Coup attempt in Turkey

[Razgovory]

I would consider that a jihadist.

An Islamist is someone who believes that the best form of government is one informed by Islam - i.e., it is a political movement.

...and is willing to use the coercive power of the state to enforce it.

Would you consider christian states that have or had` blasphemy laws, "Christianist"?

[Razgovory]

If we use Berkut's term

Hey I have a fucking great idea: why don't you talk to Tamas and Berkut about this shit instead of just lumping us all together like an asshole?

Needless to say, his version of "Berkut's terms" has no actual resemblance to my actual views, in a shocking, shocking turn of events.

If your own terms have no resemblance to your actual views, what does that make you?

[barkdreg]

I'm starting to wonder if Erdogan knew something was brewing.
Was im Istanbul from 7 to 11 july and while there were only a few cops in the airport the citycentre itself was teeming with heavily armed police, including armored cars.

[Malicious Intent]

(...)
But once the early hours were over and he knew he had won, I bet Erdo has never been happier. He gets to be President for life now and turn Turkey into an autocracy, his life long dream.

Erdogan did not even hide his joy. He already very openly called the coup a "gift from god" that allowed him to clean house.

[Hamilcar]

You know, used to be when a military threw a coup, it was fucking thrown.  Even without the help of the CIA.

Fucking Millennials.

Are you saying the coup leaders got distracted by rare pokemon during the crucial hours?

[grumbler]

are you saying erdogan's primary motivation that drives his actions is the creation of an islamic government (based on whatever sect of islam)?

That's an interesting, but unanswerable, question.  Whether Erdogan is using Islamism to promote his own authoritarianism, or using authoritarianism to promote his own Islamism, isn't really knowable at this point, I don't think.  As he gains more power, we'll find out. 

[alfred russel]

I would consider that a jihadist.

An Islamist is someone who believes that the best form of government is one informed by Islam - i.e., it is a political movement.

...and is willing to use the coercive power of the state to enforce it.

Would you consider christian states that have or had` blasphemy laws, "Christianist"?

Definitely not in the past tense. But in the current tense, with the laws enforced, and not general blasphemy laws that cover non christian religions? Sure.

Though "Christianist" isn't really the word to use--"Christian" is the better adjective.

[alfred russel]

I think military coups have become far more difficult to pull off. There used to be a whole cold war team that was not democratic, and then in the third world there were plenty of dictators. So a non democratic state was a lot less of an outlier, first world democracies were used to working with non democracies, and of course there was strong motivation for first world democracies to accept a non democracy that was anti communist.

[Monoriu]

I think military coups have become far more difficult to pull off. There used to be a whole cold war team that was not democratic, and then in the third world there were plenty of dictators. So a non democratic state was a lot less of an outlier, first world democracies were used to working with non democracies, and of course there was strong motivation for first world democracies to accept a non democracy that was anti communist.

I think the first problem is that there are simply more democracies now.  Spain, Greece, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia etc are now democracies.  Coups are far less likely to take place in mature, established democracies. 

The second issue is the difficulty of coup plotters to convince the public that they have succeeded.  In coups, perception is reality.  Successful coups need to control the media and spread the message that they have made it.  It is now much more difficult to control the media with the advent of the internet and Facebook. 

[grumbler]

I think military coups have become far more difficult to pull off. There used to be a whole cold war team that was not democratic, and then in the third world there were plenty of dictators. So a non democratic state was a lot less of an outlier, first world democracies were used to working with non democracies, and of course there was strong motivation for first world democracies to accept a non democracy that was anti communist.

I agree.  Add to that the improved communications among potential opponents of the coup, and the element of surprise is not nearly as strong a factor in the coup plotters' success.

[DGuller]

I wonder why Egypt's coup succeeded, especially given that al Sisi telegraphed that the coup will likely happen a couple of days before it happened.  Is it that Egypt is more of a backwater when it comes to civil society?  Was it Morsi's political incompetence?  There certainly wasn't a consensus that Morsi had to go, given that al Sisi had to mow down thousands before the Islamists understood he meant business.

[Berkut]

How is the idea that there could be "christianist" countries somehow a refutation of the concept of Islamism?

Of course there are plenty of historic examples of Christian nations that enforce religious laws. We mostly consider that a bad thing, and are happy that the Spanish government no longer engages in Inquisitions, for example.

Like everything, there is a range of course. There are probably Americans today who would support state enforced religious laws. I guess we could call them "Christianists", but mostly we just call them fundies, because they mostly don't matter much. They have lost, by and large.

Islamism has not lost however - this is an ongoing conflict with incredibly serious implications for hundreds of millions of people. There are countries that are completely Islamist (Iran), there are countries that are somewhat secular, but have significant religious restrictions based on Islamic law, there are countries that are mostly secular that are leaning in an Islamist direction now (Turkey). This is all happening right now, and the idea that we should pretend like it is not, or draw some meaningless and practically irrelevant inferences with Christian political actions is not just pointless, it is dangerous. There is no analagous Christian movement that matters that is trying to put the Pope back in charge of the world, or code stoning of gays back into law.

There are people out there who are putting their lives at risk, Muslim people, trying to resist this, and the idiotic left demand that we pretend it doesn't exist is the worst possible stance we can take trying to help them create a secular society within Muslim populations that respects basic human rights, including the right to freedom of worship, but also including women's rights and basic respect for freedom.

[Razgovory]

I would consider that a jihadist.

An Islamist is someone who believes that the best form of government is one informed by Islam - i.e., it is a political movement.

...and is willing to use the coercive power of the state to enforce it.

Would you consider christian states that have or had` blasphemy laws, "Christianist"?

Definitely not in the past tense. But in the current tense, with the laws enforced, and not general blasphemy laws that cover non christian religions? Sure.

Though "Christianist" isn't really the word to use--"Christian" is the better adjective.

There is no word such as "christianist", because we don't make an equivalent to "Islamism" in the English language. It would be to universal to have any meaning.  Certainly Angela Merkel's party is political Christianity. "Islamism" is a pretty flabby term if it is used to describe today's Turkey and Iran and ISIS.  Pretty much every Muslim country is "informed" by their religion, yet we don't call Malaysia an Islamist state.  I would say that "Islamist" is the term we use for Muslims we aren't so keen on, and for a lot of people that happens to be all Muslims.

[alfred russel]

There is no word such as "christianist", because we don't make an equivalent to "Islamism" in the English language. It would be to universal to have any meaning.  Certainly Angela Merkel's party is political Christianity. "Islamism" is a pretty flabby term if it is used to describe today's Turkey and Iran and ISIS.  Pretty much every Muslim country is "informed" by their religion, yet we don't call Malaysia an Islamist state.  I would say that "Islamist" is the term we use for Muslims we aren't so keen on, and for a lot of people that happens to be all Muslims.

Merkel's party is not political christianity. Historically that was the case and it has retained the name, but it is now a secular party.

[The Minsky Moment]

It is remarkable how many intelligent people throw away good sense when Muslims are involved.

I agree and yet that can cut both directions.  Just because Erdogan is unfairly criticized merely because if his religious associations doesn't mean he does not otherwise merit criticism.  From my perspective it seems to me you have a blind spot with him.  AKP is really no different from MHP and their gray wolves - the deep state lives with all its antidemocratic and anitliberal tendencies, just with an islamist tinge and a different set of letters.