Turkey at a Crossroads
Since the beginning of the new semester I have been holed up in my office at the University of Lethbridge, writing, rewriting, submitting and marking papers, with the usual flourish of critical stress common in all overly committed individuals. However, this is no excuse for the appalling lack of posting here on this blog. I was struck by how far behind I had fallen, when today, on a uncharacteristically productive break, I finally checked the international news, only to discover that the debate on rescinding the hijab ban, or at least one version of the hijab, had ended in the Turkish Parliament, and had passed the first round of voting to be enacted into law.
The Turkish nationwide ban on hijab’s in universities and other public institutions was enacted during a period of intense attempts, by a newly founded republic, to encourage national cohesion and individual rights in a period of political instability. The first President of the Republic of Turkey, President Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, set about enacting reforms, which encouraged a multicultural and inclusive secular state. Some of these reforms sought to disintegrate the social status and stigmas that had caused contention in the previous political government, the Ottoman Caliphate. As a result, the ban on headscarf’s, or hijab, in public institutions was enacted.
However, there have been serious drawbacks to this system. While the elites of society, the secularists, have benefited from these laws, religiously pious underclass’s have remained, partially at least, in the quagmire of poverty. Particularity, the Islamic women of Turkey, who choose to wear the hijab as an outward symbol of their inner submission, have been barred from admission to institutions of higher learning as well as other governmental job. Some have gone as far as to claim that the secularist reforms maintain the dominance of actual power in Turkey in the hands of the educated elite, which make up only one third of the population.
There has been intense debate on both sides of the issue, with the secularists citing Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s original visions of a secular state, as seen here on this video, against the ruling AKP, the moderate Islamicly based “Justice and Development Party”. While AKP has made claims that the reforms in no way seek to rescind the secularist nature of the Republic, many commentators from the nations liberal newspapers foresee a slippery slope to Islamic law.
For now it is a matter of perspective on where these reforms will take Turkey. As I examine these changes I find that I myself am at a crossroads. Turkey struggles to gain membership in the EU while facing escalating pressures from the increasingly xenophobic member nations. At the same time it faces mounting calls for reform from a politically large middleclass, reforms which could begin a process of upheaval, and further alienation from the West. Fundamentally though, the reforms must be viewed as necessary, for the laws, as they presently stand, are discriminatory and facilitate an obvious class structure based on faith.
Perhaps this is the fundamental paradox of a liberal society.
maffersalmon writes “Perhaps this is the fundamental paradox of a liberal society.” Strange characterization of a liberal society! Fundamental paradox!!??
Basic terminology in the Turkish mind is totally distorted! Secularism implies that the Christians are massacred, their properties confiscated, and basic instincts disappear. How can anyone explain that from more than 10% of the population (1927) Christians have been reduced to less than 1%?.
If the main topic in a society is the headscarf then it is obvious that there are far more serious problems in basic human rights. Liberal Society? Is that a joke?
Although your comment appears fairly confrontational in its tone, this type of conversation is nonetheless the very reason as to why I created this blog in the first place. So thank you anonymous “Riace.Warrior” for your reflection.
Allow me to clarify. When I speak of a Liberal society, I do not imply a morally liberal culture, nor do I attempt to contrast one version of a liberal society against another, as comparative approaches tend to lean towards absurdity in their effectiveness. A liberal social agenda is best described as a society in which the ideals espoused as progressive, modern and forward looking. This does not necessarily mean a society must intrinsically value the same standards as Western European nation does. To imagine such would undoubtedly place the paradigm firmly in the camps of the original orientalist, where societal values is measured against the Taylorinian Evolutionist structures of Victorian England. I assume this is not your intent.
In all respects, Turkey stands as a liberal society. There is a free and open press, as well as representative parliamentary democracy. There are codified laws with regards to human rights, as well as firmly established women’s rights. There is a healthy debate within the nation itself with regards to issues of religion, geopolitics, climate change and international economics. Doe these factors mitigate the obstacles the nation faces? Absolutely not. But it does not preclude Turkey from being a highly secular and liberal society.
However, Liberal Societies are faced with a “fundamental paradox” in their allowance of debate, even if the debate aims to undermine the foundations of liberalism. A liberal society allows groups to express ideals and propaganda that would, if implemented, restrict aspects of individualism. And in this situation, herein lies the paradox. The liberal societies endearment with an outward symbol of secularism has restricted the rights of certain women. However, there is fear that if such groups were granted rights, they would grow influential, and revoke the secularist agenda. It is a catch 22, a paradox if you will.
Secondly, there are other, less extreme conclusions which can be reached from your data; Exponential population birth rates among disenfranchised religious majorities for one, or migration of the secular elite as another.
Finally, while a debate surrounding a hijab ban may appear innocuous, perhaps it represents the tip of a greater social dynamic.