PDF Dosyası - Ankara Üniversitesi Kitaplar Veritabanı

tutionalization. In the course of its vicissitudinous existence it has surviveda roeky transition to multiparty politics and three praetorian interludessince 1946. 15 In India, the Federal Legislature, i.e., Parliament hascertainly undergone a comparatively smooth phase of institutionalization.Third, Turkey embraced market economy to integrate the Turkish economyinto the global economy. Privatization of the State economic enterprises,the devolution of authority and the transfer of funds to the municipalities,and the increasing emphasis on market forces vvere crucial tostrengthen the civil society. Massive industrialization and stress uponmarket economy and foreign investment are now the philosophy of developmentin India.Fourth, vvith the exceptions of military intervention in 1960, 1971and 1980, there have been peaceful and democratic changes of the governmentsin Turkey. India has no such exceptions in this context. Lastly,coalition politics, fragmentation of political parties, and minority governmentshave become political realties in Turkish and Indian politics. Indiahas experienced these realities at tvvo level of governance — centre andstates. Coalition governments and its survival shovv the level of adjustmentbetvveen and among contending parties in national interest. Similarlyminority government is the acid test for democracy. Despite resultinginto political instability, they contribute to political pluralism in governance.There are certain issues such as military take-over, role of State, natureof socio-cultural diversities and demands groups, localism/regionalism, treatment of minorities and other issues on vvhich both Turkeyand India have different opinions. Some of their policies have beendetrimental to state-society relationship. The Turkish paradox is not alvvaysan apparent contradiction betvveen poverty and democracy in Turkey,but the far more amazing contradiction betvveen Turkey's militaryinterventions (including their occasional pressure) and its success at sustainingdemocratic polity. Strong State, centralized authority, vulnerablecorporate intermediary structures and vveakness of local governmentshave been counterproductive to state-society relationship.Historically and culturally state vvas assigned dominant position inTurkey. There has been an emphasis upon building strong Turkish Stateand nation in military training, educational institution and mass media. InTurkish folk tradition State is generally referred to as the "father, Devletbaba, the land as the mother, toprak ana, vatan ana, and the people as thechildren, memleket çocukları'" 615. Ersin Kalaycioğlu, "The Grand National Assembly of the Post 1983 Multiparty Era",in Ergun Özbudun, ed., Perpectives on Democracy in Turkey, Ankara, 1988, p. 154.16. Engin Deniz Akarli, "The State as socio-cultural Phenomenon and Political Participationin Turkey", in Engin D. Akarli with Gabriel Ben-Dor, eds., Political Participationin Turkey, Boğaziçi University Publications, 1975, p. 138.665