THREE MOST IMPORTANT SOCIOPOLITICAL STRUCTURAL PILLARS OF TURKEY
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
THREE MOST IMPORTANT SOCIOPOLITICAL
STRUCTURAL PILLARS OF TURKEY
UNDERGROUND ECONOMY, SECULARISM AND
MULTICULTURALISM IN TURKEY
MEHMET ALİ YETİŞ 280506057
ÇAĞLA TOYLAR 280506023
NAGİHAN IRMAK 280506055
YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Picture Source : http://www.aseed.net/uncorporated/pictures/three-pillars.gifTurkey has sought to find an identification for the future models make Turkey a
though republic in terms of every sector such as economical, reforms put by government,
cultural, and so on. Hence, since the last period of Ottoman Empire there has been remarkable
occupation in order to originate today’s modern Turkey. While some people were trying to
certify these reforms, Turkey was prominently altering slowly in terms of new economic
system, being more central and various people living in Turkey .Eventually, today, the three
vital pillars making Turkey remains are underground economy, secularism and
multiculturalism.
I. UNDERGROUND ECONOMY
Underground economy one of the three vital pillars of Turkey provides us an
extraordinary point of view which makes it possible to see the economic status of Turkey.
This ignored menace is one of the realities of Turkey and at the same time, it is the elephant in
the room. The issue, Underground Economy in Turkey and its effects can be examined in
three steps, of course, if people are willing to dig out the fact and to face with the confusing
contradiction.
A. Definition and Explanation of Underground Economy
Underground economy does not have a common definition. Many scientists and
researchers have been making several definitions and explanations for the term. Fortunately,
there is a common sign of all these statements emphasizing the illegal aspect of it. One of
them ,Schneider, assert that underground economy is, all economic activities that contribute to
value added and should be included in national income in terms of national accounting
conventions but are presently not registered by national measurement agencies (Schneider,
1986). Likewise, Smith (1994) states it as, market based production of goods and services,
whether legal or illegal, that escapes detection in the official estimates of gross domestic
product. As it may be seen in these statements, it is the all kind of untaxed activity. (Yılmaz,
G., 18)
1B. Statistics about Underground Economy
According to Turkish Statistical Institute, 9 483 000 people are being employed
without having any social insurance. It is the % 44,5 of the whole of 21 million employees.
On the other hand, it may be observed on a opposite side of the issue. 365 000 employers are
not secured by a social insurance service. It is the % 29 of the whole which is 1 259 000
employers. The percentages of the total underground employment are % 86,9 in agriculture
and % 29,8 in other sectors. In addition, the circumstance, unfortunately, does not differ in
other countries. For instance, according to L. Feige unregistered income level growth is
approximately 800 billion dollars in United States. (Yılmaz, G., 30)
2C. The Place of Underground Economy in Turkish Economy
Undoubtedly, the underground economy harms Turkish economic system while it
heals some problems. In other words, it heals while it damages the economy. For example,
G. Yılmaz puts forward that;
The main negative effect of underground economy is seen in the case of economics
policymaking process. A high underground economy creates unreliable official
macroeconomic aggregates such as unemployment rate and income level. Economic
policy decisions that use these official macroeconomics data are likely to be
ineffective. [On the other hand,] underground economy has some positive effects on
the official economy. It creates employment in the economy of a country. Firms in the
underground economy have lower cost structure than registered firms, and so their
labor demand can be higher than the firms in the official economy. In addition, society
welfare level may increase as a result of underground economy. As mentioned above,
underground economy firms may sell their goods and services at a lower price than
general market price, and so lower prices may increase purchasing power of society
and increase general welfare level of the public. (6)
Having looked at this information, it may be observed in every field that Turkey does not
have the possibility to establish strict laws to avoid the harmful effects of it. Because Turkey
have borders with too many countries and frequent disputes among them and Turkey have the
population taking advantage of the underground border trade. These people obstructing the
way of controlling underground economy. The queer part of the controversial issue is that the
circumstance contributes to the economic growth positively especially in east part of Turkey.
Due to this, strictly regulating the border trade may leads to poverty in that problematic area.
3II. SECULARISM
Another significant pillar making Turkey remains is secularism. To begin with, there
are unprecedented reforms brought by Ataturk about secularism area such as eradication of
sovereignty, reconstructions in educational part, establishment of “Diyanet”, acceptance of
“Medeni Kanun”, abolition of caliphate and so on. The most prominent one is abolition of
caliphate in 1924.As Dr. Çetin Özbek articulated in “Türkiye’de Laiklik” (1962), the structure
evaluating political behaviors as considering the Islamic Principles was removed (p.36) and as
Ataturk declared in “Nutuk”, ”Islam must be saved from being used as a politic means …”
(p.551).In the light of these information, it can be said that the insight of “ümmet” was
annihilated and power of caliph was transferred to Turkish Grand National Assembly. In
addition, Turkey got new laws and made alterations in Constitution. Firstly, acceptance of
“Medeni Kanun” in 1926 is remarkable one among others. As Prof.Dr.İsmet Giritli states in
his book, ”75.Yıllık Demokratik ve Laik Cumhuriyetin Oluşum ve Gelişim Süreci” (1998),
”…acceptance of “Medeni Kanun” is a vital improvement because women had more rights
such as the right to have property, the right to vote etc., regulations in women’s social life,
compulsory of marriage or “medeni nikah” instead of religious one or “dini nikah”. Marriage
became secular with this rule (p.133, 134). Moreover, Turkey made changes in Constitution.
As Giritli (1998) utters that”…part of “The religion of Turkey is Islam” was removed from
constitution, religious form of oath of president was altered…” (p.133,134). It is obvious from
the above examples that Turkey began to have secular structure with the abolition of caliphate
and getting new laws and changes in constitution.
Apart from reforms put by Ataturk, secularism also yields freedom of religion. Firstly,
there is a correlation between freedom of religion and secularism. Freedom of religion means
people are independent to believe any religion they want and secularism is demanded to
protect the freedom of religion. Similarly, some principles of secularism rely on the freedom
4of religion. As Prof.Dr.Çetin Özbek articulates in his book, ”Türkiye’de Laiklik”(1962),the
state has to take precautions for freedom of religion, even people who do not believe any
religion must be placed under the protection of the state(p.4).Likewise, Prof.Dr. İsmet Giritli
claims in his book, ”75.Yıllık Demokratik ve Laik Cumhuriyetin Oluşum ve Gelişim Süreci”
(1998), ”article 24, now, is discussing the liberty of conscience, religion and
conviction…”(p.136).In addition, the state must not hold any religion as a state. According to
Özbek,”…religion must possess a different structure and religion must not have an influence
on political organizations. Having a religion as a state is contrary to the standards of
secularism.”(p.5).Taking into consideration, it can be said that freedom of religion is one of
the basic principle of secularism and government must care for freedom of religion. In
addition, not having any religion as a state is a fundamental support for secularism in Turkey.
III. MULTICULTURALISM
A. Definition of Multiculturalism
Multiculturalism is a situation in which all the different cultural or racial groups in a
society have equal rights and opportunities, and none of them is ignored or regarded as
unimportant. The belief that to include people or ideas from many different countries, races,
or religions is crucial and beneficial for a country.
Being among the most popular issues in the contemporary world order,
multiculturalism gets increasingly popular in the intellectual world, as well. Various
metaphors are used to describe different kinds of multicultural societies. Melting pot
illustrates how different ingredients in the pot are combined to create a homogenous society.
Salad-bowl, on the other hand, is used by those who favor integration more than assimilation
and points up how different cultures, races, ethnicities, religions, languages and the like can
build up a culture while maintaining their own identities. Many other metaphors seem to
appear as the sophistication grows in studies on multiculturalism. (Aydemir, 2009)
5B. The Discussion on the Minority Concept
1. The Ottoman’s Inheritance : Minority Rights
In the past, in the Ottoman Empire’s time, there was no Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Important missions have been given to the Jews and Christian Catholics who escape from the
Europe because they have different languages. The Ottomans trusted them because they were
driven away from the Europe. We see that the Ottomans are great in terms of openness to new
ideas and new people. They did not say, these people are not Turkish or Muslim. These
people had been measured only about their well-informed and usefulness. It is an interesting
situation because it is clarifying today. At the present Turkey, racialism can not find a place to
develop its ideas. Although there is a Turkish-Kurdish issue, there is no racialist actions
despite Kurdish nationalist’s existence.
2. “Ashura” – The Best Symbol to Describe Multiculturalism in
Turkey
When it comes to Anatolia, Ashura seems to be the best way to describe
multiculturalism in this land. Its history goes back to Noah’s time. People on Noah’s board
mixed everything together to survive and managed to create a wonderful taste. Pea, bean,
wheat, all sorts of nut, apricot, cinnamon and many other ingredients give flavor to each other
despite keeping their original tastes. Different from salad, all tastes mix into each other but
still remain to be their own. Ashura is neither a mosaic nor a melting pot. It is neither
assimilation nor integration. It is something different; it is something special. Ashura
symbolizes the great taste of all the society without eliminating their identities. Ashura is a
symbol of how different values can make the others much more tasteful despite maintaining
the original taste. One feels all different tastes when eating Ashura, but also feels the great
taste the desert’s own. Ashura is both the symbol of pluralism and unity at the same time.
Ashura is the symbol of democracy and tolerance. Ashura is Anatolia, Ashura is Istanbul.
6Minorities exist in every society on earth and face difficulties. To illustrate, the
existing multiculturalism literature hardly explains why and how hundred thousand Turkish
people came together at the funeral of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink on January
19 of 2009. Mr. Dink was a well-known Armenian activist and said things contradictory to
the general opinion. He used to believe that the Turks had committed the genocide which
most of the Turks strictly oppose. Still, hundred thousand people, not a few intellectuals, were
at his funeral and carrying posters saying "We are all Armenians, we are all Hrant Dink". We
have to work a lot to expand the literature enough to make it explain why hundred thousand
Turks shouted being Armenian in a freezing January afternoon and at a time when
nationalism was on its peak. As for Mr. Dink, himself, he always used to mention how much
he loved Turkey. He was greatly sad when he was on trial for "Assaulting Turkishness". He
had decided to leave the country in case the court would found him guilty but also mentioned
that he had no place else to go since Turkey was his country. Rakel Dink’s, Mr. Dink’s wife,
words at his funeral explain much, indeed: "…You left those you love, you left your children
and grand children, you left all those people here, you left me, but you didn’t leave your
country...". (Aydemir, 2009)
In conclusion, three most important sociopolitical pillars of Turkey which are
underground economy, secularism and multiculturalism make Turkey a bright country.
Because, a country whose community utilizes the beneficial part of underground economy,
the secular structure which was set by Atatürk in a short time and cultural diversity in its body
might be open to a victorious future. Consequently, these fundamental supports should not be
ignored. Because becoming a bright country might be possible via understanding these three
pillars.
7References
Din Hürriyeti ve Laiklik (n.d). Retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://www.darulkitap.com/
oku/fıkıh/V2/laikdüzen4/0252.htm
Laiklik Alanında Yapılan Inkılaplar (n.d). Retrieved October 3, 2009, from http://
sosyaldersleri.com/inkılapgenel/ders.php?no=4&klasör=10601&ders=inkılapgenel
Atatürk, K. (2007). Nutuk. İstanbul: Star Medya Yayıncılık A.Ş. Baskı Tesisleri
Aydemir, N. (2009). Ashura- The Best Symbol to Describe Multiculturalism in Turkey,
Retrieved October 21, 2009, from http://www.turkishweekly.net/columnist/3061
/ashura-the-best-symbol-to-describe-multiculturalism-in-turkey.html
Fierman, J. (1999). The growing underground, Fortune, 129.
Giritli, İ.(1998). 75.Yıllık Demokratik ve Laik Cumhuriyet’in Oluşum ve Gelişim Süreci. Cem
Ofset Matbaacılık San. A.Ş
Öğünç, F., Yılmaz, G. (2000). Estimating the underground economy in Turkey. The Central
Bank of the Republic of Turkey Research Department Discussion Paper. Retrieved
November 16, 2009, from http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/research/discus/dpaper43.pdf
Özbek, Ç. (1962). Türkiye’de Laiklik(gelişim ve koruyucu ceza hükümleri). İstanbul: Baha
Matbaası.
Schneider, F. (1986). Estimating the size of the Danish shadow economy using the currency
demand approach: an attempt. Scandinavian Journal of Economics.
Schneider, F., Enste, D.H. (2000). Shadow economies: Size, causes, and consequences.
Journal of Economic Literature.
Smith, A. (1994). An ınquiry ınto the nature and causes of the wealths of nations.
Smith, P. (1994). Assesing the size of the underground economy: the Canadian statistical
perspectives. Canadian Observer.
8You can also read
