The failure of the left and socialist movements in Turkey to transform into a permanent, powerful and broad-based political actor is no longer a matter of coincidence or something that can be explained solely by “external pressures”. It is the result of both historical ruptures and the internal weaknesses of the left itself. To put it harshly: The left in Turkey has often been a political tradition that has strangled its own potential with its own hands.
First of all, the obsession with ideological purity is one of the biggest diseases of this field. Leftist structures, detached from the real agendas of the people, have become embroiled in endless theoretical debates within themselves, turning minor differences into major divisions and turning division into a reflex. Movements that should appeal to people living in the same neighborhood and suffering from the same economic difficulties have become detached from society by fighting within themselves “who is the most correct?”. The result: organization, theory, but no people.
The second big problem is elitism. A significant part of the left in Turkey has produced a language and attitude that considers itself superior to the people. Even when talking about workers, peasants and tradesmen, a political understanding has developed that cannot touch their lives or speak their language. This has led to the left being perceived by the masses as “distant”, “incomprehensible” and even “patronizing”. To think that one can do “politics for the people” without the support of the people is a contradiction in itself.
Thirdly, the weakness of organization. While the political right in Turkey has been organizing neighborhood by neighborhood and street by street for years, the left has often been trapped in narrow cadres. Trade unions have weakened, local organizations have ceased to be sustainable and youth movements have failed to gain continuity. There have been reactionary outbursts, but these have not been able to turn into a permanent political force.
Another critical issue is the lack of strategy. Left movements have often acted on the spur of the moment reactions instead of developing a long-term political plan. Temporary alliances during election periods, harsh outbursts in times of crisis, followed by silence... This has created a problem of trust. Voters want to see a stable and predictable political actor; they do not trust a structure that constantly changes direction and fights within itself.
Of course, state repression, coups, bans and systematic exclusion are an important part of this picture. But to attribute everything to this is to evade responsibility. Because if different political movements have been able to grow under the same conditions, the problem should be sought not only in external factors, but also internally.
In conclusion, the failure of the left and socialists to develop in Turkey is not just a story of “being blocked”; it is also a story of mistakes, disconnections and persistent errors. If this tradition really wants to grow stronger, it must first turn inward and ask itself the following question: “Why can't we be the hope of the people?”
Without an honest answer to this question, a left that keeps circling around in the same debates, no matter how right it is, will be doomed to remain ineffective.