Would you agree with this?

[dogukan]

As far as I know Turkish war of independance was one of the the succesfull fights against imperialism. It was an inspiration for many leaders such as Gandhi, Fidel Castro, Mao...etc
This speech is thought to be given by Atatürk after a small scale rebellion in Bursa by radical Muslims who claimed it was a sin to make ezan(Imam sins something to call the Muslims to pray in Mosque) Turkish.
It is ccla,imed by some that the speech does not belong to Atatürk....whether it be his or not, apply it to your country. Would you agree with that?
Basically he questions the country he establishes and tell the future of that country to fight it's own government if necessary.

I brought this up because of the latest events in Turkey....I don't know which side to support really. Some people are making some resistance against the government(just as they did and became heroes back in 60s)....though some use terror. It is really weird to see this done by people who are in the best univiertieis of this country doing these actions. Such people capable of great intellectual capacity fighting for their cause expecting nothing from the army. And I actually believe their point(NOT PKK FELLOW TURKS). They're labelled as "terrorists".....but wasn't every person who won his freedom was a "terrorist" once?
Wasn't William Wallace a terrorist for the British? Aren't Palestinians, Iraqis, terrorist for many western people? Wasn't Atatürk a terrorist for the Ottoman empire?

I do not approve terror.....but people has to see the line between terror and fighting for a cause. Terror is targetting civillians...nothing more.
Here is the speech:



The Turkish Youth are the owner and guardian of the Reforms and the Republic. They are convinced to the necessity and correctness of these, more than anyone else. They have assimilated the Reforms and the form of the government. The instant they notice a slightest or greatest quirk, or an attitude, which would weaken those, they will not say:

“This country has its police, its gendarme, its justice organization”

With their hands, stones, sticks and arms, whatever available, they will defend their own creation.
The police will come, ignore the actual criminals, capture them as the guilty.
They will think that

“The police is not yet the police of the reforms and the republic”

but will never ask for mercy. The courts will prosecute them. They will think again:

“So, the justice organization needs to be improved, re-structured suitable to fit the regime”

they will think.
They will be jailed. Although they will appeal by way of legal means, they will not bombard the premier and the congress with telegrams, asking for their mercy to be released, to have preferential treatment for having been innocent and not guilty.
They will say:

“I did the necessities of my beliefs and convictions. I am right in my interference and action. If I have ended up here unfairly, it is my responsibility to correct the causes and influences, which resulted in this injustice."

This is my understanding of the Turkish Young and the Turkish Youth.

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

[Atatürk]

Of course you cannot follow the government under every condition. But that isn't an excuse for rebellion, we need to maintain order and stability and that is what I stand for.

It is a Muslim's duty to launch a Jihad against an oppressive government. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said that the best way to deal with an oppressive government is with a sweet tongue flowing with the talk of freedom and justice.

There is also a very similar Turkish proverb: "Tatlı dil yılanı deliğinden cıkarır"

[Каие]

It is a Muslim's duty to launch a Jihad against an oppressive government. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said that the best way to deal with an oppressive government is with a sweet tongue flowing with the talk of freedom and justice.

So it's settled. The Prophet Muhammed was not a Republican.

[Bovril]

As far as I know Turkish war of independance was the first succesfull fight against imperialism.

Even restricting ourselves to modern imperialism, this is far from the case. By the time it occured the Bolivarian movements in Latin America had long succeeded in their goals, and obviously the US was independent. Besides, the Turkish 'war of independence' was hardly a classic case of resisting imperialism, since Turkey was never under established imperial control.

[Atatürk]

Even restricting ourselves to modern imperialism, this is far from the case. By the time it occured the Bolivarian movements in Latin America had long succeeded in their goals, and obviously the US was independent. Besides, the Turkish 'war of independence' was hardly a classic case of resisting imperialism, since Turkey was never under established imperial control.

The Ottoman Empire, and after the collapse it was shared between the imperialistic nations of France, Britain and Italy.

[dogukan]

The Ottoman Empire, and after the collapse it was shared between the imperialistic nations of France, Britain and Italy.

Ottomans themselves too were imperialist and this cause was also against them......as well as religious mindwashing.

[dogukan]

Even restricting ourselves to modern imperialism, this is far from the case. By the time it occured the Bolivarian movements in Latin America had long succeeded in their goals, and obviously the US was independent. Besides, the Turkish 'war of independence' was hardly a classic case of resisting imperialism, since Turkey was never under established imperial control.

OHH totally forgot about the South American(hehe and northern) resistance...sorry.

Well why would you say it's not a war against imperialism?
Fighting against the oppression and poverty the Ottoman aristocracy brought? Fighting against imperialist world powers who were looking to get their hand on resources/lands in Anatolia.
And Atatürk himself stated this many many times that their cause is against imperialism. In fact the relations of the earliy republic was very close with the Soviet Union.

And well the ideology Atatürk established has the idea of being "revoutionalist". Check out Kemalism.

and btw what would be your view on this topic?

[Bovril]

Well why would you say it's not a war against imperialism?

It was in a sense, but what I said was it was not a classic example of a war against imperialism. The ottoman Empire, which had been centered on Turkey anyway, was gone, and the various powers that tried to take chunks out of Turkey did not establish their claims due to the Turkish resistence. When people think of struggles against imperialism they usually think of the overthrow of an established imperial occupation. The Turkish example represents a nation strugling to establish itself in the ruins of an empire against the will of other powers, rather than against an established imperial system. Even the imperialism it might have been subject to was only a sort of crypto imperialism. The mandates established after the break up of the Ottoman empire were all temporary, and the proposed chunks taken out of Anatolia by other powers would have been the creation or expansion of nation states rather than empires.

All of which is not to denigrate this war, just to say it is in many senses more complicated than some of the more typical anti-imperialist strugles.

The Ottoman Empire, and after the collapse it was shared between the imperialistic nations of France, Britain and Italy.

In the case of Turkey, these powers never actually established controll however, which is why I said Turkey was never under established imperial control. Besides, not all of Turkey was put under mandate.

[dogukan]

It was in a sense, but what I said was it was not a classic example of a war against imperialism. The ottoman Empire, which had been centered on Turkey anyway, was gone, and the various powers that tried to take chunks out of Turkey did not establish their claims due to the Turkish resistence. When people think of struggles against imperialism they usually think of the overthrow of an established imperial occupation. The Turkish example represents a nation strugling to establish itself in the ruins of an empire against the will of other powers, rather than against an established imperial system. Even the imperialism it might have been subject to was only a sort of crypto imperialism. The mandates established after the break up of the Ottoman empire were all temporary, and the proposed chunks taken out of Anatolia by other powers would have been the creation or expansion of nation states rather than empires.

All of which is not to denigrate this war, just to say it is in many senses more complicated than some of the more typical anti-imperialist strugles.

What about "overthrowing" the Ottoman ways....the imperialism of ignorance, backwardness....Ottoman aristocracy long used the people of Anatolia and left them to poverty.

[Barry Goldwater]

Where's the 'I want to set up a new order if the government gets turned into fail' option? I only see ones for anarchy and brainlessness

[dogukan]

Where's the 'I want to set up a new order if the government gets turned into fail' option? I only see ones for anarchy and brainlessness

that goes to "resisting" part....overthrowing the government. MAKING A REVOLUTION!!!

[André Masséna]

third option?

[dogukan]

third option?

You either listen to your oprresive governemnt or you resist. What could be a third option?

[Helm]

If the government is doing something wrong it should be replaced with another government that doesn't ideally.

[Helm]

The Rebel Alliance overthrew the Empire in Star Wars that's another good example there.

[Lord Tomyris]

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=2]
Wasn't William Wallace a terrorist for the British?

No no he wasn't. The Scottish are British.

[dogukan]

No no he wasn't. The Scottish are British.

I mean terrorists....terrorists doesn't have to be from a different nationality....but TBH I was going to say English in that case

[Nutsack]

Ataturk is definitely one of the greatest leaders of all time. I voted yes, because an oppressive government threatening individual freedom is one of the greatest threats to a natural lifestyle.

[Atatürk]

Ataturk is definitely one of the greatest leaders of all time. I voted yes, because an oppressive government threatening individual freedom is one of the greatest threats to a natural lifestyle.

I sure am.

[awalanche]

It is true that Atatürk was one of the most influential figures in history. Atatürk considered to be the obstacle of imperial powers to block their solution to Eastern Problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Question

I think it should be considered as one of the first fight against imperial powers. As you already know imperialism is a process of exploiting a countries welfare and other richness for the benefit of a imperial power. It does not care about how people living and what is the situation of country, it only focuses on stealing welfare and richness of country.

I think the victory of Imperial power on Ottoman was began when Düyun-u Umumiye by imperial powers was established which effectively controlled empires tax collection in return of foreign debts. So I think an imperial power does not need to invade a control but rather control the country with indirect methods.

After WWI Anatolia was occuppied by Allied forces and this time the invasion happened and in order to steal welfare and richness they did not need any indirect instutions.

Also influenced many other independence movements form imperial powers