The CHP is not only experiencing a political crisis today; it also looks like a structure that has lost its identity, ideology and directional compass. The fact that those who yesterday described siding with the nationalist camp as “betrayal” today normalize walking on the same political line with names like Adnan Beker clearly shows the point to which the CHP has drifted.
The fact that the so-called revolutionary and democratic circles, which until yesterday criticized “right-wingization”, remain silent in the face of this picture today is another sign of decay. Because the issue is no longer just an internal party debate; the issue is the dismantling of the CHP's ideological backbone at the bargaining tables.
The insulting language used against Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu over his return as the head of the party after the “absolute nullity” debates is in fact the product of a lack of politics. Those who are unable to generate ideas and develop policies think that they are doing politics through the culture of personal lynching. Yet the same circles do not say a word about the CHP being surrounded by nationalist figures and actors of establishment politics. Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu Adnan Beker
The fight within the CHP today is not just a fight for seats; it is a fight over the axis on which the CHP will be shaped. On one side are those who have completely broken with the party's historical codes and surrendered to pragmatism, and on the other side are those who react to this. The picture that emerged after the court's “absolute nullity” decision showed that the fragmentation within the CHP could no longer be hidden.
This is where the biggest contradiction of the so-called democratic circles emerges. Those who market the heaviest insults against Kılıçdaroğlu as “freedom” remain silent when the CHP comes under the influence of other political centers. Because their concern is not democracy but the power of their own political cliques.
What is happening in the CHP today is not a transformation but a clear drift. The party is shaped not by principles, but by media operations, group showdowns and interest relations. This is why a significant part of the public no longer sees the debates within the CHP as a struggle for ideology, but as a power struggle.
And the most painful part is this: Structures that for years presented themselves as “revolutionary”, “progressive”, “democratic” are today applauding this drift instead of standing against it. Both their silence and their selective anger show that they are partners in this order.