2 ms·

It seems that some of what you are saying is not that different to the claims I was replying to, but with a different interpretation. E.g. you consider weakeni

It seems that some of what you are saying is not that different to the claims I was replying to, but with a different interpretation. E.g. you consider weakening the power of legal bodies, the media and the military to be bad, but from their point of view, these bodies were supporting an undemocratic power structure that favored the pro-secular minority. On alcohol, there is not a blanket ban, but fairly strict restrictions (in particular limiting sales of alcohol from 6am to 10pm). And lifting the ban on head-scarfs seems like the lifting of excessive restrictions, not the imposition of Islamic ideas. As to Erdogan's general ideas on the nature of democracy, can you be more specific?

ludwigvan 13y ago
We are not against lifting of the head-scarfs. His proponents try to paint us, the protestors, as traces of that tradition so that they can still play the part of the wounded. As to his Islamist plans, he is quite open about them. He basically emphasizes in his every speech that their aim is to bring the pious youth of the Ottoman empire. The legal bodies and free media are fundamental for any democracy. As I said before, AKP gov't used EU-restrictions to crush legal bodies and military, but then after they reached their goals turned their back on the EU since the main goal was different. As to the freedom of media, I think we can agree that it is vital for any democracy and just the fact that these events are not being televised are proof how powerless they are. There are journalists working in the media, who have to share international links since their own TVs cannot show the events. About his antidemocratic ideals, just from his talks today: - (when talking about his decision to build a mosque in Taksim) We will build it, whether you like it or not. Decision is made. I will not ask these looters (referring to the hundreds of thousands of protestors) whether to build it or not. - Twitter is a menace. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article3780713.ece http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article37807... - You gathered 20,000 people. It is not an issue for me to gather 200,000 people. If you gather 100,000 people, it will not be an issue for me to gather 1,000,000 people. - (Referring to advertisers who have decided to cut their ads from TVs who are not showing the events) I have started an investigation about which companies these are. His thought on democracy can be summed up as thus: The elections take place. The party who wins the majority can do whatever it pleases until the next elections, since that vote has given them that right. There is no need to reach consensus on any affair. The parliament in Turkey is basically powerless, since they hold the majority and can pass any law they want. He sees democracy as a winner takes all game, that only takes place every 4 years, not as a daily part of life. Democracy is not a system where the majority can do whatever it wants. It is only a democracy if it can protect and respect the rights of every voter.

ludwigvan 13y ago

We are not against lifting of the head-scarfs. His proponents try to paint us, the protestors, as traces of that tradition so that they can still play the part of the wounded. As to his Islamist plans, he is quite open about them. He basically emphasizes in his every speech that their aim is to bring the pious youth of the Ottoman empire. The legal bodies and free media are fundamental for any democracy. As I said before, AKP gov't used EU-restrictions to crush legal bodies and military, but then after they reached their goals turned their back on the EU since the main goal was different. As to the freedom of media, I think we can agree that it is vital for any democracy and just the fact that these events are not being televised are proof how powerless they are. There are journalists working in the media, who have to share international links since their own TVs cannot show the events. About his antidemocratic ideals, just from his talks today: - (when talking about his decision to build a mosque in Taksim) We will build it, whether you like it or not. Decision is made. I will not ask these looters (referring to the hundreds of thousands of protestors) whether to build it or not. - Twitter is a menace. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article3780713.ece http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article37807... - You gathered 20,000 people. It is not an issue for me to gather 200,000 people. If you gather 100,000 people, it will not be an issue for me to gather 1,000,000 people. - (Referring to advertisers who have decided to cut their ads from TVs who are not showing the events) I have started an investigation about which companies these are. His thought on democracy can be summed up as thus: The elections take place. The party who wins the majority can do whatever it pleases until the next elections, since that vote has given them that right. There is no need to reach consensus on any affair. The parliament in Turkey is basically powerless, since they hold the majority and can pass any law they want. He sees democracy as a winner takes all game, that only takes place every 4 years, not as a daily part of life. Democracy is not a system where the majority can do whatever it wants. It is only a democracy if it can protect and respect the rights of every voter.