Previously, I had reminded everyone that the “right of resistance” statement used by Kılıçdaroğlu was a “constitutional code” which legitimized a military coup in Turkey.

I’ve received reactions over it, especially from post-Kemalists.

I don’t like making reminders that evoke the coup, and in this sense, pointing at connections between yesterday and today.

However, when a mentality frequently makes its existence felt, it becomes inevitable to remember and remind. Thus, some people are forming these connections actively on the mentality level. They are repeating the statement that “DP has suspended the constitution, formed a dictatorship and that resistance is a right”, which had been said 40 years ago, today with the same justifications, by only “replacing DP with AK Party”.

Even John Lock (who used the right of resistance Notion) cannot save the day. Isn’t it true that, in 1960, there had been people in universities and the founding parliament, who had attempted to produce rebellion and then a revolution law out of Montesquieu?

Kılıçdaroğlu is a different event. If the leader of the main opposing political party reflexively repeats a statement, which took place in the first coup constitution and confirms the revolution, then, it will form a fatal situation from the point of “mentality-memory relation”, not only in Turkey, but rather everywhere. As for the others, who care about the “right of resistance” and get offended by Kılıçdaroğlu’s words; with all due respect, this country has a story and they should be more attentive from now on. They should have a look at the articles written by the people, who were swarming around shouting, “We are democrats”, after Sisi overthrew İhvan in Egypt.

They should never forget about the implications that İhvan deserved the coup and the İhvan-AK Party assimilations they’ve formed.

I’m not using the post-Kemalist expression for nothing.

With this, I’m not only referring to a political stance, but at the same time, a state of mind.

The average secular elitist of this country has been experiencing a severe disruption for years. No matter their education, knowledge or the future envisagement about themselves, when the “other” is the point in question, their “intolerance” reaches an intolerable level.

The disruption is clear; likewise, this picture contains an ailing duality, pluralism and heterogeneity ascription directed to itself, and in relation with the other, the emphasis of constantly being monolithic, homogeneous and ideological. Fundamentalism is an absolute. Likewise, this situation is pointing at the state of being a part of a superior mind, which decides what’s correct or wrong, makes out the maps of rightful thinking and behavior, and which reduces this to the criteria of “suitability for proving legitimacy”.

Actually, even the idioms like orientalism and elitism don’t correspond to the ascription of legitimacy in its own world of meaning and the illegitimacy reference of the others’ world, over the universal value it “privatized, and attributed to its own identity and stance”.

This situation had us pondering on the “apartheid culture” and “apartheidist personality disorder”. Declaring every unwanted actor, situation in politics, or, every party that lost as “illegitimate”, and, declaring apolitical ways despite this, is the main symptom of this disorder.

We encounter this in different periods, different people, different tendencies and different levels.

We also encounter this today.

The essential here is the common point and essence of these differentiations.

There are no differences between a grandfather and grandchild from the point of mentality.

This is not called opposition, as it’s assumed.

This is not called politics.

This is not called an idea either.

This is a completely apolitical, absolutist and discriminative political attitude, which exceeds the borders of criticism, reduces a political fight to a civil war, places itself on anger and intolerance.

Turkey has a political rulership problem, that’s for sure.

This post-Kemalist mentality is one of the main factors, which creates this problem and represents depoliticism and being out of date….