I stated earlier that the politics, which AK Party pursued and demonstrated under the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdogan until now, broke the stereotypes concerning politics. The new Turkey will be a location where such stereotypes will be broken and new political conventions will take place.

Turkey, accompanied with all its sociological dimensions, gradually got used to this new political style, conventions and parameters.

From another angle, the politics of Turkey is being shaped under the pressure of the great expectations it generated in the society. This pressure is by no means negative. To the contrary, in this way it demonstrates an interactive, a high participant political example with its sociological base.

Of course, we have a problem with the opposition who does not know how to play its role on the political stage and repeats the political lines of another stage in the most irrelevant places. This type of opposition is still unaware of the fact that Turkey has changed.

Therefore, this type of opposition, while repeating the stereotypical lines that are peculiar to Turkey in their most irrelevant and unattuned places, always contributes to the brightening of AK Party more as a political actor. AK Party, the main dynamic of change in Turkey, is increasingly becoming the main reason of the opposition party"s existence.

Since its foundation, AK Party has had a context and story for each of its nine election victories. On the whole, we are encountering a great story in which there is entirely consistent and coherent.

November 3, March 1, April 27, July 22, October 21, January 29 (Davos), June 12, September 12, December 17-25, March 30, August 10, the closure case, Ergenekon and Sledgehammer cases, Mavi Marmara, the Arab spring, the coefficient case, the democratic opening and the resolution process. These are the important dates and historical events in this great story.

Of course, in all these stories, AK Party"s gigantic achievements in economy, foreign policy, social services, education and transportation can be mentioned.

And the most prestigious concept from the total sum of this entire story is politics. In the consistency of this story, there is an artistic integrity, which reflects from this sentiment of coherence and aesthetics.

There is no doubt that on August 27 when Davutoglu will be elected as the chair of the party. This will represent a distinct quality of beauty within the political performance, which AK Party has demonstrated until now, for those who attentively followed it with acquaintance.

Walter Benjamin, warning against the disadvantages on the aestheticization of politics, alternatively offers to politicize aesthetics. I believe that in the whole sum of AK Party"s 13-year political performance, instead of beautifying politics, we found the opportunity to watch the politicization of beauty. I mentioned earlier that the essence of this beauty is sincerity that this quality has been quite alien to many de facto political styles.

There is a need for an aesthetic support in order to reinforce the politics, that are not based on sincerity; in which case art is abused so wastefully under the service of politics. However, if there is sincerity, there is an adequate amount of beauty. The sincerity is beautiful enough. The politicization of this beauty means to demonstrate the original, new and true.

The criticism against Davutoglu because of his foreign policy performance cannot alternatively recommend a better and more beautiful political style. Even so, all the proposed politics become distant from sincerity and supposedly in order to exist in the name of realism, suggesting partnership within wickedness.

For example, what could have been done to deal with the emerging events in Egypt, Iraq or Syria with less damage? Or even, what could have been done to become advantageous? If you listen to those who do the profit and loss accounting from where they put the major blame on Davutoglu, there is neither beauty nor goodness left.