It is natural that political polemics increase and harden towards the elections. That’s what happens this time. But the level is very low. It is seen that polemics that should normally nourish politicians, writers, journalists, scientists and intellectuals intellectually and force them to work harder, do not fill the seeds of figs or consist of swearing and insults.
So what’s the reason for this? Politics, of course. Lack of ideological clarity.
For example, a vote on Finland’s NATO membership was held in the Turkish Grand National Assembly last week. There was not a single objection. All of your votes were “Yes”. There were also those who did not participate in the voting. All parties, left and right, ruling and opposition, aligned themselves with the USA. We have seen once once more that there is not a single anti-imperialist party, not even a single deputy. It’s painful, it’s embarrassing.
Of course we are aware of that. Anyone with historical knowledge and historical awareness knows that an action that increases the participation of the people, paves the way for the people and liberates the people does not always take place with the will of the people reflected in the ballot box, and revolutionary steps are required for this. Moreover, it is also a historical fact that many steps for the benefit of the people were taken in historical conditions, in spite of the people. Therefore, as seen in history, the element that gives a progressive step a democratic character is not the way it is done, but the way it is done, but whether it achieves results for the benefit of the people. For example, in our history, the abolition of the sultanate, the right to vote and the right to be elected to women, the transition to a multi-party system, and the recognition of many rights to workers were realized not through ballot boxes, but through revolution. This does not make these breakthroughs undemocratic. The fact that the voters vote in favor of the continuation of squire, slavery and inequality between women and men at the ballot box does not make these decisions democratic just because they came out of the ballot box.
There’s more. In class societies, the question of which democracy should be asked.
The rule of law is necessary for democracy, the separation of powers is necessary. What regarding other requirements? What will be secularism, civic consciousness, class consciousness, equality of opportunity, free individual, educated and organized society, minimum subsistence level?
Let’s repeat, there can be no democracy if the society, especially the workers, is not organized. It should not be forgotten that one of the first decisions taken following the September 12 coup d’état was to ban the strike.
In short, if national consciousness, civic consciousness and class consciousness are weak, democracy is also weak.
