Coup attempt in Turkey

[The Minsky Moment]

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.

I suspect the first, but at the end of the day the result is pretty similar.

[Razgovory]

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.

  Could you give me the date when the Christian Democratic Union struck Christian Democracy from their party platform.

[Razgovory]

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.

I'd say they are different.  For one, the Deep State was a result of the military, since the AKP doesn't inspire the same devotion from the military it doesn't have the resources or capabilities.  Second, the AKP is much more liberal economically (which I think is the major reason it has been so successful).  Personally I think Erdogan is a fool who likes playing dress up and if following a current global toward strongmen.  Still, he is the one the people of Turkey have chosen, and I believe that people should be allowed elect their own government, even if they chose stupid things.  I am hostile to the idea that he should be murdered and the secularism be reinstated by firing guns into crowds or having helicopters blast Parliament.

[Zanza]

  Could you give me the date when the Christian Democratic Union struck Christian Democracy from their party platform.

It is a Christian party, but it has always been more than just a Christian party. They have other traditions and values that they base their politics on besides Christianity. As society in Germany became less and less religious over the last decades, so did the CDU.

From their program:
Dennoch wissen wir, dass sich aus christlichem Glauben kein bestimmtes politisches Programm ableiten lässt. Die CDU ist für jeden offen, der Würde, Freiheit und Gleichheit aller Menschen anerkennt und die hieraus folgenden Grundüberzeugungen unserer Politik bejaht.
However, we know that it is not possible to derive a certain political program from Christian creed. The CDU is open for everybody who acknowledges dignity, liberty and equality of all humans and accepts the core convictions of our politics that derive from that.

Die geistigen und politischen Grundlagen der CDU sind in der Sozialethik der christlichen Kirchen, in der liberalen Tradition der Aufklärung, in der wertkonservativen Pflege von Bindungen und dem Wissen darum, dass der Staat nicht allmächtig sein darf, sowie im christlich und patriotisch motivierten Widerstand gegen den Nationalsozialismus zu finden.
The spiritual and political foundations of the CDU are the social ethics of the Christian churches, the liberal tradition of enlightenment, the value-based conservative preservation of relations and the knowledge, that the state may not be allmighty, as well as the Christian and patriotically motivated resistance against National Socialism.

[Maladict]

It is a Christian party, but it has always been more than just a Christian party. They have other traditions and values that they base their politics on besides Christianity. As society in Germany became less and less religious over the last decades, so did the CDU.

It's not really possible in northwestern Europe to be a major political party without acknowledging that most people don't believe in God anymore.

[Razgovory]

I do not deny that the Christian Democratic parties have become more inclusive.

[Zanza]

Their policies are not really motivated much by Christianity either anymore. The liberal streak and the social ethics - without the Christian part - is what guides their politics these days. So arguing that they represent politicial Christianity is not supported by their actual policy-making.

From this side of the ocean, the GOP looks more led by Christianity than the CDU. Regardless of name. 

[Berkut]

I love that Raz, and the useful idiots like him, are willing to go to the lengths of trying to argue that Islamist parties in Turkey are pretty much just like the Christian Democrats in Germany.

The shark has truly been jumped.

[Tamas]

Raz just has issues he "takes a stand" on. I don't understand why you even indulge him.

[dps]

Their policies are not really motivated much by Christianity either anymore. The liberal streak and the social ethics - without the Christian part - is what guides their politics these days. So arguing that they represent politicial Christianity is not supported by their actual policy-making.

From this side of the ocean, the GOP looks more led by Christianity than the CDU. Regardless of name. 

Best as I can tell, our Democratic party is more Christian than any major party in Europe.

I love that Raz, and the useful idiots like him, are willing to go to the lengths of trying to argue that Islamist parties in Turkey are pretty much just like the Christian Democrats in Germany.

While I do agree that Raz is going overboard here, I do think that he has a point about your definition of "Islamist" being a bit too broad.  It's not that your definition is wrong, exactly;  it's more that it's going to apply to the government of any nation where the majority of the population is Muslim, unless it's is under the control of an outside non-Muslim country. 

[Berkut]

Raz just has issues he "takes a stand" on. I don't understand why you even indulge him.

I don't, actually.

What is bothersome is that his position on this is not his own - there appears to be a lot of people out there who share the idea that Islamism is no big deal, and is really just a small degree in difference from any other religious movement.

[Berkut]

While I do agree that Raz is going overboard here, I do think that he has a point about your definition of "Islamist" being a bit too broad.  It's not that your definition is wrong, exactly;  it's more that it's going to apply to the government of any nation where the majority of the population is Muslim, unless it's is under the control of an outside non-Muslim country. 

I don't think that is the case at all - for a veyr long time (and even now, arguably) Turkey for example was not Islamist.

Of course there are always going to be people within those countries who wish they were MORE Islamist, but that doesn't argue against the definition, since the intent is to identify not only those who support using Islam as a source of political law, but those who are *against* just that, even though both groups will be Muslim.

That is the entire point of the definition, in fact. It is to distinguish between Muslims who are devout, but understand that their religion is not to be forced on others, and those who feel that their religion should be forced on others.

So now - I don't at all agree that my definition is broad, it is exactly as broad as it ought to be. And most current governments in majority population countries I don't think could be fairly described as "Islamist". Many of the people in some of those countries could be so described however.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The problem Turkey has always had, since the days of Ataturk, is that the public at large never accepted secularism. It was always seen as something the educated upper class elites supported, and any time the popular movement for Islamism grew too powerful the unelected military would step in and impose temporary periods of autocracy. Considering this has gone on for almost 100 years and a majority of the Turkish population still is Islamist, I'm not really sure that a true democratic Turkey and secularism is ever possible long term. What's unfortunate is Erdogan isn't just an Islamist, but also an autocrat. He isn't seeking to build a democracy with "Islamic values", he's seeking to build a populist autocracy that will give major concessions to Islamists (like more in intermingling between church and state.)

I don't think Erdogan wants an Iranian approach, in which the clerics are actually part of government, because he's far too attached to power residing with him for that.

I don't imagine Turkey ever being as bad as Saudi Arabia or Iran, but what Turkey's government always represented was the promise you could have a secular government (like America's) and an Islamic people, coexisting. That dream is largely dead now. But even an Islamist Turkey is probably still a better model of government than is seen in Saudi Arabia or Iran.

[DGuller]

The problem Turkey has always had, since the days of Ataturk, is that the public at large never accepted secularism. It was always seen as something the educated upper class elites supported, and any time the popular movement for Islamism grew too powerful the unelected military would step in and impose temporary periods of autocracy. Considering this has gone on for almost 100 years and a majority of the Turkish population still is Islamist, I'm not really sure that a true democratic Turkey and secularism is ever possible long term.

That was my thought process after the whole thing went out with a whimper.  If the only way liberal secularism survives is by regular coups, then sorry, it ain't going to work indefinitely.  The first time the coup fails, the coup isn't launched in time and the army gets co-opted, or the coup succeeds but the army decides to stay in power, the system collapses.  That's pretty much the opposite of how stable liberal secular democracies should function.

[LaCroix]

I think the problem with turkey is that its constitution and general government framework already offered the tools for a non-secularist like erdogan to chip away at the country's secular institutions. before, it was to maintain secularism at all costs. but once a non-secularist finally got into power who had enough ambition to mold the country in his own vision, he could. he had the same tools that the secularists had at their disposal.

secularism was promoted as ataturk's legacy, and these principles were held by the upper echelons of turk society rather than across the whole society, so is it any wonder that it couldn't survive for all time? the "oppressed" majority never agreed to it. seems like the secularists in turkey shot themselves in the foot.