What is the critical line between a civilized and an uncivilized country? Well, after events I have experienced since November 19th, I can certainly say that it is the lack or existence of freedom of expression. A civilized country is one in which freedom of expression lives.
I am an academic and a university professor, dedicated to studying politics, political philosophy and political economy. In this capacity, I gave a speech on November 18th as part of a discussion panel in the western coastal city Izmir. The panel was organized by the local branch of the governing Justice & Development Party (AKP). In my speech I said I have a paradigm called the “common civilization paradigm.” This paradigm includes the following elements: private property, free exchange, limited and responsible government, freedom of expression, religious freedom including minorities and non-believers, the absence or narrowness of political crimes category, the legitimacy of political opposition, rule of law, and widespread horizontal, instead of vertical, social relations.
I expressed that for this paradigm to have any analytical use it should be employed to evaluate different countries, including Turkey. And in evaluating Turkey we should avoid the mistake of treating the history of Turkish Republic as a whole. Turkish Republic’s history consists of at least two main periods: first, between 1925-45, the single-party system era, and second from 1950 onwards, the multi-party system era. Using my paradigm, I can state that the first period is not as progressive as claimed, despite widespread official propaganda. It is even, in some respects, backward. So, Kemalism, the local ideology created during the single-party era that has gained official status in Turkey, appears backward rather than progressive.
This was the essence of my speech. Among the panel participant was a female journalist from a local newspaper. She asked whether she had misheard my statement that Kemalism was somehow backward. I replied that she did not misunderstand me. And went on: "We need to discuss these issues without swearing at each other or treating one another in a cold manner. If Turkey is to become a member of the EU there will be more issues to debate. For example, the official propaganda that 'the Republic saved us from the darkness of Middle Ages' does not make sense for two reasons. First, recent academic studies have proved that the Middle Ages were not that dark, in contrast, the foundations of the progress Europe made in new age had been prepared between 6th and 11th centuries especially by reforms of the six Popes, Gregroy I to VI. Second, even if it is true, it does not mean anything for Islamic world as it has a different historical story." I added, "in EU membership, Europeans who come to Turkey may or will ask: 'Why is there everywhere this (same) man’s pictures and busts?'" I ended with this: "I would like to have reasonable replies to my views from Kemalists, but I am doubtful that I would receive such replies."
I was proved right the following day.
The journalist left the meeting in a hurry. I expected to see a bad headline next day in her newspaper. But it surpassed my expectation. I was declared a traitor who “swore at and insulted Ataturk heavily.” This was the beginning of a media defamation campaign against me. I have never experienced anything like this. Some newspapers and television stations were judging and hanging me. For four days I tried to resist. I appeared on TV shows to reply to their accusations. It was an impossible mission. They were biased. Their intention was not to discover the truth but to destroy me. For four days I struggled and could not eat or sleep. Before a TV discussion program on the evening of November 23rd, my body collapsed, and I was hospitalized. I am still recovering at home.
Gazi University, where I work, also took action against me instead of defending academic freedom. It decided to kick me out of my classes and started to investigate me for leaving Ankara without official permission. The investigation will surely cover accusations of me teaching against Ataturk’ principles and reforms.
This was something unbelievable. I thought that I was in a dream. Later I came to realize the reasons behind the defamation campaign of these newspapers and TV channels.
I am a well known classical liberal. I openly defend human rights for everybody. That naturally includes the rights of Kurds and conservative Muslim masses. The Kemalists hate my attitude but they are not able to challenge and refute my ideas. Whenever I speak or write I completely destroy their arguments and put them in an undefendable position. My recent challenge was against the general director of one of the biggest and most selling dailies. In an open letter, I questioned his arguments with respect to the reflections of negative freedom in social life. He could not reply even in a word. I think that step tipped the scale. I had the feeling that they would look for opportunities to take revenge. The opportunity came with this event.
Another reason for the defamation camping against me was that the speech took place in the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) meeting. The Kemalists hate the AKP. Since the AKP came to power in November 2002, the Kemalists have been living in a trauma. And the coming presidential election in April 2007 has intensified their trauma. This is why they severely assaulted me. They wanted to weaken the AKP by using my ideas, for which I am fully responsible.
Now, I am not a politician addressing thousands of people. I usually speak to academic circles numbering from the tens to the hundreds. In the panel on November 18th, I made a scientific analysis. True, it was critical of Kemalism. But I am a scientist -- to doubt, criticize and evaluate is my job. And everything I said falls under freedom of expression. Nobody can play God. Nobody holds the eternal truth in her/his hands. What is needed is free competition of ideas and of paradigms. The Kemalist circles attacked my personality and tried to change my criticism of Kemalism into an insult against Ataturk, since it was the only method they could use to harm me.
Freedom of expression is important for everybody. But for academics like me it is a matter of life or death. To take my freedom of expression away is equal to attacking my right to life. To be honest, I was shocked -- I still cannot understand what happened. But these unethical assaults make me quite determined. I declare that I am a student of Voltaire and J. S. Mill, and until my ideas are refuted scientifically I stand behind them. No matter how much they try to suppress me, I will defend my ideas. Because I love Turkey, and I want it to be a civilized country. If there is a price on my part to pay for that, I am ready. Indeed the unfair reaction in itself perfectly proves that Turkey does not have sufficient freedom of expression. I pray to God to give me the courage to be ready to be Turkey’s Socrates, for the sake of freedom of expression.
Those who wish to express their support for Dr. Yayla should contact Ms. Ozlem Caglar Yilmaz, executive director of the
Association for Liberal Thinking in Ankara, of which Dr. Yayla is the president.
The email is
ozlemcaglar@liberal.org.tr and the fax is +90 312 230 80 03.
MORE INFORMATION
International Society for Individual Liberty
> Freedom of Expression Under Attack in Turkey
