Turkish Politics & Internal Affairs

[Neptune]

It is clear as ice if you carry on here.

 

[Lure]

What was the discussion specifically? Sounds like a nice topic tough. I might be on board on this one.

 

[T-123456]

What was the discussion specifically? Sounds like a nice topic tough. I might be on board on this one.

The topic is the changing of the Turkish society from a relatively modern into a backward religious society.

 

[Neptune]

What was the discussion specifically? Sounds like a nice topic tough. I might be on board on this one.

He was arguing that if so much money was given and if the people were so rich in any country, you could change the society and the understanding of things and vise versa. He gave KSA as example.

 

[Armstrong]

I want to take part in this discussion as well !

 

[SouI]

Ah.. LoL, didnt see that this was a separate thread! XD Arright then!

@T-123456


Well...Look at the elite class in KSA, UAE...etc. all the petroleumistan countries. They have money and a hell of a money. The government is the richest. We all hear about human rights violations, torture, sexual assault, crimes against children and women very oftenly. Though these are committed by the elite class as well.

You are on a solid point! Look at the daughters of "those elite petroleumists"! Look at the daughter of the King himself!

I think that is enough to say Of course I do not expect rich "masters" who have "slaves" to be more democratic, turning into people who would bash "having slaves" etc. It works the other way around. If you are in bad conditions, and your conditions get better, then you'll also improve. How can a king's conditions get better?

But looking at their kids, you can say that they are seeing modernity and the shit their families are stuck in, and severely stand against their ideologies.

@T-123456 I haven't seen any oil rich country spending on R&D or a serious scientific investment. And these governments, ruling class have their azzes filled with dollars.

It is like the relationship of "arz-talep". Their lives were always the best one can get. There was no need (arz) for R&D and stuff, so nothing happened. They did not feel the need to educate themselves, so no improvement they have done.

But their kids who get educated in the best universities on the world, can judge even their families.

@T-123456
But they have that in Europe, Israel, US and Australia. Why? Not because they were rich as hell like KSA or nationalist as Turkey. It's about mentality. That's all matters if you're talking about changing a society.

And mentality changes with education. Think about it. Our unis have gotten to top uni list this year. About 10 of them, or maybe more in top 100. 3 of them in top 10.

A good education system in a nation which cares the education so much, would eventually lead to higher quality life standarts, and thus better mentalities.

@T-123456
My friend, take that like giving money to a 12 month old baby and telling him to buy some cloths to wear by himself[/USER]

That is the point. The kings and their families are the baby, who will not most likely improve much.

But their kids are not that 12 month baby. And that is what causes improvement among a nation.

 

[T-123456]

Nothing there

Not here,he knows where.

 

[-SINAN-]

Ah.. LoL, didnt see that this was a separate thread! XD Arright then!




You are on a solid point! Look at the daughters of "those elite petroleumists"! Look at the daughter of the King himself!

I think that is enough to say Of course I do not expect rich "masters" who have "slaves" to be more democratic, turning into people who would bash "having slaves" etc. It works the other way around. If you are in bad conditions, and your conditions get better, then you'll also improve. How can a king's conditions get better?

But looking at their kids, you can say that they are seeing modernity and the shit their families are stuck in, and severely stand against their ideologies.





It is like the relationship of "arz-talep". Their lives were always the best one can get. There was no need (arz) for R&D and stuff, so nothing happened. They did not feel the need to educate themselves, so no improvement they have done.

But their kids who get educated in the best universities on the world, can judge even their families.




And mentality changes with education. Think about it. Our unis have gotten to top uni list this year. About 10 of them, or maybe more in top 100. 3 of them in top 10.

A good education system in a nation which cares the education so much, would eventually lead to higher quality life standarts, and thus better mentalities.




That is the point. The kings and their families are the baby, who will not most likely improve much.

But their kids are not that 12 month baby. And that is what causes improvement among a nation.

KSA example is wrong in my opinion. King's daughter might be relatively modern but that doesn't applies to whole nation.

Other than that. " if the people were so rich in any country, you could change the society and the understanding of things and vise versa. "

This one is correct but how ?

We are not blessed with the natural riches. To rise our GDP/Capita we need to produce more valuable goods like cars, smart phones, air planes etc.... These things are being vocalized recently by government officials.

In order to produce them we need to make R&D, raise qualified engineers, scientists, researchers. And that will happen if we focus more on the education system. Opening new universities and bringing deans with backward mentality results products like these.....

Denizli'de 5 ayrı elektrikli araç üretildi - En son haber

Developing a decent education system and a society relies on science will get you both rich and will make you a modern society instead of religious backward society.

But you can't achieve decent education system with mandatory religion classes and Ottoman language classes. Things are not going well from my perspective.

 

[Neptune]

What we need is a complete mental change in all parts of society. From soldier to politician, from police to judiciary, from businessman to plumber. God!! We're so ignorant.

@T-123456 Charlie that!

 

[Armstrong]

No one is bringing me into the discussion !

I'll think I'll just eat microwave cheese macaroni and sulk !

 

[Lure]

He was arguing that if so much money was given and if the people were so rich in any country, you could change the society and the understanding of things and vise versa. He gave KSA as example.

Did @SouI give KSA as a counter example?

Back on topic. Yeah the rich countries are the first ones that have developed the science and free speech etc. is a well known sociological thesis. Ancient Egypt and Greece is given as an example of this.

However for today's societies one should think a little bit more broad. We are living in a post industrial age society. That changes things a lot.

If we are talking about the transformation of societies, religion is a tranformer per se. And a strong one I might add. You need motivation to change something. That motivation came from the basic survival instinct that evolution gave us in hunter gatherer societies. They had some sort of belief systems to gather knowledge from the nature. But that belief systems are not like moral codes, but more like to create "sensible" knowledge from the observation of the chaotic nature. It's like "oh birds are singing, so it's gonna rain". Then it evolved into "birds songs evokes the soul of the sky". Soul of the sky is the clouds as you might suggest. Also death is a very problemmatic and traumatic thing to explain. They have used very different explainations to be able to explain cause of the death and all of them were mixtures of superstition and observations.

Findings in Gobeklitepe suggested that people had organized religion before they have passed to the neolithic age. The common belief before Gobeklitepe findings was the organized religion started to exist after neolithic revolution. This is extremely important because anthropologists think that organized religion in Gobeklitepe actually motivated the people to move the stones and carve them. Create monuments and wonders. They have made silos near their temples before building houses and stored the collected fruits, seeds and wild grains there. And finally that had given them the inspiration of housing and farming. So religion created the motivation for them to be transformed them into an advanced society. Their form of religion was like a social club today. If we go to same monument, then I trust you and we can work together. The actual ethic codes of this religion is still a mystery today but it's function is not.

If we flash forward to Ancient Egypt we actually see a very similar society with higher technology and massive in scale. But the basic essence of the society is the same. You have some mixture of superstition and scientific observations. You have religion to explain natural phenomenons. Religion is the main motivator for building wonders and monuments. That develops the knowledge of engineering and architecture as a side effect. So religion actually triggers the scientific development again.

If we consider Ancient Greece we will see very similar things with one slight difference. Trade. Ancient Greece is rich because it has merchants. Merchants means you have bourgeois class. And that means you have middle class of today. And that means you don't like aristocracy. And that means you have either some form of fascism which is not quite possible in Ancient Greece or you have Democracy.

If we take this lesson from Ancient Greece, we can flash forward to Post Industrial era socieities. Now rich countries are the ones that are scientifically advanced. Not really no. Being rich is an extremely important factors but does not make an advanced society (or Advanced Economy in today's terms). Every Advanced Economy is rich, but not every rich economy is advanced. In order to be regarded as an Advanced Society you need to have a strong middle class that produces services and commodities. This type of middle class will make you a secular nation. Back in 20th century that type of middle class was so proud of it's work so it became extremely nationalist. After 2 World Wars the middle class decided that war is not good for business so it became a little democratic. Still very proud of it's work tough. That's why Nationalism still exists in today's societies. The only difference is it's tone is softer.

In Turkey the situation of middle class is different, compared to Europe. Middle class can mobilize the working class in Europe. They don't like eachother a lot but they cooperate in certain situations. In Turkey middle class and working class are sworn enemies. That's why it's very hard to transform Turkey. That type of situation had seen in 16th to 18th century of France. "Artisans" were Calvinist and "Commons" were Franciscan and that didn't come out pretty good.

@Nihonjin1051 you can join my friend, you were interested in Turkish society. There is nice discussion over here.

 

[-SINAN-]

What we need is a complete mental change in all parts of society. From soldier to politician, from police to judiciary, from businessman to plumber. God!! We're so ignorant.

@T-123456 Charlie that!

Most true, but even Ataturk failed to fully change the Turkish society....yes we had a quantum leap under his leadership. But looking today's society. We can't say, he did a complete job.

No one is bringing me into the discussion !

I'll think I'll just eat microwave cheese macaroni and sulk !

Mate, everyone on this thread presenting their own ideas. Do the same please.

 

[Aepsilons]

Wonderful discussion, thanks @Lure for invitin me! Will read more first before I share my view. ^_^

 

[T-123456]

No one is bringing me into the discussion !

I'll think I'll just eat microwave cheese macaroni and sulk !

So,what do you think of the statement;the richer the country and its people the more open,modern the society ?

Did @SouI give KSA as a counter example?

Back on topic. Yeah the rich countries are the first ones that have developed the science and free speech etc. is a well known sociological thesis. Ancient Egypt and Greece is given as an example of this.

However for today's societies one should think a little bit more broad. We are living in a post industrial age society. That changes things a lot.

If we are talking about the transformation of societies, religion is a tranformer per se. And a strong one I might add. You need motivation to change something. That motivation came from the basic survival instinct that evolution gave us in hunter gatherer societies. They had some sort of belief systems to gather knowledge from the nature. But that belief systems are not like moral codes, but more like to create "sensible" knowledge from the observation of the chaotic nature. It's like "oh birds are singing, so it's gonna rain". Then it evolved into "birds songs evokes the soul of the sky". Soul of the sky is the clouds as you might suggest. Also death is a very problemmatic and traumatic thing to explain. They have used very different explainations to be able to explain cause of the death and all of them were mixtures of superstition and observations.

Findings in Gobeklitepe suggested that people had organized religion before they have passed to the neolithic age. The common belief before Gobeklitepe findings was the organized religion started to exist after neolithic revolution. This is extremely important because anthropologists think that organized religion in Gobeklitepe actually motivated the people to move the stones and carve them. Create monuments and wonders. They have made silos near their temples before building houses and stored the collected fruits, seeds and wild grains there. And finally that had given them the inspiration of housing and farming. So religion created the motivation for them to be transformed them into an advanced society. Their form of religion was like a social club today. If we go to same monument, then I trust you and we can work together. The actual ethic codes of this religion is still a mystery today but it's function is not.

If we flash forward to Ancient Egypt we actually see a very similar society with higher technology and massive in scale. But the basic essence of the society is the same. You have some mixture of superstition and scientific observations. You have religion to explain natural phenomenons. Religion is the main motivator for building wonders and monuments. That develops the knowledge of engineering and architecture as a side effect. So religion actually triggers the scientific development again.

If we consider Ancient Greece we will see very similar things with one slight difference. Trade. Ancient Greece is rich because it has merchants. Merchants means you have bourgeois class. And that means you have middle class of today. And that means you don't like aristocracy. And that means you have either some form of fascism which is not quite possible in Ancient Greece or you have Democracy.

If we take this lesson from Ancient Greece, we can flash forward to Post Industrial era socieities. Now rich countries are the ones that are scientifically advanced. Not really no. Being rich is an extremely important factors but does not make an advanced society (or Advanced Economy in today's terms). Every Advanced Economy is rich, but not every rich economy is advanced. In order to be regarded as an Advanced Society you need to have a strong middle class that produces services and commodities. This type of middle class will make you a secular nation. Back in 20th century that type of middle class was so proud of it's work so it became extremely nationalist. After 2 World Wars the middle class decided that war is not good for business so it became a little democratic. Still very proud of it's work tough. That's why Nationalism still exists in today's societies. The only difference is it's tone is softer.

In Turkey the situation of middle class is different, compared to Europe. Middle class can mobilize the working class in Europe. They don't like eachother a lot but they cooperate in certain situations. In Turkey middle class and working class are sworn enemies. That's why it's very hard to transform Turkey. That type of situation had seen in 16th to 18th century of France. "Artisans" were Calvinist and "Commons" were Franciscan and that didn't come out pretty good.

@Nihonjin1051 you can join my friend, you were interested in Turkish society. There is nice discussion over here.

So,what you are saying is that Turkiye cannot be transformed into a religiously oriented society?
Did i get that right?

 

[Lure]

So,what you are saying is that Turkiye cannot be transformed into a religiously oriented society?
Did i get that right?

Turkey can not be transformed into a true secular society or a religious society without a civil war. Because middle class and working class does not cooperate. They have conflicting culture and world views. Same happened in France, lasted for 200 hundered years, created a civil war a.k.a French Religious Wars. Ended with French Revolution.

Final Verdict : That secular vs religious discussion will go on forever like a vicious circle and won't end up anywhere.