Freedom and tolerance. Because the opposites are just below the surface. They present sudden contrasts, at unexpected times. Suppression and intolerance are kept as political reserves, to cause confusion, to spread fear; to feed an already tense social polarity.
There is a widespread belief that Melih Gökçek, the mayor of Greater Ankara, has been ruling the municipality like a tsar. Most intolerant to the press, and an aggressive opponent to critique, he has produced enough evidence over the years that he wants to rule the capital as a “one man show.”
The latest story is the following: “7th Street” in the Bahçelievler district is a lively part of the capital, where the bars, cafes and restaurants serving alcohol are flourishing, mainly because of the popularity it enjoys with the youth. Lately, the number of visitors and places serving alcohol has increased in the street.
Çankaya municipality, run by a mayor from the Republican People's Party (CHP), recently came up with a proposal: An opinion poll -- rather, a plebiscite -- should be staged in the district on whether the street would be closed to traffic or not.
Gökçek seemed to like the idea. He suggested that a referendum be declared so that people should decide. Soon after the mayor of Çankaya agreed, the issue came to the council of the municipality. In a move that clearly bore the sign of political hijacking, “encouraged” apparently by Gökçek, local deputies of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) added a “referendum on alcohol consumption” to the proposal.
The CHP deputies somehow “missed” that “detail,” and we now face a most peculiar, and politically lethal, event on either Sept. 20 or 27. Bahçelievler in its entirety will vote. It is unclear whether the municipality of Çankaya, which operates as a minor one under the Greater Ankara Municipality, will have to “comply” with the results of the vote, but enough damage will be done.
The decision to move in that direction is a daring display of stupidity. Turkey is already being targeted in suspicious foreign circles as a country of religious intolerance and nobody would dispute the fact of polarization that has defined the course of major politics in the past seven years.
The referendum will only serve to put kerosene on the fire.
It may do so by setting a precedent, only possible in countries ruled by Shariah, and trigger others in the opposite pole.
What if a CHP municipality in the staunchly secular city of X declares a referendum on banning the headscarf from all public places? What about a referendum on forbidding the drum playing in Ramadan?
What if some other rigidly conservative mayors stage a referendum on keeping all the restaurants and cafes closed in the daytime during Ramadan?
Gökçek certainly knows of such possible consequences. He sets a cynical play, because he always enjoyed “forcing,” always took pleasure in “testing people's patience.”
His move should be stopped. Or, if done, totally rejected.
Varying sensitivities on lifestyle is the soft underbelly of this country. The fight for freedom and social tolerance must, under all circumstances, everywhere in Turkey, be conducted as a whole, not in selected parts, excluding others. There must be a clear symmetry of freedoms enhanced by respect to all the segments of this complex and tense society.
The banning of alcohol, either through the tough and arbitrary restrictions of permits or, as this stupid example shows, through referendums, goes completely against the rights given in the Constitution and the basic principles of an open market. In a country like Turkey, where the individual should have all the rights of native language, local cultures, choice of outfits and preferences of sexual practice, they should also have the right to find places -- everywhere in the country -- where he/she can purchase or be served alcoholic beverages.
That right must be vigorously protected. As it is in any “normal” secular and democratic country.
Turkey has suffered enough from disrespect, social hatred, intolerance, official and cultural suppression and lack of individual freedom.
One hopes that the government shares the same anxiety about this irrational referendum and acts.
