The Rahmi Koç incident, which has been the subject of public debate in recent days, actually highlights an issue far more significant than a mere anecdote.
For those interested in the details of the debate, in-depth coverage of the topic is available on Euronews and Diken.
Of course, anyone can be criticized. Of course, everyone has the right to react to a statement they find objectionable. This freedom is, after all, the foundation of democratic societies.
However, there is a very important difference between criticism and a witch hunt.
Criticizing someone’s words is one thing; trying to discredit them in public, insulting them, singling them out, calling for their imprisonment, or even using hate speech is something entirely different.
That is precisely what caught my attention in today’s debate. Instead of discussing the substance of the issue, some are waging a campaign that directly targets the individual. Yet in healthy democracies, it is ideas—not individuals—that are debated.
So who are we talking about?
Rahmi Koç…
In a subsequent statement, he apologized to those who were offended, stating that he had not intended to hurt any community; however, the debate centered less on the joke itself and more on the appropriateness of using a specific ethnic identity as a subject of humor.
Rahmi Koç is one of the key figures who played a significant role in the industrialization and modernization of the Republic of Turkey. He led for many years an organization that housed Turkey’s largest industrial enterprises, contributed to the development of a corporate culture, and played a key role in the creation of an economic structure that provided direct and indirect employment to hundreds of thousands of people.
In addition, it has made significant contributions to Turkey’s social life through museums, foundations, and educational and cultural projects.
Today, 95-year-old Rahmi Koç is not just a businessman; he is one of the figures who embody the economic and institutional memory of the Republican era.
This fact does not mean that he is beyond criticism.
However, it is also unacceptable to subject a person to a public lynching based on a single incident, while disregarding their decades of contributions, their service to the country, and the values they represent.
At this point, government officials also have an important role to play. During times when public debates spiral out of control and turn into personal witch hunts, calls for restraint must come from the highest levels of government. Statements such as “Let the law take its course, let everyone speak with restraint, let us stay away from a culture of lynching, and let us not exacerbate social polarization” protect not just one person, but social peace.
It is undoubtedly significant that Mr. Devlet Bahçeli has stated that he considers the opening of an investigation to be wrong and does not believe it is right to target a businessperson who has served Turkey.
However, in my view, what is needed is a broader appeal to social common sense.
Because this isn’t about Rahmi Koç. The issue is how we treat people who think differently.
Those who remain silent today in the face of the injustice done to Rahmi Koç will find it difficult to object tomorrow when the same method is applied to another group.
Once a culture of lynching becomes normalized, it spares no one.
What Turkey needs is not anger but common sense, not polarization but dialogue, not mob justice but the rule of law.
It should not be forgotten that a country’s true strength comes not only from its economy, but also from its people, who are able to respect one another despite their differing views.