It frequently happens, and it’s happening once again.
Plenty of political developments and suggestions in Turkey are being handled within a polarization frame, either over counterpart or proponent political perception or without causing an attempt to deeply discuss it or understand it (as it happened in the presidential system matter).
This situation forms dangerous “blind spots” or cause “partial blindness” from the viewpoint of some political lives.
The fact that the security-law or efficacy is being defended around the deficiencies pertaining to the political polarization related with secondaries within the principal balance due to absolute partisan reasons is forming one of the typical reasons of this partial blindness.
Blindness will be more striking and annoying when some universal values or deficient democratic implementations are in question.
Likewise, at this point, attitudes can change rapidly from transformative politics or from supporting such politics to defending an authoritative political stance.
Today, we are face to face with a rulership wording, which expands the political and civil field against the government, and undertakes, carries the mutationism, however, socializes the patriarchal political culture.
There no need to repeat: Democracy does not only consist of the expenditure of political field; it also requires politics to sprout civil and peaceful values in this field simultaneously.
This is the name of the state, which is being identified by these criteria of these humane values, laws or implementations of the legitimacy criteria of human rights ...
Blind spots or their ideological usages….
Why does this happen?
There are two possible answers to this question…
It happens because there is no opposing party; in other words, there is no alternative to AK Party in the sense of transformation, reform or democratization policies. The opposing party only exists to defend the status-quo or the old regime, to say “no” or point out the impossible.
If the carriers in communities, which pass from partial closed systems to partial open systems, are single, then frequently the style of the winner will be absolutized. It can be assimilated with the idea of one road and even with a democratic notion.
It happens this way with us.
As for the second answer….
This answer is related with AK Party’s view model on the community. The mutationism or reformism is not changed with this model, it’s only being masked.
What’s this model?
For years we are underlining this;
One foot of AK Party’s viewpoints of the community is being surrounded by the spirit or moves of “traditional solidarity” related with but nor solely based on the “field-giving interactions” and the giver’s “good will”.
The other leg is being built over the “monolithic nations”, which fulfill the demand or doesn’t directly demand, doesn’t have different tendencies or assumes that every right move influences everyone in the same and right way…
This view refers to an immanent Turkish conservatism;
It gives importance to politics, which is identified with the politician and power….
When this happens, in this model, the political view only consists of right, wrongs or absolutes…
If these are on the side of change and democracy, then you are lucky….
If not, things get complicated.
