Opinion of Kemalism

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Negative.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Utterly terrible.

Erdoganism is shaping up to be equally terrible if not worse, though.

[Derpist]

Negative.

[Boston Bread]

 The lesser evil

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Heh, I know it's fashionable to s**t at everything Turkish today, but the only answer is mixed. Preferable to Erdoganism, Enverism or Abdulhamidism.

[Green Line]

Wonderful Idealogy

[Sozialliberal]

Freedom ideology because it's the reason for Turkey's secularity.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Actually the US's laws regarding church/state separation aren't much different. The real difference is that Christianity isn't really all that "rules" focused in comparison to Islam or Judaism and Christianity is far easier to function separately from the state.

[Santander]

The lesser evil

Also,

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Actually the US's laws regarding church/state separation aren't much different. The real difference is that Christianity isn't really all that "rules" focused in comparison to Islam or Judaism and Christianity is far easier to function separately from the state.

lol... okay.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I was under the impression that Kemalist secularism had more in common with Third Republic French secularism (not to say those two are similar, far from it, but everything is relative) than with the American non-establishment doctrine.

[Intell]

FI. The reason, why Turkey was much better than other muslim countries, in the area, until very recently. What's the reason for voting negative?

[Derpist]

I have to say, there seems to be no correlation between people's political affiliation and how they are voting on this.

[Green Line]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

[Derpist]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

What exactly makes Turkish Islamism dangerous?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Horrendous. I see everybody is focusing on muh laïcité and completely ignoring the hyper-nationalistic component.

[Green Line]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

What exactly makes Turkish Islamism dangerous?

They wouldn't be in NATO, for starters.

The anti-semitism is another issue which only started to come out under Erdogan, naturally.

[Derpist]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

What exactly makes Turkish Islamism dangerous?

They wouldn't be in NATO, for starters.

Erdogan seems to be staying well-put in NATO.

Also, this of course also implies Turkish membership in NATO is conducive to peace, which Russo-Turkish relations have shown that it is probably not.

[Green Line]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

What exactly makes Turkish Islamism dangerous?

They wouldn't be in NATO, for starters.

Erdogan seems to be staying well-put in NATO.

Also, this of course also implies Turkish membership in NATO is conducive to peace, which Russo-Turkish relations have shown that it is probably not.

He's staying put, for now.. Give it 20 years and come back to me.  He has no choice at the moment.
Turkish membership has absolutely been condicive for peace.  During the Cold War, without Turkey, the middle east is a total wild card.  You way underestimate their contribution.

And like I said, explain away the anti-Semitisim that has arisen.

[Antonio the Sixth]

What's the reason for voting negative?

Giving two sh*ts about the fate of Armenian, Kurdish and Greek people would be a good starting point.

Horrendous. I see everybody is focusing on muh laïcité and completely ignoring the hyper-nationalistic component.

The reason I focused on muh laïcité was because that was the most obvious way to point out the ridiculousness of an American conservative expressing support for it. It's certainly not what motivated my vote.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I don't actually care about laicite. I have long come to accept it's a cultural thing, and what to my Anglo ears seems like a completely trivial and banal thing (like people being allowed to wear a turban or or a hijab or a cross or whatever in the public sphere) is in fact a deeply disturbing attack on the secular state for people steeped in laicite values.

What I do care about is the hyper nationalist TURK FIRST TURK FIRST TURK FIRST (especially in a country with so many ethnic minorities), the hilariously elitist attitudes and outright dislike of the poor etc,

I should point out that Kemal himself wasn't terrible and was overall an FF, as a lot of his ideas replaced even worse ideas like Pan-Turkism. But the contemporary form of Kemalism has got worse And more ridiculous over the years.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Wonderful Idealogy

If an American leader treated Christianity the way Kemal treated Islam, you'd be up in arms.

Yeah, I would be.  American Christianity and Islam are not the same.  Turkish Islamism is dangerous, American Christianity, not as much. Kemal realized that.

What exactly makes Turkish Islamism dangerous?

They wouldn't be in NATO, for starters.

The anti-semitism is another issue which only started to come out under Erdogan, naturally.

The anti-semitism is a (disturbing) pan Islamic trend that has emerged from a mixture of legitimate grievances with Israel and ominous funding from the usual suspects.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I should point out that Kemal himself wasn't terrible and was overall an FF, as a lot of his ideas replaced even worse ideas like Pan-Turkism. But the contemporary form of Kemalism has got worse And more ridiculous over the years.

Destroying any chance of a Kurdish and (at the time) Armenian State, makes him a clear HP IMO.

[Mopsus]

Obviously, the ideal mix for Turkey would be an ideology that respects minorities' right to self-determination, while at the same time pursuing secularization and pan-Turkism as a counterweight to Saudification. Given the actually-existing alternatives, however, I can't see Kemalism as anything other than a Relative FI.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I should point out that Kemal himself wasn't terrible and was overall an FF, as a lot of his ideas replaced even worse ideas like Pan-Turkism. But the contemporary form of Kemalism has got worse And more ridiculous over the years.

Destroying any chance of a Kurdish and (at the time) Armenian State, makes him a clear HP IMO.

I understand, but I'll play the devil's advocate here. The Ottoman Empire had collapsed massively, which on it's own was quite traumatizing. Furthermore, Turkey was destined by the victors to be a small state, divided into zones of influence, and it took Ataturk to threw these plans, which, in some cases, were just plain wrong (Istanbul to Greece, wtf?).

I'm not defending Ataturk in regard of Kurds and Armenians, but we must remember context of the times and how any separatism/fragmentation must have been viewed by the Turks.

Also, if it's worth anything, Kemalism was nowhere near genocidal levels that took place under the Three Pashas.