Do you think that the Turkish society was traumatized by the reforms of Atatürk?

Question

I ask this question because the Sharia lovers from AKP are still in power.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/world/europe/22turkey.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=turkish%20society%20traumatized&st=nyt&scp=1

Answer 1

No. Not at all. Atatürk was a great leader, he did the best for his nation, he gave so much to Turkey. I thin k the Turkish society earned so much from the modernization efforts, he gave change when it was needed the most!

Answer 2

This wiseaşş has to define traumatize first. Trauma means wound in Greek so if they try to claim ppl were mentally wounded by Atatürk's reforms, no. In their sick minds they may make up anything that they want it to be changed. Be it anything from lifestyle all the way to history itself.

I think this fogger, Denyo Mir Mehmet Fırat, just learnt a new word in English, and that is traumatize, and wanted to use it in a fashionable way.

Boring

Answer 3

Yes because you can't enforce the western values in a muslim country.

Answer 4

I would prefer to use "forcibly changed their traditional way of living". I think such a description is fair.

On the other hand all these changes were towards becoming a modern society, which is personally positive for me.

Traumatized is not the correct word, and implies that the "old way of living" was "good and healthy". In reality, backward looking religious elements were "amputated" from the society. You always lose blood during an amputation, but this may stop gangrene, which in turn, saves your life.

There were some extreme "westernization attempts" like banning folk music etc. But changing the alphabet from Arabic to Latin helped greatly to push down illiteracy. Which revolution does not have side effects, anyway?

Answer 5

The guy is talking like a madman.

Of course, the patriarchal, feudal, religion manipulating part of the male members may have been traumatized. Ask me if I care. :DDD

Other than that, Turkish people didn't change languages overnight. They had been speaking Turkish for thousands of years and the official language was Turkish. All non-Turkish government officials had to learn Turkish at school. The language may have been infused with non-Turkish words, but hey, that's what a living language is like anyway.

And the dress code didn't change overnight. The Ottomans were already going towards modernism for centuries. WW1, the attack of colonialists, the ensuing war and republic only accelerated the process.

Of course, religious sects and orders lost their leverage on the society, because the organization of the Ottomans were based on religious departments and a democratic republic cannot be that. I think THAT'S what traumatised manipulators of religion.

See, when you don't know your own history enough and make up stories to support your political/religious agenda, such ridiculous rhetoric is inevitable.

I suggest Mr Dengesiz Bir Fırat read the popular short history books of the venerable İlber Ortaylı.

Answer 6

This troubles me: How does a complete people get traumatized? Isn't it a little too much personification? Some liked the reforms, some didn't. Isn't it pretty simple?

Answer 7

Here's an alternative view:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/opinio...

Answer 8

why ask that question when u know the answer?

the sharia lovers are in power yes,but turkey is secular and democratic and western and cosmopolitan and that wont change no matter how much the islam lovers want it to.

sharia turks should understand this phrase...'dont bite the hand that feeds you'.everything you have today in turkey is due to ataturk .ur security,lifestyle,education,western connections ect,all down to him.how dare you put islam infront of secularism,any turk with that ideology is my enemy and an insult to the turkish bloodline.