Left-Leaning Interpretations of Kemalism Within the Scope of Three Journals: Kadro, Markopaşa and Yön
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Left-Leaning Interpretations of Kemalism within the Scope of Three Journals: Kadro, Markopaşa and Yön A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Research Master of Arts in the department of Middle Eastern Studies, Leiden University, November 2016. Banu İdrisoğlu Student No: 0896845 ResMA Supervisor Prof. Dr. Erik-Jan Zürcher Table of Contents Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………….....2 Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………….……..4 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….….....5 1. Kadro……………………………………………………….……………………………..12 1.1 Nationalism……………………………………………………………………………...15 1.1.1 Kadro Writers and Their Relation with Nationalism Prior to Kadro…………....….15 1.1.2 Nationalism and National Economy………………………………………….….....18 1.1.3 Anti-Imperialism…………………………………………………………...….……20 1.1.4 Exclusivist Policies of Kemalism………………………………………...………...28 1.2 Populism……………………………………………………………………....…………36 1.2.1 Elitism………………………………………………………………...…………….39 1.2.2 Classes and Society…………………………………………………………...…….40 1.3 Republicanism……………………………………………………………………….......45 1.4 Etatism…………………………………………………………………………...……....52 1.5 Reformism………………………………………………………………………...……..63 1.6 Laicism…………………………………………………………………………………..70 2. Markopaşa…………………………………………………………….…………………..77 2.1 Nationalism……………………………………………………………………...............79 2.2 Populism………………………………………………………………………….......…86 2.2.1 People……………………………………………………………………................87 2.2.2 Society and Classes…………………………………………….……………...……89 2.2.3 Elitism and Authoritarianism………………………………….…………………....91 2.3 Republicanism and Democracy…………………………………….…………………....94 2.4 Laicism……………………………………………………………….………………….97 2.5 Reformism………………………………………………………………………....…...101 2.6 Etatism…………………………………………………………………………...…….105 3. Yön………………….………………………………………...………...……………….108 3.1 Nationalism………………………...……………….………………...………..…....…111 3.2 Populism………………………………………………………...………………....…..117 3.3 Etatism………………………………………………………...……………………….125 2 3.4 Reformism……………………………………………………....…………………...132 3.5 Laicism………………...…………………………………………………………….137 3.6 Republicanism……………………………………………………………………….141 Conclusion……………...…………………………………………………………………146 Bibliography………...…………………………………………………………………….153 3 ABBREVIATIONS AP Justice Party (Adalet Partisi) CUP Committee of Union and Progress (İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti) DP Democrat Party (Demokrat Parti) FRP Free Republican Party (Serbest Cumhuriyet Fırkası) KUTV Communist University of the Toilers of the East MDD National Democratic Revolution (Milli Deokratik Devrim) RPP Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi) TIP Workers Party of Turkey (Türkiye İşçi Partisi) TKP Communist Party of Turkey (Türkiye Komünist Partisi) TSP Turkish Socialist Party (Türkiye Sosyalst Partisi) TWPSP Turkish Workers and Peasants Socialist Party (Türkiye İşçi ve Çiftçi Sosyalist Fırkası) 4 INTRODUCTION This study examines the Kemalist discourse of the Kadro, Markopaşa and Yön journals and their role in the connections between Kemalism and leftist ideas. Analyzing and comparing these three journals throughout the 1930s, 1940s and 1960s will provide valuable information on left-wing interpretations of Kemalist ideology by different left-leaning groups which have had varying objectives. Kemalism emerged as the ideological framework for the Turkish Republic in the early 1920s and often refers to the hegemonic ideology of the republic. It includes political thought and practices of Mustafa Kemal and his party, the RPP (Republican People’s Party). Kemalism’s tenets are crystallized in the “six arrows of the RPP”, which are nationalism, populism, laicism, republicanism, reformism, and etatism. Despite its clear directions, Kemalism has never been formulated clearly, although it has functioned as the official ideology of the republic. Due to its relative ambiguity and its changing reference points, several people from different periods and political backgrounds were able to adopt Kemalist ideology. Consequently, how to define Kemalism has led to big questions in political life as well as in academic world in Turkey: Is Kemalism a way of “Turkish enlightenment”? Is it democratic or authoritarian? Is it a modernizing or a conservative ideology? Does it fit left-wing or right-wing politics? Does it carry features of solidarism or socialism? What is its exact relation with ideologies like positivism and corporatism? As such, understanding the left-leaning interpretations of these influential journals may shed light on the attitudes of different types of intellectuals about Kemalism. In order to understand this, discussing Kemalism and putting it in a certain ideological context seems unavoidable. This is an important issue, since many of studies on Kadro and Yön do not question the very nature of Kemalism clearly, and therefore the exact relationship between these journals and Kemalism does not reveal itself. Although the scope of this thesis cannot include lengthy discussions about Kemalism, some of these crucial questions will be answered, especially in the Kadro chapter where they appear for the first time. Kadro, Markopaşa and Yön are not only journals but also political currents of different scales. It is quite common for Turkey’s intellectuals to gather forces around journals, which sometimes 5 evolve into political or literary currents within time. As such, the journals became crucial for many groups for expressing themselves, as they have done since the Ottoman times. For example, as expressions of different currents, “Meşveret”, “Servet-i Fünun”, “Halka Doğru”, and “Büyük Doğu” are all such journals. However, journals became particularly important for leftists in the republican era. Although not abundant in numbers, their existence was crucial for people who published them, especially when expressing leftist views or being involved in politics through legal channels was not possible. Particularly, the “Aydınlık” journal of Turkish Workers and Peasants Socialist Party by 1921 and “Resimli Ay” of Zekeriya Sertel by 1924 functioned as a platform for many famous intellectuals and activists such as Sabiha Sertel, Nazım Hikmet, Vala Nureddin, Ethem Nejat, Şefik Hüsnü, Suat Derviş, future Kadro writers Vedat Nedim, Burhan Asaf, Ismail Hüsrev, Şevket Süreyya and Markopaşa’s Sabahattin Ali. These efforts continued in the following years and the journals that are discussed in this thesis are also such intellectual currents which came into prominence in a vanguard role. Kadro proved its foresight with its anti-imperialist ideas about the independence movements of underdeveloped countries almost twenty years before the “third-world” term was invented. Markopaşa came forward with its unique oppositional style and its courageous stand against the government, even though this resulted in grave consequences for its writers. Eventually, Sabahattin Ali was killed, mainly due to the events which were triggered during the Markopaşa period,1 and his case became a harsh reminder for all leftists of the “dangers of being a dissident.”2 Finally, Yön served as a platform for progressive and leftist intellectuals and showed its influential role in Turkey by breaking the taboo subjects. It questioned the Kurdish issue, named it the “Eastern Problem” for the first time, and published the work of the communist poet Nazım Hikmet, who died in diaspora in Russia in 1963. Analyzing the relations of these three journals with Kemalism as the dominant formal ideology of their time is crucial as this will provide a concrete discussion about the three different intellectual attitudes towards Kemalist ideology. In this way, it will be possible to see what exactly these intellectuals understood from Kemalism and how they interpreted it according to their world- view. This is important because Kadro, Markopaşa and Yön members all described themselves as Kemalists, although they had different positions towards the regime. It will be interesting to see 1 Geriye Kalan, Aziz Nesin, Tekin Yayınevi, İstanbul, 1975, p.17 2 Markopaşa: Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi, Levent Cantek, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul, 2001, p. 40 6 how diverse or similar these intellectuals were in their ideologies and practices. In order to do this, the journals will be examined in light of the tenets of Kemalism. Until now, studies were undertaken by historians and political scientists who strictly focused on Kadro and Yön, but not on Markopaşa. There is academic work that directly focuses on Markopaşa such as Levent Cantek’s “Markopaşa: Bir Mizah ve Muhalefet Efsanesi” and that study is very helpful to grasp Markopaşa’s history and style as an oppositional satirical journal, however, its focus was mainly on journalism. As a result, there has not been enough attention on Markopaşa to examine its relationship with Kemalism, especially through text analyses. Therefore, examining Markopaşa articles in detail in order to understand its interpretation of Kemalism might be quite helpful. In addition, comparing this leftist journal to the Kadro group, which worked for the Kemalist regime while Markopaşa writers were deeply troubled by it, may provide interesting insights about Kemalism, especially because both journals claimed to have Kemalist ideology. Therefore, it is crucial to add Markopaşa to the comparisons between left- leaning journals to see if they have any common point in Kemalism to bring them together. In this way, this research will provide new perspectives for this discussion. Related to the above-mentioned issues, the following questions will