Erdogan calls Dutch as well as Germans 'Nazis'

191 posts in this topic

6 minutes ago, bramble said:

 

Yeah, so were the Nazis after all the humiliation of losing WWI. Justified? Bloody hell. 

 

So: both things can be true.  Germany was terribly mishandled because of a Carthago delenda est sort of attitude after WWI, and Germans who supported Hilter were very wrong to do so. They're both true.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, klubbnika said:

Wasn't Turkey Nazi's ally under WW2?

 

No. It remained out of the war until close to the end, when it formally joined the Allies. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the point at which this all went really off the rails (as opposed to merely screetching around a curve), actually, was the failed putsch, where European leaders revealed a lack of enthusiasm for the failure of the putsch. That signalled both to Turkish politicians and to the Turkish public that Europe was probably OK with the Egyptization of Turkey and the establishment of military rule.  Few in Turkey want a return to military rule.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

So: both things can be true.  Germany was terribly mishandled because of a Carthago delenda est sort of attitude after WWI, and German who supported Hilter were very wrong to do so. They're both true.

 

Tell me, isn't Erdogan ruining Turkey? Where is Turkey heading? Are the flagwaving Turks in Germany deluded?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bramble said:

 

Tell me, isn't Erdogan ruining Turkey? Where is Turkey heading? Are the flagwaving Turks in Germany deluded?

 

Erdoğan is ruining Turkey.  Turkey is heading towards a postmodern presidential autocracy.  In this style of autocracy, democracy is formally recognized as the unrestricted inchoate will of the absolute majority, but only one man can embody that majority. 

 

The flagwaving Turks in Germany are simultaneously deluded from Sehnsucht while telegraphing to anyone with the emotional competence to pay attention particular aspects of their life experiences.

 

Erdoğan is, however, Not Exactly Hitler.  The method by which he needed to have been handled by European leaders was fully different from the one chosen.  His economic miracle is in the process of evaporating, and then an ugly situation will ensue with unpredictable consequences for Europe's overall geostrategic position and, eventually, material costs for Europe. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My theory about this situation is that Dutch politicians drunk the insulting, stereotyping Islamophobe kool-aid about Muslim cultures interpreting tolerance as weakness, so that once they showed strength to Erdoğan, he'd slink off and behave respectfully or something.  Instead, Kaya gets to grandstand like she's some kind of ministerial Rosa Parks.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, klubbnika said:

Wasn't Turkey Nazi's ally under WW2?

It was more or less like Finnland: formally neutral, but morally were supporting its traditional ally Germany, at the end of the war pretended it has never supported Germany.

 

Anyway, by „Nazis“ people hardly ever mean the events between 1933 and 1945, they mean neo Nazis. For example, Berlin Wall was officially anti Nazi wall, because, well you know, all west Germans were Nazis, according to east German Erdogans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not bother quoting as it does not seem to work on mobile but to say that people do not equate Nazis with events between 33 and 45  but rather neonazis is deranged and laughable.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

Erdoğan is, however, Not Exactly Hitler.  

 

Not yet. But he looks like he's heading that way. Anyway, I hate hero worship of any sort and the Turks are indulging in dangerous hero worshipping. 

 

47 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

The method by which he needed to have been handled by European leaders was fully different from the one chosen.

 

Europe should have mollycoddled him? Why? Give him an inch and he'll take a yard. He's that sort of person. 

 

49 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

His economic miracle is in the process of evaporating, and then an ugly situation will ensue with unpredictable consequences for Europe's overall geostrategic position and, eventually, material costs for Europe. 

 

Everywhere you look, things are ugly and unpredictable at the moment. Shiver. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard fare from the usual suspect- the West is at fault for not kissing the special snowflake(s)' narcissistic ass(es). If their ass(es) get kissed and they get accomodated they'll play nice...sure- in Schlaraffenland. They don't respect the West, period.

 

The "good guys" won't ever attain power in Turkey anyway, so why bother sucking up to Erdogan by trying to do Kabuki Theater on a comically inept "putsch"?

 

What was dumb was the Armenian genocide resolution in the Bundestag.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic should be merged but EI who seems to be being attacked from all sides makes very valid points. 

 

Rather than standing up to Erdogan they mollycoddled him. He is a very astute politician who uses the missteps of others to his own advantage in his homeland. He is a very dangerous man.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

In any case, this is all even better for Erdoğan since the behaviour of NL is clearly conditioned on the upcoming election, in which the parties are competing with an explicitly Islamophobic party.  This means that Erdoğan can tell his voters in Turkey and elsewhere that indeed, NL is making these choices because a significant part of its voters hate Muslim Turks and he would not be, you know, totally wrong, since of course Wilders is an Islamophobe and anyone who votes for him is signing on to a program that explicitly proclaims the persecution of Islam qua Islam.

 

Other voices.

 

Ertuğrul Kürkçü of HDP (the one that is known as the oppressed Kurdish party in the west I think) said that the Europe - AKP dynamic is a sham fight. He said "The European right and Turkey right are using this referandum period manipulatively to strengthen the conservative fortification amongst them." He also added, this is not strategical but tactical. It seems that subjects to be "rescued" for pragmatic purposes can disappoint western right both when they vote for right and left. It's not their theoretical problem actually.  

 

Turkish alt-nationalists and laicists (both strong no) have both criticized the Nazi metaphor but also said very clearly that they don't agree with limitations, hindrances and blocking of speech this way, as this is what AKP does to them in this country. The no-campaigners are allowed everywhere but they are not going (politically wise but also has a point, which is different from what Europe wishes to hear on its own soil or not.) 

 

Also, everyone (from political parties to lawyers' bar associations) univocally agrees that it is indeed wrong and dangerous to discuss this referandum in terms of Erdoğan. Constitution is about the scope of power, not the source. It is said, two years to the presidential elections, let's talk about why people should or should not vote for a constitution as such. Talks about Erdoğan right now actually do shadow a very serious issue (a new constitution is always a serious issue) and takes it to an emotional level where people will vote for him or not. That's exactly the problem actually! We must separate a constitution from a person. If not, yes, like everyone, Erdoğan has supporters, too. Is this where a constitutional discussion stops? Do we want this description of a certain scope of power for people we like or don't like is the real democratic discussion in our opinion. 

 

Per double-standards of Europe discourse which is again very common,  that affects the public more than terms like "plebiscite" surely. It would anywhere. Öcalan favouring meetings in Europe are released with photos. And whatever the conceptual arguments about freedom fighter/terrorist etc etc is, from a basic viewpoint, PKK is classified as a terrorist organization in the EU. And here, it sure is one that has and does kill civilians, teachers in compulsory duty in poverty areas, captures ambulances etc. If the EU takes its out of terrorist category, people will believe that it is because of the US uses PYD as a proxy etc. Anyone can agree or disagree, but there are valid points in all these arguments. The theroretical paradox here is not produced by the common Turkish public people actually, and we can discuss this. And it is indeed a fruitful discussion commonly done here in all circles post 2015. But really, it has been just 2 or 3 days since an AKP town head (town being bigger than a village and smaller than a city here) was killed in his office, with his brother with him. Is this the way? Turkey has a history of armed conflict between its left and the state, with the leftist jargon here, this is termed lumpen here - meaning cheap and unneccessary violence, attacking the easiest "targets", who happen to be people really. Once everyone starts deciding who has a right to live at this level, things get difficult. And this is against the sociological core of the Turkish public actually - the home, family level connections between people is not exactly the same as political or armed clashes. People are people. They want to have jobs, food etc. 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm i am not sure if i agree with ,zeino here. Most of my Turkish friends tell me it is a vote between yes and terrorism...If you vote no you are a defacto terrorist. 

 

Anyways that's me for tonight as i write one word and then loose connection to TT although i have several other sites open and working without these issues.

 

Sleep well everyone

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Conquistador said:

Standard fare from the usual suspect- the West is at fault for not kissing the special snowflake(s)' narcissistic ass(es). If their ass(es) get kissed and they get accomodated they'll play nice...sure- in Schlaraffenland. They don't respect the West, period.

 

The "good guys" won't ever attain power in Turkey anyway, so why bother sucking up to Erdogan by trying to do Kabuki Theater on a comically inept "putsch"?

 

What was dumb was the Armenian genocide resolution in the Bundestag.

 

Those in the audience who are susceptible to reason should note that I never argued anything like, as usual, what Conquistador seems to think I argued. I have little idea of what he is on about. For example, I was in favour of taken a harder line with the Turkish government -- when the time was opportune.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, topcat 1 said:

This topic should be merged but EI who seems to be being attacked from all sides makes very valid points.

 

There's a chorus of TT members who are upset that I don't show due respect to their fearful worldviews.

 

17 minutes ago, topcat 1 said:

 

Rather than standing up to Erdogan they mollycoddled him. He is a very astute politician who uses the missteps of others to his own advantage in his homeland. He is a very dangerous man.

 

Yes, Europe has been on the wrong foot with him for a while. Basically, providing bad incentives.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, klubbnika said:

Wasn't Turkey Nazi's ally under WW2?

 

No,Turkey did everything to stay out of the war at the time. It was a time of great poverty after WWI and hard to resist international pressure, and people were eating broom seeds for breakfast. The Brits approached Turkey at the very end of the war when military clashes were more or less over and asked Turkey again to join the war in return of a couple of Greek Islands, Turkey still said no. This is interpreted by some circles as Turkey's covert support for Germany, which has played an important role in Ottoman modernization as the period of Abdulhamid II saw the modernization of the army by German "pashas" working with the Ottoman army. By others, it is interpreted as the principle of "Peace at home, peace in the world." 

 

From a people's perspective, around 1000 people with Turkish origin were killed in Nazi camps - data from Mirjam Schmidt's dissertation submitted to Wipperman and Baader in Berlin Hur University. 

 

Jews with Turkish passports had certain privileges recognized by Germany in earlier periods. Some were released without being taken to camps, they didn't have to wear the yellow star at first etc. It is a very touching history when people speak about these, like everything else about the loss of human life of course. Sometimes children and parents had different passports, so for instance children wore stars and parents didn't or vice versa. 

 

Recently, there was a book about how physical education in Turkish schools was inspired by armies. 

 

Constitution studies, is there one country who can ever do constitution studies without saying Carl Schmitt at least 500 times really? (Turkish constitutions are very French inspired btw). 

 

So, that's us. 

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no fan of Erdgogan, but preventing politicians or surrogates of another NATO member to enter the country seems like a bad idea.   In my opinion, anti-Turkish sentiment in Germany is pretty open.   It is not a big stretch for Turks within Germany to feel insulted.  

 

Erdogan himself entered Germany for political rallies in 2014 and maybe later.    Now that his views are not as popular, the political class has decided that they need to limit his access via surrogates.    The political class believes that it knows better than the people it is protecting and they will actually be shocked when their "concern" backfires.    The rejection of centralized authority and expertise in the EU via Brexit and the real or imagined rejection of the political status quo and open mistrust of the press and poltical class in the US have been difficult to ignore, but telling people what is best for them is a hard habit to break.  

 

Turkey is a rising power, it is a NATO member, and it plays a key role as a gatekeeper of refugees coming out of the middle east.    Turkey has been bold enough to shoot down a Russian plane which invaded its airspace less than one year ago.    Ergodan is holding a very strong hand and Germans and Dutch would be well advised to acknowledge Turkey's power and its crucial role whether they like Erdogan's style or not.  

 

One point to EI about Germans being mishandled after WWI - it could be the case and many people argued that point.   It should not be overlooked that Germany as well as every other WWI participant was so confident in winning that it financed the efforts via debt with the idea that post war looting would pay the bills.   It was a political choice by Germans (right, wrong or otherwise). 

 

After WWII with the status of Berlin in doubt, i.e. questions of whether US taxpayers would continue to sink money into defending the city from an eastern bloc takeover,  Turks came to Berlin so that the rapidly declining population which was migrating west, would not be grounds to diminish support.    It was a political choice by Germans (right, wrong or otherwise).  

 

Germans are forced to live with the choices they have which are based on historical developments and in some case really poor decisions made by the leadership and supported by the people.    Germans see themselves as victims of an uncivilized world rather than normal actors in a system where Germany is not always benevolent.    The lack of skepticism shown by Germans in examining the motivations of the government are pretty astonishing.  

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, yourkeau said:

Is it an accusation of me?

Hint: he didn't mean besorgte. Because he is besorgte himself, the ideal of besorgte Bürger.

 

Nazi name calling of Germans by a foreign politician is very creative. No one has done this ever before. Not.

No, I did not referred to you, Yourkeau. You mostly make comparisons, but you are not a name-caller.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

I have not ever expressed an opinion on whether people are "fundamentally good and honest" -- I think it's a very peculiar question to ask.

It was not a question. It was a statement.

You seem to flip betweene the two views very often, when it suits your arguments.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

That is a matter between the descendants of the genocide victims and Turkey, for which other governments can effectively intermediate, in practical terms, only if they have a positive relationship with Turkey.  Other than that, what is left to them is only recognition, but it should not be done as a political stunt in a tit-for-tat diplomatic spat.

"Only recognition". Such a small and insignificant thing, right?

You are not better than Erdogan when you try to belittle the genocide victims.

It should be done as soon as possible, and tit-for-tat is the primary feature of diplomacy whether you want it or not.

The world is built on reciprocity and mutuality.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now