Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
June 7 2013
Gezi: anatomy of public square movement
by Nilüfer Göle*
A protestor wearing a Guy Fawkes mask prays on top of a damaged public
transport bus near Gezi Park in Taksim Square, Ä°stanbul on June 7.
(Photo: Kerim Ã-kten, EPA)
7 June 2013 /
`Living like a tree alone and free; and like a forest in brotherhood'
-- Nazım Hikmet
A new movement is in the making right in front of our eyes. Even the
participants in this movement are astonished. They feel the joy of
hearing their own voices and seeing the unifying power of their acts.
The tension is high, even days later. There is a festive atmosphere
despite the disturbing sense of potential clashes, the police
pressure, the wounded people and deaths.
As many commentators have noted, this movement signifies a new turning
point. We are still trying to give this movement a name. Some try to
draw an analogy with the French civil protests of '68 or make
references to the Arab Spring and others find a closer analogy in
Europe's `angry citizen' movements.
The Gezi Square movement is all and none of them; it has borrowed
elements from each of them. Like all of them, it is a movement where
citizens occupy a square and stand guard there. But it has an
originality that sets it apart from others.
The 1968 youth revolt movement was triggered by the weakening of the
long-standing de Gaulle government and consisted of French youths
occupying the streets and clashing with the police, shouting, `Stop.'
Like the 1968 movement, the Gezi Square movement is a revolt movement
that says `stop' to the individualization of a ruling party that has
been in office for the last 10 years. But while it was initiated by
the youth, it has managed to bring together people from diverse
segments of society, ordinary citizens who have come to the square
after leaving their offices, shops and houses.
The Arab Spring, as symbolized by the occupation of Tahrir Square, is
associated with demands for the overthrow of authoritarian regimes and
for the voice of the majority being heard via democracy. In Turkey, on
the other, the majority democracy is criticized.
As for the angry citizen movements in cities throughout the West, they
promote the preservation of human dignity that is crushed by the
global neo-liberal economy. The Occupy Gezi movement also criticizes
liberalism. However, the protesters are not the victims of the
economic crisis. They just don't want to be the pawns of the monster
of economic growth that commodifies everything.
Where does the originality of this square movement come from?
Like the movement itself, its anatomy has a close analogy to the roots
of trees. The attitude that sees trees only as a pretext fails to
notice the meaning, innocence and root power of the movement. To
protest the project that called for the removal of the trees from the
park and building a shopping center (AVM) in their place, young people
occupied the park, bringing a new urban awareness to the agenda.
Environmental concerns, critique of capitalism
Environmentalist concerns were intermingled with a critique of
capitalism. In general, people tend to nurture a fuzzy understanding
of abstract notions such as capitalism, global powers, the finance
world and neo-liberalism.
In Turkey, however, capitalism has a name: the mall, or AVM (AlıÅ?veriÅ?
Merkezi). As an embodiment of commercial capitalism, consumer society
and the global exploitation of labor, AVMs became part of the daily
urban life. Although they were initially met with enthusiasm and they
emerged not only as popular destinations for consumption, but also as
excursion destinations, AVMs are increasing viewed with skepticism.
Collaborating with the dynamics of insatiable consumerism and an
economy of riding the gravy train, they have started to wreak havoc on
the urban texture. Building an AVM at the very center of Gezi Park is,
in the eyes of the residents of Ä°stanbul, nothing but an act of
plundering the public sphere or a place open to citizens being
committed by private capitalists.
The pious-capitalist critique voiced by leftist Muslims signified the
Islamic transformation in Turkey. The Gezi movement has helped to
articulate an emerging urban awareness against the hyper-development
that prioritizes consumption at the expense of culture. Protection of
the park literally means affording physical, not only metaphorical,
protection to it. So protesters protect a public place against the
commodification of the state and against the tendency to transform
urban life into a source of lucre.
The ruling party's intervention with tear gas and the police force has
shown that the public sphere has been suffocated or poisoned. The fact
that even ordinary citizens coming from their homes and workplaces
took part in the wave of demonstrations is proof that this observation
is shared by many.
In the pre-Gezi era, the public sphere was shrinking. Restrictions on
the freedom of expression, the litigation of journalists, the
silencing of dissident figures and the widespread practice of
self-censorship as evidenced in particular by the latest Hasan Cemal
incident, have long been on the agenda and this is really hurting us.
The fact that the latest revolt was essentially not covered during the
most important first few days by the mainstream media was a saddening
indication of the extent of the ruling party's grip on the freedom of
expression. Given the sheer number of TV channels in Turkey, the
media's silence was hard to explain.
The concerns nurtured by some segments of society, known as `concerned
moderns,' over the likelihood of intrusion into their way of life have
long been voiced, sometimes in tones that are reminiscent of
Islamophobia. While they were tainted with pro-coup and subversive
sentiments, the Republic rallies revealed that the republic classes'
fears and concerns of the potential for interference in their
lifestyles.
They also can be seen as the preliminary signs of the socialization of
secularism or its taking to the streets. The current movement, on the
other hand, is a voluntary civilian resistance movement. We cannot say
that they adopt the exclusionary interpretation of secularism as
advocated by the state. It is a youth movement in which secular values
are embodied in lifestyles.
A pluralistic movement
But it is pluralistic. It unifies in `the square.'
The beginnings of an intervention in lifestyles in the name of
morality, as seen in the public announcement made in the Ankara subway
with a warning to young people kissing each other, added to the
suspicion that there would be an attempt to regulate the public sphere
within the framework of Islamic values. The bill regulating the sale
of alcoholic beverages also drew reactions, especially for the
moralist rhetoric surrounding it.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an's tendency to personify power and
his habit of imposing his own tastes and ideas on other people can be
seen in a number of cases, ranging from the statue in Kars to the
project of rebuilding the Atatürk Culture Center (AKM) in Ä°stanbul and
have made people feel impotent about their own lives, environments,
and cities.
Public life has turned into a ring with only one wrestler.
The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) deputies and local
administrators have refrained from getting into the game thus far and
have opted to just sit and watch. The soothing words uttered by the
Ä°stanbul mayor about Gezi Park have been lost in the noise. The fact
that all intermediary mechanisms, including the press, politicians and
civil society have faded from the scene is the reason why the anger is
currently targeting ErdoÄ?an personally. He has been left alone as the
sole addressee of the protesters in the square.
The prime minister's manner has become a problem in the eyes of the
general public. Though it was initially welcomed as sincere and
amusing at times, his attitude and behavior have evolved into a style
that hurts and denigrates citizens. Indeed, with the slogans `Respect'
and `Watch your tongue,' the Gezi Square movement reinforces the
importance of public manners. That such concepts as `respect' or
`manners' or `etiquette,' which are often thought to be monopolized by
adults, especially conservatives, have been adopted by a young,
pro-freedom movement seems paradoxical in itself. This movement is
bringing about a new public culture that is mindful of its discourse
and that pays respect to others to the public stage.
Another characteristic of the square movement is its ability to stage.
Unlike political movements, it is open to improvisation, humor and
creativity. Indeed, in a way reminiscent of the Woodstock rock
festival, which became the symbol of peace and counter-culture
movements of 1960s, these young people today also experience a sort of
commune life mixed with music, ecology, politics, flowers and beer.
The improvised alternative peaceful square culture they stage via
globalizing communication networks, such as social media tools like
Facebook and Twitter, is simultaneously shared with a global audience.
We have a rich repertoire of protest. The movement has its own
glossary, too. The words `ayyaÅ?' (drunkard) and `çapulcu' (looter)
have been filtered with humor, transformed and new words have been
coined using English and other idioms. Different media and people have
become involved in the process; new meanings have now been attached to
these words.
Murat Belge criticized the artlessness with which the word `ayyaÅ?' is
used and said that the world `akÅ?amcı' (habitual evening drinker)
refers to the rakı tradition and the nuances of alcohol consumption.
People who are versed in the Turkish language can perceive these
nuances. By introducing themselves as `ayyaÅ?' and `çapulcu,' the
protesters have reversed the hurtful, offensive words and it
contributed to the formation of a common identity for the movement.
The host of a famous guess-the-word program on TV changed the literal
meaning of the word `çapulcu,' describing it as `someone who tries to
implement his/her ideas through physical means or an activist' and
capitalized on the playful dynamics of the movement.
Uniting against polarizing policies
The Gezi movement has united people in a square and around a tree
against the polarizing policies and rhetoric of the ruling party. It
has brought together people, ideas, lifestyles and clubs that are hard
to get to come together, including young and old people, students and
bureaucrats, feminists and housewives, Muslims and leftists, Kurds and
Alevis, Kemalists and communists, Fenerbahçe and BeÅ?iktaÅ? supporters.
These people might have taken the stage perhaps only for a moment, but
that moment has been engraved on the square and on the collective
memory.
Some see this movement as doomed to be a minority movement as it
cannot create an impact or opposition in the political arena. But the
role and transformative power of active minorities in democracies
cannot be underestimated. More importantly, it is wrong to look at
this movement with a political perspective. The square movement can
renovate the social imagination or texture of democracy as long as it
remains independent and autonomous from political parties and
preserves its innocence in the shadow of trees. But if it inserts
itself into a political movement, it will, in fact, distance itself
from democracy.
Therefore, the call for treating people with respect and the call for
[the government's] resignation signify different dynamics. The revolt
that seeks dignity should not be confused with the quest for
overthrowing the ruling party. This means that the streets don't care
about the rules of democracy or disregard democratic elections.
The square movement has breathed new life into the shrinking public
sphere. It has advocated that squares should be open to the public and
they cannot be restricted to state control or plundered by capitalism.
The ruling party is concerned about public order, but not about the
public sphere. Perhaps, squares mean chaos in their parlance. They are
determined not to be `deterred' by a handful of marginals and looters.
Their insistence on the manner of administration, legal arrangements
and disciplining citizens indicates that they have difficulty in
handing over squares to individuals. They prefer the democracy of
elections to the democracy of the square.
Struggles for democracy may exist in different time frames. The
withdrawal of the military from the political arena, the launching of
the peace process with the pro-Kurdish movement, the debate of the
Armenian genocide taboo -- each of these illustrates Turkey's
democratization. In the face of these entrenched and important issues,
the Gezi Park movement may be despised as being the movement of those
who are obsessed with daily issues and who seek to preserve their
privileges. Some even argue that this movement undermines the AKP and
therefore the peace process.
On the other hand, there are people who don't want peace or who
believe peace will not bring democracy, but reinforce the AKP's power.
However, the civilian resistance movement has helped to expand the
sphere of democracy. Indeed, as noted by pro-Kurdish Peace and
Democracy Party (BDP) Ä°stanbul Deputy Sırrı Süreyya Ã-nder, who lent
support to the Gezi Park movement, this resistance will not undermine
peace, but rather oppression; i.e., that refusing to give room to
people, or not taking them seriously, would undermine this process.
The Gezi Square movement shows that we have arrived at a new watershed
in democracy in Turkey. It has indicated once again that
Kemalist-Islamist, neo-nationalist-separatist, reformist-pro-coup,
progressive-conservative and other dichotomies that have left their
marks on our political and philosophical lives are not as functional
as we believed them to be.
The square is emerging as a venue or a means for coming together,
debating, showing solidarity and intermingling with each other.
Libraries are being established and cookies are being distributed.
A new form of citizenship is being rehearsed.
*Nilüfer Göle is a sociologist at the School for Advanced Studies in
the Social Sciences (EHESS) Paris. This piece was originally published
in Turkish on www.t24.com.tr on June 6.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-317643-gezi-anatomy-of-public-square-movementby-nilufer-gole-.html
June 7 2013
Gezi: anatomy of public square movement
by Nilüfer Göle*
A protestor wearing a Guy Fawkes mask prays on top of a damaged public
transport bus near Gezi Park in Taksim Square, Ä°stanbul on June 7.
(Photo: Kerim Ã-kten, EPA)
7 June 2013 /
`Living like a tree alone and free; and like a forest in brotherhood'
-- Nazım Hikmet
A new movement is in the making right in front of our eyes. Even the
participants in this movement are astonished. They feel the joy of
hearing their own voices and seeing the unifying power of their acts.
The tension is high, even days later. There is a festive atmosphere
despite the disturbing sense of potential clashes, the police
pressure, the wounded people and deaths.
As many commentators have noted, this movement signifies a new turning
point. We are still trying to give this movement a name. Some try to
draw an analogy with the French civil protests of '68 or make
references to the Arab Spring and others find a closer analogy in
Europe's `angry citizen' movements.
The Gezi Square movement is all and none of them; it has borrowed
elements from each of them. Like all of them, it is a movement where
citizens occupy a square and stand guard there. But it has an
originality that sets it apart from others.
The 1968 youth revolt movement was triggered by the weakening of the
long-standing de Gaulle government and consisted of French youths
occupying the streets and clashing with the police, shouting, `Stop.'
Like the 1968 movement, the Gezi Square movement is a revolt movement
that says `stop' to the individualization of a ruling party that has
been in office for the last 10 years. But while it was initiated by
the youth, it has managed to bring together people from diverse
segments of society, ordinary citizens who have come to the square
after leaving their offices, shops and houses.
The Arab Spring, as symbolized by the occupation of Tahrir Square, is
associated with demands for the overthrow of authoritarian regimes and
for the voice of the majority being heard via democracy. In Turkey, on
the other, the majority democracy is criticized.
As for the angry citizen movements in cities throughout the West, they
promote the preservation of human dignity that is crushed by the
global neo-liberal economy. The Occupy Gezi movement also criticizes
liberalism. However, the protesters are not the victims of the
economic crisis. They just don't want to be the pawns of the monster
of economic growth that commodifies everything.
Where does the originality of this square movement come from?
Like the movement itself, its anatomy has a close analogy to the roots
of trees. The attitude that sees trees only as a pretext fails to
notice the meaning, innocence and root power of the movement. To
protest the project that called for the removal of the trees from the
park and building a shopping center (AVM) in their place, young people
occupied the park, bringing a new urban awareness to the agenda.
Environmental concerns, critique of capitalism
Environmentalist concerns were intermingled with a critique of
capitalism. In general, people tend to nurture a fuzzy understanding
of abstract notions such as capitalism, global powers, the finance
world and neo-liberalism.
In Turkey, however, capitalism has a name: the mall, or AVM (AlıÅ?veriÅ?
Merkezi). As an embodiment of commercial capitalism, consumer society
and the global exploitation of labor, AVMs became part of the daily
urban life. Although they were initially met with enthusiasm and they
emerged not only as popular destinations for consumption, but also as
excursion destinations, AVMs are increasing viewed with skepticism.
Collaborating with the dynamics of insatiable consumerism and an
economy of riding the gravy train, they have started to wreak havoc on
the urban texture. Building an AVM at the very center of Gezi Park is,
in the eyes of the residents of Ä°stanbul, nothing but an act of
plundering the public sphere or a place open to citizens being
committed by private capitalists.
The pious-capitalist critique voiced by leftist Muslims signified the
Islamic transformation in Turkey. The Gezi movement has helped to
articulate an emerging urban awareness against the hyper-development
that prioritizes consumption at the expense of culture. Protection of
the park literally means affording physical, not only metaphorical,
protection to it. So protesters protect a public place against the
commodification of the state and against the tendency to transform
urban life into a source of lucre.
The ruling party's intervention with tear gas and the police force has
shown that the public sphere has been suffocated or poisoned. The fact
that even ordinary citizens coming from their homes and workplaces
took part in the wave of demonstrations is proof that this observation
is shared by many.
In the pre-Gezi era, the public sphere was shrinking. Restrictions on
the freedom of expression, the litigation of journalists, the
silencing of dissident figures and the widespread practice of
self-censorship as evidenced in particular by the latest Hasan Cemal
incident, have long been on the agenda and this is really hurting us.
The fact that the latest revolt was essentially not covered during the
most important first few days by the mainstream media was a saddening
indication of the extent of the ruling party's grip on the freedom of
expression. Given the sheer number of TV channels in Turkey, the
media's silence was hard to explain.
The concerns nurtured by some segments of society, known as `concerned
moderns,' over the likelihood of intrusion into their way of life have
long been voiced, sometimes in tones that are reminiscent of
Islamophobia. While they were tainted with pro-coup and subversive
sentiments, the Republic rallies revealed that the republic classes'
fears and concerns of the potential for interference in their
lifestyles.
They also can be seen as the preliminary signs of the socialization of
secularism or its taking to the streets. The current movement, on the
other hand, is a voluntary civilian resistance movement. We cannot say
that they adopt the exclusionary interpretation of secularism as
advocated by the state. It is a youth movement in which secular values
are embodied in lifestyles.
A pluralistic movement
But it is pluralistic. It unifies in `the square.'
The beginnings of an intervention in lifestyles in the name of
morality, as seen in the public announcement made in the Ankara subway
with a warning to young people kissing each other, added to the
suspicion that there would be an attempt to regulate the public sphere
within the framework of Islamic values. The bill regulating the sale
of alcoholic beverages also drew reactions, especially for the
moralist rhetoric surrounding it.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an's tendency to personify power and
his habit of imposing his own tastes and ideas on other people can be
seen in a number of cases, ranging from the statue in Kars to the
project of rebuilding the Atatürk Culture Center (AKM) in Ä°stanbul and
have made people feel impotent about their own lives, environments,
and cities.
Public life has turned into a ring with only one wrestler.
The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) deputies and local
administrators have refrained from getting into the game thus far and
have opted to just sit and watch. The soothing words uttered by the
Ä°stanbul mayor about Gezi Park have been lost in the noise. The fact
that all intermediary mechanisms, including the press, politicians and
civil society have faded from the scene is the reason why the anger is
currently targeting ErdoÄ?an personally. He has been left alone as the
sole addressee of the protesters in the square.
The prime minister's manner has become a problem in the eyes of the
general public. Though it was initially welcomed as sincere and
amusing at times, his attitude and behavior have evolved into a style
that hurts and denigrates citizens. Indeed, with the slogans `Respect'
and `Watch your tongue,' the Gezi Square movement reinforces the
importance of public manners. That such concepts as `respect' or
`manners' or `etiquette,' which are often thought to be monopolized by
adults, especially conservatives, have been adopted by a young,
pro-freedom movement seems paradoxical in itself. This movement is
bringing about a new public culture that is mindful of its discourse
and that pays respect to others to the public stage.
Another characteristic of the square movement is its ability to stage.
Unlike political movements, it is open to improvisation, humor and
creativity. Indeed, in a way reminiscent of the Woodstock rock
festival, which became the symbol of peace and counter-culture
movements of 1960s, these young people today also experience a sort of
commune life mixed with music, ecology, politics, flowers and beer.
The improvised alternative peaceful square culture they stage via
globalizing communication networks, such as social media tools like
Facebook and Twitter, is simultaneously shared with a global audience.
We have a rich repertoire of protest. The movement has its own
glossary, too. The words `ayyaÅ?' (drunkard) and `çapulcu' (looter)
have been filtered with humor, transformed and new words have been
coined using English and other idioms. Different media and people have
become involved in the process; new meanings have now been attached to
these words.
Murat Belge criticized the artlessness with which the word `ayyaÅ?' is
used and said that the world `akÅ?amcı' (habitual evening drinker)
refers to the rakı tradition and the nuances of alcohol consumption.
People who are versed in the Turkish language can perceive these
nuances. By introducing themselves as `ayyaÅ?' and `çapulcu,' the
protesters have reversed the hurtful, offensive words and it
contributed to the formation of a common identity for the movement.
The host of a famous guess-the-word program on TV changed the literal
meaning of the word `çapulcu,' describing it as `someone who tries to
implement his/her ideas through physical means or an activist' and
capitalized on the playful dynamics of the movement.
Uniting against polarizing policies
The Gezi movement has united people in a square and around a tree
against the polarizing policies and rhetoric of the ruling party. It
has brought together people, ideas, lifestyles and clubs that are hard
to get to come together, including young and old people, students and
bureaucrats, feminists and housewives, Muslims and leftists, Kurds and
Alevis, Kemalists and communists, Fenerbahçe and BeÅ?iktaÅ? supporters.
These people might have taken the stage perhaps only for a moment, but
that moment has been engraved on the square and on the collective
memory.
Some see this movement as doomed to be a minority movement as it
cannot create an impact or opposition in the political arena. But the
role and transformative power of active minorities in democracies
cannot be underestimated. More importantly, it is wrong to look at
this movement with a political perspective. The square movement can
renovate the social imagination or texture of democracy as long as it
remains independent and autonomous from political parties and
preserves its innocence in the shadow of trees. But if it inserts
itself into a political movement, it will, in fact, distance itself
from democracy.
Therefore, the call for treating people with respect and the call for
[the government's] resignation signify different dynamics. The revolt
that seeks dignity should not be confused with the quest for
overthrowing the ruling party. This means that the streets don't care
about the rules of democracy or disregard democratic elections.
The square movement has breathed new life into the shrinking public
sphere. It has advocated that squares should be open to the public and
they cannot be restricted to state control or plundered by capitalism.
The ruling party is concerned about public order, but not about the
public sphere. Perhaps, squares mean chaos in their parlance. They are
determined not to be `deterred' by a handful of marginals and looters.
Their insistence on the manner of administration, legal arrangements
and disciplining citizens indicates that they have difficulty in
handing over squares to individuals. They prefer the democracy of
elections to the democracy of the square.
Struggles for democracy may exist in different time frames. The
withdrawal of the military from the political arena, the launching of
the peace process with the pro-Kurdish movement, the debate of the
Armenian genocide taboo -- each of these illustrates Turkey's
democratization. In the face of these entrenched and important issues,
the Gezi Park movement may be despised as being the movement of those
who are obsessed with daily issues and who seek to preserve their
privileges. Some even argue that this movement undermines the AKP and
therefore the peace process.
On the other hand, there are people who don't want peace or who
believe peace will not bring democracy, but reinforce the AKP's power.
However, the civilian resistance movement has helped to expand the
sphere of democracy. Indeed, as noted by pro-Kurdish Peace and
Democracy Party (BDP) Ä°stanbul Deputy Sırrı Süreyya Ã-nder, who lent
support to the Gezi Park movement, this resistance will not undermine
peace, but rather oppression; i.e., that refusing to give room to
people, or not taking them seriously, would undermine this process.
The Gezi Square movement shows that we have arrived at a new watershed
in democracy in Turkey. It has indicated once again that
Kemalist-Islamist, neo-nationalist-separatist, reformist-pro-coup,
progressive-conservative and other dichotomies that have left their
marks on our political and philosophical lives are not as functional
as we believed them to be.
The square is emerging as a venue or a means for coming together,
debating, showing solidarity and intermingling with each other.
Libraries are being established and cookies are being distributed.
A new form of citizenship is being rehearsed.
*Nilüfer Göle is a sociologist at the School for Advanced Studies in
the Social Sciences (EHESS) Paris. This piece was originally published
in Turkish on www.t24.com.tr on June 6.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-317643-gezi-anatomy-of-public-square-movementby-nilufer-gole-.html