Tweet
TURKISH TABOOS PERPETUATE IMMATURITY
guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 18 April 2012 16.39
The protection of 'Turkishness' has gone too far. To heal the wounds
of our dark past, we need debate and deliberation
A woman holds a portrait of the Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink
at the Hague in 2007. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images Growing up under the
spell of taboos is a debilitating experience. It can imprison one's
mind in a state of infancy despite the inevitable physical growth of
a person. As the Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana says:
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." When
I understood the magnitude of these words, I was already an adult
enrolled in graduate school in the US.
I grew up in Turkey, where the prevailing education system still
conceals certain historical facts in primary and secondary school
curricula lest they harm the "indivisibility of the state with its
country and nation", an expression that is used several times in
the current Turkish constitution. Perhaps the fear about deeds that
can harm the unity of the state and nation is best symbolised in the
Turkish national anthem, which begins with the lyrics "Do not fear".
When fears nurture and sustain taboos, the ability to retain
experiences declines. Enduring an education that is laden with either
false historical facts or an eerie silence makes it impossible for
people to exit the state of self-imposed immaturity.
When I encountered Armenian-American students in Boston who examined me
as "the Turk" in flesh and blood, at first, I could not understand the
reason for their unfettered curiosity. As soon as we began to talk,
I also began to read about the tragedy of the Armenians during the
demise of the Ottoman empire. It almost felt as if I was from another
planet. I had grown up under the spell of nationalist taboos and was
educated to be ignorant on certain issues. Yes, progress is diminished
to cosmetic change in the absence of retaining knowledge.
Taboos perpetuate immaturity.
There are many taboos in Turkey that mainly concern the protection
of the "indivisibility of the state and nation". There are also many
laws that make it a crime to break these taboos. When taboos are
sustained by law, the minds (and, many times, bodies) of citizens
end up being imprisoned. One such taboo involves the founder of the
Turkish republic, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. In Turkey, it is a crime to
insult his memory and harm his statutes. Another taboo involves the
sacredness of the armed forces. This is sustained by a law against
discouraging people from performing their compulsory military service.
Many conscientious objectors, as well as writers, have faced criminal
charges on the basis of this law. "Turkishness" is another taboo and
there is a law against insulting "Turkishness". Armenian-Turkish
journalist Hrant Dink was charged and found guilty for insulting
Turkishness on the basis of an opinion piece he had authored despite
a report of experts presented to the local criminal court who opposed
the charges against him. This indictment ignited the fire of events
that led to his assassination in 2007.
The notion of the "indivisibility of the Turkish state with its
country and nation" is the most pervasive taboo of the Turkish
republic. The Turkish state's unremitting drive to protect the
fantasy of a unified nation has led to the denial of the identity of
its Kurdish citizens. They were banned from speaking Kurdish in the
aftermath of the 1980 military coup. Thousands of Kurds were killed or
"lost" in Turkey in clandestine acts in the 1990s. It does not seem
possible to heal the wounds of this dark past without widening the
channels of public debate and deliberation.
Taboos, enforced by law, are fetters in front of the ability to
reason. It is possible to be released from the spell of taboos
and strengthen the ethos of democracy by upholding the realm of
public debate and deliberation. Therefore, yes, I agree with Free
Speech Debate's fourth draft principle, "We allow no taboos in the
discussion and dissemination of knowledge", because we try not to be
trapped in a state of immaturity and want to do our utmost to fulfil
our capacities as reasonable human beings.
From: A. Papazian
guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 18 April 2012 16.39
The protection of 'Turkishness' has gone too far. To heal the wounds
of our dark past, we need debate and deliberation
A woman holds a portrait of the Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink
at the Hague in 2007. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images Growing up under the
spell of taboos is a debilitating experience. It can imprison one's
mind in a state of infancy despite the inevitable physical growth of
a person. As the Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana says:
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." When
I understood the magnitude of these words, I was already an adult
enrolled in graduate school in the US.
I grew up in Turkey, where the prevailing education system still
conceals certain historical facts in primary and secondary school
curricula lest they harm the "indivisibility of the state with its
country and nation", an expression that is used several times in
the current Turkish constitution. Perhaps the fear about deeds that
can harm the unity of the state and nation is best symbolised in the
Turkish national anthem, which begins with the lyrics "Do not fear".
When fears nurture and sustain taboos, the ability to retain
experiences declines. Enduring an education that is laden with either
false historical facts or an eerie silence makes it impossible for
people to exit the state of self-imposed immaturity.
When I encountered Armenian-American students in Boston who examined me
as "the Turk" in flesh and blood, at first, I could not understand the
reason for their unfettered curiosity. As soon as we began to talk,
I also began to read about the tragedy of the Armenians during the
demise of the Ottoman empire. It almost felt as if I was from another
planet. I had grown up under the spell of nationalist taboos and was
educated to be ignorant on certain issues. Yes, progress is diminished
to cosmetic change in the absence of retaining knowledge.
Taboos perpetuate immaturity.
There are many taboos in Turkey that mainly concern the protection
of the "indivisibility of the state and nation". There are also many
laws that make it a crime to break these taboos. When taboos are
sustained by law, the minds (and, many times, bodies) of citizens
end up being imprisoned. One such taboo involves the founder of the
Turkish republic, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. In Turkey, it is a crime to
insult his memory and harm his statutes. Another taboo involves the
sacredness of the armed forces. This is sustained by a law against
discouraging people from performing their compulsory military service.
Many conscientious objectors, as well as writers, have faced criminal
charges on the basis of this law. "Turkishness" is another taboo and
there is a law against insulting "Turkishness". Armenian-Turkish
journalist Hrant Dink was charged and found guilty for insulting
Turkishness on the basis of an opinion piece he had authored despite
a report of experts presented to the local criminal court who opposed
the charges against him. This indictment ignited the fire of events
that led to his assassination in 2007.
The notion of the "indivisibility of the Turkish state with its
country and nation" is the most pervasive taboo of the Turkish
republic. The Turkish state's unremitting drive to protect the
fantasy of a unified nation has led to the denial of the identity of
its Kurdish citizens. They were banned from speaking Kurdish in the
aftermath of the 1980 military coup. Thousands of Kurds were killed or
"lost" in Turkey in clandestine acts in the 1990s. It does not seem
possible to heal the wounds of this dark past without widening the
channels of public debate and deliberation.
Taboos, enforced by law, are fetters in front of the ability to
reason. It is possible to be released from the spell of taboos
and strengthen the ethos of democracy by upholding the realm of
public debate and deliberation. Therefore, yes, I agree with Free
Speech Debate's fourth draft principle, "We allow no taboos in the
discussion and dissemination of knowledge", because we try not to be
trapped in a state of immaturity and want to do our utmost to fulfil
our capacities as reasonable human beings.
From: A. Papazian