Erdogan about secularism

[KediKesenFare3]

“If the faith of all religious groups in this country is guaranteed in the constitution, and the state’s equal distance to all religious groups is a foundation, why do you need to emphasize Islam? If I can live my faith as a Muslim the way I want to, the issue is over. If a Christian can live his/her Christianity, if a Jew can live his/her Jewishness or an atheist can live his/her atheism, the issue is also over for them.”

- Recep Tayyip Erdogan

If you decide collectively to become a secular state - please - don't take Turkey as a role model, where secularism was deliberately abused by our Kemalist elites as an 'antireligious' tool to oppress the religious classes of our society. It will backfire. Don't follow our path blindly. Learn from our failures and be a trustworthy secular state and socially conservative society (my ideal). Liberalism ≠ secularism. You don't have to abandon your identity, religion, traditions and culture. You can decide which parts of your public affairs should be secularized and which parts shouldn't be.

Like I said several times before, secularism and Islam don't contradict each other necessarily. With regard to Turkey you shouldn't forget that the Kemalists never in the history of our republic won a free and democratic election overwhelmingly; they never had reached the absolute majority in secular Turkey. That is the reason why our Kemalistic military staged several coups against civilian governments in the past. They weren't capable of winning a free and democratic election in the first place because ordinary people simply didn't trust them.

And even as a secular and democratic person I have to admit that a misapplication of secularism can lead to an outcome that is diametrically opposed to the original ideas of secularism. This happened in Turkey to some extent.

But secularism does not mean that Pakistanis have to be gay like certain people claimed. This is ridiculous. You don't have to consume alcohol, you don't have to eat pork, you don't have to party if you don't want to. Secularism is simply a social concept of free choice.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

Your observations are very insightful, fantastic piece buddy!

@Kaptaan this would interest you as well

I recently wrote my master's thesis about Gallipoli, wherein i touched upon these issues a little bit, i'll share some of the relevant parts here with you. Hope it will interest you

 

[war&peace]

“If the faith of all religious groups in this country is guaranteed in the constitution, and the state’s equal distance to all religious groups is a foundation, why do you need to emphasize Islam? If I can live my faith as a Muslim the way I want to, the issue is over. If a Christian can live his/her Christianity, if a Jew can live his/her Jewishness or an atheist can live his/her atheism, the issue is also over for them.”

- Recep Tayyip Erdogan

If you decide collectively to become a secular state - please - don't take Turkey as a role model, where secularism was deliberately abused by our Kemalist elites as an 'antireligious' tool to oppress the religious classes of our society. It will backfire. Don't follow our path blindly. Learn from our failures and be a trustworthy secular state and socially conservative society (my ideal). Liberalism ≠ secularism. You don't have to abandon your identity, religion, traditions and culture. You can decide which parts of your public affairs should be secularized and which parts shouldn't be.

Like I said several times before, secularism and Islam don't contradict each other necessarily. With regard to Turkey you shouldn't forget that the Kemalists never in the history of our republic won a free and democratic election overwhelmingly; they never had reached the absolute majority. That is the reason why our Kemalistic military staged several coups against civilian governments in the past. They weren't capable of winning a free and democratic election in the first place because ordinary people simply didn't trust them.

And even as a secular and democratic person I have to admit that a misapplication of secularism can lead to an outcome that is diametrically opposed to the original ideas of secularism. This happened in Turkey to some extent.

But secularism does not mean that Pakistanis have to be gay like certain people claimed. This is ridiculous. You don't have to consume alcohol, you don't have to eat pork, you don't have to party if you don't want to. Secularism is simply an social concept of free choice.

Good informative article about Turkey. In Pakistan liberal fascists try to portray Turkish nation as secular and anti-Islam and they openly lie but that's how they earn their bread 'n' butter.
As far as, Pakistan is concerned.. 97% of the population is Muslim and it was created in the name of Islam so any effort to force secularism on 97% majority will backfire with dire consequences.

 

[MultaniGuy]

Good informative article about Turkey. In Pakistan liberal fascists try to portray Turkish nation as secular and anti-Islam and they openly lie but that's how they earn their bread 'n' butter.
As far as, Pakistan is concerned.. 97% of the population is Muslim and it was created in the name of Islam so any effort to force secularism on 97% majority will backfire with dire consequences.

This whole secularism is all rubbish. Pakistan won't accept secularism.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

A couple of excerpts from my thesis which i think is relevant

The status and place of the Ottoman Empire in the Turkish national history has been highly controversial. The official national history has been built on carefully forged boundaries that separate and distance the Turkish national experience from its Ottoman predecessor.12 According to historian John R. Gillis, it is at a moment of historical rupture that the modern nation-state has inserted itself into being. Breaking from the immediate past serves to mark the onset of a “founding moment”, creating a turning-point which marks the end of the old and the beginning of the new. In the words of Gillis “..people who have never seen or heard of one another, yet who regard themselves as having a common history… are bound together as much by forgetting as by remembering..”13

In the Turkish national history novelty and modernity were achieved by the creation of a historical rupture by the founding of the Republic on 29 October, 1923. To create a new beginning, an end had to be created as well and this required the distancing from the Ottoman rule and the Islamic Caliphate. The Ottoman past was constructed as worthless, corrupt and declining, something that could not possibly be worth celebrating. The first official Turkish national history book The Outline of Turkish History, which was prepared and published under the guidance of Kemal in 1930 by the Turkish History Committee made this abundantly clear:
“The sons of Osman had long lost the ability and the honor to rule the Turkish nation…. Almost no one contemplated the possibility of overthrowing the enemy armies and establishing an independent national Turkish State. (But) knowing the heroism of Turkish nation in battlefields, the hardship it is facing and its needs, Mustafa Kemal took on the leadership of the nation and initiated an opposition in Anatolia (1919)… Mustafa Kemal, who saved the Turks from the sons of Osman and the worthless Caliphate, formed the Republic. The Gazi (veteran), who was elected as the president of the Republic engaged the Turkish nation on a path of true advancement and progress”14

The success of the Kemalist state was largely predicated on joining the European civilization which meant joining the European Union. However, Turkey's attempts to join the EU saw drawbacks in 1987 when the EU decided to defer Turkey‟s membership for an indefinite period. Turkey‟s aspirations for full EU membership go beyond fulfilling economic self-interest; it represents the last step to prove Turkey's Europeanness. EU membership is particularly important for Turkey‟s westernized/secular elite because it would confirm the success of Kemalist reforms.45 The inability to join Europe, therefore, undermined the Kemalist monopoly on political power and brought about the election of the Islamist Welfare Party (Refah Partisi) in 1995. The Welfare Party, led by Necmettin Erbakan, opposed the official secularist identity of the state and based its own identity on the binary opposition of West versus East. It rejected the “West within” meaning the Kemalist establishment which wished to create a Western Turkish identity devoid of the former “glorious” Islamic Ottoman Empire. In the eyes of the Kemalist establishment and the Turkish Armed Forces, the new Islamist government infringed the Republic's secular principles46

Back in 1997 when Erdogan challenged Kemalist history via the Conquest of Constantinople he asked “God for the recovery of the freedom of religion that had been granted by Mehmet the Conqueror.”58 What was particularly peculiar in Erdogan‟s rhetoric at that time was his association of the Ottoman era with freedom of religion which would endure in his Canakkale rhetoric. The combination of liberal democratic rights with Islamic and Ottoman tones undoubtedly derived from Erdogan‟s Muslim background. However, Erdogan adopted more liberal lines and avoided pursuing strictly Islamist identity politics. Erdogan‟s acceptance of the secular and liberal political framework, nonetheless, has not deterred him from using Islamic language in politics since his election as Prime Minister in 2003. Quite to the contrary, he has widely exploited Islamic language in dealing with emotionally charged issues, predominantly in order to convert Islamic sentiments into votes.

For the Republicans the Ottoman Empire and its Islamic elements represented all that was wrong with the Turkish state. These elements, it appears, endured in the Turkish society despite the Republic's efforts to undermine them. Taking a more distanced view, Erdogan's Islamic Canakkale rhetoric took off most likely because the secularist and Kemalist elite has lost its monopoly of the intellectual debate. Historian Erik J. Zürcher claims that many members of the old subject class have now been educated that they can put forward social and cultural projects of their own to challenge the secularist one

 

[Indus Pakistan]

@Zulkarneyn @KediKesenFare Fatastic stuff guy's. I am very interested in this. Will explore my ideas and thoughts later.

And Zulkarneyn do tell us more about your masters thesis on Gallipoli.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

Good informative article about Turkey. In Pakistan liberal fascists try to portray Turkish nation as secular and anti-Islam and they openly lie but that's how they earn their bread 'n' butter.
As far as, Pakistan is concerned.. 97% of the population is Muslim and it was created in the name of Islam so any effort to force secularism on 97% majority will backfire with dire consequences.

Pakistani friends. Turkey was a failed state up untill the early 2000s. Throughout the 20th century, one honorless corrupt Kemalist government after the other brought our nation further into carnage and economic crisis. After the Republic was created in 1923 Mustafa Kemal wished to develop the nation following European principles of industrialization and culture. This means undermining Ottoman and Islamic elements and legacies. To be sure, Ataturk was a visionary leader, and he could see how the late Ottoman leaders 17th to 19th century had become alien from their own populace and alien to science and development, the culprit as he saw it was Islam, as that was what brought lazyness and dogmas that prevented progress. In many respects he was right, the Islamic interpretation in late Ottoman period was corrupt, ineffective and couldn't compete with European enlightenment movements. In other words the culprit was clearly the idiotic Islamic interpretation - not Islam or people's lifestyles'.

Decades after decades Kemalist governments set out to erase Islamic and Ottoman elements from society, and it backfired badly, they alienated and infuriated the majority of Turks who wanted to get educated while remaining muslim and adhering to Ottoman values that they had held dearly and proudly. For 80 years, from 1923 to 2003 Turkey was a laughing stock. Muslims were denied education, so they went to Europe and were educated in these countries while keeping close to their core Ottoman values, my family and kedikesenfare and millions of Turks in Europe's history is almost identical. We preserved our identity and dignity without the least doubt in our minds and hearts. Ottomanism and Islam has taught us lessons: to be just, honest, copassionate and streneous in our eucational or career life.

What happened? Turks in Europe got together and fought for this cause we know to be true. We Created Milli Görüs and supported leaders like Erbakan and Erdogan. In 2003 AKP got elected, and in 10 years we tripled our economy, infrastructure, health, education leaped decades that were held back when Kemalist leaders repressed their own people.

There are many lecture for Pakistan and all Muslim countries. Success was attained once we respected our people and listened to their grievances and concerns. Once we got rid of our corrupt incompetent politicians who hid behind their Kemalist ideologies which forbid our sisters education and dignity. I believe Pakistan will shine, respect every single citizen and dignify them

 

[xenon54 out]

Decades after decades Kemalist governments set out to erase Islamic and Ottoman elements from society

Now your being overly dramatic here, sure head scarfs were banned from public buildings (as all other religious smybols) but the Mosques were always state funded, Presidency of Religious Affairs has been established 1924, that Kemalists wanted to erase Islam is just a myth.

In fact Turkish state is only funding institutions of Sunni Islam in Turkey, this was the case under Kemalists and still the case in AKP rule, Christian Churches only get occationally help for renovations while Alevis and Jews get nothing even thought they are paying their taxes too.

 

[Neptune]

“If the faith of all religious groups in this country is guaranteed in the constitution, and the state’s equal distance to all religious groups is a foundation, why do you need to emphasize Islam? If I can live my faith as a Muslim the way I want to, the issue is over. If a Christian can live his/her Christianity, if a Jew can live his/her Jewishness or an atheist can live his/her atheism, the issue is also over for them.”

- Recep Tayyip Erdogan

If you decide collectively to become a secular state - please - don't take Turkey as a role model, where secularism was deliberately abused by our Kemalist elites as an 'antireligious' tool to oppress the religious classes of our society. It will backfire. Don't follow our path blindly. Learn from our failures and be a trustworthy secular state and socially conservative society (my ideal). Liberalism ≠ secularism. You don't have to abandon your identity, religion, traditions and culture. You can decide which parts of your public affairs should be secularized and which parts shouldn't be.

Like I said several times before, secularism and Islam don't contradict each other necessarily. With regard to Turkey you shouldn't forget that the Kemalists never in the history of our republic won a free and democratic election overwhelmingly; they never had reached the absolute majority. That is the reason why our Kemalistic military staged several coups against civilian governments in the past. They weren't capable of winning a free and democratic election in the first place because ordinary people simply didn't trust them.

And even as a secular and democratic person I have to admit that a misapplication of secularism can lead to an outcome that is diametrically opposed to the original ideas of secularism. This happened in Turkey to some extent.

But secularism does not mean that Pakistanis have to be gay like certain people claimed. This is ridiculous. You don't have to consume alcohol, you don't have to eat pork, you don't have to party if you don't want to. Secularism is simply an social concept of free choice.

Tell me do the jews, christians and atheists in Turkey are discriminated against? Cloud of lies...

 

[Zulkarneyn]

Now your being overly dramatic here, sure head scarfs were banned from public buildings (as all other religious smybols) but the Mosques were always state funded, Presidency of Religious Affairs has been established 1924, that Kemalists wanted to erase Islam is just a myth.

In fact Turkish state is only funding institutions of Sunni Islam in Turkey, this was the case under Kemalists and still the case in AKP rule, Christian Churches only get occationally help for renovations while Alevis and Jews get nothing even thought they are paying their taxes too.

I look at facts and realities. In the beginning the Republic set out to reinvigorate Turkish society and rid itself of Islamic elements. I've repeatedly underlined that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was a visionary leader and i respect him for that. I actually dont think we could have come very far without his leadership. But this doesn't mean he was a supreme entity void of any faults. Ataturk did what he could do and many of his undertakings have been instrumental in the Republic's creation. Yet governments following Kemal ruined much of what the Republic was set out to accomplish, they hid behind Ataturk's name and alienated the majority of Turks and undermined their lifestyle and made an enemy of their own people.

 

[Timur]

for a muslim lets better say for a mu'min secularism is like eating pork..

 

[xenon54 out]

I look at facts and realities. In the beginning the Republic set out to reinvigorate Turkish society and rid itself of Islamic elements. I've repeatedly underlined that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was a visionary leader and i respect him for that. I actually dont think we could have come very far without his leadership. But this doesn't mean he was a supreme entity void of any faults. Ataturk did what he could do and many of his undertakings have been instrumental in the Republic's creation. Yet governments following Kemal ruined much of what the Republic was set out to accomplish, they hid behind Ataturk's name and alienated the majority of Turks and undermined their lifestyle and made an enemy of their own people.

Ok lets look at facts, you say kemalist goverments wanted to erase islam based on what?
-Headscarf ban on public schools was just one of the bans which took effect for all other religious symbols aswell.
-Translating Quran into Turkish was so that people would finally understand what they are reading.
-Ezan in Turkish, well i dont know why, most probably a result of nationalistic policy but i dont see any sign of erasing Islam either.

Does it make sense to you that a goverment that wants to erase Islam publicly funding Mosques and Imams education? To me not really to be honest.
What the kemalist done is closing the way for extremists to use religion for their benefits by;
A) taking responsibility in educating clerics
B) making mosques financially independent from idividuals by publicly funding them
C) preventing corruption of religion by educating people in state funded religious schools

etc. etc.

All of those privileges havent been given to any other religion or sect so how exactly were kemalists erasing Islam, am i missing something here?

 

[Selim I]

Ok lets look at facts, you say kemalist goverments wanted to erase islam based on what?
-Headscarf ban on public schools was just one of the bans which took effect for all other religious symbols aswell.
-Translating Quran into Turkish was so that people would finally understand what they are reading.
-Ezan in Turkish, well i dont know why, most probably a result of nationalistic policy but i dont see any sign of erasing Islam either.

Does it make sense to you that a goverment that wants to erase Islam publicly funding Mosques and Imams education? To me not really to be honest.
What the kemalist done is closing the way for extremists to use religion for their benefits by;
A) taking responsibility in educating clerics
B) making mosques financially independent from idividuals by publicly funding them
C) preventing corruption of religion by educating people in state funded religious schools

etc. etc.

All of those privileges havent been given to any other religion or sect so how exactly were kemalists erasing Islam, am i missing something here?

Headscarf ban in a country with 99% Muslims population? That surely seems as a very secular and pro-Islamic move. Very insightful rule indeed.

Translation of Qur'an into Turkish happened long before Atatürk. Turkish language doesn't consist from 1923.

Adhaan (Call for prayer) into Turkish language was clearly also very insightful thing to do, when they knew majority of people are Muslim and even after people were protesting against it, it was very delicate to insist that it should remain Turkish.

Now, away with all this none-sense. Headscarf ban is truly one of his greatest "visions" of moving towards a "modern" western life-style. Before he can change his people towards a new entity, he must destroy the constructed entity in people, and this was done with forced rules, like headscarf ban and the hat-law. He was forcing an entire society to change into western life-style. This is the biggest crime one can commit.

If I for example were the new leader in Turkey, and I see that Japan and Korea are doing very well, and I predict that they will do very well in the future. And if forcefully bring new rules to change people towards being more Korean and Japanese, and make new laws, change the alphabet into Japanese (or Korean) such that people can't read, demonizing Islam and its values such that people forget their religion. What would you think about all this? The only people who'd like this idea, are people with no honor, no dignity, no cultural bonds, no faith - or more simply, people with a slave-mind (who's victim of assimilation).

 

[Mucahit]

for a muslim lets better say for a mu'min secularism is like eating pork..

lf that's the case, why are you living in Germany?

You despise it yet you live in a European country.

You know that's exactly the reason why Germans hate Turks, l lived there for 5 years and saw how ignorant and backward those Turks were...They still think they live in their villages from 1960's.


First, Muslims destroy their own country then they run to a European country and demand *Sharia for Europe*.

Erdoğan and his party may have done some good things in the past overall but they also made too many mistakes.

 

[xenon54 out]

Headscarf ban in a country with 99% Muslims population? That surely seems as a very secular and pro-Islamic move. Very insightful rule indeed.

Translation of Qur'an into Turkish happened long before Atatürk. Turkish language doesn't consist from 1923.

Adhaan (Call for prayer) into Turkish language was clearly also very insightful thing to do, when they knew majority of people are Muslim and even after people were protesting against it, it was very delicate to insist that it should remain Turkish.

Now, away with all this none-sense. Headscarf ban is truly one of his greatest "visions" of moving towards a "modern" western life-style. Before he can change his people towards a new entity, he must destroy the constructed entity in people, and this was done with forced rules, like headscarf ban and the hat-law. He was forcing an entire society to change into western life-style. This is the biggest crime one can commit.

If I for example were the new leader in Turkey, and I see that Japan and Korea are doing very well, and I predict that they will do very well in the future. And if forcefully bring new rules to change people towards being more Korean and Japanese, and make new laws, change the alphabet into Japanese (or Korean) such that people can't read, demonizing Islam and its values such that people forget their religion. What would you think about all this? The only people who'd like this idea, are people with no honor, no dignity, no cultural bonds, no faith - or more simply, people with a slave-mind (who's victim of assimilation).

Did you see me claiming anything here? I just asked how Islam should have been erased at all, so far no satifactory answer was delivered.

And regarding Culture, Turks also had another culture, religion, language before islam, times are changing so do people, but ofcourse everyone is free to pretend as if it was 600 a.d. as long as he doesnt disturb other people.