« Render Unto Atatürk | Main | Enough with Christophobia »
April 19, 2007
The Poverty of Marxism-Sezerism
[Originally published in Turkish Daily News]
Communism is an ideology with different shades and tones. Throughout the 20th century, we have seen its moderate versions such as the one in Tito's Yugoslavia, and its horrible versions such as the one in the Khmer Rouge's Cambodia.
Yet still, communist regimes have some basic common characteristics. First, they are against economic freedom; they want to limit private property and free trade as much as they can. Since Marx argued for the collectivization of the “means of production” (produktionsmittel) in order to avoid “exploitation” by the bourgeoisie, all Marxists have aimed to take them under the control of the state.
Later, Lenin introduced “imperialism” as a substitute for the bourgeoisie, which meant that communists had to protect the “means of production” from the foreign “imperialists” as well.
The second common character of all communist regimes is the suppression of religious freedom. They might introduce ersatz (secular) religions in order to replace the traditional ones, but they have little if any tolerance for the latter. This is not only because that they see traditional religion as the “opium of the people,” but also because the dialectical materialism that underlies their worldview depicts theism as superstition. For them, believing in God — and taking this belief seriously — is an ignorance that stems from the lack of “scientific” thought.
The third character, which is an outcome of the first two, is totalitarianism. The best way to suppress economic and religious freedoms is, of course, to rely on the powers of a state dedicated to the Marxist ideology. Thus, for the Marxist, the state cannot be subordinate to the society and the individual. Quite the contrary, the state has to indoctrinate the citizens and suppress the ones who show signs of dissent.
Sezer's Produktionsmittel
Now you may ask what all this has to do with Turkey's President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, as my title suggests.
Well, let me quote him and then you decide.
Last week, President Sezer gave an address at the War Academies in Ankara, in which he claimed that the Turkish Republic is facing severe threats both from within and without. For him, the “regime” was in danger.
But what were these threats? Well, Sezer unabashedly said:
“The Global System, through the practices of privatization, wants to take over the natural resources and the means of production of countries… The fact that Turkey has not been fully dominated by the Global System is an annoyance for the System countries. And that is thanks to the persistence of the Atatürkist structure against all odds, and the strong stance of the Republican institutions.”
(Note: There is no translation trick here. He literally said “means of production”, or “üretim araçları” in Turkish, which comes straight from Marxist jargon.)
So this is how our President sees the global economy. Like Lenin, he thinks we should prevent the “imperialists” from buying our “means of production.”
Of course there are other political leaders who see the global economy within the same perspective, such as Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela. But while President Chavez restricts economic freedom, he does not interfere in the religious one. As a believer himself, he actually tries to create a synthesis of socialism and Christian values.
The Observant Enemies of The People
President Sezer, on the other hand, is dedicated also to the second big principle of communism: the destruction of religious freedom. He said:
“The social developments within Turkey in the last 15-20 years, the non-modern scenes in private and social life, religious edicts… the wearing of the headscarf in the public sphere despite court decisions… are enough to understand where Turkey wants to be taken to.”
Now, let's be careful. As we all know, secularism is a principle which says that the state should not be governed by religion. And that is all fine. But please note that Mr. Sezer targets the signs of religiosity in “private and social life”!..The fact that some citizens of the Republic dare to wear “non-modern” clothes is enough of a danger for him and his perception of the “regime.”
In his speech Mr. Sezer also mentioned that the graduates of the religious imam-hatip schools and the members of Sufi orders “infiltrate” state institutions. He fails to see that by defining some of the citizens as people who “infiltrate” the system, he openly declares them as second class citizens — or, as a more literal Marxist would prefer to call, “the enemies of the people.”
Of course this is completely against the idea of democracy, which means that all citizens are (created) equal and that they have the right to be in any level of their government regardless of their religious belief. (Imagine what would happen in the US if the President warned, “Practicing Christians are infiltrating the state!”)
People's Republic of Turkey?
But Mr. Sezer is pretty unabashed about all this, because he thinks that the state is not supposed to respect the citizens; but citizens have to obey and agree with the state. Which brings us to the third feature of communism, i.e. totalitarianism. Just look at what Mr. Sezer said on the relation between the state and the individual:
“The ideology of the modern Turkish Republic, which is built upon the principles and revolutions of Atatürk, is the State ideology that all citizens have to support.” (The capital “S” is in the original; perhaps as an expression of the sacredness of the “regime.”)
So, just like in Stalin's USSR, Mao's China or Kim Il Sung's North Korea, we have a “State ideology” that we citizens HAVE TO believe in. Those who fail to do so are not sent to gulags, thank God, but are continuously insulted, threatened and purged by the guardians of the “regime.” (In the past, these guardians used to stage military coups, too, once in a while, but thanks to Turkey's integration with the “imperialist Global System,” they had to tone down a bit.)
It is funny that Mr. Sezer also warned us in his speech against those who “misunderstand democracy.” Apparently we have to understand democracy in the Orwellian way. Therefore, the ideal “democratic” Turkey we have to aspire to has to be some sort of a “Democratic People's Republic of Turkey.”
Well… This is the vision of our President, whose term will end in a few weeks' time. I hope he will enjoy his retirement and perhaps find some spare time to reconsider his political views. I actually don't think he is a Marxist, of course. But there are similarities between all totalitarians and, although they might not be fully aware about each other's views, they speak a similar language. That seems to be the root of “Marxism-Sezerism” — an ideology that does not belong to the Turkey of the 21st century.
Posted by Mustafa Akyol at April 19, 2007 5:22 PM


Huh ! Sezer & Marxism. Isn't it a bit unfair comparison? Marxist will not be happy about it... He is nothing but a ill-tempered state official. I'm in doubt he could manage a grocer, we made him a "president"!!. It's a shame for Turkey.
Posted by: blue at April 20, 2007 2:57 PM
Alla-Turca anti-imperialism originated with the popular reaction against Gegie-watchmen whose duty was to kill tobacco traders selling their merchandise in bazaars instead of delivering to the monopsony. Karl Marx has not been interested with Great Britain's similar practices in India. So turks' marxism has noting to do with him.
Posted by: librarian at November 20, 2007 3:35 PM
Dear Mustafa,
What terminology must we use to describe a political activist who expects progression from medieval/mercantilist institutions such as T. Barolar Birliği (association of lawyers), TMMOB (association of architects and engineers), etc..? A “scientific socialist” or a “scientific sheepish”?
With my warmest regards,
Murat Aygen
Posted by: Murat Aygen at February 27, 2008 3:11 PM
a very bad assessment unfortunately!
you have prejudices about marxism.and also you cannot understand the real socialism and socialism itself.furthermore you misunderstand the difference between marxism and kemalism.socialism is not totalitarian,however the bourgeoisie stucturely use force.marxist are not against the religion,but the exploitators.every religion seem to be with the poor but the reality is completely different.the real performance of islam which is widely distorted since the beginning of the death of the prophet, is a mass.just try to understand the structure of capitalism,private property,the means of production and see the world history as a process.just think how wealth is created.free trade and the global system,maybe you have persanol interests by supporting these kindsof rhetoric.does freedom mean the free trade,the free flow of capital?to me absolutely not.
Posted by: ali aybars at June 17, 2008 9:27 PM