TÜRKİYE POLİTİK ARENASINDA KİM KİMDİR?

(99 Cümleyle Gerçekler)

Değerli Dostlar,
Okuyacağınız bu yazının altta İngilizce çevirisi var: Who is Who İn Turkey’s Political Arena. Yazıdaki görüşlere az çok katılıyorsanız, bu İngilizce metni tanıdığınız yabancılara veya internet yollarına gönderirseniz hiç fena olmaz. Sevgilerimle

Küresel kapitalizm dünyada doğal yaşamı sona sürüklüyor.
Zengin devletlerin gündeminde bu yok edişi değiştirmek yok.
Onlar sadece “demokrasi” dersi veriyorlar bütün ülkelere.
ABD ve AB bu konuda da birbirinden çok farklı değil.
Demokrasiden anladıkları tüm ülkeleri daha sıkı bir egemenlik altında tutmak.
Her ülkede kendileriyle işbirliği yapacak tercihan parlamenter demokrasiye inanmış güçleri geliştirmek.
Demokratlaşmayan ülkeleri işgal etmek, demokratlaşmayanları kitle halinde imha etmek de bu kutsal amacın gereği.
Türkiye’ye gelince:
Batılı özgürlükçülerin büyük çoğunluğu Türkiye’ye de bu açıdan bakıyor.
Bizim gerici bildiklerimiz Avrupalı sıradan solcu için ilerici.
Bizim anti-emperyalist saydıklarımız Batılı liberal için faşist.
ABD ve AB Türkiye’de de medya ve entelektüeller içinde kendine bağlı güçlü iktidarlar yarattı.
Bu odaklar kendi ideolojileri doğrultusunda bilgiler veriyorlar dışarıya.
Dışarıdan da onlara Türkiye’yi nasıl görmelerinin tercih edildiği noktasında yönlendiriliyorlar.
Sonuçta ortaya Türkiye’deki anti-kapitalist anti-emperyalist çevrelerin gördüğünden çok farklı, çarpık bir tablo çıkıyor.
Bizim bulunduğumuz ağaçtan ülkedeki bazı siyasi oyuncular şu özellikleriyle göze çarpıyor:
AKP: İktidardaki Parti.
Ülkenin en büyük siyasi gücü.
Son seçimde yüzde 47 oy aldı.
ABD’nin Büyük Ortadoğu Projesi’nin kilit oyuncularından.
Ilımlı İslam modelinin uygulayıcısı.
Ordu’ya karşı çıkıyor, ABD ve AB tarzı demokrasiye yakın görünüyor.
Bu yüzden iktidar partisi Avrupalı için ilerici.
Oysa AKP demek ABD işbirlikçisi takiyyeci radikal tarikatlar demek.
Yani bize göre bölgedeki en tehlikeli gerici güç.
Laik sistemi için için parçalıyorlar.
Ordu’ya muhalif tavırları sadece bundan kaynaklanıyor.
AKP liderleri ve taraftarları çoğunlukla açgözlü, kaba, usul adet bilmeyen kültürsüz erkekler
Kadınları aşağı tabaka olarak görüyor ve onları örtünmeye zorluyorlar.
Ilımlı islam hareketi gerçekte Hitler-Mussolini’nin tabandan yükselen faşizmine çok benziyor.
PKK (Kürt gerillalarının yasadışı partisi) Onun Yasal Partisi ve Kürt Milliyetçileri:
Birçok batılı onları özgürlük savaşçısı olarak tanıyor.
Türkiye’deki radikal solcuların büyük bölümü de öyle.
Tek kesitten bakıldığında bu görüş haklı gibi.
Sol söylem kullanıyorlar ve ezilmiş bir halkın temsilcisi olma iddiasındalar.
Avrupa’daki Kürt nüfus içinde güçlü biçimde örgütlüler.
Mali gelirlerinin büyük kısmı Avrupa’dan geliyor.
Bağışlar, Avrupa fonları, kara para faaliyetleri…
Örgütün Avrupa devletleri, politikacıları ve gizli servisleriyle yakın bağları mevcut.
Buna son on yılda ABD ile yakın işbirliği de eklendi.
PKK, ABD’nin Büyük Ortadoğu Projesi’nde kullandığı önemli bir güç.
Bu “özgürlük savaşçıları” nedense tüm emperyalistlerin (İsrail dahil) gözdesi.
Öte yandan Türklerle yüzyıllardır birlikte yaşayan Kürtlerin birçok yönden hak mahrumiyetleri de inkar edilmez gerçek.
Türkiye devleti, hükümetler ve Türkçü faşistler bugüne kadar bu gerçeği inkar etmeyi tercih ettiler.
Ama Avrupalının bilmediği nokta şu:
Başlangıçtan beri Türkiye oligarşisinin içinde yarı-feodal, kapitalist Kürt hakim sınıflarının da bulunduğu.
Ayrıca Kürtlerin büyük çoğunluğunun Türklerden ayrılmak istemediği...
En az 15 milyon Kürt Batıda Türklerle birlikte kardeşçe yaşıyor.
Bir bölümü Türkler ve öteki etnik gruplarla melezleşmiş durumda.
Tam ayrılığı PKK bile çok yerde ifade etmiyor.
Buna rağmen PKK, 25 yılda 37 bin “insan yaşama hakkının” öldüğü bir savaş yürütüyor.
En az devletin çirkin uygulamaları kadar PKK da kirli bir terör politikası güdüyor.
Bunun sonucu: Türkiye’de düşmanlığa dayalı milliyetçilik karşılıklı olarak yükseliyor.
Sol söylemin halk içindeki etkisi giderek zayıflıyor.
PKK ve yandaşları da bir yerde sadece bu misyon için ayaktalar.
Kürt sorunu bir gerçeklik.
Fakat bu sorundaki emperyalist kışkırtmalar da bir gerçeklik.
İşbirlikçi Liberaller ve Hain Sol:
Liberalleşmiş radikal solla, baştan beri liberal olan solcular Türkiye’de kalabalık değiller.
Ancak medyadaki destekleri ve bazı kitle örgütlerinin başında bulunmaları nedeniyle sayılarının ötesinde etkililer. (Birçok köşe yazarı, TV yorumcusu, sendikacı, oda başkanı, ünlü yazarlar: Orhan Pamuk, Elif Shafak vs.)
Bu seçkinci özgürlük savaşçıları anti-kapitalist, anti-emperyalist mücadeleyi unutmuş durumdalar veya böyle bir kavramları zaten yoktu
Tek dertleri demokratikleşme.
Demokratikleşmenin önündeki en büyük engeli de Ordu ve milliyetçiler (sol yurtseverler de içinde) olarak görüyorlar.
Bu yüzden böyle solcular ve Amerikanseverler Avrupa’dan büyük sempati topluyorlar.
Söz konusu liberaller ısrarla milliyetçiliğe karşı olduklarını ifade ediyorlar, çünkü onlar için milliyetçilik faşizm demek.
Fakat kendileri gizli milliyetçiler (Kürt milliyetçiliğinin ve emperyalizmin milliyetçiliğinin destekçisiler).
Sıkıcı bir tarzda sürekli düşünce özgürlüğünden bahsetmelerine karşın medya ve edebiyat çevrelerinde oligarşik çeteler oluşturuyorlar.
Avrupalı entelektüelin en büyük açmazı Türkiyeli entelektüellerin de en büyük açmazı artık; hiçbir şeyi başkalarına bırakmak istemiyorlar.
Aynı anda hem toplum öncüsü, hem düzen yanlısı, hem tatlı yaşam aşığı, hem özgürlük savaşçısı, hem solcu, hem sosyalist, hem kapitalist olmak: Bu dünyada mümkün değil böyle bir şey, öte dünyanın fantastik gerçekliğinde mümkün olabilir.
Liberaller ve Liberal solcular cumhuriyeti tahribe uğraşıyorlar.
Solcu bilindiklerinden bu tutumları Türkiye’de sol söylemin halkça anlaşılabilirliğini çok azaltıyor.
En önemli görevleri gerçekte bu.
Ulusalcı (Yurtsever) Sol:
CHP (ana muhalefet partisi) bu grubun en büyük oluşumu sayılabilir.
Emekten, yoksul halkın sorunlarından pek az bahseden garip bir sosyal demokrat parti.
Tabanındaki anti-emperyalist duyarlılık üst yönetime doğru zayıflıyor.
Ama ulusalcı sol denince akla, daha küçük bazı sol gruplarla, Atatürkçü olarak bilinen dernekler, gazete (Cumhuriyet) ve dergiler çevresi akla geliyor.
Bugün Batı, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’ne karşı örtülü bir savaş yürütüyor; bu da bir gerçek değil mi?
Eğer hakikat paranoyak iddialardan daha fantastikse, nerede paranoya başlar hangi gerçek sahtedir kimse bilemez.
Bu örtülü savaş için birçok neden sayılabilir.
Türkiye ve onun etki alanı emperyalizmin daha sıkı denetim altında tutmak istediği büyük bir pazar.
İkinci olarak, Türkiye oligarşisi Amerikalıların akıllı oğlanlarından kızlarından oluşsa da, halkın güdük yurtsever tepkileri bazen emperyalist girişimleri engelliyor.
Ulusalcı sol emperyalizme karşı mücadeleyi ön plana çıkarıyor, Kürt sorununa mutlak birlik açısından yaklaşıyor (kısmen bu sorunu yadsıyor).
Ordu’nun laik cumhuriyetçi gücüne ve devlet içindeki henüz AKP’ce tasfiye edilmemiş bürokratlara fazlasıyla güveniyor.
Ordu ve devlet içindeki zayıf anti-emperyalist eğilimleri kışkırtmaya çalışıyor.
Bu nedenlerle ulusalcı sol Avrupalılarca demokrasi düşmanı, hatta faşist olarak görülüyor.
Başka Bazı Politik Gruplar:
MHP (Klasik milliyetçi parti- Muhalefetin güçlü ikinci partisi).
Amerikan karşıtı radikal dinci gruplar.
Ayrıca iki adet küçük merkez sağ parti (bir zamanlar iktidardaydılar).
Gerçek Komünistler ve Sosyalistler:
TKP bu kategorideki en büyük örgütlü güç.
Daha küçük gruplar ve dağınık, örgütsüz halde çok sayıda insan bu başlık altında ele alınabilir.
Hepsi tüm ülkede yaklaşık 200 bin kişi...
Anti-emperyalist, anti-kapitalist mücadele ve sosyalizmi kurma hedefi onlar için öteki sorunların önünde en önemli görevler.
Demokrasi sorunu ve Kürt sorunu ancak böyle bir yolda çözülebilir.
Bu doğrultuda dayanılacak güç de halk güçleri, emek güçleridir.
Türkiye halkının kurtuluşu gerçek sosyalistlerin yeteneğine ve başarılarına bağlıdır.

WHO IS WHO IN TURKEY'S POLİTİCAL ARENA?

(The Truth in 99 Sentences)

Global capitalism is pulling the natural life of the world to its end.
There isn’t any item on the agenda of wealthy states to prevent this devastation.
They do nothing but teach democracy to all countries.
There isn’t much difference between the USA and the EU on that point either.
Their understanding of democracy is as a means to control other nations more stringently.
Their aim is to reinforce those groups which have the ability to cooperate well with them and preferably believe in parliamentary democracy.
To invade other lands and to massacre un-democratized people could be necessary for this holy purpose.
In relation to Turkey:
Most of the Western advocates of freedom look at Turkey from this point of view.
Some groups which we in Turkey know as reactionary, serve as progressive for European leftists.
Some people whom we regard as anti-imperialists are seen as fascists by European liberals.
The USA and the EU have created powerful allied communities in the intelligentsia and mass-media.
These circles are giving information abroad arising from their own ideology.
Also they are driven by foreign politicians as to how they should look at problems in the country.
As a result, some distorted pictures have emerged, very different from the pictures as seen by anti-capitalist groups in Turkey.
We are at the top of the tree from which the whole panorama and political actors are seen as follows:
The Justice and Development Party (AKP) : (Ruling party)
It is the most powerful political movement in the country.
The Party gained 47% percent of the vote at the last election.
The AKP is one of the main actors in the USA’s Great Middle-East Project.
Also it is the most important practitioner of the USA’s Moderate-Islam Model.
The AKP opposes the Turkish Army and pretends to believe in the EU’s and USA’s models of democracy.
Therefore the ruling party is seen as a positive force by Europeans.
However the AKP in reality consists of a covert group of fundamentalist sects operating as the loyal collaborators of the USA.
In other words the ruling party is the most dangerous political movement in the region.
This party is intent on destroying the secular system from within.
The contradiction between the AKP and the Turkish Army is revealed mainly on this issue.
The AKP’s leaders and supporters are mostly men who are greedy, crude and without manners or culture.
They see women as an inferior class and force them to cover their heads.
Actually the Modern-Islam movement looks like Mussolini or Hitler’s type of fascism, instructed from bottom to top.
The PKK ( the Kurdish guerillas’ illegal party); the DTP (its legal party) and Kurdish Nationalists:
Most westerners see them as freedom fighters.
Also, most of the Turkish or Kurdish leftists in Turkey suppose the same.
This opinion seems right when you look at the overview from only one cross-section.
Kurdish nationalists use leftist or liberal jargon and they see themselves as representatives of an oppressed nation.
They are well organised in European Kurdish society.
A very important part of the PKK’s income comes from Europe.
From donations, European funds and as black money…
The organisation has close relations with some state departments, intelligence services and politicians in Europe.
In the last ten years collaboration with the USA and CIA has been added to this.
The PKK is an important force that the USA is using in its Big Middle-East Project.
For some reason, the above mentioned organization is the favorite of nearly all of the imperialists (including Israel).
On the other hand Kurdish people (living with Turkish people for hundreds of years) have suffered deprivation of some rights.
The Turkish Republic, governments and Turkish civil fascists have preferred to ignore this reality until now.
But Europeans don’t want to know about these issues:
Kurdish half-feudal and capitalist upper classes have been in Turkey’s oligarchy since the begining.
The great majority of Kurdish people don’t want separation.
Nearly 15 million Kurdish people are living as brothers and sisters with Turks in the western regions of Turkey.
Some of them are interrelated with Turkish or other ethnic groups.
The PKK doesn’t always even express the demand for a separate state.
Despite all this, the PKK is going on killing in a bloody civil war in which approximately 37 000 “humans with the right to live” have died in the last 25 years.
The PKK is following terror strategies at least as dirty as those of the state.
As a result: nationalism is steadily increasing in Turkey due to mutual Kurdish-Turkish hostility.
The influence of leftist discourse in public opinion is diminishing year by year.
Perhaps the PKK and its supporters exist mainly for that purpose.
The Kurdish problem is a reality.
But imperialist provocations on that issue are also a reality.
Collaborating Liberals and Traitor Left:
Liberalized radical leftist and soft leftist liberals have never been numerous in the country.
But they are relatively more effective than their number (their qualities are excellent thanks God), because the mass-media supports them and some civil organisations are under their control (in their number are many columnists, presenters, trade unionists, heads of chambers, famous writers –Orhan Pamuk, Elif Shafak … etc.)
These elitist freedom fighters have forgotten anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist struggle, or they have never come across such notions anyway.
Democratization is their only business.
For them, the Turkish army and the nationalists (including the patriotic left) are the foremost barrier in front of democracy.
Therefore these types of leftists and American-lovers collect abundant sympathy from Europe.
These kind of liberals persistently state that they are against nationalism, because nationalism means fascism.
But they themselves are covertly nationalist (supporters of Kurdish nationalism, and the nationalism of imperialism).
They tediously go on about freedom of ideas, but themselves are members of oligarchic cliques in the areas of media and literature.
The biggest dilemma of the European intellectual is the same as the one of the Turkish intellectuals now; they do not want to hand over anything to anybody.
They want to be the leader of the society, the conformist, the epicurean, warrior of freedom, the leftist, the socialist and the capitalist all at the same time: It is definitely impossible on the planet earth; it may be possible in the fantastic reality of the other world.
The liberals and liberal leftists are trying to destroy the Turkish Republic.
Ordinary people in Turkey see them as leftist, so the probability of understanding real leftist discourse is diminishing day by day.
That is actually their mission.
Nationalist (Patriotic) Left:
The CHP (Republican People’s Party – the main oppositional party) may be supposed to be the biggest formation in this category.
As a social democrat party they are strange because they hardly mention labour and the affairs of poor people.
Anti-imperialist awareness among the grassroots grows weaker at the top of the party.
As a matter of fact, small leftist groups, parties and some civil organisations known as Kemalist (following Atatürk’s route) and some readers of newspapers and periodicals such as Cumhuriyet are known mostly as nationalist leftists.
Nowadays, Western capitalist civilisation is carrying on a covert war against the Turkish Republic: Isn’t this a reality?
If truths are more fantastic than paranoid claims, nobody can realise where paranoia begins, and which truth is false.
There may be many reasons for this covert war:
Turkey with its hinterland is a big market that imperialists want to control more effectively.
Secondly, although the Turkish oligarchy is composed of people who are reliable in terms of the USA, nevertheless the basic patriotic reflex of the Turkish people sometimes blocks regional imperialist initiatives.
The nationalist left gives priority to the anti-imperialist struggle, looking at the Kurdish problem from the point of view of united anti-imperialist resistance (though partly denying it).
They rely too much on the secular republican potential of the army as well as the state bureaucracy which has not yet been eliminated by the AKP.
The patriotic left tries to provoke moderate anti-imperialist trends in the army and the state.
For these reasons that kind of left seems to Europeans to be non-democrat and even fascist.
Some other political groups:
The Nationalist Movement Party (powerful second opositional party: classical nationalist).
Anti-American fundamentalists. (Relatively small groups)
And conservative (centre right): two small parties. (They were ruling parties 10 - 25 years ago).
Real Communists and Socialists:
TKP (Communist Party): the biggest organised movement in this category.
There are many non-organised people and some smaller groups may be mentioned under this item.
They make up approximately 200.000 people in total.
Beyond all their other aims, anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist resistance and the struggle for socialism are the most important duties for them.
The democratisation problem and the Kurdish problem can be solved only in this way.
The forces one should rely on are the workers and ordinary people.
The freedom of the people of Turkey depends on real socialists’ abilities and success.

Scratches On The Face And The Terror of Pamuk

This article by Kaan Arslanoğlu is published in Cumhuriyet at 18.01.2007


Orhan Pamuk won the Nobel prize for his belief in freedom of thought and literature. Yet – ironically - the wave this award has triggered in the media has manifested itself as a very campaign against literature and free thought. Newspaper editors in chief, influential columnists and TV commentators, all by an overwhelming majority, expressed to us how pleased we should be and that we should not hesitate to embrace our Nobel Laureate. Moreover, people who had an aversion to Pamuk’s writings were accused of being simpletons, fascists, green with envy, or worst, in an odd campaign to discredit dissenters. In the end, many older established writers, once fiercely critical, ended up having to reluctantly endorse and celebrate the Pamuk phenomenon.

The extraordinary breakthrough of Orhan Pamuk, whom many in the literary establishment considered little more than an unexceptional writer, was indeed a triumph of marketing, advertising and above all good connections that deserve scrutinizing. After a barrage of international awards, the Nobel Prize was to be the cherry on top of the cream.

The first sentence of the self-help-book “NLP- The New Technology of Achievement” (1) published in the USA in 1994, reads: “This book will change your life”. Similarly the first sentence of Mr. Pamuk’s book “Yeni Hayat” (New Life) (2) published towards the end of the same year reads: “One day I’ve read a book and my life changed”. I do not suggest that Pamuk, who is apart from his skills in building up connections, a master of “uncredited referencing”, has been inspired by that book. Nevertheless, Mr. Pamuk’s success clearly has an American flair to it and it is not without pleasure to find similarities between his methods and the approach suggested in the book mentioned above and other flashy “how-to-succeed” books. Spielberg, who is one of the leading figures admired in the NLP book, has also touched success and fame through his sympathetic relationships with the Zionist movement; and this is just one of the resemblances. It’s no wonder that the frenzied admirers of the Nobel Laureate happen to be mostly domestic American sympathizers or americanist Europeans.

Among others, Cengiz Çandar, Hasan Cemal, Mehmet Barlas, Hadi Uluengin, the Altan family, Taha Akyol, M. Ali Birand, Murat Belge, etc. Still the most remarkable comment has been made by Serdar Turgut. After describing the detesters of Pamuk as a pack of barbarians and fascists, Turgut continues by saying that “the power that will boost Turkey are the brains of the ‘White Turks’ and the modern brand of nationalism they will nurture” (3). Yıldırım Türker’s article is even more hostile; it is a masterpiece of a manifesto pointedly directed at the middle-classes, that elegantly combines insults against those that dislike Pamuk’s works with rude gestures and foaming at the mouth.(4)


FREEDOM, BUT TO WHICH THOUGHT?

Yet the point I am trying to make is not to look into the differences between philosophically tangible achievements and brilliant but superficial achievements; it’s to ponder over the phenomenon in terms of freedom of thought. Many psychology books theorize on how to stop the vicious cycle of conflict breading conflict, born from ancient beliefs, prejudices and hostilities within groups, societies and nations. As indicated in the well-known work of Muzaffer Şerif, hostility between groups can be lessened by making the opponent groups collaborate in pointing them towards a mutual enemy. (5)

In my opinion, the mutual enemy is global capitalism that leads the world into biological extinction. However, since the proponents of globalism thoroughly know this, they provoke wars between nations, religions and local societies. The real enemy of the Turks, Kurds and Armenians is the provocation of the most primal emotions through demands of redrawing borders under the guise of “freedom”, “progress”, “redemption” and other popular slogans of the day. On one side Pamuk and the like, and on the other, forces promoting radicalism and fascism. It’s difficult to talk about the virtues of thought when primal instincts are reinforced.

Strangely enough, the media elite who celebrated Pamuk’s success in the name of literature and free speech and those tabloid TV and newspaper barons who seem intent on emptying the public’s minds are in effect one and the same. The same old usual suspects who can’t stand the proliferation of a single unchecked thought and who try to throw any controversial idea or any sparkle of wit into the waste bin just because they find it “marginal”. The local and international cartels of literature merchants for whom only a well marketed bestseller or a prize winner constitutes a “good novel”; and those whose very reason d’etre is nothing more than the outright regurgitation of the same policies that the EU commissioners once dictated to them.

The campaign that uses Pamuk as their poster boy has come to such a point that even admirers of the writer find themselves turned off by the ordeal. Suat Kınıkoğlu writes : “It is as if someone pushed a button and asked our media to facilitate the rehabilitation of Orhan Pamuk in the arena of Turkish public opinion. ”(6) Thus, even the basics become murky: who uses whom? Indeed, some are said to bolster their own success by riding the coattails of Pamuk; and in the process the writer’s persona and artistic individualism is all too happily sacrificed.

TWO NEW VICTIMS OF TERROR

Turkish society and societies of the world are decaying; so inevitably is literature. If I was asked to identify the literary critics I trust and admire the most, I would name, on the top of a short list, Semih Gümüş and Ömer Türkeş. But the heavy handed, gung ho terrorization of free thought that has become the Pamuk campaign, has evolved into such an overwhelming force that even they surrendered and were reshaped in the image of the status quo.

The same Türkeş who once called Pamuk a “pop-star” and wrote about the damage Pamuk’s marketing aproach may inflict on literature (7); now says that “it’s time to celebrate”. Similarly, Gümüş had always expressed his irritation of the exaggeration of Pamuk’s talents as a novelist (8). Now he talks about the gains the Nobel prize can bring to Turkish literature. Even worse, he announces him to be a writer of “solitude” who is only concerned about writing the truth as he sees it. What an insult to genuine lonesome writers! To put it in other terms, two men who previously declared that the game is rigged, suddenly decide to stand up and applaud the winning team of the same game. In effect, the behavior of these two respected critics can be viewed as a suicide of integrity for the love of Pamuk or likelier yet, they are the latest victims of the terror campaign against thought.

The “free thinkers”, who hate freedom of expression, use the very notions and thoughts that were achieved through altruistic self sacrifice with blood and sweat, against those that made these sacrifices. Just like the notions of ethics and decency which the big media outlets have turned into hollow clichés, that the ordinary masses and even psychopaths can chew like bubblegum. Even The Guardian (9) and the Independent, two of the most discreet newspapers of England, read the reactions against Pamuk from Turkey, as an act of fringe nationalists When Pamuk sinisterly describes his country as “Turkey is a savage country; there is no understanding for other religious, ethnic, linguistic communities. A wild land where there has been no civilization, where there is no room for different religions, languages and nationalities”, (10) the pro-American and pro-European “liberal elite” in our midst become satisfied. However, the same ears turn deaf to the ideas and opinions of most of the ordinary readers, of socialists, communists and patriotic leftists, all in the name of “freedom of thought”.

The entire notion of nice and peaceful freedom of thought is a deceitful concept. The reality is a never ending dirty war between irreconcilable ideas. Yes, oppressive laws may inhibit thought; but well before that closed minds in key places prevent them in the form of a “free” media which control the agenda and the nature and flow of information to the masses. The oppression is further escalated by a constant injection of fear, panic and confusion. Those who attempted rape, cry out showing the scratches on their face and condemning their victim’s aggression.


(1) Steve Andreas, Charles Faulkner, NLP Comprehensive, 1994
(2) Orhan Pamuk, İletişim, 1994
(3) Serdar Turgut, Akşam, 25.10.2006
(4) Yıldırım Türker, Radikal, 16.10.2006
(5) Peter Scott, C. Spencer, Psychology, Blackwell, 1998
(6) Suat Kınıkoğlu, Turkish Daily News, 13.12.2006
(7) Ömer Türkeş, Milliyet İnternet, 8.1.2004
(8) Semih Gümüş, Puslu Ada, T. İş. Kült. Yay. 2002
(9) Ian Traynor, The Guardian, 13.11.2006
(10) Fernanda Eberstadt, The New York Times, 4.5.1997

Have You Ever Look at Humanity From This Point of View?

A brief summary of main themes discussed in Kaan Arslanoğlu’s novels and theoretical books for nearly twenty years:
A NEW UNDERSTANDING of HOPE
A NEW PARADIGM
1- The evolutionary process of humankind is not finished yet. Humans lack intelligence, features of positive personality, willpower, and wisdom. Although the human mind could perform at a distinctly higher rate than animals, it is still lower than the desired level of cultural values and the ideals created by and for humans. This is why people have failed in the experiment of socialism. This is the actual reason lying behind the choice of unequal and unjust systems, and not being able to solve basic problems for thousands of years.
2- Today the most crucial problem of humanity is the world’s drawing closer to its biological death due to global pollution and climate changes. The fault lies, again, with humankind, and with capitalism, which people have not been able to do without. We could consider overpopulation, famine, obesity-metabolic diseases, epidemic diseases, wars, and all kinds of accidents as the other important problems of our generation. Unfortunately, humans mainly keep themselves busy with the secondary problems and put off the most serious problems until a future time.
3- Humanity suffers inequality in terms of biological background. There is a wide range of disparity among human beings with regards to the capacity of their intelligence and minds, as well as the qualities of their personality and character. The bell-shaped curves point out the similarities in different societies by indicating the frequency rate of different features of people. The majority of people accumulate in average levels in terms of positive and negative aspects while some extreme features are displayed by the minority. Humankind: They are in between destroying and revitalizing, nowadays it is evident that humans act as destroyers (See item: 2). Clever ones, who are in the minority, attain power and advantages, usually by misusing their intelligence against others. Those who use their intelligence in the service of their societies have always been exceptions in any country in the world. Therefore, high cultural values could never be internalized by massive crowds of people, and ideals could never be realized except for short periods of time.
4- Human beings can be grouped according to different personality types, each of which demonstrate such different aspects that they could be treated as sub-types (there are approximately twenty sub-types, including those who strive to improve their society; those who support the status quo; harmful psychopaths; selfish sociopaths; political fundamentalists, etc.). Since the first ages of written history, people from the same sub-types have displayed very similar attitudes and reactions towards daily life issues, politics, professions, philosophy, art, etc., regardless of the time frame they lived in. Conflicts between personalities are as important as conflicts between social classes.
5- A human being’s character is her/him destiny. Preferences in different areas are defined by a person’s personality, and the personality is mainly determined by genetic structure. Educational background and environment might also be considered as the other important elements; nevertheless, these would remain only as secondary determiners. Therefore, the primary and the subsidiary choices one makes are not determined by the environment, but mainly by personality. Here, it is important to note that people with average/ordinary features are usually more affected by environmental conditions around them. This can also be interpreted as meaning that conditions imposed by the environment have more impact on masses than on those people with extraordinary/extreme personality features.
6- It is a fact that the humans are biologically limited living beings. This fact should be treated as a guideline in all areas of life, especially in terms of the following three points:
First of all, this fundamental fact, like all other facts, is accepted as a truth. We cannot disregard an important truth for the reason that it affects our feelings negatively, it does not comply with our judgment patterns, or simply because it does not work for us. Acting this way would eventually weaken our knowledge and reliance, make us insincere, and narrow down our scope.
Secondly, disregarding such a fact would eventually bring the same inevitable results for refusing any other facts, and that would be, having to accept the truth one day in the most painful way.
It is true that the new paradigm discussed here may cause some despair at first, especially considering that hope is one of the most necessary resources that provides individuals, groups and societies with the vital energy and the determination to struggle. In that case, it should be an unavoidable mission to let go of our self-deceiving false hopes and to create new and realistic ones.
It is clearly observed in real life situations that the opportunities provided for individuals or groups to improve environmental conditions, willpower, education, organization, and reform-revolution are restricted by human biological limits. The cautions from the scientific world highlight the complexity of this issue by referring to the lack of physiological resources.
Finally, scientific theory does not undermine any of the endeavors undertaken in order to improve humanity. On the contrary, it emphasizes the necessity to pay more attention to these efforts. If the possibilities to change are limited, and the bad is naturally preponderant over the good, it should not mean that we need to ignore what is needed (Despite their influential discourse, the overwhelming majority charged with unrealistic hopes will eventually arrive at that inevitable point). This theory urges the importance of being more patient, more reasonable, thriftier, and having more self-control. This is not what is being done by most of left-leaning opposition parties that try to become a catalyst for change with their patchy, irregular and superficial activities which do not interfere with capitalism as a whole in politics, philosophy, the arts, business, and in the other aspects of daily life.
However, the ultimate goal should not be reaching the end of the road, especially when there is no end. The victory of the good depends on resisting and standing, and is doomed to temporary dominance only. The ultimate goal is to proceed continuously in this endless race within which hope will find the opportunity to arise.
7- Nevertheless, a more fundamental and genuine salvation for humanity shall be possible by means of a genetic restructuring, either by natural or artificial ways. Any positive efforts in this field, whether minor or major, shall serve the salvation of humanity. 26.12.2006

İnsanlığa Bu Açıdan Hiç Baktınız mı?

Kaan Arslanoğlu’nun yaklaşık yirmi yıldır romanlarında ve kuramsal kitaplarında işlediği ana tezlerin özetidir:

YENİ BİR UMUT ANLAYIŞI
YENİ BİR PARADİGMA

1- İnsan evrimini tamamlayamamış, gelişmemiş bir canlıdır. Zeka, olumlu kişilik özellikleri, irade gücü, akıl yönünden fakirdir. Aklı hayvanlarınkinden belirgin ölçüde yüksek düzeyde, ama yine kendi yarattığı kültür değerlerine, ideallere göre çok aşağı düzeydedir. İnsanlık sosyalizm deneyini de bu yüzden becerememiştir. Eşitsiz, adaletsiz sistemleri yeğlemesinin, binlerce yıldır temel problemlerini çözememesinin asıl nedeni budur.

2- Şu anda insanlığın en büyük problemi küresel kirlenme ve iklim değişiklikleri nedeniyle Dünyanın biyolojik ölüm sürecine girişidir. Suçlusu yine kendisi, vazgeçemediği kapitalizmdir. Nüfus sorunu, açlık, şişmanlık, salgın hastalıklar, savaşlar, kazalar soyumuzun öteki ağır sorunlarıdır. Ne ki insanlık bu en ciddi sorunları gündeminin en arka sıralarına atmakta, ikincil problemlerle fazlasıyla ilgilenmektedir.

3- İnsan biyolojik anlamda da eşitsizlik mağduru bir canlıdır. Akıl-zeka, kişilik-karakter yönünden ciddi farklılıklar içindedir. Pek çok özelliği toplumlarda çan eğrisi biçiminde dağılım gösterir. Olumlulukta ve olumsuzlukta büyük yığınlar ortalama düzeydedir, küçük azınlıklar ise uç özellikler taşır. Bu yüzden de insanlık ne öldürür ne güldürür. (Ancak artık öldürmektedir. Bkz: Madde 2) Küçük orandaki parlak zekalılar bunu genellikle olumsuz yönde kullanır, ötekilerin aleyhine güç ve kazanç elde ederler. Hem zeki olup hem zekalarını daha çok toplum yararına kullananlar her dönem her ülkede istisnayı oluşturan insanlardır. Bu yüzden yüksek kültür değerleri hiçbir zaman geniş yığınlarca benimsenemez. İdealler kısa dönemler dışında hiçbir zaman hayata geçirilemez.

4- İnsan değişik kişilik gruplarına ayrılır. Bunlar neredeyse birer alt tür gibi çok farklı özellikler gösterir. (Toplumu hep iyiye doğru geliştirmek isteyenler, statükocular, kötücül psikopatlar, çıkarcı sosyopatlar, siyasi köktendinciler v.s gibi yirmiye yakın alt tür...) Günlük yaşamdaki, siyasetteki, meslekteki, felsefedeki, sanattaki vs. anlayışları, tepkileri yazılı tarihin ilk dönemlerinden beri birbirine pek fazla benzer. Kişilikler arasındaki çatışma sınıflar arasındaki çatışma kadar önemlidir.

5- Karakteri insanın kaderidir. İnsanın her alandaki yeğlemelerini kişiliği belirler. Kişiliğini belirleyen de esas olarak genetik yapısıdır. Yetişme koşulları, çevre etkenleri de ciddiyetle ele alınmalıdır, ne var ki bunlar ikincil belirleyenlerdir. Dolayısıyla kişinin seçtiği-kapıldığı ana ve tali yollar çevresinden çok kişiliğinin götürdüğü yollardır. Önemli bir kural olarak, ortalama-sıradan kişilik özellikleri çevre koşullarından daha çok etkilenir (geniş yığınlar çevre koşullarından daha çok etkilenir de diyebiliriz), sıradışı-uç kişilik özellikleri çevreden daha az etkilenir.

6- İnsanın biyolojik sınırlarını kabul etmek ve tüm yaşamda bu bilgiyi rehber kılmak üç bakımdan mutlak gereklidir:
Bir, bu bilgi öteki birçok temel bilgi gibi gerçeğin bilgisidir. Herhangi bir önemli gerçeği, duygularımızı olumsuz etkiliyor, işimize gelmiyor, inandıklarımıza kalıp yargılarımıza ters düşüyor diye reddetmek öbür alanlardaki bilgimizi ve inançlarımızı da samimiyetsiz ve zayıf kılar, ufkumuzu daraltır.
İki, bu gerçeği kabul etmemek tüm öteki gerçeklikleri reddetmenin kaçınılmaz sonuçlarına benzer şekilde insanı bir gün bir yerde duvara toslatır ya da her gün burnunu yere sürter.
Evet, buradaki yeni paradigma insanın umudunu başlangıçta biraz kırar. Umutsa hem bireyler hem gruplar ve toplumlar için ekmek kadar, su kadar gerekli bir yaşam enerjisi ve mücadele azmi kaynağıdır. O halde kendini kandırma temelinde sahte umutları bırakıp yeni ve gerçekçi umutlar yaratmak kaçınılmaz görevdir.
Tüm insani biyolojik sınırlar kişisel ya da yığınsal anlamda çevre düzenlemelerinin, iradi çabanın, eğitimin, örgütlenmenin, değiştirme uğraşlarının olanaklarını -gerçek yaşamda zaten keskin biçimde görüldüğü gibi- daraltır. O konudaki bilimsel uyarılar işin zorluğunu maddi kaynağına işaret ederek gösterir.
Ve üç. Ama söz konusu bilimsel kuram tüm bu çabaların önemsiz olduğunu göstermez, aksine daha çok önemsememiz gerektiğini vurgular. Değiştirme olanaklarımız kısıtlıysa, kötü doğal olarak iyiye baskınsa, buradan çıkaracağımız sonuç işi tümden boşlamak değildir. (Geçersiz umutlarla yüklülerin ezici çoğunluğu parlak söylemlerinin aksine zaten eninde sonunda o çaresiz noktaya varırlar.) Tersine daha sabırlı, daha akılcı, daha ekonomik, daha iradi çalışmanın gerekliliğinin üstünde ısrarla durur. Şimdinin bölük pörçük, bir o zaman bir bu zaman, yalaş bulaş etkinlikleriyle değiştiriciliğe çabalayan, ancak günlük yaşamda, iş yaşamında, siyasette, felsefede, sanatta, bir bütün olarak kapitalizmle hesaplaşmayan sol muhalefetin büyük çoğunluğunun yaptığı bu değildir.
Yine de tek amaç yolun sonuna varmak olmamalıdır; çünkü yolun sonu yoktur. İyinin zaferi, direnmek, ayakta kalmak ve geçici baskınlıklarla sınırlıdır. Amaç bu yolda yürümektir, umut bu bitimsiz bayrak yarışının içinden yeşertilmelidir.

7- Ancak insanlığın daha temelden, daha gerçek kurtuluşu genetik değişimiyle mümkün olacaktır. Doğal ya da yapay yollarla. Şu veya bu alanda büyük ya da küçük her olumlu çaba az veya çok bu kurtuluşa hizmet edecektir. 26.12.2006