Secularism: Friend or Foe

This week I decided to explore the blogosphere under the theme of laicism. Laicism is a concept brought to Turkish vocabulary by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (see Figure 1), the founding father of the modern Turkish Republic. It means the state and religion should exist separately, basically it is a synonym of secularism, and this concept is the most important factor one should look for in the politics of the government in Turkey. Therefore the first blog that caught my attention, "The White Path" ,written by Mustafa Akyol, was about secularism and his clashing views with the secular thinkers of Turkey. Mustafa Akyol is a highly educated journalist, who’s views are in favor with the current government. If his motives are analyzed it is clear that he is opposed to secularism. I specifically chose this blog because it clashes with my opinions, and I think challenging oneself is a way to self improvement. The second blog I chose to comment on is called “The Istanbulian.” It is written by Emre Kizilkaya, also a journalist, who has the opposite views on the government that those of Mustafa Akyol. He is known for his bashing of the government, more specifically AKP (the ruling party, called the Justice and Development Party.) His views are more similar to my own. I think that the balance of opposing views will persuade one to analyze both sides of the debate. Although the issues of both blogs are not related in context they share the same theme; secularism. Kizilkaya’s post mentions PETA’s letter recently sent to the mayor of Istanbul, which has caused quite a stir in domestic politics due to the fact that it was very provocative.






"Turkey Is Getting More Secular, Not Religious"
Comment:
Mr Akyol,
The main ingredient of a good scholar is objectiveness, and perspective. Thus I will try my best to be a scholar of such merit while analyzing your blog post “ Turkey Is Getting More Secular, Not Religious.” However we do have contrasting argument even though the origins of thought are the same. For example we both agree that the turmoil and instability in Turkey is a major concern for both the-as you define myself-“urban secularists,” and -as I define yourself “Islamic fundamentalists.” Our common ground set the basis of argument.
This is where we differ; you think that Turkey is progressing to a more secular social stance, basing your argument on “objective” social research. I cannot locate your sources, therefore trust your argument, but I will present a few points. I respect the fact that you have analyzed the situation, and gathered data, although the accuracy and reliability is a question, on the shifting concept of religion. To one extent I do agree with you; the rural parts of Turkey have not been subject to major change since AKP has come to power. This coming from a very realistic perspective I would like to ask the reason that you, a respected author, do not bring up the major question: Why has Turkey not been able to undergo major developments and changes, without loosing the concept of national identity and Ataturk's idea of secularism? Why is secularism seen to be such a threat, when it is clear that religion in state affairs is just disrupting and corrupting the pureness of religion? I have a problem with the fact that no one who has the power, and connections to reach to an audience, does not use this as an advantage. This is also the main problem that me and my fellow "urban secularists" have.
Mr. Akyol, I agree with you that before AKP, the rural Turkey, has not been so modern, but that is the result of politicians not being able to follow the reasoning and values of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. I believe we are all to blame for this mess, and hopefully in the future we shall peacefully co-exist.
As I have stated before, objectivity is what makes a scholar. As long as you shall write, I shall read your opinions with an open mind. I know this is crucial because I also write a blog myself; http://aylinececicek.blogspot.com/.


"PETA's XXX Letter To Istanbul Mayor "
Comment:
Mr. Kizilkaya,
While reading your post titled “PETA's XXX Letter To Istanbul Mayor “ I realized that the international community is rather oblivious to the real Turkey. I would have expected PETA to be more sensible about the letter, keeping in mind that the government nowadays is quite religious. This strategy is clearly based on attention seeking, and although the message is an important one; the issue of stray animals that should be neutered, I see that the nude image of Jenna Jameson, has taken precedence over the real issue. I must say in all simplicity, their approach is not the way to resolve this issue , and PETA’s strategy is politically offending. Their approach is an indicator that PETA does not have enough information about the structure of the political mechanism that exists in Turkey. An international organization of such merit should be able to gather sufficient data and analyze the correct way to approach officials, in order to be affective.
Looking at the bigger picture, it is seen that PETA is only one of the organizations that do not know how to approach governments of countries other that the United States of America. Although there is a small fault in the government’s portrayal of identity to the international community, I think that the majority flaw is of PETA’s. However it is crucial for them to be able to change their methods in order to be affective, because their cause is clearly a good, humanitarian one. The world is in desperation for good causes that raise awareness to issues that impact everyone. Even the slightest improvement matters to those in need, and that is why I decided to write my own blog; http://aylinececicek.blogspot.com/.