“Communist Police!” The State in the 1970s Turkey (original) (raw)
Related papers
Turkey: The Oscillation Between «State» and «Regime» (1/3
This three part series of articles -- based on extensive fieldwork research in Turkey since 2010, and which appeared in Almasry Alyoum in July 2016 following the Turkish attempted coup -- analyze why the attempt itself was predictable, based on detected politicization and agitation of the mid-rank level within the Turkish Armed Forces, due to subjective promotions and loyalism under Erdogan's regime. The articles also explain why the failure of the attempt was also equally foreseen, given that the mutiny within the army, against the political leadership was not a broad-base societally-supported move, due to a public weary of a history of military interventions. In the end, the articles argue, the Turkey is currently undergoing a transformation from a State to a Regime, and the prediction is an eventual ousting of the Erodgan Regime at the 2023/24-25 juncture.
Türk parlamenter demokrasisinin krizini Schmitt üzerinden okumak : 1971-1980
2013
This thesis examines the political conditions of Turkey from March 12 1971 to September 12 1980 with the use of Carl Schmitt’s concept of the political, critique of parliamentary democracy and concept of partisan to analyze the relation between main political actors of the period. The main theme of this study is how the friend and enemy distinction would be produced in the interactions of the parliament, the military and partisan and which concepts would be applied to define the friend and enemy. This study argues that the theoretical framework of Carl Schmitt is worth using to examine the given period of Turkish politics. It is also argued that Schmitt’s theoretical framework would provide fruitful theoretical perspective to examine the crisis that Turkish parliamentary democracy experienced between 1971 and 1980 which ended up with a military coupM.S. - Master of Scienc
The State, Political Party and Society in post-1983 Turkey
Government and Opposition, 1990
IN TERMS OF THE HISTORICAL CATEGORIES FORMULATED BY S. N. Eisentadt, the origins of the Ottoman-Turkish polity were imperial-bureaucratic rather than imperial-feudal or patrimonial. The regime was not patrimonial because the centre had its own distinctive normative system; the values of the centre were just a pale reflection of those of the periphery. The regime was not imperial-feudal for the centre did not have to face civil societal groups able to challenge it and impinge upon it. The members of the periphery could not develop horizontal loyalties; instead they competed among themselves for a limited number of privileges such as tax-farming rights or quotas for import or export which the centre granted. The Ottoman-Turkish peripheral elements did not develo into an aristocracy or a bourgeoisie with political influence. Consequently, the efforts towards modernization initiated during the nineteenth century took on a particular twist. Modernization meant Westernization, which in tu...
It is supposed that many bureaucratic institutions including army will be regulated by the government after 15th July coup attempt in Turkey. Since bureaucracy which constantly tries to dominate political power has been the most important and superior institution in Turkey for two centuries the regulations should be done regarding not only the Fethullah Gülenist Terror Organisation (FETÖ) but also over the entire bureaucratic tutelage system. For this reason, that power of bureaucracy should be reduced as soon as possible is vitally important. It is obvious that Turkish bureaucracy has been organised like a secular community since Tanzimat period. This community has consisted of a modernisation project which is designed to be embraced by Turkish people, a perception which depends on the superiority of bureaucracy against political power and finally on suspicion towards all individual choices of ordinary people. It is argued in this article that Turkish bureaucracy which has been aimed to transform the whole political realm and the society in Turkey has used a communitarian mind-set in order to accomplish its purposes.
TURKISH POLITICAL LIFE AND THE NATIONALIST FRONT GOVERNMENT IN 1970s
In this article, the importance of Turkey's democratization process on Turkish politics and nationalist front government are discussed. I would argue the importance of the national front government in the democratization process in Turkey. But I show the problems of the nationalist front government in the process of democratization. Also, Political behavior of Ecevit and Demirel and Ecevit's efforts to personalize cyprus. Learn the activities of the nationalist front governments. The general characteristics and activities of the previous governments before the establishment of the nationalist front government. Turkey's biggest problem; right-left battle. Events and protests in the nationalist front government. First and second nationalist front governments and opposition party clashes about many topics. The discourse of polarization in the nationalist front government. The events of corruption in the nationalist front governments. The causes and consequences of growing unrest in Turkey. The events that result in 20 deaths per day and the reason for the increase of this number every day. The danger of fascism in Turkey and will be handled path to the 1980 military coup.
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY ASIA, 2023
This article puts Turkey's current state crisis into a historical perspective. During the transition to neo-liberalism after the hegemony crisis of the late 1970s, a critical objective for those in the high echelons of bureaucracy and ruling politicians was to ensure the security of state apparatuses. However, the policies implemented to achieve this led to fragmentation in both the state and the political spheres. Thus, during the second half of the 1990s and during the 2000s, the state became a field for open warfare between power networks that had established direct links between state apparatuses, political society, and civil society. These fragmentationsthat is the parcellation of state apparatusestriggered an intra-state crisis. Regarding the formation of the state and the political spheres in the neo-liberal era, this article shows that Turkey is a unique case in the debate on variegated forms of authoritarian statism.