Erkan's field diary

hope all these people will go on the street as well as there will be a coup...
but than 'in their own interest' they wil not be allowed to do so...
you saw these kind of scenarios in Latin America from the sixties suntil the mid nineties..

Dear Erkan,

I don't agree with your words that most of those 1 million attendants desired a military coup and in this sense they have nothing to do with the progress of democratic rights in this country.

They joined the rally because they thought their life styles would change in the long run if it goes like that . They believed in democracy, there were people wearing headscarfs in the crowd as well. So JTW is misleading, it was not a meeting of secularist, militarist or leftists only, but in general the bright people of Turkey who wish to see a more democratic country.They don't want a leader who is using democracy for his own "hidden"agenda.

dear mert,
i completely understand and agree with what you state. i am afraid i could not make my point clearly. first of all, there is a clear difference between the main organizers and participants. the latter does not conform with the former's politics. however, even the latter has a problematic relation with democratic rights. democracy in essence already includes secularism. but most of the participants do not go beyond a secularist position. In the mean time, i have lots of friends who did attend the rally. i mean no bad feelings!

I'm always amazed by the people who accuse the opponent side to have a "hidden" agenda. This government rules the country for almost 5 years now, and the same "ideology" also at work at municipal level more than a decade. As far as I know, there is nothing change in those people's lives who attended to rally. So what excatly they're afraid? A Muslim population who celebrates the Prophet's birthday by reading Quran?
I agree with you Erkan, democracy is more than secularism (and Kemalism in that matter). It is upset me to see that some of us did not learn anything after 3 bloody military coup and still rely on military to "solve" democratic issues.

Democracy in Turkey (in the same sentence ??) is all about changing the rules of the game, in the middle of the game, if the game's not going your way!

Aren't the 'secular' elitists Muslim themselves? or do they belong to a different brand of Islam?

How many years do you think Turkey has been set back by the recent 'comedy of errors?'

Most of the signs at the protest and most of the slogans read "Ne seriat ne darbe - Sadece Laik Turkiye"
I'll let you translate that yourself.

Apologize my concern and excitement Erkan, i misunderstood you, too :)

Dear Metin,
Is that in the rules of the game to appoint your friend as "temporary president" despite the reaction of millions in your country ? Is this called democracy ?

How come you lead a country with only 25-28 % of the total votes (i am not saying total population) ? You may lead, but you can not change the direction. They are 2 different things...

How come you could not change 10 % parliament barrier while you had 2/3 of total members ? Is it a democratic approach ?

Where were you while they were not acting as a democratic party ?

If you say leading party complied with the rules in the past 5 years, i have nothing more to say to you..

Dear Cigdem,

I'm always amazed by the people who have fish memory. These were the words spoken by president candidate Abdullah Gul and published in the British Guardian newspaper in November 1995 "it is the end of the republican regime in Turkey. We certainly want to change the secular system."

Dear Mert,
I'm also amazed by the people who, after seen many many fabricated news, still believe everything they read. Just for your info, that "statement" appeared on Cumhuriyet, Gul is taking legal action against it and saying it's a complete lie. Anyway, I'm a journalist, I learn long ago not to believe everything, I can only advise you to same: be more sceptical.. We do not have like or approve those people, but I believe we should be just.

Dear Cigdem,

I believe as a journalist your duty is not to believe what Gul says, too. You are neither his lawyer nor his voter in this discussion.Please be objective. In recent years our journalists and media act as if they are supporters of the parties (especially the leading party) and they eventually lost their objectiveness. You should have already contacted the Guardian and requested permission to check their archives on this claim as a journalist.This is what we expect from our journalists. We are in the age of information. I am looking forward to hear good news from you. Thanks in advance :)

Dear Mert,
In fact I did:) Gul, as I learned, already rejected that reporting and the words that claimed as his and the paper published that also.
When it comes to objectivity, I always believe that objectivity is an impossible and romantic idea for anyone (not just journalists) who have ideas and opinions on things. That's why I mentioned "being just", and that's what I'm trying to be. You're right, I'm neither Gul's lawyer or voter, I don't think I even like the guy. Still, I believe saying somebody should be judged by his/her actions, but not by some "fears" does not mean I support that person. One more thing before I end this nice discussion: I believe, "politics of fear" is dangerous even for "very" democratic countries (as we see in the USA after 9/11), so in Turkey's case I worry about future even more.
I really hope we will give democracy a real chance, even when we disagree.
Have a good day..

Mert, it appears you have an agenda against Gul and AKP, like many others, and that is your right. But it appears you do not necessarily understand democracy's true definition. Be careful about being used by provocateurs and try to stay mature about passionate affairs too lengthy for me to discuss with you here on this platform.

Do the rules of democracy say, if 51% of the voting population stays home, we do not elect anyone to lead us. If so, then that should be the requirement. And you can even threaten people with fines for not voting. On the other hand, if the rules say the majority of the voting public is enough to form a government, to me that suggests playing by the rules.

The whole purpose of creating the 10% barrier was to 'eliminate' the parties and ideologies that now are being accused of being in the majority. So let's change the rules.

Why don't we create a constitutional amendment that any future Turkish President cannot be a 'religious' person, and his wife or her husband cannot cover their head, must be three legged, have a full head of hair, must be able to recite the Turkish alphabet backwards, and love the color red.

And if that doesn't work still and we still end up with someone we don't like, even after all that, then let's stop him/her from becoming prez and add the ability to have landed on the moon as an additional requirement, just so we can have Neil Armstrong sit in Cankaya.

Why have a democracy then?

Will you hold yourself responsible for Turkey's appearance from outside looking in (over the past week?) Do you even recognize that as a negative or are you simply one of those who doesn't care about what anyone else thinks so long as Turkey gets what it 'needs?'

And who 'decides' what Turkey needs? Is it the 'popular' minority or the 'dangerous' majority?

We will find out the answer in the next few weeks as the elections unfold and the winners will extend their lead over the 'failing' opposition, possibly creating further polarization between the arrogant 'elite' and the rest of the country.

I would probably think that most here, no matter what your political allegiance is, would agree that all the positive press Turkey has received over the past five years have been erased quickly over the past week.

Now the whole can see clearly that there is no such thing as 'moderate' Islam. Heck, even the ones subscribing to it have a problem with owning it!

Metin, thank you very much for sharing your ideas with me. I learnt a lot from you, really.

I don't claim that i am an expert in democracy, and i don't believe that there is democracy in the world at the moment either. It is just a popular term used by the governments, especially by USA to rule the world, process his "hidden agenda" :)

Before giving you a more detailed reply, please tell me whether you live in the "world's largest democracy exporter country" or not ?

Ciggem, thanks a lot, i respect you.

Please read below news from Haberturk :

http://www.haberturk.com/haber.asp?id=21970&cat=110&dt=2007/05/02

Actually there is a major fundamental difference between 'democracy,' and a 'republic,' And despite what everyone thinks, the US is not a democratic country. It is a Republic.

In a democracy, the majority rules over the minority, even a simple majority like 51%.

In a Republic, individual or civil rights are cherished. The majority (even at 99%) cannot abuse the rights of the minority (even at 1%.)

Turkey is also a Republic, but there are 'protectors' of the 'abuse' by those who might take advantage of the situation.

I know the people of the US realy do not think 'exporting' of democracy is no better than suppressing of the minority even in totalitarian regimes. But obviously the US policy is not really about 'bringing' democracy to the world, when they do not practice a democracy either.

But what does all this have to do with the chaos created in Turkey. In the eyes of the West, everyone is going, 'here they go again.'

This should (and could) have been handled differently.

As M.A.Birand said today, ""Sonuçlarını iyi hesap etmeden bir çatışmaya doğru, büyük bir hızla sürükleniyoruz."

By the way, does anyone care what I said back in 1995? Or last week? Things change and circumstances develop. Times are different, and the days of 'analog' ideology is over. We need to get used to it. Heck, take a look at the Republicans of Reagan vs. the ones today under Bush.

Thanks a lot for sharing your constructive ideas Metin. I learn something in every post, i appreciate.

I don't like M.A.Birand and those sort of journalists and authors who look at their own people from foreigner's perspective. He, Orhan Pamuk and many other intellectuals can do everything to be applaused and prized by the western society. They are not representing their own country, so far away from us. I call them "fake intellectuals".

Believe me your ideas are much more important to me than M.A.Birand. I don't see him as a reference...

Thanks a lot for sharing your constructive ideas Metin. I learn something in every post, i appreciate.

I don't like M.A.Birand and those sort of journalists and authors who look at their own people from foreigner's perspective. He, Orhan Pamuk and many other intellectuals can do everything to be applaused and prized by the western society. They are not representing their own country, so far away from us. I call them "fake intellectuals".

Believe me your ideas are much more important to me than M.A.Birand. I don't see him as a reference...

I agree Mert with you. And even I do not live in Turkey. However, as a Turk living abroad, and as an American, I can appreciate the point of view from an outsider looking in perspective.

But these are my opinions and opinions only based on facts. The facts are the facts. And I don't preach that what I say or know is the right or the only way to go.

I just like people to step back and see what they're doing when they learn to walk and congratulate themselves for it after crawling for awhile and not realize that when they took that step they stepped into shit. Lots of cleanup necessary to wipe it off and the smell stinks.