« The Obstacles to Islamo-Liberalism | Main | Turkey Is Getting More Secular, Not Religious »
September 20, 2008
Let's Get Over With This Crusade-Phobia
[Originally published in Turkish Daily News]
The most tragic-comic news story of this week came from the central Anatolian town of Kayseri. A film crew was shooting a documentary about the medieval past of the town, and they decided to use the city's ancient castle as a stage. But when they put a Crusader's banner, a white plate with a red cross, on the walls, all hell broke loose. Dozens of Kayserians gathered under the castle to protest against the irritating banner. This is Turkey, one man yelled angrily, and we want only the Turkish flag.
One side of the problem here is simple ignorance. It is about not comprehending what a film is and how it differs from real life. In the past, there have been similarly funny incidents where some Turkish bystanders that were watching the shooting of an action scene on a street got so excited that they physically intervened to save the endangered actress from the bad guys. This naïveté seems to be the advanced version of the reaction to the first film ever, The Great Train Robbery. When the final shot of a gun was fired toward the camera in that silent movie, it is said that some in the audience pulled out their firearms and shot back.
Crusades, Crusades, Everywhere
The Great Train Robbery was in 1903. In the Turkey of 2008, though, the only problem is not this funny lack of distinction between fact and fiction. The deeper problem that relates to the incident in Kayseri is a paranoia about the Crusades, which is prevalent not only in Turkey but also in the broader Islamic world. The knights and armed monks of the middle ages are long gone, but they are too much alive in the minds of many Muslims.
To be sure, there are very good reasons to despise the Crusaders. They were a brutal, savage force that slaughtered and plundered not just Muslims but also Jews and even Eastern Christians. In the early centuries of the second millennium, the Eastern World was the center of civility, and the Franks of Europe were basically barbaric invaders supported by religious zeal.
Yet the world has changed a lot since then. Today the West is not launching crusades anymore, and even its very allegiance to the cross is very shaky. Especially Europe is becoming increasingly secular. The challenge for Pope Benedict XVI today, unlike that of the crusade-launching Pope Urban II, is how to reclaim Europe for God. And the Pope's armies, are today made up of not armed divisions, as Stalin famously noted, but peaceful preachers. Meanwhile, the center of Christianity is moving from the West to the South and the East. Many Turks think of French or British men when they hear the term missionaries. Yet more missionaries are coming today from countries like South Korea. If there was really a link between Western imperialism and Christianity, as leftists love to emphasize, it is very much a thing of the past now.
In short, to see today's world through the lens of the crusades is an illusion. Yet it is also a very popular one. Many Muslims just need to hear the C word in order to start building up conspiracy theories about the evil intentions of the Christian West. When President Bush used the term crusade against terrorism right after Sept. 11, 2001, the same theories started to pour into Middle Eastern media, including the Turkish media. Few people noted that American culture is also full of crusades against polio, poverty or racism. Many Muslims also overlooked the fact that they were making the very same excuse Bush needed when they noted that the word jihad could refer to not just holy war, but also a peaceful effort against selfishness or social injustice. To be fair, there were, and still are, lunatics around such as Ann Coulter who madly wrote, We should invade [the Muslims'] countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. And the occupation of Iraq by the Bush Administration created a horrible, bloody carnage. But this was not a Crusade in that medieval sense. It couldn't have been so, because we were simply at a different phase of history.
Living in History
That brings us to a fundamental problem that one can come across in the contemporary Islamic world: living in history. History is actually a great source of wisdom if you get it right. A secularist could tell you at this point that it is the Islamic culture which is responsible for this mind-blocking nostalgia. So, his reasoning would go, we should cleanse our minds from the effects of Islam.
Well, apparently things are not that simple. If you look at Turkey's Kemalists, you will see that their passionately secular minds are deeply trapped in history, too. They just take their blueprint from the time of not Prophet Muhammad, but Supreme Leader Atatürk. They dogmatically believe that all enemies of Mustafa Kemal the Greek invaders, the European colonialists, and the internal collaborators are just alive and kicking today. No wonder the Crusade-phobia is also shared by Turkey's Kemalo-nationalists. I am getting unsolicited emails from the marginal Workers Party (İşçi Partisi) of the ex-Maoist and born-again-Kemalist Doğu Perinçek almost every day on the joint Crusader/Islamist conspiracy against the Turkish Republic.
Apparently you can be delusional within any world view. As you can also be sensible within them.
Posted by Mustafa Akyol at September 20, 2008 2:47 PM


Mr Akyol: It is really good that you light up the "social handicap" of conservative people in Turkey.
Now let me describe the kemalist mind in my way.
A sunni kemalist talks to an other sunni turk:
Now the kemalist is a "true" sunni muslim, he has tremendous "respect" for Islam but rejects practicing muslim as sharia-follower. Therefore the state must control the believers and oppress them. The spirit of Ataturk demands this according to him.
After a couple of minutes the discussion leads to alevis. Now, the "secular" kemalist is a hardcore sunni who can enumerate several reasons why alevis are a threat to the sunnis. He even refers to the Ottoman history to proove his conclusion that alevis can become traitors anytime.
The proud "sunni" kemalist who thinks that the headscarf is a threat to the secular system is in fact a "morbid sunni". His kemalist bureaucracy has always discriminated the alevis in the name of "kemalist sunni nationalism". But why have our alevi brothers and sisters accepted this?
Now our dear kemalist talks to a alevi citizen:
His message is clear and simple. He says that the sunnis (practicing muslims) is a big threath to the alevi culture. He also says that the "backwarded" sunnis will oppress them if they (kemalist) loose their power. Our kemalist friend represent his ideology as the biggest guarantor for the alevi cultures survival. The sunnis want to takeover the country but we put them in place in the name of the holy secularism.
Our kemalist friend is a true turk ofcourse (according to him a true turk should be kemalist and worship Ataturk as a prophet). Our kemalist friend is also a master of stupid and pathetic nationalism. During the conversation with our alevi friend he says that the alevi religion is the first and true religion of the turks (As you may now a element in the alevi religion is shamanism. Shamanism was the main belief among turks before they became muslims).
This statement makes our turkisk alevi friend very flattered. The kemalist can now direct the conversation to sunni islam and describe it as a barbaric -arabic religions forced on the turks.
Now our kemalist is really satisfied.He celebrates with a visit to Anitkabir where he can feel the spirit of the involuntarily sectarian leader Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
Now we can identify a pattern of suspicious behavior towards alevis among our turkish sunni.
We also have a alevi contrymen who is suspicious towards sunnis.
To be honest, I prefer a guy from Kayseri who gets mad at Crusader-flags as long as he is not a ”member” of the kemalist sect and want to see Turkey in EU.
I also prefer to be a sunni or alevi than a member of the kemalist sect.
Mr Akyol:
May I ask u how you think that a conversation between a kurd and a kurdish apoist (PKK) would look like?
Posted by: Osman at September 21, 2008 2:59 PM