Individualism and democracy in Turkey

Abstract

"Individualism and Democracy in Turkey" is a study that tries to capture the dynamic relationship between individualism and superstructure (the culture, institutions, power structures) in Turkey as well as a critique of the dircction of this influence and its consequences, with the outlook and methodology of the "Critical Theory". Individualism herc is not used in the economic sense endorsed by liberalism, but in social, political and psychological sense with clearly defined parameters, verified by worldwide research on the values. The definition of individualism in modem democracy embodies pluralism, a precious element of contemporary democracy, which is described as "Aesthetic Individualism", that ensurcs the protection of individual differences in ethnic, racial, sexual, political and religious sense. We will try to analyse the nature of the political regime and its ideological devices like education through their impact on the development of individualism in Turkey. The political, cultural and economic factors present in the country only partially define the way an individual interacts with the superstructure in a quest to pursue hilher own vision of life. It is mainly the way state organizes its ideology that makes the main impact. The hypothesis here is that the lack of liberal democracy and its institutions to ensure freedom and rights hinder individual development, which is essential for the welfare and dignity of the people. The outlook of individualism upon the foundation of the Turkish Republic was not inclusive of pluralist principles, which did not change since. Coupled with formal rationalism, this leaves the political system vulnerable to the dangers of authoritarianism, which was closely examined by social scientists of the Frankfurt School after the Second World War and the Holocaust. The research conducted for this study demonstrated the imporlance of superstructure in the growth of individualism. The ideologv of the state with all its boundaries - -" and limitations towards creating a monotype and submissive citizenship model exerts a considerable pressure against opposing ideologies, identities, behaviour, life-style and diversification which iievitablytakes its toll on individualism by limiting freedom of expression and choice The effects of this are evident in the expression of identity where the survey shows nationality and religion top the list for 47 % of the population, which alone indicates the inaccessibility, and limitation of diverse identity characteristics. This means nearly half the population define themselves with the "ready made, dominant ideology-imposed" identity pattern. It seems that dominant ideology doesn't allow much room for versatile and unique identity expressions, which are viewed as a threat for the order and unity by spoiling the 'safe' citizenship model. One of the most important findings of the Survey is that 37.5 % of the people are ready to abandon one of the collective identity elements in order to pursue their dreams. This is an indication for the involuntary acceptance of identity elements, which can be translated into a potential for the development of individualism for these people.