rfmcdpei: [BRIEF NOTE] Liberalism needs better defenders

Randy McDonald (

rfmcdpei) wrote,
@ 2007-05-10 19:11:00

Entry tags:

clash of civilizations, clash of ideologies, european union, turkey

[BRIEF NOTE] Liberalism needs better defenders
Below is the conclusion of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's Los Angeles Times commentary "Can secular Turkey survive democracy?".

An important trait of liberalism, however, is the opportunity to learn by trial and error. Turkish secular liberals must start their own grass-roots movement, one with the message of individual freedom. They must restore the confidence of the electorate in entrusting Turkey's economy to them, and they must reconquer the institutions of education, information, police and justice.

They must also make EU leaders understand and respect the fact that the army and the Constitutional Court — besides defending the country and the constitution — are also, and maybe even more important, designed to protect Turkish democracy from Islam.

Bringing back true secularism does not mean just any secularism. It means secularism that protects individual freedoms and rights, not the ultra-nationalist kind that breeds an environment in which Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" is a bestseller, the Armenian genocide is denied and minorities are persecuted. Hrant Dink, the Armenian editor, was murdered by such a nationalist.

It is this mix of virulent nationalism and predatory Islam in Turkey that makes the challenge for Turkish secular liberals greater than for any other liberal movement today.

Two observations.

1. Any country where the rule of law can be maintained only through the machinations of a deep state that controls the secret services and the military likely should abandon all hope as to the possibility of European Union membership. Neither Francoist Spain nor Titoist Yugoslavia recommended themselves as EEC candidates--why should Kemalist Turkey be different?

2. The assassination of Hrant Dink that refers to was carried out by a teenager who seems to have been motivated by a nationalist that combined Islamic fundamentalism with secular Turkish nationalism. Countries tend not to move beyond murderous narrow-mindedness if one gives the ideologies that undergird this narrow-mindedness control over society in general.

UPDATE (12:24 AM, 11 May 2007): Thanks to

angel80 and

optimussven for correcting me on the ideology of Dink's assassin, such as it was.

(Post a new comment)

angel80
2007-05-11 12:09 am UTC (link)

She did mention that the Hrant Dink assassination was carried out "by such a nationalist".

The big demo in Istanbul was possibly a start, but I'm not sure to what extent it included 'such nationalists'. In any case I'm inclined to think that, as with Erdogan, an Islamic president with a popular mandate would not attempt to impose fundamentalist rule. Moreover, it would be an important lesson to the military that they can't maintain their 'deep state' forever. I think there would be more hope for Turkey under an elected Islamic leadership with a well-organized secular opposition, than in a situation where secularism is imposed by force with a well-organized Islamic opposition.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	rfmcdpei 2007-05-11 04:30 am UTC (link)
	Thanks for the correction. At any rate, I agree that aggressive laicism won't work in the long run. There's no particular reason to think Islam as being incapable of the sort of accomodation to modernity that Christianity has made, and no particular reason to suspect that Turkish Islam is either a homogeneous whole or especially incapable of this. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

georgesdelatour
2007-05-28 06:40 pm UTC (link)

You're making a massive assumption of broad equivalence between Christianity and Islam, and between the teachings and examples of Jesus and Muhammad. But you don't provide any evidence for it.

To accommodate to modernity, Muslims will have to disown virtually all of Muhammad's teachings and actions after he left Mecca. They will have to give up seeing him as al-insan al-kamil. Christians never had to make such a renunciation of Jesus.

One of Jesus' most famous remarks was "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's". The founder of Christianity thereby explicitly separated Church and State. The founder of Islam explicitly rejected this separation.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rfmcdpei 2007-05-29 06:35 pm UTC (link)
	You're making a massive assumption of broad equivalence between Christianity and Islam, and between the teachings and examples of Jesus and Muhammad. But you don't provide any evidence for it. Point. I should have said "Muslims," instead. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	georgesdelatour 2007-05-28 06:09 pm UTC (link)
	An Islamist president, whose very motivation for entering political life is his belief in political Islam, will, of course, try to use his powers of office to promote Islamist policies. Just as a Gaullist French president will try to promote Gaullist policies, a Republican US president Republican policies etc. Why else would he want the job? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	angel80 2007-05-30 11:24 am UTC (link)
	I don't recall suggesting otherwise. Do you think there's something wrong with a democratically elected Islamist coming to power? Surely it's a question for the Turks to decide themselves? (Reply to this)(Parent)

optimussven
2007-05-11 02:00 am UTC (link)

I can't read the full article because I'm not signed-up with the LA Times, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali once again just needs to shut-up. Not only can secular Turkey survive democracy it can also survive one in which slightly conservative Muslims get elected. What she fails to see is that a Turkey run by AK Partisi is a Turkey less isolationist Turkey and one more on the path to the EU.

As for Dink's assassin, he was not a nationalist in the old Turkish style. He is part of a new breed of nationalists taht also have strong Islamist sympathies. They believe in both the Turkishness and Muslimness of Turkey. The most nationalist party, MHP, has in recent years found that its strongest support comes from Turkey's most conservative areas.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	rfmcdpei 2007-05-11 04:43 am UTC (link)
	Thanks for the correction. There's "religious with consent" and then there's "religious without consent." Boneheaded moves like the attempt to criminalize adultery do worry me somewhat, but on the whole the AK seems to be as responsibly Islamic and democratic-minded as most Christian Democratic parties were when they got started, i.e. enough to work with. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	optimussven 2007-05-11 12:20 pm UTC (link)
	Exactly. Sometimes might reach too far, but are usually beaten back. Erdoğan, when he was mayor of Istanbul also tried to ban alcohol. It didn't get very far. For being such a secularist I wonder what Hirsi Ali's feelings are on the US, now that she's been run out of Europe. If Turkey's democratic future looks like anything, it looks like the US. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 07:25 pm UTC (link)

"on the whole the AK seems to be as responsibly Islamic and democratic-minded as most Christian Democratic parties were when they got started"

The AKP strikes me as considerably less Islamic than the Polish far right is Catholic, and quite a bit more sensible about the public role of religion. I'm not a fan of religious-based parties in general, but by the standards of the breed, the AKP is pretty tame.

Jonathan Edelstein

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rfmcdpei 2007-05-12 12:48 am UTC (link)
	The AKP strikes me as considerably less Islamic than the Polish far right is Catholic, and quite a bit more sensible about the public role of religion. C'mon. You know that Jesus Christ would make a great king of Poland, don't you? ;-) (Reply to this)(Parent)

secularism
(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 07:36 pm UTC (link)

What the Christian world in general and the Europeans in particular do no wish to understand is the very constitution of the Turkish armed forces in protecting the country from its foreign and domestic enemies: The domestic enemy are those who are intent of disintegrating and thus destroying, the Republic, democracy and laicism in the country. These forces are being supported by the western deep states which cannot stomach a modern, democratic and equally civilized Turkey because of their culturally inherent dogma- "civilisation" is the monopoly of the Christians. They cannot stand a civilized secular Muslim country at the same level as theirs. That is why Merkels and Sarkozys and others refuse Turkey's membership to the UN. That is why they deal and support all the primitive İslamic states and sell them all kind of weapons including sensitive technologies at the highest prices. They produce all the mortal weapons not to defend themselves but to export them to the porrr 3rd world and oil rich countries so that the Latter can use them for mutual annihilation. Disn't Huttus massacred Tutis by the French supplies weapons before the eyes of the Christain manipulated UN Security Council? Consider the Saddam report Sarkozy and the likes are conservative Christians who cannot sit side by side with a country where the popuylation is overwhelmingly Muslim. They cannot digest another culture to be even with themselves in a European Organisation where a Muslim country would have a say!
Consider Saddam's report to the UN in which he divulged the dishonesty of all the European countries(Germany, France, British, Italy, the Dutch, American,Russian etc)which exported to Iraq all the weapons in spite of the strict(!)arms and economic embargo imposed on the Latter by themselves through the UN ! In fact they encourage islamic fundamentalism(Saudi Arabia, former Afganistan, Pakistan etc.) through which they can exploit their richess.Do they have the right then to complain about regretful incidents such as the ones of 9/11, Spain, England etc.?
The raise of nationalismin Turkey is a product of senseless European and American policies: They reject the membership of Turkey to the EU on he false and dishonest grounds as I menioned above. the US and the EU countries support the terrorist assaults of the PKK terrrorists. They side with the Armenian allege that the shameful mutual massacres that took place in the Eastern Anatolia in 1915 is "genocide". This an insult on the Turkish nation and people. Turks cannot and will never accept such a false incrimination. The more they insist the more people will be pushed , as a defensive mecahnism, to natinalism. On he other hand Armenia and the Armenian diaspora has become ultra nationalist since 1960s by a genocide fixation that became to form their "riason d'etre". Hence "genocide" became the whole of their identity! Ayan al Hirsi must make more reading of this matter not excluding the side of the story.
Turkish critics hateful murder of Hrant Dink must also consider what Hrant Dink thought of the European, American,Armenian and Diaspora's behaviour on the issue of "genocide". They are on the YouTube videos in Turkish.
Today Turkish professors are discussing freely the matter of "genocide" some şn favoıur of its occurrence, in Turkey! Can anybody survive in Armenia or among the diaspora Armenians who slghtly express doubt of the occurrence of " genoıcide"?

(Reply to this)

(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 08:06 pm UTC (link)

secularism
(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 07:36 pm UTC (link)
What the Christian world in general and the Europeans in particular do not wish to understand is the very constitution of the Turkish armed forces in protecting the country from its foreign and domestic enemies: The domestic enemy are those who are intent of disintegrating and thus destroying the Republic, democracy and laicism-secularism in the country. These forces are being supported by the western deep states which cannot stomach a modern, democratic and equally civilized Turkey because of their culturally inherent dogma- "civilisation is the monopoly of the Christians". They cannot stand a civilized secular Muslim country at the same level as theirs. That is why Merkels and Sarkozys(semi fascists) and others refuse Turkey's membership to the EU. That is why they deal and support all the primitive İslamic states and sell them all kind of weapons including sensitive technologies at the highest prices. They produce all the mortal weapons not to defend themselves but to export them to the poor 3rd world and oil rich countries so that the Latter can use them for mutual annihilation. Didn't Huttus massacred Tuttis by the French supplied weapons before the eyes of the Christain manipulated UN Security Council? Sarkozy and the likes are conservative Christians (pseudo fascists) who cannot sit side by side with a country where the population is overwhelmingly Muslim. They cannot digest another culture to be even with themselves in a European Organisation where a Muslim country would also have a say! These are the inhuman middle age and colonialst heritage of the so- called democratic, humanist West and the US!
Consider Saddam's report to the UN in which he divulged the dishonesty of all the European countries(Germany, France, British, Italy, the Dutch, American,Russian etc)which exported to Iraq all the most destructive, şincluding chemical (and nuclear technology and material) weapons in spite of the strict(!)arms and economic embargo imposed on the Latter by themselves through the UN ! He explains openly how he bribed the UN officials to breach the economic embargo! Shamelesss people. Then let hundred thousands of children die because of economic embargo which included also the most needed medicines. How can they claim that Saddam was inhuman! In fact they encourage islamic fundamentalism(Saudi Arabia, former Afganistan, Pakistan etc.) through which they can exploit their richess.Do they have the right then to complain about regretful incidents such as the ones of 9/11, Spain, England etc.?
The raise of nationalism in Turkey is a product of senseless European and American policies: They reject the membership of Turkey to the EU on he false and dishonest grounds as I mentioned above. Turkish people feel cheated.The US and the EU countries tolerate and support the terrorist assaults of the PKK terrrorists on Turkish people and territory although this terror organization appear on their list of terrorist organizations! They concur with the Armenian allegations which define the shameful mutual massacres that took place through Russian, British, French and at their Missionaries' instigations in the Eastern Anatolia in 1915, as "genocide". This is an insult on the Turkish nation and people. Turks cannot and will never accept such a false incrimination. The more they insist the more people will be pushed , as a defensive mechanism, towards nationalism. In the meantime Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have become ultra-ünationalist since 1960s through a genocide fixation that became to form their "riason d'etre". Hence "genocide" became the whole of their identity! Without "Ayan al Hirsi must make more reading of this matter not excluding the side of the story.
Turkish critics hateful murder of Hrant Dink must also consider what Hrant Dink thought of the European, American,Armenian and Diaspora's behaviour on the issue of "genocide". They are on the YouTube videos in Turkish.
Today Turkish professors are discussing freely the matter of "genocide" some şn favoıur of its occurrence, in Turkey! Can anybody survive in Armenia or among the diaspora Armenians who slghtly express doubt of the occurrence of " genoıcide"?

(Reply to this)

(Reply to this)

Aayan Hirsi&Turkish Nationalism
(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 09:27 pm UTC (link)

(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 08:06 pm UTC (link)
secularism
(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 07:36 pm UTC (link)
The follwing is the final version(part1) of the text. The previous versions were drafts accidentally sent by a wrong click!
"What the Christian world in general and the Europeans in particular do not wish to understand is the very constitution of the Turkish armed forces in protecting the country from its foreign and domestic enemies: The domestic enemy are those who are intent of disintegrating and thus destroying the Republic, democracy and laicism-secularism in the country. These forces are being supported by the western deep states which cannot stomach a modern, democratic and equally civilized Turkey because of their culturally inherent dogma- "civilisation is the monopoly of the Christians". They cannot stand a civilized secular Muslim country at the same level as theirs. That is why Merkels and Sarkozys(semi fascists) and others refuse Turkey's membership to the EU. That is why they, together with the US, deal and support all the primitive Islamic states and sell them all kind of weapons including sensitive technologies at the highest prices. They produce all the mortal weapons not to defend themselves but to export them to the poor 3rd world and oil rich countries so that the Latter can use them for mutual annihilation. Didn't Huttus massacred Tuttis by the French supplied weapons before the eyes of the Christain manipulated UN Security Council? Sarkozy and the likes are conservative Christians (pseudo fascists) who cannot sit side by side with a country where the population is overwhelmingly Muslim. They cannot digest another culture to be even with themselves in a European organisation where a Muslim country would also have a say! These are the inhuman middle age values and colonialst heritage of the so- called democratic, humanist West and that of the US!
Consider Saddam's report to the UN in which he divulged the dishonesty of all the European countries(Germany, France, British, Italy, the Dutch, American,Russian etc)which exported to Iraq all the most destructive, including chemical (and nuclear technology and material) weapons in spite of the strict(!)arms and economic embargo imposed on the Latter by themselves through the UN ! He explains openly how he bribed the UN officials to breach the economic embargo! Shamelesss nations. They let hundred thousands of children die because of economic embargo which included also the most needed medicines(middle ages inquisition mentality). How can they claim that Saddam was inhuman! In fact don' they encourage islamic fundamentalism(Saudi Arabia, former Afganistan, Pakistan etc.) through which they can exploit the Latter's richess.Do they have the right then to complain about regretful incidents such as the ones of 9/11, Spain, England etc.?

(Reply to this)

Aayan Hirsi Ali& Turkish Nationalism(Prt 2)
(Anonymous)
2007-05-11 09:35 pm UTC (link)

Part 2
The raise of nationalism in Turkey is a product of senseless European and American policies: They reject the membership of Turkey to the EU on the false and dishonest grounds as I mentioned above. Turkish people feel betrayed and cheated.The US and the EU countries tolerate and support the terrorist assaults of the PKK terrrorists on Turkish people and territory although this terror organization appear on their list of terrorist organizations! They concur with the Armenian allegations which define the shameful mutual massacres that took place through Russian, British, French and their Missionaries' instigations in the Eastern Anatolia in 1915, as "genocide". This is an insult on the Turkish nation and people. Turks cannot and will never accept such a false incrimination. The more they insist the more people will be pushed , as a defensive mechanism, towards nationalism. In the meantime Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have become ultra-ünationalist since 1960s through a genocide fixation that became to form their "raison d'etre". Hence "genocide" became the whole of their identity! Ayan al Hirsi must make more reading on this issue not excluding the other side of the story".
Critics of hateful murder of Hrant Dink should also consider what Hrant Dink thought of the European, American, Armenian and Diaspora's behaviour on the issue of "genocide". They are on the YouTube videos in Turkish.
Today Turkish professors are discussing freely the matter of "genocide" defending its occurrence,in Turkey! Can anybody survive in Armenia or among the diaspora Armenians who slightly express the possibility of its non- occurrence?
Armenia and Daispora Armenians strongly contend that Armenian "genocide" is an established and proved fact. Turks say that " we have other opinion and proofs". What should be done? Fight until another annihilative war or talk about it? Armenians and their diaspora seem to opt for the Former which is not in the interest of Armenian, Turkish peoples and the peace in the region and in the world.

(Reply to this)

(Reply to thi

(Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…