Turkey Referendum catastrophe: Erdogan declares victory. End of the Republic?

[Harith]

What's wrong with you? Are you accusing me fascists sentiments? Based on what? Your inability to read or understand?

I was referring to this statement where you insinuated that their citizenship should be revoked because *some* Turks voted in a way you don't like.

They are Turkish AND German citizens by law - an option which after the referendum is now questioned again (and it is general election year in Germany). Argument is, when you vote for Erdogan (with his clearly anti-German sentiments) Germany not is the right place for you to live, and you certainly should not be travelling around the world with the protection of a German passport.

Just in case you missed it: I am not a German politician running for election this year. Whether or not I think Turks should have double citizenship therefore is not part of that posting.

I haven't missed anything. In fact, it seems that you're the one who missed the point of my post which was pointing out that entertaining the notion of revoking the citizenship of Turks is indeed quasi-fascist.

Because in a democracy no one can change the laws? Or does that only apply to German laws from which Turks benefit?

Because in a functioning democracy, no one can enact laws that serve to discriminate against people. Laws become meaningless if they serve to discriminate or oppress people. After all, most atrocities committed in the modern times were committed under the guise of "laws" and "democratic mandate".

And just to be clear, requiring dual citizens to renounce their other citizenship is not oppression. However, enacting laws that revoke Turks' citizenship or baring them from benefits they are entitled to is unconstitutional and wrong regardless of whether the people democratically voted for the laws or not.

[Akrotatos]

The idea of kicking Turkey out of NATO is lately tied to it's ties to various groups in Syria. Ignoring the fact that many European states who are also NATO members also ignored or indirectly helped similar groups in Syria, their support for PKK is well-known. Their leader was caught on his way out of a Greek embassy holding a Southern Cyprus passport after all.

That was only 3 years after we almost went to war with each other and it's been almost 20 years since then. Why not mention the Greek junta's action in Cyprus while you are at it?

[Diocle]

Gaiten, following your reasoning we should expel anti-EU voters from far-right parties (ignorants of the main european values, freedom, equality and fraternity) to their home in Fascistland.

When you decide to expel me from this clownish Union of sheep and sycophants of bankers & usurers .. advise me please, it will be one of the best days in my life!

.. You might even decide to put us into some well guarded mental hospital, all in all, it's an old classic ..



But .. beware, do it quickly, for in few months it may happen that you will be the ones who will be expelled .. with Turks and few others, of course.

[Kyriakos]

Don't worry about it. Erdogan supporters are not enemy of non-Turks, just opposite actually. That's why many people accusing Turks who support AKP with being traitor because they accept Kurds. There are tons of non-Turkish people I know who live in Turkey and they are seriously happy now. Because under kemalist ideology, if you're not a Turk, you're an enemy. This isn't even open for a discussion. People may not believe this but almost all Blacksea region (tons of Muslims Greeks) and Armenians voted and still voting for Erdogan. Because before Erdogan, neither Greeks, nor Armenians, not even Kurds were allowed to speak their own language in public. There were many incidents that Turks beat the out of Kurds just because they spoke Kurdish in public back in years. And I'm serious. Now, everyone is free and people stop you if you try to say something to minority. I love how media manipulates the truth and shows Erdogan as dictator. A dictator you insult, mock and go away like nothing happened...

Btw, if they divide country into "Eyalets", I hope they name provinces historically, not with modern bs. Kurdistan for south-east, Pontus for north, Rum for East of central Anatolia etc. Or Hattusa for central Turkey. That would be cool af.

I think an issue is exactly that Erdogan is (again) not the uncharacteristic bad/problematic choice in Turkey, cause the deep-state there and open issues (Kurdistan wanting to form being the most obvious one) do not allow for something other than a perpetual AKP islamism vs kemalism power struggle. And kemalism wouldn't be better; we have seen what that is, and it is gory/repressive. So posters who argue that Erdogan is the worst ever and that anything else in Turkey would be better... aren't really sticking to reality. Erdo is bad, ok, but remember what other choices you have. Don't get eaten by gray wolves

Anyway, once in the past i had noted in one of these threads, that maybe the best way forward for Turkey would be to negotiate some deal with kurds there and allow for a Kurdistan to form in its east, thus allowing the western part of Turkey to become a lot closer to european countries in the region. I don't see anything disallowing that. I have to suppose that the actual people are not that different from us, and it would be an actual solution to many problems in our region (let alone allowing both countries to spend less on military).

[alhoon]

Posts on Greece's and Turkey's NATO membership and whether their actions should put it in jeopardy, moved to this academy thread
~ Alhoon

[River Lord]

.

[KEA]

I was referring to this statement where you insinuated that their citizenship should be revoked because *some* Turks voted in a way you don't like.

According to your alternative facts, that's what I certainly said - unless you are completely wrong and simply made things up. Let's see:

I said: "They are Turkish AND German citizens by law - an option which after the referendum is now questioned again (and it is general election year in Germany)."

Where does "I" appear in that sentence? I can't see it. So how did came up with reading my opinion out of it? You simply made it up. Did I say who is questioning the dual citizenship? Obviously: people who are running for election this year. I am sorry that I did not made it more obvious. Next time a draw a graph for your convenience.

I was referring to this statement where you insinuated that their citizenship should be revoked because *some* Turks voted in a way you don't like.

Interesting emphasis for the word "some". You certainly wish us to agree to it that not a democratic majority voted for Erdogan but that everyone who didn't vote at all is to be counted as "no"?

Because in a functioning democracy, no one can enact laws that serve to discriminate against people. Laws become meaningless if they serve to discriminate or oppress people. After all, most atrocities committed in the modern times were committed under the guise of "laws" and "democratic mandate".

Revoking a dual citizenship is hardly discrimination. In fact it is entirely legal as long as the person in question isn't left stateless.

However, enacting laws that revoke Turks' citizenship or baring them from benefits they are entitled to is unconstitutional

And which part of the German Constitution would be violated that way?

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

Haha, sometimes I'm telling that it would be perfect if Gray Wolves take the lead. And then we would sit and watch people who were complaining about Erdogan lol. Same goes for leftists as well. They're obsessed with ataturk and they literally take him like someone divine and they never hesitate to do extreme things for him.

I don't support any political party because I dislike all of them and I don't vote but if I have to be honest, AKP is the best thing Turkey had since the first day of her history in social perspective. But I hate them for something they did and still doing but it's another topic. People feel more free not oppressed. Removing ban from Hijab is something any person would do, if you want everyone be free. Under kemalist ideology (even when kemalist parties weren't ruling the country, Turkey always lived under shadow of kemalism) you weren't even allowed to say your opinion. Erdogan imprisoned just because reciting a poem which wasn't lovely for kemalism. An effin poem! If you're a Muslim you're a threat, if you're a Kurd, you're not human, if you're a Greek or Armenian *insert insult here* you're the worst and Turks must get rid of them. For example, Etyen Mahçupyan was advisor of Ahmet Davutoğlu, the Prime Minister of Turkey from AKP. You wondering why? Your answer is up there.

I'm tired of this sick nationalism of Turks and currently, it's going pretty well. People becoming normal towards each other without saying "you're a Kurd, I'm a Turk", "that one is Greek other one is Laz, Armenian, Circassian" so and so. Media is really powerful and easily manipulates millions just in a few mins. If someone wants you be the bad guy for some reasons, you're the bad guy, no matter if you're good or bad. Media is the key.

Erdogan was imprisoned for a poem but now there are thousands of Turkish citizens in jail, many of them for similar "offenses".

If Erdogan was only bad news for foreigners I would understand why Turks might vote for him, he seems to be a menace for everyone that doesn't approve of him though, Turkish or otherwise.

[Harith]

According to your alternative facts, that's what I certainly said - unless you are completely wrong and simply made things up. Let's see:

I said: "They are Turkish AND German citizens by law - an option which after the referendum is now questioned again (and it is general election year in Germany)."

Where does "I" appear in that sentence? I can't see it. So how did came up with reading my opinion out of it? You simply made it up. Did I say who is questioning the dual citizenship? Obviously: people who are running for election this year. I am sorry that I did not made it more obvious. Next time a draw a graph for your convenience.

You don't have to use "I" to imply or insinuate agreement with something. Nonetheless, this back and forth is silly and so I'll leave it here.

Interesting emphasis for the word "some". You certainly wish us to agree to it that not a democratic majority voted for Erdogan but that everyone who didn't vote at all is to be counted as "no"?

?
No, I was making the point that just because Turks in Turkey or even some Turks in Germany exercised their legal right against the wishes of disapproving Germans is not a justifiable reason to revoke their citizenship. This is of course without even getting into the whole concept of collective punishment, guilt by association which is... you know.... bad.

Revoking a dual citizenship is hardly discrimination. In fact it is entirely legal as long as the person in question isn't left stateless.

Not for voting.

And which part of the German Constitution would be violated that way?

The discrimination part.

[KEA]

You don't have to use "I" to imply or insinuate agreement with something

So you have the second sight? Ah, okay.

No, I was making the point that just because Turks in Turkey or even some Turks in Germany exercised their legal right against the wishes of disapproving Germans is not a justifiable reason to revoke their citizenship. This is of course without even getting into the whole concept of collective punishment, guilt by association which is... you know.... bad.

Well actually the question is not about revoking dual citizenship but about no longer granting them, which anyways required a lot of special regulations for non-EU citizens from a state with conscript military service. These particular were introduced for the benefit of the Turks in order to help them integrating - a wrong track as it seems now. Revocation would only be possible on individual basis.

The discrimination part.

citizenship not is regulated in "the discrimination part".

[River Lord]

Erdogan was imprisoned for a poem but now there are thousands of Turkish citizens in jail, many of them for similar "offenses".

If Erdogan was only bad news for foreigners I would understand why Turks might vote for him, he seems to be a menace for everyone that doesn't approve of him though, Turkish or otherwise.

I'm sorry if this sounds rude but I really don't care what you -or anyone- think about him. I told you what is what and how things going in Turkey. Rest is up to you.

Regards.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

I'm sorry if this sounds rude but I really don't care what you -or anyone- think about him. I told you what is what and how things going in Turkey. Rest is up to you.

Regards.

It's fine, but this is a forum for sharing opinions and debate

[KEA]

And finally things got back to normality with the evil Crusader-Nazis being called for financing Erdogan's "successful politics".

http://www.newsweek.com/turkey-germa...ic-help-589402

[KmanBEAST]

Just throwing my two cents in here (I'm Turkish, but I was born here in the USA and I lived here all my life except for summer vacations to Turkey to see family). I'm glad this thread isn't just Turk-bashing OR full of nationalists who go around praising Erdogan and hating anyone who doesn't like him, because honestly that is pretty immature for a public forum like this. So I'm glad to see the discussions are civilized.


Turkey was never perfect in the first place. It still had problems like its past (Armenian Genocide, treatment of other ethnic/religious groups/etc) and the economy was still pretty dirty poor. Now despite what you may believe about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, whether you praise him or hate him, you have to admit him forming the republic and being its first president REALLY affected how the economy and society was shaped. There are also many who believe that the early republic promoted much of the nationalism that the Young Turks had as well. Many people say that the current party in power, the AKP, has helped grow the economy and help many people. They also believe that the current republic is more tolerant towards non-Turks, non-Muslims, etc. I really don't have an opinion on this, however. All I believe is that Erdogan really is trying to gain, as Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars said, "UNLIMITED POWER!" Jokes aside, he really doesn't care much for his people anymore (IMO) and he is making the country less and less secular (that's the argument, at least) as the day goes by. In my opinion, he is really making poor decisions and not being a responsible leader.


In the end, I just hope Turkey will be able to fix itself somehow by getting rid of him. Or maybe a whole new nation will be formed with different leaders. I highly oppose nationalists who go around on the internet talking about how great their people or countries are. I'm fine with having a love for your people, but I don't think you should take it to the extent that the Nazis did. I may be only 15 years old, but I do really have a lot of exposure to this stuff whether it's parents and other family members, internet forums and discussions (both civilized and not), and most importantly...history. People forget how important history is sometimes when applying it to the modern world.

[ioannis76]

Just throwing my two cents in here (I'm Turkish, but I was born here in the USA and I lived here all my life except for summer vacations to Turkey to see family). I'm glad this thread isn't just Turk-bashing OR full of nationalists who go around praising Erdogan and hating anyone who doesn't like him, because honestly that is pretty immature for a public forum like this. So I'm glad to see the discussions are civilized.


Turkey was never perfect in the first place. It still had problems like its past (Armenian Genocide, treatment of other ethnic/religious groups/etc) and the economy was still pretty dirty poor. Now despite what you may believe about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, whether you praise him or hate him, you have to admit him forming the republic and being its first president REALLY affected how the economy and society was shaped. There are also many who believe that the early republic promoted much of the nationalism that the Young Turks had as well. Many people say that the current party in power, the AKP, has helped grow the economy and help many people. They also believe that the current republic is more tolerant towards non-Turks, non-Muslims, etc. I really don't have an opinion on this, however. All I believe is that Erdogan really is trying to gain, as Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars said, "UNLIMITED POWER!" Jokes aside, he really doesn't care much for his people anymore (IMO) and he is making the country less and less secular (that's the argument, at least) as the day goes by. In my opinion, he is really making poor decisions and not being a responsible leader.


In the end, I just hope Turkey will be able to fix itself somehow by getting rid of him. Or maybe a whole new nation will be formed with different leaders. I highly oppose nationalists who go around on the internet talking about how great their people or countries are. I'm fine with having a love for your people, but I don't think you should take it to the extent that the Nazis did. I may be only 15 years old, but I do really have a lot of exposure to this stuff whether it's parents and other family members, internet forums and discussions (both civilized and not), and most importantly...history. People forget how important history is sometimes when applying it to the modern world.

One of the most mature, well thought out positions I've heard in here from a Turk (and from many MANY members of other nationalities). I can only agree with you. If more people thought like you, there would be no need for us to be nationalist on this side of the Aegean (Greek nationalist here).