Petros,

Let me touch upon some of the points you raised in your essay.

Regarding poverty, my point was that if there is poverty for certain sections in Turkey, and I believe there is, this did not happen within the last few months. What you try to portray as a shock is not necessarily perceived as one, since those sections who are being most affected by these latest problems have been going through this. However, I agree with Artun’s point that the problems began affecting the upper sections now. Otherwise, I was not making the point you are making in your post that we should ignore the poverty in Turkey. I agree that it is a very serious matter.

Regarding your macroeconomics section, I think Artun’s explanation is sufficient here. For example, petroleum is something we import and it is not something only the upper sections use. Once the currency rates change, once certain imports, not only the luxury materials, become more expensive, there is always a chain reaction in Turkey, affecting all of the prices. Everyone knows this elementary knowledge in Turkey. Too bad, for someone who talks about macroeconomics, you do not know it.

Regarding the trade and the introduction of new ideas, I think, Artun’s explanation is sufficient here also.

You are giving too much credit to the US. Well, rebellions did happen in Turkey’s past, and the superpowers of those times were hardly able to stop them. Once there is a real rebellion in Turkey, and I hardly think there will be one anymore, there is not much the US can do. The US may of course try to influence the outcome, but it can not by itself produce the outcome.

I would like to hear about your theory on the relationship between the Janissaries and the fall of the Ottoman Empire. If you are paying any attention to what you are writing, by giving these two examples, you have just proven both Artun’s and my points regarding the power of the student groups in Turkey to start and conduct rebellions.

Neither of these movements were devoid of participation by people. Without the full support by the people, both movements would have failed, as quite many similar movements had failed before them. You may have a difficult time assessing the present situation in Turkey, since you have to know Turkish to follow the current events closely, but when it comes to the history, you can have nearly perfect knowledge in this area, since there are a lot of books in English. So, do a little reading to find out that there were quite many preparatory rebellions in both cases, which failed because they were really from top to down kind of rebellions. But, the events you are talking about succeeded because they were not really from top to bottom entirely. They were not truly democratic events either. Not being wholly naturalized by the masses both ideologically and procedurally, they did not produce truly democratic solutions, but still they had full support by the masses.

Not coming from some elite background, Ataturk was actually an ordinary man, and that was probably one of the major pluses about him. He had just become a general, if I recall correctly. He did not enter the war as a general. He also happened to be the only general with a major victory, and that was also a plus for him.

You lost me with your argument about the role and efficiency of the student movements in Turkey. I do not get your example, either. All I am saying is that the Turkish student movement, whatever there is at the moment, is hardly even close to the strength the one in the 70s had. They are not taken seriously by the rest of the population, either. It is a different world, that is for sure, but it is a world in which the present day youth in Turkey have other priorities as well. And, my impression has been that they are less into popular rebellions than some much slower procedures.

On the other hand, I think the real force in Turkey may still be those people who were young in the 60s and 70s, but are now in their late 30s and 40s. This generation may combine with the present day youth to affect some radical changes in today’s Turkey. But, I believe that most of us, not including those old leftists who are still living in the same dream world, are not thinking in terms of magical popular rebellion that supposedly change everything overnight. Rather, the future of Turkey seems to be tied to the kind of approach that will be interested in getting into lot of social and cultural pacts, (consensus politics) in order to affect the necessary radical changes.

t.

What are those? "Go home IMF, McDonald's, etc.," when the heating systems aren't turned on until it gets cold enough to freeze the registrar's fat arse, too (and this spring they turned the heating off early in every school, too).
It's not just schools that are "economizing," though. My cousin's workplace is also like that... She now goes to work with pants, and nobody can object or "remind" the rules...

Candy asses, I say, candy asses!
We had an instructor who said that, had it been in his time, they would have broken a window, maybe also turned over a car and set it afire, and everything would be working smoothly the next day. Such were the good old days with the student movements. LOL...

You tried - and are still trying - to convince me that the poverty in Turkey is not a sudden phenomenon, but the facts disprove you. I tried to modify my vies to get closer to you, but I failed and I dissapointed you. My fault was that attempt to modify my views before I make a small research of mine. NO PIGETI, the Turks might have always been poor, but THEY HAVE NEVER WITNESSED SUCH A SUDDEN DEGRADATION OF THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

I made a small research of mine, and I found an excellent article from the TDN news which gives a clear picture with statistics. The most Turks did not get ANY wage increases despite the fact that the inflation has gone up by 80%. I posted it, and I hope that you read it. If you disagree with TDN, you can tell them (I posted it with their e-mail).

Then you are trying to tell me that the people are not Democratic in Turkey, and they cannot react in the right way. The truth is that your people are actually more Democratic that the Greeks, but they cannot get any Democracy because of the System. If they were offered what the Greek state offers to the Greek citizens they would be model citizens. Yet the Greeks (including me) are dissatisfied with what the Greek state gives to them. (Obviously, we would like to see from the Greek the offers that the other E.U. states offer to their citizens).

The truth is that while at economic depression, no rebellion take place, is history again. (And don't piss me off with my remarks about history, because you fancied that there can be exchange of idea without trade, and citing the web. Can you tell me how could you enter the web without to buy a computer from somewhere in South East Asia?). The rebellion shall begin once the economy begins to improve, vecause the people shall have more strength to impose change when they are more stable socially.

I do not have time to give a full rsponse to you right now about your two last posts - the last of the previous thread and the first of this thread - but when I shall find time, I shall respond to you. I have done a small research and I rely on my knowledge of the flow of history very much, believe me...

Petros,

I am not trying to convince you. I am arguing. I am putting down my argument and you are putting down yours. If someone gets convinced in the process, that is fine. But, my purpose is not to convince a certain Petros about anything.

This is just an argument, a debate, an exchange, or anything in these terms. We are not here to kill each other. If you do not like my argument that is fine; it is your freedom. There is no need to get personal like “you lied” or “don’t piss me off”. If these are attempts to provoke me then good luck. I am not going to bother with this kind of language.

Not only I care about presenting and exchanging ideas, but I am also interested in attitudes, mentalities, and ways of doing things. You talk about democracy; bringing democracy here or there; but the way you present yourself is not very democratic. The expressions I quoted above (“you lied”, “don’t piss me off” ) are not arguments, but statements aimed at controlling the other side by means other than presenting your ideas. Perhaps, you are running out of arguments. Just a guess.

I do not going to bother with this newspaper article. I have read a lot of newspapers articles like this before. Is this your research? A newspaper article? If it is then we have a long way to go. What do you expect those union leaders in this article to say? At any rate, I do not deny what this newspaper article says and it does not say anything about what I was arguing about. It is about the social and psychological impacts of the latest economic mess up. And, these impacts were experienced also during the Gulf War, which was as bad, and perhaps, even worse in some ways. The inflation rate was up to 120% then; in one night the bank interest rates on businss loans changed. I know, because I was there and nearly destroyed by these sudden changes. Go check the figures about those days. You should probably read what you read a bit more carefully.

Talking about reading carefully, I did not say anything about the exchange of ideas without trade. Artun wrote about this; so perhaps you should address that part of your post to him.

There seems to be a good expression in Turkey for your latest post: “Keskin sirke kupune zarar” (Bitter vinegar damages its own jar). Take it easy a bit.

It was nice debating with you.

t.

I am not trying to provoke you, but I have to point out to you that you are not revealing all the data. I said that this is the worse period for the Turks from financial standpoint - without to mention the arguments of the Union leaders but the statistical data - and you responded with the argument that "This is what the union leaders are supposed to say and with arguments that are backed up with statistical data of a previous era which show that Turkey had a harder time in turns of finance in the past, BUT NOT THE TURKS.

Where is the difference? Well, you quote an inflation of 120% for the era of the Gulf war, but this is but news for Turkey, not necessarily for the Turks: If wages were 240% up during the same period - they weren't, of course - then the Turks would be celebrating. Right or wrong?

What the Union leaders suggest is that there are no wage increases when the inflation is running with 80%. This is bad news for Turks.

The truth is as follows: Turkey has been used to disastrous econonomics since it was found - actually, you inherited the ineptude of the Ottoman empire in that sector - and kept doing the same thing all the time: footing the bill to the IMF, until it skyrocketed. All that time, you were keeping the wages on a par with the inflation, or just a bit lower, when you had a crisis. The IMF was calling for other things of course, but you did never give a damn.

Finally, the Bush administartion decided to show its teeth on you - funny thing really, mostly for him - and to demand from you to implement the IMF demands for once. Finally, you were forced to disengage the inflation rate with the wage increase rate for good. Despite that party politics are live and kicking, as Dr. Cuneyt Ulsever of the TDNews quotes: "The leftist party (DSP) and the nationalist party (MHP) both have built "their reason for existence" to get a better share for their supporters from the so-called "state wealth." The IMF demands a smaller government from these "statist parties!""

There are other things, of course, that relate to the income of people, like taxation and the currency rate. Although I am unaware of the exact situation here, I think that the taxation in Turkey today is not lighter that it was during the cold war, and the Turkish lira did not sink taht fast against the other currencies as it did this year for sure.

You know, Pigeti, it is so obvious that the Turks have never witnessed such a bad time ever: During the Golf war few Turks would make fuss about the economy, and it wasn't because of the other war and its' impact upon the society, because a lady who opposed that war was nearly elected vice chairman inher party, and created a lot of fuss at that time. There was not such a sudden increase in unemployement either, as far as I can remember. There is ofcourse, the case of a Turk businessman who almost became bankrupt because of the high inflation at that time, but I do not think that our discussion ahs anything to do with the troubles of the Turk businessmen, at least the way I perceive it. I know very well that the best business in Turkey is to lend your money to the Turkish state at an outrageous interest, and this is what your most wealthy interpreneurs are doing right now, and that nearly all other business is doomed due to high inflation, but that was NOT the concern of the Turkish public, as long as the value of the money in its hands was not decreasing so much.

You are claiming that you know Turkey better than I do. I don't doubt it, but I am not a fool either. I also know that you didn't really suffer from the Gulf war, as much as you suffered from another incident that I mentioned above and is being estimated to have cost to Turkey some 1 trillion $...

...But few people in Turkey admit that as true, do they? Can you tell me really Pigeti, why did the Turkish economy collapse?

P.S.

In case you didn't notice, Greece has cut zero's from the Drachma quite a lot of times until today, especially after the WWII. What happened to you does not happen just to "South American countries" in general, but to specific countries which witness similar problems, and which are the root of corruption actually. When Greece had these problems, it had quite a lot of corruption as well, not to mention an army of public servants, but Greece has come out of the hole today...

P.S. II

I still did't read the two posts of yours in detail. I shall do it ASAP. Unfortunately, the frequent problems of access in all the Network 54 forums makes that difficult.