Nationalism is historically built on a people's consciousness of sovereignty, a sense of public responsibility and a shared vision of the future. In the words of Ernest Renan, the nation is “a plebiscite that is given every day anew”; in other words, it is a conscious, continuous and moral political will. Benedict Anderson defines this will as a politically constituted “imagined community”, while Eric Hobsbawm emphasizes that nationalism only gains meaning through history, labor and institutions. In short, nationalism exists not by shouting but by thinking, not by consuming but by producing, not by cursing but by establishing law.
In Turkey, this conscious political will has long been replaced by reflexive tantrums, tribune swearing and objects of consumption. Nationalism has been transformed from an idea into a gesture, a pose, a label. This now needs a more honest name: Soda pop nationalism.
Atatürk's nationalism, the founding ideology of the Republic of Turkey, stands in stark contrast to this shallowness. Atatürk's definition of “The people of Turkey who founded the Republic of Turkey are called the Turkish nation” is based on political affiliation, not ethnicity, law, not blood, equal citizenship, not cultural superiority. Atatürk's nationalism is not patriotic; it is programmatic. It is not exclusionary; it is constructive. It sees patriotism not as an outburst of emotion but as a regime of public responsibility. Many reflexes marketed as “local and national” today stand at the opposite end of this understanding.
The swearing at Leyla Zana in the Bursaspor stands is not an accidental example of this collapse. This swearing is the natural consequence of identity politics, enmity-oriented language and hate speech that has been consciously produced for years with impunity. Blasphemy is not nationalism. Blasphemy is a form of primitive discharge that begins where thought ends. In Atatürk's nationalism, there is no swearing; there is intellectual struggle, political criticism and law. When politics is practiced with the language of the grandstand, the nation ceases to be a citizen and turns into an easily manipulated crowd.
But what is really exemplary is the reaction after this incident.
The fact that different political actors, starting with the Zafer Party, pose with Uludağ Gazozu shows that nationalism is no longer based on historical consciousness, but on market shelves. A beverage brand has suddenly been transformed into a measure of political loyalty. This is an almost parodic performance of nationalism that falls behind even the “invented traditions” mentioned by Eric Hobsbawm. There are no ideas; there are symbols. There are no programs; there are gestures. There are no principles; there are photographs.
The inclusion of Imamoğlu's advisor İbrahim Özkan and Dr. Bengi Başer in this show shows that this shallowness does not only belong to the nationalist right, but has spread to the center of the opposition. The opposition has preferred to adapt to nationalism instead of discussing it, to pose with it instead of transforming it. Politics has ceased to be a field for generating ideas; it has been reduced to a perception activity carried out through rituals of visual loyalty.
At this point, it must be said clearly:
If political belonging is established through a beverage brand, this is not nationalism, but a political imitation of cultural consumerism. This understanding produces neither national consciousness nor citizenship. It only produces noise. And noise is always the enemy of thought.
The CHP's stance in this process is almost a textbook example of the intellectual crisis of the Turkish opposition. Neither a clear position on the basis of Atatürk's nationalism was taken against the tribune swearing, nor a constitutive patriotic language was developed against this populist symbolism. Once again, the CHP preferred to hide behind the crowd, surrender to the noise and not take intellectual risks. Yet it is precisely in these moments that patriotism gains meaning: It is the courage to defend the right against the majority that applauds the wrong.
True patriotism;
- defends public morality,
- puts law at the center,
- based on labor and equal citizenship,
- It speaks not with identity politics but with the principles of common life,
- Understands the Republic not as a collection of symbols but as a living political order.
There is no patriotism with soda.
Blasphemy does not make a nation.
You cannot defend the Republic by posing.
These practices circulated under the name of “nationalism” in Turkey today do not strengthen the nation as a political subject; on the contrary, they reduce it to an emotional, reactive and easily manipulated crowd. This is a social form that favors not only those in power but also the opposition, which lacks political courage. Because the thinking citizen asks questions; the shouting supporter merely accompanies.
Patriotism does not live in the stands; it lives in reason, law and public conscience.
Soda nationalism arises precisely in their absence.
And every time it emerges, it further erodes not only the political mind of this country but also the claim of the Republic.
What needs to be done in the face of this picture is quite clear. What Turkey needs is not a pseudo-nationalism that surrenders to reflexes, but to reproduce Atatürk's nationalism on the basis of political reason, civic law and public responsibility. The opposition must stop following what is popular and regain the courage to defend what is right.
Nationalism is practiced without compromising secularism, law, social state and equal citizenship, not by winking at the grandstands. Republican patriotism is not based on short-term applause, but on a long-term political backbone. Otherwise, the symbolic loyalty established with soda today will evolve into harsher, more exclusionary and more authoritarian forms tomorrow. Therefore, the issue is not a beverage brand; it is a question of whether the political mind will be rebuilt.
On the other hand, it is also noteworthy that this process of “soda pop nationalism” runs side by side with the anti-terrorism discourse that has been operating in Turkey for years. When the claim to end terrorism is turned into an apparatus for generating tension over identities instead of strengthening social peace and the rule of law, the result is not security but a state of constant vigilance. Symbolic alignments based on soda pop are the cultural extension of this politics of vigilance. The habit of suppressing problems with symbols instead of solving them with law feeds both terrorism and social polarization.
Because the fight against terrorism does not succeed where the law is suspended; on the contrary, it succeeds in the strongest way possible. Soda pop nationalism, on the other hand, breeds reflexes, not law; temporary satisfaction, not solutions.
And I'm sorry.
Nationalism is not done with a bottle from the market.
The Republic cannot be defended by posing.
Atatürk did not play to the stands; he appealed to the mind.
This country was founded on thinkers, not shouters.
Those who line up with soda today will line up with another shelf product tomorrow.
Because the loyalty of those without ideas is limited to symbols.
Being a nation is about building, not drinking.
And what Turkey needs is not more soda pop;
more reason, more law, more courage.
And perhaps the most painful truth is this: Soda pop nationalism did not emerge in this country by chance. It is the natural product of a long political climate in which thought is systematically discredited, reason is considered “elitism”, law is considered a “hindrance” and principle is considered a “luxury”. For years, supporters were produced instead of citizens, reflexes were encouraged instead of consciousness, loyalty was rewarded instead of demanding rights.
What emerged in the end was not a nationalism that would move the nation forward, but a crowd of emotions that would bubble up and make noise at the slightest crisis, but would not solve any problem. This is precisely why the issue is not a matter of soda pop. The issue is whether the Republic will raise citizens or continue on its way with crowds that are directed between shelves.