Turkish nationalism and Article 301 of the penal code

[north_malaysian]

can anybody define "Turkishness"?

 

[zanjabeela]

I hear what you are saying. I'd like to urge your thoughts into considering Turkey as two things.

1. The nation Turkey

2. The image of Turkey

What might be good for the nation is not always good for the nation's image.


You think that pointing to flaws will allow the growth of identity? How does identity grow?

Thank you for your input guys. As I stated in my first post..Im not here to debate...I am merely here to pick on your thoughts and make you think of new things etc etc etc.

Yes, you are so right when you say that what might be good for Turkey as a nation may not be good for it's image. However, I also think that a nation needs to concern itself with how it's own people, those within it's borders, perceive it...to an extent. Can the nation of Turkey be truly healthy if a significant portion of it's population perceive it negatively? I don't know, perhaps. But, certainly, an internal tug of war will persist until those self-images are resolved. As far as external image, I don't think Turkey needs to give two hoots for how other nations perceive it. That would not be in the best interest of itself as a nation.

No, simply pointing to flaws of any nation's identity is not something that will encourage growth of the nation. It might perpetuate a very doom-and-gloom self-image. Identity grows by allowing questions to flourish, and also pointing out the strong points of a nation's existence. I mean (and I'll just point to one example of a tension within Turkey), there is very little value to Turks or to Kurdish Turks to solely focus on how Kurds are treated as second-class citizens (if they are, in fact...I don't know) when perhaps they could take certain steps to integrate into Turkey and discover what it feels like to be a real Turk. On the other hand, how long will Turkey continue to patrol Kurdish-dominant Turkey, and are the cost, whatever they may be, worth it? Is there something simple Turkey could do in helping Kurds feel more or a Turkish identity? Condemnation is very different from constructive criticism, and all those wanting a reform, whether they be Armenians or Kurds or Turks themselves, will have to discover the fine line separating the two.

 

[zanjabeela]

To what extent do you think the Kurds represent the Turkish national image?

You don't have to answer this by the way. I just think you are onto something...

I know this was a question for Pomak, but I was wondering: if a people are part of a nation, ought not they to be representing the national image? Do they have to be exclusively Kurdish? I ask this because, while far from perfect, the United States has been merging identities and ethnicities in a way that seems to be working. Hence, we have African Americans, Chinese Americans, etc. And didn't the Jews who came to the Ottoman Empire acquire a bit of a Turkish national image, while retaining their Sephardic Jewishness? I'm just having a hard time understanding why Kurds can't (or won't?) do the same? This will have much to do with a Turkish-Kurdish resolution, I'm sure.

Are we focussing too much on the Kurd issue? Did you want us to think exclusively in terms of the Armenian genocide? I am conflating the two, because while one is over and done with, a similar situation could result from the Kurdish conflict...I'm saying that due to the statement of:

A question, would those even be done again, deed for deed, if lets say Kurdistan was slipping away? (edit: rebelling)

I'm gna give you an annoying answer, Pomak.

The Kurds are still rebelling...and the Turks are fighting back...so yes, I think they would do everything they did, deed for deed.

So, I'm talking current events, because it just is on the radar right now.

 

[Pomak]

I know this was a question for Pomak, but I was wondering: if a people are part of a nation, ought not they to be representing the national image? Do they have to be exclusively Kurdish? I ask this because, while far from perfect, the United States has been merging identities and ethnicities in a way that seems to be working. Hence, we have African Americans, Chinese Americans, etc. And didn't the Jews who came to the Ottoman Empire acquire a bit of a Turkish national image, while retaining their Sephardic Jewishness? I'm just having a hard time understanding why Kurds can't (or won't?) do the same? This will have much to do with a Turkish-Kurdish resolution, I'm sure.

Are we focussing too much on the Kurd issue? Did you want us to think exclusively in terms of the Armenian genocide? I am conflating the two, because while one is over and done with, a similar situation could result from the Kurdish conflict...I'm saying that due to the statement of:


So, I'm talking current events, because it just is on the radar right now.

Yeah i second that, sevgi do you want us to ignore the Kurd issue and just focus on the Armenian one?

Also for the the Turkey-USA comparison, the countries were created in slightly different ways. Turkey came about from the ruins of the Ottoman Khalifa/Sultanate. In WW1 the US prez was very high on his idea that all ethnic groups deserve "self determination" and basically (correctly me if im wrong sevgi) Turkey was created for "Turks". But in order to keep the south east, they had to come up with the terminology of "mountain Turks" to describe the Kurds. Otherwise the Americans would of pushed for their independence.

 

[zanjabeela]

Yeah i second that, sevgi do you want us to ignore the Kurd issue and just focus on the Armenian one?

Also for the the Turkey-USA comparison, the countries were created in slightly different ways. Turkey came about from the ruins of the Ottoman Khalifa/Sultanate. In WW1 the US prez was very high on his idea that all ethnic groups deserve "self determination" and basically (correctly me if im wrong sevgi) Turkey was created for "Turks". But in order to keep the south east, they had to come up with the terminology of "mountain Turks" to describe the Kurds. Otherwise the Americans would of pushed for their independence.

Very true, the historical comparison can never be completely accurate, only in very small bits and pieces. I say that mainly because I have known of Turks of Bulgarian descent (expelled from Bulgaria in the 80s) who identify completely as Turks...yet do refer to their Bulgarian heritage. Can Kurds not do something similar? If the Turks will accept them (and that's a genuine if...I don't know that they will or not) as Turks of Kurdish extraction, is holding onto an exclusively Kurdish identity necessary?

And of course, everything you said there, I do agree with. I'm totally thinking out loud.

 

[Pomak]

Very true, the historical comparison can never be completely accurate, only in very small bits and pieces. I say that mainly because I have known of Turks of Bulgarian descent (expelled from Bulgaria in the 80s) who identify completely as Turks...yet do refer to their Bulgarian heritage. Can Kurds not do something similar? If the Turks will accept them (and that's a genuine if...I don't know that they will or not) as Turks of Kurdish extraction, is holding onto an exclusively Kurdish identity necessary?

And of course, everything you said there, I do agree with. I'm totally thinking out loud.

hmm thats interesting. I would really like to know the particulars of their history.
In Bulgaria a Turk of Bulgarian decent can actually mean a ethnic Bulgarian muslim. And since they don't have any "Bulgarian" muslim community that they belong to, they just might identify with the Turks.

But it is a good question. The most obvious thing that strikes me, is that the one difference between Turks in Bulgaria and Kurds in Turkey is that Kurds don't have a Kurdish state.

 

[sevgi]

Yeah we rebelled for 500 years lol, but i mean like the Kurds getting close to setting up their own "Kurdistan" on current Turkish land.

anyways i am happy to be wrong about the "accurate events" issue

Turkey will do anything in their power to make sure this does not happen.

can anybody define "Turkishness"?

Never. Sot objectively anyway. Turkishness is imaginary. That's the point.

Yes, you are so right when you say that what might be good for Turkey as a nation may not be good for it's image. However, I also think that a nation needs to concern itself with how it's own people, those within it's borders, perceive it...to an extent. Can the nation of Turkey be truly healthy if a significant portion of it's population perceive it negatively? I don't know, perhaps. But, certainly, an internal tug of war will persist until those self-images are resolved. As far as external image, I don't think Turkey needs to give two hoots for how other nations perceive it. That would not be in the best interest of itself as a nation.



No, simply pointing to flaws of any nation's identity is not something that will encourage growth of the nation. It might perpetuate a very doom-and-gloom self-image. Identity grows by allowing questions to flourish, and also pointing out the strong points of a nation's existence. I mean (and I'll just point to one example of a tension within Turkey), there is very little value to Turks or to Kurdish Turks to solely focus on how Kurds are treated as second-class citizens (if they are, in fact...I don't know) when perhaps they could take certain steps to integrate into Turkey and discover what it feels like to be a real Turk. On the other hand, how long will Turkey continue to patrol Kurdish-dominant Turkey, and are the cost, whatever they may be, worth it? Is there something simple Turkey could do in helping Kurds feel more or a Turkish identity? Condemnation is very different from constructive criticism, and all those wanting a reform, whether they be Armenians or Kurds or Turks themselves, will have to discover the fine line separating the two.

This is the issue anyway. This is what we are talking about. This is what is happening in Turkey right now. Internal image is what I meant.

I only asked the second question coz that is what you said in your previous post.

 

[zanjabeela]

hmm thats interesting. I would really like to know the particulars of their history.
In Bulgaria a Turk of Bulgarian decent can actually mean a ethnic Bulgarian muslim. And since they don't have any "Bulgarian" muslim community that they belong to, they just might identify with the Turks.

But it is a good question. The most obvious thing that strikes me, is that the one difference between Turks in Bulgaria and Kurds in Turkey is that Kurds don't have a Kurdish state.

Ahhh...I see...so it could the couple folks I know had been Turkishly inclined, regardless. That totally makes sense. Thanks!

And yes, that difference would be key to a lot of issues as far as wanting to retain the Kurdishness.

Sorry, sevgi, for the domination of the Kurdish orientation this topic took. You can steer us back anytime

 

[Pomak]

Turkey will do anything in their power to make sure this does not happen.

I would expect nothing less.

Never. Sot objectively anyway. Turkishness is imaginary. That's the point.

If its imaginary what do the judges base their decision on?

 

[sevgi]

If its imaginary what do the judges base their decision on?

Judges onlu decide what is derogatory towards Turkishness. The article I attached should give you an idea.

Turkishness is imaginary as every turk has his/ her own ideas of what Turkishness is.

For example...to a Turk living in Istanbul, turkishness may mean trying to express all that is western...their main concern for turkeys image might be to join the EU.

For another Turk, turkishness may mean goin off and killing Armenian journalists and shooting at kurds...this may be their understanding of upholding their turkishness and turkish rights.

The former Turk in my example would dispise the latter turk..and vice versa.

 

[KAding]

Turkey will do anything in their power to make sure this does not happen. [me: Talking about splitting off from Turkey]

But why is this? If "Turkishness" is so important, why do they even want to keep non-Turks as part of their nation!? Is it the trauma of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire? Are Turks afraid of a slippery slope, whereby other ethnicities will also demand independence (are there even such other ethnicities nowadays?)?

I know Canadians who would be dancing in the streets if the Quebecois would finally decide to split off .

 

[sevgi]

But why is this? If "Turkishness" is so important, why do they even want to keep non-Turks as part of your nation!? Is it the trauma of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire? Are Turks afraid of a slippery slope, whereby other ethnicities will also demand independence (are there even such other ethnicities nowadays?)?

I know Canadians who would be dancing in the streets if the Quebecois would finally decide to split off .

Its about losing land to a minority.

 

[Pomak]

This is a refutation for the bloke who called AKP "islamists"

http://en.fgulen.com/press-room/col...grand-ambition-turkeys-islamist-danger-l.html

 

[theguest]

These codes are drafted by secular people with secular mindset, so what did you expect? Ofcourse they want to silence dissent and opposition. All taghout Governments want to do that, are the Arab regimes any better? No.

As far as the Armenians are concerned, they were massacred not by Ottomon troops, but by "Young Turk" nationalists, and the Armenians were not angels either, they were killing and massacring Muslim villagers and helping the invading Russians, so they got a bit more then they bargained for.

Also i think some nationalist Kurds are trying to cause division within Turkey by asking for their separate homeland.

If they were calling for a Islamic State they would get much more support, but instead they are working with the Americans and Israelis to try and win a homeland for themselves which is a gross type of nationalism, totally contrary to Islam.

The Ottomon Khilafah gave Kurds, Turks and Arabs equal rights as Muslims, they all lived and worked peacefully together for hundreds of years.

When Arab nationalism in WW1 led to rebellion against the Khilafah, then Turks developed their own nationalism to carve out a identity for themselves (even though ethnically not all Anataolians are "Turks", they were given the title under the new Republic). This left the ethnic "Kurds" isolated.

So the solution to the problems of Turkey lies in Islam, we need to remove nationalism from our hearts and see the world as "Muslim and non-Muslim" as Islam commands us to do.

All Muslims are our brothers, and all Kafirs are brothers of each other.