And I said since 2003. Before the coup attempt ( in 2016 ), his actions boosted turkey economy 5X. It has slipped since the coup attempt but that's to be expected. Political stability is required for economy prosperity.
> It’s not like putting 100k political opponents in prison is a boost to the economy.
What should he do with coup plotters? Throw them a parade?
>> When one looks at his actions in the light of those motives his actions make a lot of sense. Without those motives his actions appear stupid.
> I disagree, see my comments about astute businessmen not using yes-men above. No worries if we don't agree here. Countries are most certainly businesses. They're in the business of acquiring people who generate money.
Right, but that is assuming that Erdogan is trying to do what is best for the country in the long term. Many would argue his primary concern is Erdogan's interests in the short term.
> you will see that every GDP in the region rose dramatically over the period of a few years in the early 2000s. This increase in GDP in the region was not caused by turkey's investment in infrastructure, it was caused by foreign investors
Fair enough. I was not paying attention to macroeconomics at that time. Still, Erdogan used the growing economy to win the secular base, while using religion and nationalism to win the non-secular base.
And now his face is a mural on every other building you see. SMH.
> Western capitals were dead silent during the 2016 coup attempt.
Yeah, and for the better. The coup attempt is very controversial and it's not good guys vs bad guys situation.
To be fair, the west cheered for Erdogan up until Erdogan completely abandoned his initial positions. Later, the west simply worked with Turkey and Erdogan was properly elected through the years.
What the West was supposed to do? Invade Turkey? Assassinate the politician who consistently got about %50 of the vote of the Turks on elections with no less than %85 voter turnaround?
> If it had succeeded, they would have got a military dictatorship.
That's not a given. Turkey's military has staged quite a few coups over the years and that's really part of their purpose in the Turkish government order. After a few years power usually transitions back to normal democratic elections.
> Turkey's GDP peaked at $950 billion in 2013, just before Erdogan became president. By 2017, it had slid to $850 billion
Do you realise that Erdogan has been in power since 2001? So if economic downturn is his achievement, then the economic growth is his achievement, too.
> Even if you hate the surviving leader, you ought to prefer defeating him within the frameworks of democracy.
Not in this case. The military (with its coups) was often the force that kept the turkish democracy alive, or else it would have fallen to many more dictators
The voters can also stop him. Instead, Turkish voters not only re-elected him multiple times, they even voted in one special election to give him even more power.
The Turkish people are getting the government they've voted for.
>Absolute power is dangerous and the mind starts to slip after a while.
Yes, but what can you do when a nation of people democratically decide to give someone absolute power? If you try to prevent this, then you're working against democracy.
> If it had succeeded, they would have got a military dictatorship
That's usually not how these things go in Turkey. In 1997, there was a non-violent military coup because of a situation very similar to what we've seen with Erdogan. A few months later, I spent the summer in Istanbul, drinking beer, discussing any and all politics with Turks, and chasing Turkish girls in a decidedly open and free environment. Most Turks I spoke to (admittedly tended to be secular) were quite glad that the coup had taken place and that the Islamist Party (Refah, or "Welfare" Party) was subsequently banned.
Incidentally, at the time the Refah party was banned, Erdogan was an active, up-and-coming party member.
In any case, few of the military coups that have occurred in modern Turkish history have been violent (1980 was significant exception) and none have resulted in a long-term dictatorship (1980 resulted in a 3-year military dictatorship).
Ironically, since 1980, it has been democracy, not military intervention, that has now permitted a dictatorship to gain a foothold in Turkey.
> If this thing goes south -- and I fear it will -- the backlash will be severe. Not a good thing for the future of Turkey.
Especially considering he has been a tempered authoritarian before the coup. Now they will respond by expanding authority. Leaders like that always do.
Hopefully that will further lead to support of the coup end goals which had some legitimacy. The only problem is that Erogdan has many hardline islamic fanatics who will take to the streets and help maintain his power.
> Anyone have a take on how successful this is likely to be?
I'm pretty sure at this point it will likely fail, Erdogan will retain power and will have carte blanche. Similar to Chavez when the people put him back in power.
Its likely a very dark future for Turkey in the form of a civil war or total collapse of secular power.
> He was seen surrounded by cheering supporters, saying in a live TV speech that the coup attempt was an "act of treason" and the army must be cleansed.
> I'm just saying they were part of the system, and when they stopped working the system failed.
No, when the last one finally succeeded in what it intended to, the system failed.
The last coup in Turkey hanged 10,000 left wing politicians, intellectuals, activists, trade union leaders, and basically anyone who opposed neoliberal wave that was sweeping the west. The ones not hanged were either jailed for decades, or banned from politics.
The result was a totally far-right slanted landscape in everything - from economics to nationalism to religion. In this environment the Islamist factions prospered because the coup government and its successors used Islam as a 'counterbalance' to those pesky left wing ideas that hampered corporate profits. It didnt take ~20 years before all of these resulted in a hellscape in which poor people had only Islamist organizations to get any support from because practically the entire country was privatized, labor protections loosened, wages bottomed and social services were gutted for tax breaks. The result is the Turkey you see now.
In all respects, the current government of Turkey can be considered much more representative of the poor majority than all the post-1980 governments of Turkey since with all its problems, this government at least does something for the poor majority - either through the scarce social programs that are left, through its municipal governments, or through the Islamist organizations that are associated with it. Financial aid, food aid, education scholarships etd - all of which are described as 'bribes' by the secular minority - things that they took away from those people in the post-coup period neoliberal craze, leaving the these segments were left to rot. Which is the reason why those segments will never let go of Erdogan and his party and vote for any competitor.
...
Think of the last coup in Turkey like the Chilean coup against Allende.
>Remarkably, Erdogan and his cronies do not think they have made a mistake!
Imagine thinking you are Napoleon and this banker or economist tells you to stop waging war. You will think that you need to silence this busy body for your noble mission.
Let's not kid ourselves though. The people voted time and again for Erdogan and his policies. It's a democracy that brought this upon itself. Putting the blame on a single individual and labeling them a dictator just muddies the water.
> is he wrong when he is accusing foreign powers from trying to incite demonstrations or manipulate public opinion? I'm pretty sure he is not.
Please substantiate. Turkey is a NATO member which, other than the recent kerfuffle with downing a Russia fighter jet, has decent relations with most of its neighbours, and no real Great Enemies. Turkey has always had a press-repressive (!!) orientation because they've wanted to keep internal Islamist forces at bay. Amusing, Erdogan has flipped the script and now it's his Islamist government which is cracking down on other voices, although the take-over of the Zaman news organization is really about internal fighting with an influential cleric. But either way, in the end, Turkey has always had authoritarian governments succeeded by military coups and more authoritarian rule.
A lot of them seem to steal money / do corrupt things first and then an attraction of being a dictator is you can live your life without going to court / jail. Erdogan wasn't so bad till the "audio recordings in which Erdogan was reportedly heard telling his son, Bilal, to urgently get rid of tens of millions of dollars." thing. Since then he's been a going bit more dictatorial.
And I said since 2003. Before the coup attempt ( in 2016 ), his actions boosted turkey economy 5X. It has slipped since the coup attempt but that's to be expected. Political stability is required for economy prosperity.
> It’s not like putting 100k political opponents in prison is a boost to the economy.
What should he do with coup plotters? Throw them a parade?
reply