In politics, sometimes a transfer is not just a personnel choice; it is a mirror of a mentality. Sometimes a single sentence can suddenly render years of rhetoric null and void. CHP Chairman Özgür Özel's decision to put Adnan Beker and Cemal Enginyurt on the rally bus and have them applauded as “the most leftist among us” is exactly such a breaking moment.
This statement cannot be dismissed as simple rally enthusiasm or stage exaggeration. Because some statements are not just said; they reveal the essence of a political line. What is revealed here is this: The CHP's current management approach is based on a “politics of recruitment” that prioritizes short-term benefits over ideological consistency.
“The word ”recruitment" is not used randomly here. Because the line being followed in the CHP today is the tendency to put political affiliation, historical memory and principles on the back burner and to turn every name that speaks effectively, draws a crowd and makes a harsh outburst into a part of the new showcase, regardless of their past. This is not an opening; it is the aestheticization of spinelessness.
The recent political language of Özgür Özel and Ekrem İmamoğlu is based on exactly this logic: blurring in the name of expansion, stretching identity in the name of gathering power, reducing the weight of one's own words in the name of “speaking to everyone”.
The problem is not only Adnan Beker's disparaging remarks about the Six Table in the past or the fact that he has openly stated that he did not vote for Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. Of course, this in itself is a serious contradiction. But the bigger problem is that this contradiction is not seen as a problem by the CHP leadership.
Because the real danger is not someone coming from outside.
The real danger is the loss of restraint inside.
When a party cannot defend its concepts, it first loses its memory. And a structure that loses its memory becomes alienated from its own electorate over time. This is exactly what is happening in the CHP today: the abandonment of historical weight in the name of getting rid of historical baggage.
However, what makes the CHP the CHP is not only its electoral success. This party came into existence with the claim of being the carrier of Turkey's modernization adventure, the idea of nationalism, the struggle for secularism and the quest for social justice. This claim was not perfect, but at least it carried a historical seriousness.
Today, this seriousness is diluted for the sake of applause on the rally stage.
Politics is not just the art of gathering crowds.
Politics is also a responsibility to carry memory.
And movements that turn their memory into a showcase have to be content with the showcase after a while.
Getting Lost for the Sake of Winning: The Ideological Gap of the Özgür Özel-Imamoğlu Line
The direction of a political movement is determined not only by its program but also by its reflexes. What it does in difficult moments, what it sacrifices in the face of crisis and what it protects reveals its true line. The line represented by Özgür Özel and Ekrem İmamoğlu in the CHP today deserves serious questioning from this point of view.
Because the political mindset that has recently come to the fore in the CHP gives the impression of window dressing rather than a transformation project. In order to be seen more, to get more applause and to appeal to a wider range of voters, the boundaries of political identity are deliberately blurred. Although at first glance this line is presented as a pragmatic flexibility, in reality it is a temporary packaging that covers a deep ideological gap.
Today, there is a striking commonality between Özgür Özel's language and İmamoğlu's politics: a politics based on perception rather than content, performance rather than principle, presentation rather than line.
Therefore, it becomes inevitable to ask the following question in the CHP:
Is the party growing, or is it only pretending to grow?
Because politics is not only about taking a position against the opponent; it is also about having clarity about what you are. The problem in the CHP today is precisely this loss of clarity.
“Much of what is being done in the name of ”enlargement" is in fact an attempt to look good to everyone at the same time, rather than to reassure the electorate. In the short term, this may bring crowded rallies and media visibility. But in the long run, it erodes the backbone of politics. Because a movement that constantly takes a position according to everyone else ceases to be itself after a while.
Names like Adnan Beker and Cemal Enginyurt joining the CHP is not a political disaster in itself. It is in the nature of democratic politics that names from different backgrounds meet on common ground. But the question is under what conditions, with what political meaning and symbolic language these people were included in the party.
The problem is not the transfer; it is the mentality that the transfer represents.
It is not only a contradiction but also a conceptual collapse for a person who until yesterday belittled the Six Table, said he did not vote for Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, and described the opposition's victory as a disaster by saying “God protected the country” to be presented as “the most leftist” on the CHP rally bus today.
This is an injustice not only to the memory of CHP voters but also to the seriousness of politics.
Because leftism is not a humor material.
Leftism is not a label to be slapped on when the need arises.
Leftism
- is to stand by labor,
- is to defend principle in the face of power,
- not to legitimize long-term decay for short-term gain.
The main problem felt today in the line between Özgür Özel and İmamoğlu is this:
Winning has ceased to be the goal; it has become the only measure that legitimizes the methods.
This understanding is dangerous. Because in politics, the line of “all means are permissible to win”, even if it looks like success at first glance, eventually turns politics into a question of character.
When a movement stretches its own identity so easily in order to defeat its opponent, it is not actually losing to its opponent, but to its own raison d'être.
What the CHP really needs today is not more transfers but more seriousness.
It is not more slogans; it is more consistency.
It is not more showcases; it is more backbone.
And perhaps most importantly:
Today, the party must honestly ask itself this question:
Are we really growing,
or do we just seem to be expanding, losing direction?
Politics that loses its connection with history also loses its future
A political movement is not only measured by today's vote share. What really defines it is what historical memory it carries, what social vein it represents and what it leaves for the future. This is why today's debate in the CHP goes far beyond a few transfers or a rally gaffe. The real issue is how the party carries - or fails to carry - its own historical weight.
The Republican People's Party was born in Turkey not only as an electoral party. This party constructed a history as the carrier of modernization debates, the idea of nationalism, the struggle for secularism, the search for a welfare state and the claim of populism. This history was not perfect, but at least it had its own weight, language and political seriousness.
Today, what is becoming increasingly evident in the Özgür Özel-Imamoğlu line is the lightening of this weight. The line that is marketed through concepts such as “new politics”, “expansion” and “change” is in reality often not a creative reckoning with the past, but a simplistic way of getting rid of the past.
However, history is not a burden you carry on your back; it is the backbone that keeps you balanced while walking.
The memory of a party is not just a nostalgic legacy. Memory determines the meaning of concepts, the limits of principles, where the line begins and ends. This is precisely where the problem lies in the CHP today: boundaries are blurring, concepts are becoming lighter, principles are being stretched.
“This is why the phrase ”the most leftist among us" is not a simple slip of the tongue.
This is a symbol of the party's loss of weight in the world of concepts.
Because when concepts are hollowed out, not only words become lighter, but also representation becomes lighter.
When a political party starts to look at its history only as window dressing, it does not draw strength from its past; it consumes it. This is the risk the CHP faces today: the risk of spending its historical capital for the sake of short-term applause.
Ekrem İmamoğlu's political style and Özgür Özel's language today meet on a similar ground: appearing impressive, managing emotions, addressing large segments of the population at the same time. This method may be remarkable in the short term. However, the permanence of politics cannot be ensured by communication skills alone.
The real issue in politics is what you protect in a crisis.
This is precisely the real test for the CHP today.
Does the party resemble itself in the name of expansion?,
or is he trying to grow away from himself?
Because not all expansion is growth.
Sometimes expansion is the first stage of disintegration.
History is full of examples of this:
Movements that obscure their identity, dilute their concepts, and lose their long-term direction for the sake of short-term gains appear to be on the rise at first glance, but over time they struggle to generate a response even among their own electorate.
This is precisely the danger the CHP faces today.
It's not just Adnan Beker or Cemal Enginyurt.
The question is what these names represent.
And more importantly:
What the party is telling itself through these names.
Because a party is known not only by how it describes itself but also by what it normalizes.
What is normalized today is not just transfer politics; it is a loss of scale.
What is being legitimized today is not just pragmatism; it is the erosion of memory.
What is being applauded today is not just the enthusiasm of the rallies, but the cheapening of concepts.
Therefore, the issue is not a polemic; it is a matter of direction.
Will the CHP remain a party that carries its historical references?,
or will it become a flexible center shaped by day-to-day political needs?
The answer to this question will determine not only the CHP but also the future of the opposition in Turkey.
Because the de-identification of the main opposition is not just a problem of one party.
This means that society's hope for change is also weakened.
The last word is clear:
When a party starts shrinking its own memory to defeat its opponent,
maybe it will get applause...
but eventually he loses his bearings.
And politics that has lost its direction,
remains alone even in a crowd.