May 6, 1972...
\nNot a calendar day.
\nThe shadow of a deathbed.<\/p>\n
Deniz Gezmi\u015f, H\u00fcseyin \u0130nan, Yusuf Aslan...<\/p>\n
They are not a political position, Three young people walking to their deaths for what they believe in.<\/p>\n But today it's not about what they do- Because history is no longer remembered in Turkey, This use is not an innocent form of remembrance. And the most dangerous aspect of this mentality is this: Ozgur Ozel comes out and No, no, no.<\/p>\n This is not an analogy. And there is no historical basis for this equation What is being done here is not just a rhetorical move. Because once you open that door, And then this happens:<\/p>\n Nothing, really nothing, Today;<\/p>\n Revolving around U\u015fak, Bolu, Antalya, G\u00f6rele and Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (allegations, investigations, publicized files...)<\/p>\n These are serious issues that need to be discussed and explained.<\/p>\n But you're gonna leave this field, You are guiding him.<\/strong><\/p>\n Take these, This is not just a mistake.<\/p>\n This is a loss of measure.<\/strong><\/p>\n But more than that:<\/p>\n This is a deliberate erasure of the boundary between politics and history.<\/p>\n Because when that border is lifted, Because Deniz Gezmi\u015f's struggle;<\/p>\n - It was not about self-interest This struggle can be found right or wrong- Today's debates, today's files, today's polemics...<\/p>\n What happens if this reduction is made?<\/p>\n Only history does not shrink.<\/p>\n It will not grow today either.<\/p>\n Both of them it becomes meaningless.<\/strong><\/p>\n The moment you put these two worlds in the same sentence, you are forcing history.<\/strong><\/p>\n And when history is forced, Is Deniz Gezmi\u015f really being commemorated today? Because they are not the same thing.<\/p>\n The first is memory. And the moment you mix the two, On May 6, it is not just about commemoration.<\/p>\n The point is this:<\/p>\n Are you really trying to understand history, If the answer is the latter-<\/p>\n Every sentence you construct is not only controversial, THE CENTER OF THE CONTRADICTION: LEFTISM OR LABEL? <\/strong><\/p>\n Now let's look at a graver picture.<\/p>\n On the one hand:<\/p>\n Berkin Elvan A child.<\/p>\n And someone calls him a bastard.<\/p>\n Arif Kocab\u0131y\u0131k<\/p>\n It's not just an insult- Although this statement seems to be directed at an individual, it actually touches the most sensitive nerve endings of a society, And what is expected in the face of this kind of language is clear: But then what happens?<\/p>\n The same name is being hosted politically, In the same political language, in the same period, So on the one hand, it is a word that hurts the social conscience, This is not just a contradiction. Now I ask you:<\/p>\n On the one hand, you say \u201cthe struggle of the Denizens\u201d, How do these two situations stand within the same ideological framework?<\/p>\n It does not stop.<\/p>\n It cannot stop.<\/p>\n But more important is this:<\/p>\n Despite this, they are being kept in the same sentence.<\/p>\n This is the most critical problem of today's political language.<\/p>\n And it doesn't end there.<\/p>\n Cemal Enginyurt and Adnan Beker Applause.<\/p>\n This is not just a scene from a rally. Because the message in that scene is this:<\/p>\n Ideological background is not important. Today it is important where you stand and what you do.<\/p>\n Now I ask you again:<\/p>\n What is leftism?<\/p>\n An ideological line? If today you call someone \u201cthe most leftist\u201d, There are uses there.<\/strong><\/p>\n But this use comes at a cost.<\/p>\n In the short term, you get applause. But what happens in the long run?<\/p>\n Nothing makes sense.<\/p>\n When a movement begins to stretch its concepts But what he is actually doing is this:<\/p>\n Erase your own boundaries.<\/strong><\/p>\n And when borders are erased, This is exactly what is happening today.<\/p>\n \u201cThe word \u201dleft\", \u201cThe word \u201dresistance\", \u201cDeniz Gezmi\u015f\u201d is... And that's what happens when you combine all three, What emerges: FACT:<\/strong><\/p>\n Leftism;<\/p>\n - Consistency But today the language is established:<\/p>\n - It depends on the need This is not politics.<\/p>\n This is identity dissolution.<\/strong><\/p>\n You are a political movement;<\/p>\n - If he can ignore the words spoken to Berkin Elvan, that movement has to ask itself this question:<\/p>\n Do I really represent a line?, You make a move, is actually not growing, And the most dangerous:<\/p>\n He may not even realize he is doing it.<\/p>\n WHO DOES THIS LANGUAGE SERVE? <\/strong><\/p>\n Why is this language being established?<\/p>\n The answer is simple:<\/p>\n Because instead of answering difficult questions, It's a reflex. Are there allegations of corruption? Is there an ethical debate? Criticism? It's over.<\/p>\n The discussion moves elsewhere.<\/p>\n But this shift is no coincidence. Because when the ground for discussion changes, And when the questions change, This is the oldest method of politics: HOW DOES THIS MECHANISM WORK?<\/strong><\/p>\n First there is a crisis. That framework is usually this:<\/p>\n - History And that's what happens when you combine all three, Because it is no longer about that:<\/p>\n \u201cWhat did you do?\u201d<\/p>\n It comes down to this:<\/p>\n \u201cWhose side are you on?\u201d<\/p>\n At this point, politics becomes detached from content- WHY IS MAY 6TH SO USEFUL?<\/strong><\/p>\n Because May 6th is not neutral.<\/p>\n It has emotion. And most importantly:<\/p>\n No one can comfortably speak out against that day.<\/p>\n Because when you oppose, you take a risk. That's why May 6th, But that's exactly why, LOSS OF MEASURE<\/strong><\/p>\n But here is what is missing:<\/p>\n History is not a reference. This sentence is not just a theoretical statement- Because the moment you put yourself in the same sentence with Deniz Gezmi\u015f, \u201cI'm on the same plane.\u201d<\/p>\n And are you really?<\/p>\n Is it the same price? If the answer to these questions is not clear- It has collapsed.<\/strong><\/p>\n SUM OF CONTRADICTIONS A SYSTEM<\/strong><\/p>\n On the one hand:<\/p>\n Harsh words for Berkin Elvan.<\/p>\n On the other side:<\/p>\n The political space opened to a name like Arif Kocab\u0131y\u0131k.<\/p>\n On the other side:<\/p>\n Figures like Cemal Enginyurt and Adnan Beker And on top of all that:<\/p>\n \u201cThe discourse of the \u201dstruggle of the seas\".<\/p>\n These are not isolated mistakes.<\/p>\n This is a language system.<\/strong><\/p>\n Here is the peculiarity of this system:<\/p>\n - Covering up contradictions And finally:<\/p>\n Making everything seem true at the same time<\/strong><\/p>\n WHO DOES IT BENEFIT?<\/strong><\/p>\n In the short term:<\/p>\n - Those who avoid criticism In the long run?<\/p>\n No one.<\/p>\n Because as this language becomes widespread, society realizes that:<\/p>\n Concepts are being shifted. And at that moment the most critical thing happens:<\/p>\n Trust dissolves.<\/strong><\/p>\n THE TEST OF POLITICS<\/strong><\/p>\n Politics is not just the art of gaining power.<\/p>\n Politics is also is the art of knowing limits.<\/strong><\/p>\n Which concept is used where? If there are no answers to these questions- There's only There is utilization.<\/strong><\/p>\n May 6th is not just a day of remembrance.<\/p>\n It is a border.<\/p>\n If you cross that line, you pollute a memory.<\/strong><\/p>\n And remember:<\/p>\n Society does not react immediately. It accumulates.<\/p>\n And when the day comes, the discussion comes to this:<\/p>\n Who is not right-<\/p>\n who used what, and how rudely.<\/strong><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Struggle of Your Arrested Friends Is Not the Struggle of the Denizens \u00d6zg\u00fcr \u00d6zel...! <\/p>","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":285669,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[286],"tags":[289],"class_list":["post-285667","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-yazarlar","tag-manset"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285667","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=285667"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285667\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":285670,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285667\/revisions\/285670"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/285669"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=285667"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=285667"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=285667"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nis the name of a price.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nwhat we turn their name into.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nis being used.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nThis is a selective production of memory.
\nIt is the product of a mentality that magnifies what works for it and silently erases what does not.<\/p>\n
\nIt does not try to understand the past as it is-
\naccording to today's political needs rewrites it.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nin the midst of current political debates
\n\u201cThe struggle of these friends is the struggle of the Denizens,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
\nThis is a is an attempt to equalize.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nnor the moral equivalent.<\/p>\n
\nThis is a conscious expansion of the language of politics
\nor even more accurately, relaxation.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nevery struggle can be likened to every struggle.
\nEvery crisis can be legitimized by any historical reference.<\/p>\n
\ncannot be evaluated in its own context.<\/p>\n
\ncorruption allegations, ethical debates, use of public resources...<\/p>\n
\nas soon as you make it about a historical symbol -
\nyou are no longer trying to resolve the debate.<\/p>\n
\nYou juxtapose it with a historical struggle that marched to the gallows.<\/p>\n
\nNo concept can carry its own weight anymore.<\/p>\n
\n- It wasn't about the seat
\n- It was not about everyday politics<\/p>\n
\nbut irreducible.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nyou don't comment anymore-<\/p>\n
\nbefore it loses its meaning,
\nthen your dignity.<\/p>\n
\nOr is it possible to create a Is a moral supremacy field being established?<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nThe second is politics.<\/p>\n
\nno memory remains
\nneither politics.<\/p>\n
\nor are you using it as a tool in today's debates?<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nirresponsible.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nA break in the memory of this country.<\/p>\n
\nis an attack on public conscience.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\ninsulting a common pain,
\nis a language that belittles a memory.<\/p>\n
\nDistance.
\nClarity.
\nAttitude.<\/p>\n
\nwearing a badge.<\/p>\n
\nby the same actors.<\/p>\n
\non the other hand, a political space opened to the owner of that word.<\/p>\n
\nThis one, a conscious choice.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nOn the other hand, you are giving political legitimacy to someone who said this.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cthe most left-wing among us\u201d are put on the bus.<\/p>\n
\nThis is the manifestation of a mentality.<\/p>\n
\nConsistency of discourse is not important.
\nIt doesn't matter what you said yesterday.<\/p>\n
\nA set of values?
\nOr is it a handout on stage? label?<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nIf tomorrow you give the same title to someone else-
\nthere is no ideology there anymore.<\/p>\n
\nYou get expansion.
\nYou bring different sectors together.<\/p>\n
\nat first he thinks it's \u201cflexibility\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nidentity is resolved.<\/p>\n
\nand then taken out of its content and turned into a kind of clapping apparatus<\/strong> is being transformed.<\/p>\n
\nused against every criticism shield<\/strong> it's becoming.<\/p>\n
\ngradually becoming a reference tag<\/strong>what is being reduced to.<\/p>\n
\nThere is no ideology, no struggle.<\/p>\n
\nsloganized emptiness.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\n- It's the price
\n- Does not tolerate contradiction<\/p>\n
\n- Stretches according to the person
\n- Shaped by applause<\/p>\n
\n- If he can speak with a reference to Deniz Gezmi\u015f at the same time,
\n- If he can distribute the definition of \u201cfar leftist\u201d according to the conjuncture-<\/p>\n
\nor am I just using the language of that line?<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nif it tries to grow by eviscerating its own concepts -<\/p>\n
\nis melting itself.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nIt is easier to draw the discussion on emotional grounds.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nBut it's not just a reflex-
\nOne of the oldest, most functional, most risky reflexes of politics.<\/p>\n
\n\u2192 \u201cThe Seas\u201d.<\/p>\n
\n\u2192 Say \u201cStruggle\u201d.<\/p>\n
\n\u2192 Say \u201cWe are part of that tradition\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nThis is a conscious or unconscious manipulation, but one that is very clear in its consequences.<\/p>\n
\nthe questions also change.<\/p>\n
\nthe need for accountability disappears.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nto generate legitimacy not from reality but from symbol.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nThen, instead of being answered directly, the crisis is reframed.<\/p>\n
\n- Emotion
\n- Symbol<\/p>\n
\nis an atmosphere that makes criticism difficult.<\/p>\n
\nit becomes a battle for identity.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nIt has historical weight.
\nIt has social relevance.<\/p>\n
\nThere is a possibility of misunderstanding.
\nThe social reflex kicks in.<\/p>\n
\nIt is one of the areas where politics can most comfortably \u201ctake refuge\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nis the area most in need of protection.<\/p>\n
\nHistory is the measure.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nis the basis of political morality.<\/p>\n
\nwhat you're really saying is this:<\/p>\n
\nIs there the same risk?
\nDo you have the same loneliness?
\nIs there the same consistency?<\/p>\n
\nthe sentence you constructed is not just weak.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cto be presented as \u201dthe most leftist\".<\/p>\n
\n- Blurring borders
\n- Stretching concepts<\/p>\n
\n- Those who don't want to be held accountable
\n- For those who want to control the debate<\/p>\n
\nHistory is being instrumentalized.
\nIdeology is being stretched.<\/p>\n
\nWhich name is mentioned in which context?
\nWhich date is included in which discussion?<\/p>\n
\nthere is no politics there.<\/p>\n
\nyou don't just make a political mistake-<\/p>\n
\nBut he does not forget.<\/p>\n