The AKP government continues to build the conservative social transformation on “well-behaved children” and continues to influence the future through an unresponsive and self-interested course.
Here are my findings;
-Loss of Economic Sustainability: “The motto ”there is no government that the pot cannot overthrow" is its biggest weakness as of 2026. Chronic inflation and the radical decline in purchasing power have led the party to lose touch with its most loyal constituency, the low-income segment.
-Institutional Decay and the Crisis of Merit: The intertwining of state mechanisms with party organs has made decision-making mechanisms cumbersome in times of crisis. The move away from meritocracy is not only criticized by the opposition, but has turned into a systemic problem that cannot function in the bureaucracy.
-Youth and Dissonance with the “Spirit of the Times”: In line with your concept of techno-feudalism, the controlling and supervisory language of the government collides with the horizontal and libertarian demands of the digital world. There is no ideological common ground with the new electorate.
-Service Politics reaches “saturation point”: The narrative of a “great Turkey” built on roads, bridges and the defense industry has lost its former excitement, overshadowed by the daily struggle to make ends meet.
-Political Lines to Follow: The following three pillars are critical for a strategy that is in line with my “Production Manifesto” approach:
1- Building the Social State against the “Hegemony of Capital”:
It is insufficient for the opposition to criticize the government only for “corruption”. A populist economic model that will break the hegemony of capital over the state must be presented and the masses must be convinced.
Fair Distribution: A model that prioritizes labor and local production over technology and capital-driven growth.
Food and Agriculture Sovereignty:
To permanently reduce food inflation through a sustainable and domestic agricultural policy free from chemical pesticides.
2-Transition from Identity Politics to “Living Conditions” Politics:
The way to break polarization, the most powerful weapon of the government, is not to focus on ideological debates, but on economic, sociological and psychological destruction.
Social Honor: “By putting the principle of ”honor and dignity cannot be sold with money“ at the center; the promise of ”citizenship income worthy of human dignity“ instead of ”charity economy" to the people left in need.
Integration of Technology and Law: Against the surveillance society brought about by techno-feudalism; a line that advocates the democratization of data and technology.
Digital Rights and Law: The state should use its technological power for transparent and accountable governance, not to oppress the individual.
Structural Reforms: A promise to solve the collapse in education and the judiciary with a “system-oriented” restoration, not a “leader-oriented” one.
In conclusion, the opposition needs to get rid of the nostalgia of “it used to be better” and build a new publicism that reads the global technological and economic transformation correctly, but protects the masses oppressed by this transformation.
By preventing the government from using the arguments of the left to create the perception that it is doing good through social policies (funding 13 million), it is possible to reduce its vote potential.
For more than two decades, the AK Party has shown the ability to use ”left“ tools with a ”right-wing“ identity. The institutionalization of social welfare networks, the increasing determinism of the state in economic life (public banks, mega projects, etc.) and the ”incar“ emphasized but actually internationalist flexibility in immigration policies have shaken the traditional strongholds of the left.
When the left saw concepts such as the “welfare state” and “international solidarity”, which it should defend in theory, as practices of governance in the hands of the government, it got stuck in its own discourse space. While the government articulated the survival mechanisms of the lower classes (social benefits and employment networks), the left, instead of reaching out to these masses, retreated into the comfort zone of neighborhood pressure by declaring them “noodle makers” or “ignorant”.
Shouldn't it be necessary to present new proposals to society that go beyond Erdoğan's practice?