Türkiye'de Mukaddesatçı Anti-Kemalizm (1945-1960)

Abstract

Anti-Kemalism, which is manifested in the world of religious meaning and which arises from the way Islamist intellectuals and cult circles, who initially describe themselves as milliyetçi-mukaddesatçı or more mukaddesatçı, perceive Kemalism, involves a mindset, discourse and perpetratorism and opposition to all meanings, fields and practices implied by Kemalism. Anti-Kemalism is not only the mukaddesatçı opposition to Kemalist modernization with an agency where religious affiliations, themes and language predominate, but also it is the name of the mukaddesatçı ideological power demand against Kemalism. It is possible to see examples of this opposition in cults such as Nakşibendilik, Süleymancılık, Nurculuk and Ticanilik and in intellectuals of the period such as Mustafa Sabri, Eşref Edip, Osman Yüksel Serdengeçti and Necip Fazıl Kısakürek. Anti-Kemalism was produced at home and abroad and did not appear openly until 1945. However, with the transition to the multi-party system, mukaddesatçı anti-Kemalist activities against Atatürk revolutions began to become public. The ideological legacy left by the mukaddesatçı opinion leaders who contributed to the formation of anti-Kemalism, in the following years, with the influence of post-Kemalism, led to the construction of a mukaddesatçı consciousness that the main cause of social problems was the modernization of the Republic. The criticisms produced with this awareness led to a selective history reading of the One Party period and Kemalism as the sole blame for of all political and social problems, since it brought about ignoring the responsibility of the cultural continuity that defined the pre-Republican and post-1950s and the political perpetrators in power in the meantime. In this process, mukaddesatçı enabled the production of a large unprocessed anti-Kemalist corpus composed of books, magazines and treatises containing anti-Kemalistism, in the formation of a suitable imagination. In our thesis, we will try to reveal the anti-Kemalism produced by the mukaddesatçı structures between the years 1945-1960 by making use of this corpus, and the mukaddesatçı ideological heritage that was circulated in this framework. In this way, the formation and content of the ideological legacy of the mukaddesatçı anti-Kemalism, which determines Turkey’s political and social life even today, will be understood a little.