Are liberals and conservatives at crossroads?
by Mümtaz’Er Türköne

Those who were worrying that the AK Party would establish a religious order have been relieved to see the support of liberals invested in the government. During its eight years in office, the ruling AK Party has implemented programs that can be considered both liberal and conservative according to European criteria. The historic alliance between liberal intellectuals and conservative elites was particularly important in making these programs possible. It appears that major problems have recently emerged in this alliance. The harsh criticisms hurled by Ahmet Altan of the Taraf newspaper, i.e., the mouthpiece of the liberals in Turkey, at Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, as well as the retributive actions brought by the prime minister against him have caused many to argue that liberals and conservatives are now at a crossroads.

Really, are liberal democratic intellectuals parting ways with the conservative democratic AK Party?

Turkey’s unique liberalism

Liberalism in Turkey is more akin to the Anglo-Saxon strand, particularly the American one, than to the continental European version. American liberalism tends to locate itself left of the political spectrum. Since Turkey’s chronic main political issue is democratization, this leftist/liberal democratic tradition has poised itself as an obstruction against military coup. The leftist/liberal democratic movement has failed to recruit followers beyond a small niche of intellectuals. However, due to the fact that these intellectuals are also leaders of public opinion, they have played critical roles in the debates over military coups.

In Turkey, military coups were always justified with the argument that the secular system of the country is under threat. It is not possible for liberals to be opposed to secularism given

their lifestyles and ideas. Accordingly, when they criticized the secularism arguments of the subversive generals and their supporters, liberals were convincing. In transforming its Islamic roots into a conservative democratic mass policy, the AK Party secured major theoretical support from liberal intellectuals.

As a paper that publishes the most daring news stories in deciphering the military coup plans, the Taraf daily has come to be seen as the mouthpiece of pure liberal thought. The paper defends universal liberal values in many important areas such as the Kurdish issue, the headscarf issue and identity issues, and its leading authors from time to time also found themselves in conflict with some of the conservative discourse of the AK Party.

The AK Party used the liberals’ support in reinforcing its democratic legitimacy. The reforms undertaken by the AK Party in the context of the country’s EU bid played an important role, together with the support from liberal intellectuals, in restoring democratic balance in Turkey.

Occasionally, the AK Party was angered by liberal intellectuals’ arrogant and didactic attitudes, while liberal intellectuals were unhappy with occasional conservative policies of the AK Party.

Priorities of the conservative politics

What liberal intellectuals fail to realize is that the AK Party is not a liberal party, but a conservative democratic one. The AK Party promotes conservative values over liberal values. Democracy is a common denominator for liberals and conservatives, but the AK Party cannot be reasonably urged to pursue liberal policies in every field. The AK Party derives its power from the support of disadvantaged groups in society and represents emerging conservative elites. It attaches great importance to the society’s moral values, the family and tradition. It is impossible for it to advocate for unlimited freedoms in every area. Moreover, the AK Party’s conservatism is also tainted by a certain amount of nationalism.

Indeed, all of the polemics that have emerged between liberal intellectuals and the AK Party’s leader are indicative of the conflict between liberal and conservative values. For instance, insofar as they defend the freedom to consume alcoholic drinks, liberals side with Kemalist secularist groups. Thus, the AK Party’s efforts to regulate alcohol consumption come in conflict with liberals. The prime minister’s demonizing of alcohol consumption by quoting a poet who said, “Drink [alcohol] until it bursts out of you with force,” elicited a harsh reaction from liberals. However, the prime minister’s words were warmly accepted by the average conservative voter. This is a quote from Tevfik Fikret, a liberal and pro-Western poet of the Ottoman era, who originally addressed it to those who exploit the public from their public posts. It thus follows that prime minister did not quote him intentionally.

Individuals or the community?

Liberalism takes the free choice of individuals as its point of reference; it is more an attitude than an ideology. Conservatives, on the other hand, take religious faith and the community life built upon it as its basis. Allowing individuals to determine the limits of freedom renders community life impossible. As liberalism is a political program only for a small group of intellectuals, it also indicates the course a political party may follow with respect to democracy.

Liberalism’s emphasis on freedoms is particularly crucial in providing a strong point of resistance to military oppression. However, by itself, it is a weak political project. Indeed, none of the liberal political parties established in the recent past have managed to prosper. Almost all of the leading liberal intellectuals who lend support to the AK Party have had unsuccessful political experiences. All of these liberal intellectuals are coming from a Marxist tradition. The referendum held on Sept. 12 created an ultimate fracture within this Marxist tradition. Those who backed the AK Party against the military tutelage at this referendum faced physical attacks from other Marxist organizations. Thus, borders between camps became more and more pronounced.

The AK Party cannot answer the question “The individual or the community?” by glorifying the individual. This applies to the liberals as well. However, this historic alliance must be maintained for the sake of democracy and rule of law.

The liberals’ support for the AK Party varied based on the political conjecture. During times when they felt interventions against the proper functioning of democracy lessened, the liberals decreased their support. The latest debate was triggered directly by the fact that Turkey has entered into an election season. When the prime minister out of necessity steered its party towards conservative/nationalist voters, liberals started to raise louder objections. By manipulating their influence over the media, liberals are trying to create a checks and balances mechanism over the prime minister. But we need to be realistic. They don’t have any chance in this regard; even if they withdrew their support from the AK Party, this will not make any difference in the votes the AK Party receives. For a political party, the sole criterion in the period leading into the elections is maintaining their policy.

Therefore, the increased criticisms from liberal intellectuals do not mean that they have terminated their historic alliance with the AK Party. Liberal lifestyles can be maintained only by having the AK Party in power. For this reason, these polemics are transient and insignificant.

Democracy is still in need of support from liberals, conservatives and all other groups, and it will continue to need this support for a long time to come.