Vital chance for republican people’s party

 The CHP declares itself to be a leftist social democrat party and is a member of the Socialist International. There are many prominent members of the party that can indeed be described as leftist, social democrat and even socialist. But, it has been observed that the party's discourse and practices also follow a nationalist and statist line. For instead of arguing for social democracy, European Union reforms, the internationalization of Turkey and socioeconomic developments, the party has almost solely focused on anti-EU rhetoric, ultranationalist discourse, a militarist outlook, a belittling of the decisions of the people during elections and anti-religious acts and speeches. Thus, it is no wonder that the party can only get 1 or 2 percent of the vote in many parts of the country, including eastern Turkey, which is a Kurdish-populated area. The 1 or 2 percent of the vote obviously come from civil servants and military bureaucrats in the region who are not Kurdish. It is a sad fact that the party has virtually become an ethnically Turkish party. If we bear in mind that it is the main opposition party and the other opposition party, the MHP, is in the same unhealthy position in the region, it becomes crystal clear that the AK Party is the only party that has attracted votes countrywide. This is very dangerous for Turkey. The CHP and the MHP keep talking about the potential danger of Turkey's division, but by looking at their election records, we can say that they have already divided Turkey in their outlook, rhetoric and performance. Can you imagine what could happen if we did not have the AK Party? A divided Turkey indeed. The CHP still has the potential to bypass this fatal cul-de-sac. The only thing they have to do is to realize the social democratic potential in their genes.

 The party had said positive things about the Kurdish issue in the past. It previously prepared reports arguing almost exactly the same things that the AK Party is arguing today. It had a positive attitude toward a kind of multiculturalism, a better human rights record, democratization of the country and so on. The party or is predecessors had election agreements with the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party's (DTP) predecessors. Today, CHP leader Deniz Baykal accuses Erdoğan of speaking with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) just because he spoke with the DTP, but Baykal's very own party in the past these helped pro-Kurdish parties bypass the national threshold of 10 percent. These pro-Kurdish parties were not denouncing the PKK at that time either, a condition posed by Baykal. What has changed then? Almost nothing, with the exception that the CHP ceased to be a Turkey party and decided to become a militarist and ultranationalist party. It is now a hermaphrodite party, combining ultranationalist Turkism, statism, militarism and social democracy. However disturbing and unwise it is, this decision is not politically stupid. At least 10 percent of the voters share the same confusion, most of them being oligarchic white Turks. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of Alevis are “captive-voters” of the CHP who think they have nowhere to go. The alliance of these voters can always guarantee 20 percent of the vote, but this politically and discursively hermaphrodite stance of the party will always deter other voters. If the party can risk losing its ultranationalist, militarist and statist oligarchic voters and opt for speaking for the masses, including the Kurds, with a vision of more democracy, better human rights, EU reforms and social justice, it has the potential to get 40 percent of the vote.