Islamic Political Identity in Turkey

1ConclusionSince 1923, Kemalism has sought to modernize society and todefend and consolidate the state. The Kemalist principles of nationalismand secularism succeeded in creating a modern society, butKemalism as an ideology failed to modernize itself, and consequentlyit became authoritarian. This is because Kemalism asunderstood by the military failed to internalize two crucial aspects ofmodernity: democracy and a fully autonomous civil society. Thereason behind this failure is the belief in the primacy of the stateover society that is inherent in Kemalism. In eVect, the state becamemore important than its citizens. Thus the state is to be protectedagainst its enemies whether they are foreign or domestic. Especiallysince 1980, Kemalism has become the “security regime” thatproduces insecurity for its citizens by transforming itself into anideology that insulates the state both internally and externally fromnew ideas and actors. Overall, then, Turkey’s experiment of Westernizationresulted in the formation of two conXicting sources oflegitimacy: on the one hand there is an elected parliament ofpeople’s representatives who seek to develop a new social contract;on the other there is a nonelected military-bureaucratic elite thatwields ultimate authority on the basis of Kemalism being a Westernizingand progressive ideology. But the history of modern Turkey isthe story of conXict between democracy and Kemalism. Democracybrought people to the public space, but their identity claims havebeen perceived as a threat for the Kemalist system and the armyregularly has intervened to eliminate these identity claims and closeoV opportunity spaces.The most important identity claims have come from Islamicactors who have felt excluded on account of the Kemalists’ excessive