INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMt films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Ifigher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Infonnatioii Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 THE CULT OF THE PEASANT: IDEOLOGY AND PRACTICE, TURKEY 1930-1946 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By M. Asun Karaomerlioglu, B.S, M.A. ***** The Oliio State University 1999 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Carter V. Findley, Adviser ^ ^ Associate Professor Jane Hathaway UA/lM (/• Adviser Professor Kenneth Andrien Department of History UMI Number: 9919875 Copyright 1999 by Karaomerlioglu, Mehmet Asim All rights reserved. UMI Microform 9919875 Copyright 1999, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyrighted by M. Asim Karaomerlioglu 1999 ABSTRACT This study focuses ou the cult of the peasant, advocated by the Turkish ruling elite as the most important constituent element of Kemalist populism from the early 1930s through the end of World War II. Embodied in the so-called peasantist [koycu] ideology and practices, the advocates in Turkey of the cult of the peasant, among other things, denied class-based ideologies; aspired to a static, imdifferentiated society; attempted to find a mass base for nationalism in a predominantly agrarian country while preempting grass-roots movements; feared and vilified socialist revolution; recognized the need to respond to the demands of the agrarian population in the troubled times of the Great Depression; aimed to consolidate the conservatism of the regime by relying on the supposedly conservative fabric of the Turkish peasants; and inspired a nationalist myth­ making process that sought the "real" Turk in villages. In light of the intellectual history of the peasantist ideology, this smdy examines the People's Houses, the Village Instimtes, land reform, and the literature of early Republican era; and by so doing, challenges conventional historiographical assessments about these issues. The peasantist activities of the People's Houses ended in a fiasco because of its inherent bureaucratic and elitist nature. The Village Instimtes, although started with conservative concerns, turned out to challenge the limits of governing elite's populist tolerance, and perhaps because of this reason they were closed. Likewise, the land reform attempts of the single-party regime, contrary to what have been argued about them, were attempts to attach the peasants to their villages, broaden the size of the propertied peasant class, limit mobility in the countryside and immigration to the cities, and prevent the spread o f leftist and radical movements by winning the support of small peasants. The overall conclusion from these different, but related intellectual pursuits and practices points to the fact that such peasantist practices of the single-party regime should be perceived as a "conservative" rather than a "progressive" modernization. The dissertation also discusses the peasantist ideologies of Germany and Bulgaria of the inter-war era in order to shed light into the peculiarities of the Turkish case. Ill Anne ve Bahama IV ACICNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to my advisor Professor Carter V. Findley for liis guidance and support of this dissertation over the years. His high intellectual and academic standards have always been an inspiration to me, not to mention his help in finding funding throughout my entire graduate life at the Ohio State. I wish to thank him for his intellectual support, encouragement, enthusiasm in my work, and patiently reading this dissertation several times to minimize my mistakes. I would like to thank Professor Jane Hathaway for her meticulous reading of the whole dissertation. I appreciate her helpful advice and critiques especially during the writing process. I owe special gratitude to Professors Çevket Pamuk and Zafer Toprak not only for their endorsement in receiving the Presidential Fellowship, but also for their continuous intellectual encouragement during my graduate years. Professor Leila J. Rupp generously offered her time and energy in finding financial support. Professor Engin Akarli's critiques and suggestions on parts of this dissertation were invaluable. Professor tlhan Baçgôz generously shared his sources and ideas with me. Professor Victoria R. Holbrook has always been helpful and friendly. Professors Kenneth Andrien, Allan Wildman, Carole Fink, Claudio Fogu, Jonh Bumham, Alan Beyerchen, Cemal Kafadar, and Halil Berktay kindly encouraged me in my intellectual pursuit, and shared with me their ideas and comments on parts of this dissertation. Professors Adrian Gully of The British Journal o f Middle East Studies, Henry Bernstein of The Journal o f Peasant Studies, and Sylvia Kedourie of Middle Eastern Studies provided outstanding editorial support for some chapters of this study. Dona Straley and Patrick Visel of the Ohio State University library did whatever they could for providing material necessary for this study. Jo by Abernathy handled the official procedures effectively and in a fiiendly environment. My fiiends s Dr. Kurt Schultz, Dr. Sylvia Onder, Orhan Koçak, Nadir Ozbek, Bogaç Ergene, Levent Erdogan, Demircan Erdogan, Aaron Retish, and many others, in one way or another, contributed to this dissertation. Last but not least, my dear wife Dilek Çetindamar-Karaômerlioglu helped me enormously with her love and good advice. I am deeply grateful to all of the above-mentioned people. Needless to say, all the responsibility and mistakes belong to me. VI VITA December 15, 1966 .......................Bom - Ankara, Turkey 1989............................................... B.S. Electronic Engineering, Bogaziçi University 1991 - 1993....................................Research Associate Bogaziçi University 1992 ............................................... M.A. History, Bogaziçi University 1993 - 1997....................................Graduate Teaching and Research Associate, The Ohio State University 1998 - present................................Presidential Fellow PUBLICATIONS 1. "The People's Houses and the Cult of the Peasant in Turkey." Middle Eastern Studies^ 34, 4 (October 1998): 67-91. 2. "The People’s Houses and the Cult of the Peasant in Turkey." in Turkey Before and After Atatürk, edited by Sylvia Kedourie (London: Frank Cass, 1999): 67-91. 2. "The Village Institute Experience in Turkey." British Journal o f Middle Eastern Studies, 25, 1 (May 1998): 47-73. 3. "Koy Enstitiileri Üzerine Düçünceler (Thoughts on the Village Institutes)." Toplum ve Bilim, 76 (Spring 1998): 56-85. 4. "Bir Tepeden Reform Denemesi: Çiftçiyi Topraklandrrma Kanunu'nun ffikayesi (Reform from Above: The Story of Land Reform)." Birikirn, 107 (March 1998): 31-47. 5. "Ya§anilam Yazmak: Hobsbawm'm Yüzyili" (The Time of His Life: Hobsbawm's Century)." Birikim, 98 (June 1997): 84-92. Vll VII 6. "On Russian Populism." UCLA HistoricalJoiirnal, 16 (1996): 131-148. 7. "Some Notes on Tektnalp and Turkish Nationalism During the 1920s." Journal o f the Association o f Graduates in Near Eastern Studies, 5, 2 (1995): 65-69. 8. "The Japanese Flexibility." METUStudies in Development, 21, 3(1994): 367-381. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History Vlll vin TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract..................................................................................................................... ii Dedication ..................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................v Vita.............................................................................................................................vii Chapters 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................... I 2. How Did the Ottoman Intelligentsia Discover "the people?” ........................ 16 2.1 The Intellectual Impact of the Late 19th Century ................................ 18 2.2 The