6 ms·

I'm a Turkish citizen, Istanbulite, now 23 years old. I have happened to witness all of this in person in this city. I wear two identities, if I can say so, o

by gkya 11y ago

I'm a Turkish citizen, Istanbulite, now 23 years old. I have happened to witness all of this in person in this city. I wear two identities, if I can say so, one is that I'm from the bosphorus, Bogazici, and the other is that I belong to the near east. This sort of findings delight me a lot. It proves that at the end of the day the human is to measure, that he be the one to be measured, and that after tens of thousands of years all we have been able to do is better tools, nothing more. Regarding the Erdogan and the rest, he's just the tip of the iceberg. The Turkish have been miserable all the time, and recently more, because, as a turkish proverb proceeds to say, the feet became the head. If it wasn't him to be made so powerful by the crowd of angry ignorant fundamentalists, it would be someone else. In this country of genocides, now one is active against the population of reasonables.

afsina 11y ago
What makes you the "reasonable" and others "ignorant fundamentalists" again? The hubris of elitism has never ceased to amaze me.
- acqq 11y ago
  "Fundamentalist" as in "religious fundamentalist." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism Compare their goals to then successful work of Ataturk in 20th century in Turkey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk's_Reforms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk's_Reforms
  - afsina 11y ago
    My problem is not on the definitions, but the "name calling".
    - acqq 11y ago
      I agree that calling the leaders of fundamentalists "ignorant" is surely wrong and hugely underestimates their capabilities, as it's known that a lot of planning is involved in their work: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file... And we also see how effective in working towards their goals they can be.
      - afsina 11y ago
        Ok, perhaps there is a misunderstanding here. Why are you referring ISIS here? You were talking about Turkey and Turkish people I thought.
        acqq 11y ago
        Using the example of extreme fundamentalism we can see that the successful leaders and their close supporters shouldn't be considered "ignorant" even if we are aware how dangerous they are. I also don't claim that they are the only kind of fundamentalists possible. And if you look at the map, ISIS isn't that far from Turkey.
        gkya 11y ago
        > And if you look at the map, ISIS isn't that far from Turkey. It's here already. About your argument on not considering fundamentalists ignorant, they are. First, ignorant does not mean idiot, or stupid. Ignorance is absence of objective knowledge. It's hard to believe that either a fundamentalist would wish to look at things objectively or one that does so would become anyhow a fundamentalist. There may be knowledgeable and smart people exploiting fundamentalists, to them I'm indifferent. All I care is the things that go, monuments, people, peace, the stuff the people are made of. Those are the things that bring tears to my eyes.
        acqq 11y ago
        > Ignorance is absence of objective knowledge. I agree. > There may be knowledgeable and smart people exploiting fundamentalists, to them I'm indifferent. Don't be. They are the real elitists, the ones accepting the suffering of the millions of people as necessary in achieving their goals. Moreover, their beliefs are also often based on the ignorant premises (religious myths!). A good example of high levels that believe in religious myths are some US politicians: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/01/04/821847/-Republicans-Now-the-Party-of-Armageddon http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/01/04/821847/-Republicans... I'm sure you can identify the equivalent examples by politicians/activists closer to you.
  - afsina 11y ago
    Also on the subject, sadly, no matter his visions and good intentions, he was a victim of perfectionism and elitism. No matter what the outcome is, Ataturk was totalitarian at the end and some of his reforms were either unnecessary or executed terribly. Besides, what is the point? Why are we comparing those two again?
    - acqq 11y ago
      You asked "What makes you the "reasonable" and others "ignorant fundamentalists" again?" I'm answering that the division exists and is important and I agree with you that there are better names for the same groups. But I surely don't want to disqualify the report of a somebody who writes from there only because his report doesn't use what in other environments would be assumed politically correct language.
      - afsina 11y ago
        What I am against is that OP, perhaps indirectly, calls Turkish people who votes for/agrees current government as "ignorant fundamentalists" and himself as "reasonable". I think this is degrading and elitist. Maybe I misunderstood him.
        acqq 11y ago
        It's not name calling if he really believes that those who he names are ignorant. You can discuss with him about what he believes they don't know. Just using the word isn't wrong in itself.
    - gkya 11y ago
      You're right in your point that M. Kemal was a victim, but he was not a victim of perfectionism and elitism. He was a victim of some blind nationalism, his admiring of the Occident and his dismissal of the parity of different cultures. He and other people thought that the Europe was better than the other, whereas in fact it was merely different. The revolutions were top down, fascistic, and forced. As you will see, if you read in an objective manner, some history, nearly none the revolutions have changed the things for the better for all. There are still many turks that sustain that Kurdish the language was invented in the 70's, that all the languages descended from turkish, that American indigenous people, Italians, Sumerians and other ancient people of the asia minore were of Turkish descent, that Armenians are the ones that made a genocide at the beginning of the 20th century, etc. People identify themselves basing on lies here. What gives a totalitarian person room to do what he wants? A bunch of hero-gazers that have nothing to base any thought on. See that I do not call people stupid or smart, many ignorant are smart. It's good when one knows that he knows or that he does not know, but the evil is the ignorance of the ignorance, which is our ill as a community of the Near east.
- reitanqild 11y ago
  "ignorant fundamentalists" exists. Stop and observe an you might see them as well: Religious, Atheists, Europeans, Africans etc. Some of them have managed to make more harm than others and Turkey -just like my home country, has a recent history (last 120 years) of killing parts of its own population just being different.
  - gkya 11y ago
    Which one is your country, if you would like to name it? I would like to be able to find out about it and maybe contrast it with Turkey, I intend to study ethical and religious clashes as a material for philosophical views on states, democracy etc. And because I can't edit my comment for who-knows-the-reason, I'll dump it here: I'm sorry that I even referred to Erdogan and that I said the things that I said after, as I caused the thread to lose its focus, which had to be the people that left those footprints here. But then again, I would not have thought that anybody would argue that people who can destroy and disregard high-importance archaeological findings for the increased speed of the construction work were not ignorant, and those who are openly fundamentalist were not so, and that I was elitist and that I had hubris for calling the miserable miserable.
    - reitanqild 11y ago
      I would say I come from one of the Nordic countries.
- gkya 11y ago
  That what makes me reasonable is that I think when I have to decide, and I do so in a dialectical manner looking for the objective truth, instead of referring myself to dogmas for justifying my subjective view of the world. Now if you'll defend those who chop off heads, make genocides, defend past genocides, steal money while looking religious, oppress the minorities, disable education facilities, polarize the people, lie shamelessly for their own benefit, blow-up monuments of our past, force their views on others, commit massacres in the name of their beliefs, disrupt anybody else, homogenate the minorities, kill languages and cultures for national-fascist wills, kill innocent people for political benefits, accept bribes, become corrupt... then I don't know what can I do for you. The aggressiveness of ignorance never ceased to amaze me.
  - afsina 11y ago
    You just mixed and piled up all bad qualities and past-current atrocities to create an imaginary monster. Then you assign that monster to someone or some particular people you personally hate -whatever the reason- in Turkey. This is not being reasonable.
    - gkya 11y ago
      No. I piled up all bad qualities and atrocities that were committed in the past and are being committed still by the people here. It has nothing to do with reason. It is a list of facts. Being reasonable is in the way you interpret this list of facts, are you comfortable as long as you are a conservative muslim turk of good income, or do you empathise, do you respect others, or do you want to bash anyone that is not like you. This is my last reply to you. I will not bother to list and prove all my points here, there's internet, there are books, if it is that important for you, you'll find it out for yourself. Maybe one day you'll visit turkey, and see it for yourself. I'm having enough of it already.
- gkya 11y ago
  To the downvoters of the above-post: Stop downvoting this guy. His critique fair and correct, he has a solid point. And he's helped me elaborate my point better. And somewhere in this thread you lot will see that we eventually agree on a lot of points. What's wrong with you? I want to think that the HN crowd is an educated one.
tragomaskhalos 11y ago
What shines through very clearly is, on the one hand, the dignity and professionalism of your fellow citizens involved in the preservation work (and the strict laws protecting archeological finds are also something to be very proud of), and, on the other, the boorishness of Erdogan. That's politicians for you though :(
srean 11y ago
Eloquently put.

by gkya 11y ago

afsina 11y ago

What makes you the "reasonable" and others "ignorant fundamentalists" again? The hubris of elitism has never ceased to amaze me.

acqq 11y ago
"Fundamentalist" as in "religious fundamentalist." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism Compare their goals to then successful work of Ataturk in 20th century in Turkey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk's_Reforms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atat%C3%BCrk's_Reforms
- afsina 11y ago
  My problem is not on the definitions, but the "name calling".
  - acqq 11y ago
    I agree that calling the leaders of fundamentalists "ignorant" is surely wrong and hugely underestimates their capabilities, as it's known that a lot of planning is involved in their work: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file... And we also see how effective in working towards their goals they can be.
    - afsina 11y ago
      Ok, perhaps there is a misunderstanding here. Why are you referring ISIS here? You were talking about Turkey and Turkish people I thought.
      - acqq 11y ago
        Using the example of extreme fundamentalism we can see that the successful leaders and their close supporters shouldn't be considered "ignorant" even if we are aware how dangerous they are. I also don't claim that they are the only kind of fundamentalists possible. And if you look at the map, ISIS isn't that far from Turkey.
        gkya 11y ago
        > And if you look at the map, ISIS isn't that far from Turkey. It's here already. About your argument on not considering fundamentalists ignorant, they are. First, ignorant does not mean idiot, or stupid. Ignorance is absence of objective knowledge. It's hard to believe that either a fundamentalist would wish to look at things objectively or one that does so would become anyhow a fundamentalist. There may be knowledgeable and smart people exploiting fundamentalists, to them I'm indifferent. All I care is the things that go, monuments, people, peace, the stuff the people are made of. Those are the things that bring tears to my eyes.
        acqq 11y ago
        > Ignorance is absence of objective knowledge. I agree. > There may be knowledgeable and smart people exploiting fundamentalists, to them I'm indifferent. Don't be. They are the real elitists, the ones accepting the suffering of the millions of people as necessary in achieving their goals. Moreover, their beliefs are also often based on the ignorant premises (religious myths!). A good example of high levels that believe in religious myths are some US politicians: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/01/04/821847/-Republicans-Now-the-Party-of-Armageddon http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/01/04/821847/-Republicans... I'm sure you can identify the equivalent examples by politicians/activists closer to you.
- afsina 11y ago
  Also on the subject, sadly, no matter his visions and good intentions, he was a victim of perfectionism and elitism. No matter what the outcome is, Ataturk was totalitarian at the end and some of his reforms were either unnecessary or executed terribly. Besides, what is the point? Why are we comparing those two again?
  - acqq 11y ago
    You asked "What makes you the "reasonable" and others "ignorant fundamentalists" again?" I'm answering that the division exists and is important and I agree with you that there are better names for the same groups. But I surely don't want to disqualify the report of a somebody who writes from there only because his report doesn't use what in other environments would be assumed politically correct language.
    - afsina 11y ago
      What I am against is that OP, perhaps indirectly, calls Turkish people who votes for/agrees current government as "ignorant fundamentalists" and himself as "reasonable". I think this is degrading and elitist. Maybe I misunderstood him.
      - acqq 11y ago
        It's not name calling if he really believes that those who he names are ignorant. You can discuss with him about what he believes they don't know. Just using the word isn't wrong in itself.
  - gkya 11y ago
    You're right in your point that M. Kemal was a victim, but he was not a victim of perfectionism and elitism. He was a victim of some blind nationalism, his admiring of the Occident and his dismissal of the parity of different cultures. He and other people thought that the Europe was better than the other, whereas in fact it was merely different. The revolutions were top down, fascistic, and forced. As you will see, if you read in an objective manner, some history, nearly none the revolutions have changed the things for the better for all. There are still many turks that sustain that Kurdish the language was invented in the 70's, that all the languages descended from turkish, that American indigenous people, Italians, Sumerians and other ancient people of the asia minore were of Turkish descent, that Armenians are the ones that made a genocide at the beginning of the 20th century, etc. People identify themselves basing on lies here. What gives a totalitarian person room to do what he wants? A bunch of hero-gazers that have nothing to base any thought on. See that I do not call people stupid or smart, many ignorant are smart. It's good when one knows that he knows or that he does not know, but the evil is the ignorance of the ignorance, which is our ill as a community of the Near east.
reitanqild 11y ago
"ignorant fundamentalists" exists. Stop and observe an you might see them as well: Religious, Atheists, Europeans, Africans etc. Some of them have managed to make more harm than others and Turkey -just like my home country, has a recent history (last 120 years) of killing parts of its own population just being different.
- gkya 11y ago
  Which one is your country, if you would like to name it? I would like to be able to find out about it and maybe contrast it with Turkey, I intend to study ethical and religious clashes as a material for philosophical views on states, democracy etc. And because I can't edit my comment for who-knows-the-reason, I'll dump it here: I'm sorry that I even referred to Erdogan and that I said the things that I said after, as I caused the thread to lose its focus, which had to be the people that left those footprints here. But then again, I would not have thought that anybody would argue that people who can destroy and disregard high-importance archaeological findings for the increased speed of the construction work were not ignorant, and those who are openly fundamentalist were not so, and that I was elitist and that I had hubris for calling the miserable miserable.
  - reitanqild 11y ago
    I would say I come from one of the Nordic countries.
gkya 11y ago
That what makes me reasonable is that I think when I have to decide, and I do so in a dialectical manner looking for the objective truth, instead of referring myself to dogmas for justifying my subjective view of the world. Now if you'll defend those who chop off heads, make genocides, defend past genocides, steal money while looking religious, oppress the minorities, disable education facilities, polarize the people, lie shamelessly for their own benefit, blow-up monuments of our past, force their views on others, commit massacres in the name of their beliefs, disrupt anybody else, homogenate the minorities, kill languages and cultures for national-fascist wills, kill innocent people for political benefits, accept bribes, become corrupt... then I don't know what can I do for you. The aggressiveness of ignorance never ceased to amaze me.
- afsina 11y ago
  You just mixed and piled up all bad qualities and past-current atrocities to create an imaginary monster. Then you assign that monster to someone or some particular people you personally hate -whatever the reason- in Turkey. This is not being reasonable.
  - gkya 11y ago
    No. I piled up all bad qualities and atrocities that were committed in the past and are being committed still by the people here. It has nothing to do with reason. It is a list of facts. Being reasonable is in the way you interpret this list of facts, are you comfortable as long as you are a conservative muslim turk of good income, or do you empathise, do you respect others, or do you want to bash anyone that is not like you. This is my last reply to you. I will not bother to list and prove all my points here, there's internet, there are books, if it is that important for you, you'll find it out for yourself. Maybe one day you'll visit turkey, and see it for yourself. I'm having enough of it already.
gkya 11y ago
To the downvoters of the above-post: Stop downvoting this guy. His critique fair and correct, he has a solid point. And he's helped me elaborate my point better. And somewhere in this thread you lot will see that we eventually agree on a lot of points. What's wrong with you? I want to think that the HN crowd is an educated one.

tragomaskhalos 11y ago

What shines through very clearly is, on the one hand, the dignity and professionalism of your fellow citizens involved in the preservation work (and the strict laws protecting archeological finds are also something to be very proud of), and, on the other, the boorishness of Erdogan. That's politicians for you though :(

srean 11y ago

Eloquently put.