Christmas is a religious holiday in Christian theology celebrated on December 25 to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ. The New Year, on the other hand, is a secular threshold that is not based on any belief system, and which marks the end of one calendar time cycle and the beginning of a new one on the night of December 31st through January 1st. The historical, theological and social contexts of these two phenomena are completely different.
Nevertheless, the conscious identification of Christmas with New Year's Eve is not a simple misconception; it is an ideological manipulation tool targeting lifestyles in the public sphere. Presenting Christmas practices that have no religious content as a “violation of faith” is the product of a mentality that aims to divide society based on cultural preferences and legitimize political intervention in individual lives.
Christmas is an Excuse, Obedience is a Must: Conservatism or Cult Order?
Conservatism in Turkey has long lost its conceptual framework. An understanding that should represent faith and morality, tradition and social continuity, moderation and balance has gradually turned into something else under the shadow of sects, communities and political Islam. Today, a large segment of society that says “we are conservative” does not actually know what they are conserving, but whom they obey.
However, Turkish society has not historically been uniform. In these lands, there were always those who drank their raki and went to Friday prayers, those who visited the mosque on the morning of Eid and met at a friendly table in the evening. There were permeable borders between belief and lifestyle, not thick walls. This was exactly the leaven of society: plurality, juxtaposition and the practice of living together.
Political Islam saw this plurality as a problem. Because plurality cannot be controlled; diversity does not produce allegiance. That is why it has reduced conservatism from an understanding of morality and balance to a uniform lifestyle. A life engineering that extends from how to dress to what to drink, from what day to have fun to who to associate with has emerged. It was called “values”, but what was actually imposed was the desire of one group to impose its own way of life on society as a whole.
Sects and congregations became the support columns of this process. Conservatism was replaced by sheikh-centered hierarchies; moral responsibility was replaced by unconditional allegiance. Reason was withdrawn, questioning was considered a sin. Political Islam, on the other hand, not only preserved these structures; it placed them directly into the state, politics and public sphere. Religion was transformed from a guide for the conscience of the individual into an instrument of regulation and control in the hands of the government.
This imposing mentality was not limited to the field of faith. The definition of “acceptable citizen” was produced in every field from education to culture, from art to daily life. Those who drink, celebrate New Year, dress differently or think differently were constantly targeted. On the other hand, any behavior that did not share the same morality but showed loyalty to the government was ignored. Thus, conservatism completely lost its moral consistency.
The memory of this country is much stronger than what is being told. During the Gezi protests, we still remember the moments when socialist youth shielded conservative protesters so that they could worship freely. That picture, where no one imposed their beliefs on anyone else, but rather protected each other's living space, revealed the true sociology of Turkish society. The language of polarization, which is constantly pumped today, exists to cover up this reality.
It is precisely here that political Islam's greatest destruction has taken place: the culture of living together has been deliberately eroded. Merit was replaced by loyalty, law by a “one of us” mentality, and justice by the balance of community and self-interest. State institutions, public space and resources were divided among sects. The discourse of religious sensitivity has often turned into a means of legitimizing political domination.
Even worse, anyone who objected to this order was easily labeled as “irreligious”, “immoral”, “not local and national”. However, it is not religion that is objected to; it is the turning of religion into a political weapon. Faith, which should remain in the conscience of the individual, has been turned into a control mechanism that keeps society in line.
Conservatism is not about interfering in other people's lives. It is not to target those who celebrate New Year's Eve, to demonize those who drink, or to turn prayer into a political showcase. But today, conservatism is imprisoned in a language that is forbidding, imperious and exclusionary.
In short, the issue is not religion. The issue is that religion, in the hands of sects and political Islam, has turned into a lifestyle imposition that uniformizes society. This imposition neither strengthens conservatism nor sustains society. On the contrary, it both erodes faith and deepens social disintegration.
Another current example that complements this picture is the calls to “not celebrate Christmas”. These discourses, which are presented today as an individual sensitivity or a personal reaction, are actually not innocent. These outbursts, which do not even distinguish between Christmas and New Year's Eve, produce new fault lines over identities. A slogan on social media today turns into an oppression in the public sphere tomorrow, a permanent reflex of social segregation the next day. Interference in lifestyle always starts with small and seemingly ‘justified’ warnings; in the end, it erodes the will to live together.
This is precisely where the real danger lies: Political Islamist language keeps society on constant alert by turning even the most ordinary moments of daily life into an ideological front. This language, which is based on who celebrates what, what to drink and how to have fun, turns individual preferences into a test of public loyalty. Thus, the different is not only criticized but also turned into a potential threat.
What needs to be done against this trend is actually clear: To liberate faith from the monopoly of politics, morality from the government and conservatism from the monopoly of sects. We have to re-defend an order where the state stands at an equal distance to all beliefs, where the lifestyle of the individual is not turned into a criterion of public loyalty, and where merit prevails over loyalty. Conservatism is not a license to design someone else's life; it is a responsibility to live together. Unless this responsibility is remembered, neither social peace nor the dignity of faith can be preserved.
True conservatism protects reason, justice, conscience and the culture of living together. Today, what is protected is often only power.