Turkish opposition imports ideological economists from US for hybrid war

13:25 . 5/12/2022 Pazartesi

Selçuk Türkyılmaz

Selçuk Türkyılmaz has been a frequent contributor to Yeni Şafak for years, penning columns on a variety of topics for the daily
Selçuk Türkyılmaz

Türkiye’s opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu earlier this week appointed new economy advisors. Among them is American economist Jeremy Rifkin, who is now Kılıçdaroğlu’s chief economy advisor. Would it be right to consider CHP efforts to import these economists from the U.S. in the “technocrats” category, and accept them as qualified and competent economists-directors? Sure, a critical attitude can be taken based on the context of technocrat governments, but more important is the fact that the economists the main opposition party leader is interested in importing reflects a common economy perspective with the opposition table of six parties, which includes the CHP. Those particularly on the right side of the table, being passionate advocates of the liberal economy theory, are more aligned with the economy perspective of the imported economists. It is hence necessary to evaluate the individuals in question in terms of ideology, qualification and competence. These individuals having a liberal world view is at least as important as qualification and competence. Thus, we can both determine the most characteristic features of a period, and help understand them. 

 In the Dec. 3 assembly addressing party members at Istanbul’s Lütfi Kırdar Convention and Exhibition Center, which launched the CHP’s election process, some focused on the significance of the imported economists in terms of Turkey, but certain details could not be clarified satisfactorily. Yet, economists such as Daron Acemoğlu and Jeremy Rifkin stand out in terms of Türkiye not based on their qualification and competence, but rather their views. These views are critical with respect to understanding certain qualities. We are quite confident that Türkiye will not give into Western imperialist pressures, and instead continue on its path with determination. Therefore, the differences between the two worlds need to be revealed clearly. We saw through experience in the last decade how all elements of the hybrid strategy were set loose on the ground. Hence, it is extremely important that the primary qualities are explained. It is quite obvious that we will see the periodical maneuvers of the same strategy during the election period. This thus makes it necessary to focus on the ideas imported rather than the individuals imported. 

 One of the things essential for a world centered around the U.K. and the U.S. to renew itself is that those around them maintain their faith in this world. Otherwise, their imperialist ideology would collapse completely. The Turkish translation of works by economist historians such as Daron Acemoğlu must be analyzed in the context of the ideological argument of U.K.-based globalization. Surely such critical evaluations should have been raised especially by leftist groups. Similarly, a critical evaluation from nationalist and Islamist groups would have been no surprise either. The unfulfillment of these expectations shows that the hybrid one is beyond the strategic level. It seems that in addition to ideologies, the groups have also become invalid through hybrid relations. If this was not the case, the classes that emerged as the Anatolian Tigers (a term that refers to a number of cities in central Turkey whose industrial prowess since the 1980s has resulted in impressive growth rates for the region and nation) would not have had the courage to fight against Türkiye. The issue the country is experiencing through grocery stores is a perfect example of this. They did not hesitate to run to the stage to support the faith in imperialist ideology. This also applies to the intellectual groups affiliated with them. Openly drawing attention to imperialist countries and their network of relations, Türkiye deeply shook the faith in a world centered around the U.K. and the U.S. This applies to the France-based world as well. They too were impacted by Türkiye’s determination. Thus the ideological argument of a West-based world has become even more important. However, the ideological reflection of the said hybrid war is a serious weakness for Türkiye. The gravity of this weakness is better understood when associated with the fragility of the election process. 

 Naturally, the group of economists that have been imported will not stand out in terms of “qualification and competence” at a time when Türkiye has been making successful economic moves. The ideas suggested by them is the ideological reality behind their prominence. It is quite important to note that they gained fame through their representation of imperialist ideologies. We should closely follow why some intellectual groups are showing indifference to these imported economists’ imperialist ideology and familiarity. Did they not realize or did they not pay attention? Their lack of realization is the result of blindness. Then what can we discuss? If they don’t care, there is no sense in taking seriously anything they say about this country. 

#Hybrid War
2 ay önce
Turkish opposition imports ideological economists from US for hybrid war
The opposition's joint political consensus statement is a call for a return to factory settings!
Will the Egyptian army loosen its grip on the country's economy?
Did Israel respond to attack on Azerbaijan embassy?
The Turkish Century: An energy hub in the making
Snake pit: Inside the fight to clinch GOP nomination