[Panel presentation on February 19th, 2010 at the annual conference of International Studies Association (ISA) in New Orleans.]
Thanks for coming.
My paper examines the Turkish educational system, and specifically the National Security Knowledge course, and analyzes the extent to which it is in line with interwar-period nationalism, which is a militarist form of nationalism that was prevalent in Europe between the two world wars.
Yazının devamı »
Serdar Kaya: In an interview you gave in Arizona about two years ago, you are reported to have said, “I live in a city, which is a third Muslim, and if you believe the Bush, Blair and bin Laden vision of the world, we’d be shooting each other, but of course we’re not.” So why do you think this is the case? I mean what’s wrong with you guys, why are you just not killing each other in Bradford?
Justin Sullivan: (laughs) It was a strange time. We started coming back to America for the first time in 2003, which is just the beginning of the Iraq War. And everywhere there was kind of flags. And I watched it dwindle, and dwindle, and dwindle, and dwindle down to where there is no flags now.
Serdar Kaya: You once said that asking whether your political songs change anything is missing the point, probably because you think that it is the expression and the communication that the music itself entails that matters. Is that true?
Justin Sullivan: Yeah…
Justin Sullivan: … and you have a very interesting prime minister.
Serdar Kaya: Prime minister?
Justin Sullivan: [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan is an interesting guy.
S.K.: I can’t say I hate him.
Justin Sullivan: I can see why you wouldn’t. He’s a very interesting guy. At one night, I was up in the mountains in the northeast, near the border with Georgia and Armenia. We were sitting there watching television one night together with this guy, and I was talking about Erdoğan. We didn’t really speak English, and I didn’t speak Turkish, so I said [turns his thumb up and down], “Good man? Bad man? Good? Good?” And he went [turns his thumb up], “Very good! Very good!” Then the call to prayer went out across the village. It was the night time prayer, and I said, “Are you going?” And he went pffff….
[Röportajın Türkçe çevirisine sitenin .pdf sayfasından ulaşabilirsiniz.]
I interviewed Justin Sullivan of New Model Army right before the band’s Vancouver show at The Rickshaw on October 8th, 2009. The interview took place inside the band’s tour bus, since the vehicle seemed to be the only quiet place around. Within the 45-minute interview, Sullivan talked about a wide range of issues, including but not limited to (1) the way the band writes music, (2) the relations between the West and the Muslims in the post-9/11 world, (3) the Ani Ruins in Kars, (4) the Turkish political culture, and (5) Turkey in general. Furthermore, he once again amazed me with his humility – visible not only in his words but also in his manners in general.
Serdar Kaya: Let’s get started… You once said in an interview, June 18th, 2001…
Justin Sullivan: … oh, never quote me, I always forget, but go on, what did I say?
S.K.: Let me try… “If you’re prepared to follow a band who do not belong to any musical category, and are largely ignored by the media, then you already have an independent mind.” Do you deny that?
I appreciate the fact that it may at times be very difficult to understand (or reason with) the conceptions of a different culture. Yet, for quite some time now, I have given up hope for a widespread mutual understanding between Muslims and the Western people for any foreseeable future. (I am not so sure about how it goes between other cultures and the West, but I am not very optimistic about it.)
Only very few people I have met in North America since 2000 were able to really understand and appreciate the rationales of the differences in question between the two cultures. Most, however, had a low view of our distinct cultural characteristics – be it religious or not. That unfortunately goes also for people who explicitly embrace multiculturalism and even acknowledge their sympathy for the coexistence and visibility of Islamic elements in Western societies. Yet what you “can live with” is not necessarily what you really understand and appreciate.
When certain actions or expressions tacitly imply that the person you are talking to attributes some sort of an inferiority to your identity, it can be highly disturbing. Yet Westerners do that all the time but hardly ever even notice it. This is very much like how a white left-winger strongly opposes racism, and openly acknowledges her distaste of discriminative behavior and practices, yet has a really hard time kissing a black kid without making a grimace – like that kid is a disgusting creature or something. The sad thing is that this white person does not do that intentionally, and is not really aware of what kind of a mentality and perception her behavior unveils. Numerous variations of this very attitude is what I find highly disturbing.
Such attitudes derive from a lack, will and pursuit of love and empathy. But although they do not strongly endanger “physical” coexistence, they definitely do not help build a more harmonious society. Therefore, in conclusion, I would like to express my deepest sympathies to the open-minded Westerners who occasionally made me feel more at home. Despite the fact that they are relatively way fewer in number, their existence keep alive our faint hopes for a better distant future.
[Panel presentation on April 3rd, 2009 at the annual conference of Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA) in Chicago.]
Thanks for coming.
My paper is about how the visibility and revival of Islamic sociocultural elements have caused a widespread fear and reaction in the laicist segment of the Turkish society. This is not a new phenomenon. It started decades ago. But the issue has become more salient recently – due to both the increasing success of the conservative parties, and Turkey’s accession process to the E.U.
It is a strong tradition in Turkey’s Kemalist circles to regard all policy choices that contradict with the country’s official ideology as a betrayal to the Republic’s founding principles. This struggle between status quo and change has always been current in the Turkish political agenda – since the Turkish people have an undying habit of bringing non-Kemalist political parties to power, and since the Kemalists who predominate the state institutions anxiously believe that their opponents, covertly or overtly, always try to do away with Kemalism, which they consider an indispensible component of the Turkish Republic.
[Originally published at Turkish Daily News.]
After the coup of 1980, Turkey was governed by a military administration for three years, during which the junta restructured the country’s political system. The most important outcome of this process was probably the Constitution of 1982, the most militaristic fundamental document of law in the history of the Turkish Republic. The new constitution was enacted by a popular plebiscite, which the junta conducted with quasi-transparent envelopes.
The next and final phase of the process was the restoration of ‘democracy,’ which, according to the junta, was a synonym of ‘elections.’
[Originally published at Turkish Daily News.]
The Turkish Parliament adopted eight legislative packages between February 2002 and July 2004, introducing somewhat revolutionary changes to the country’s political system. As the European Commission’s 2004 progress report on Turkey stated, these changes ranged from “improved civil liberties and human rights to enhanced civilian control of the military.” The changes were so wide in scope that the European Commission, in response, recommended the EU to start accession negotiations with Turkey.
Preceded by a number of other positive developments, this long-awaited decision of the European Commission was warmly welcomed in Turkey. The majority of the Turkish people came to believe that things were finally getting on track in the country. The subsequent events, however, proved otherwise.
Batılıların herşeyden önce "Türk" olarak algıladıkları bir kişidir. Aynı şekilde kendisini Türkler "Anglo-Sakson", Kemalistler "AKP yanlısı", İslamcılar "liberal", liberaller de "demokrat" olarak algılarlar. Halbuki site yazarı, bu kavramların çoğunun anlamını bilmemekte ve kendisini sadece "siyasetbilimci" olarak tanımlamaktadır. http://serdarkaya.com
