent of the population, take 46 percent of the national income. While 60 percent of the population takes 50 percent of the national income, the remaining 20 percent of the population takes 4 percent of the income. Therefore, 80 percent of the population is disadvantaged; however, this disadvantage is not limited to finance alone; receiving 46 percent of the national income also translates to entertainment, housing and living like a humane life. Unfortunately, however, while those who live a privileged life make up 20 percent of the population, the remaining 80 percent are disadvantaged. Now if parties based on class and politics cannot represent this disadvantaged crowd, surely “values” will.