Mümtaz'er Türköne wrote: Wolf terrors

Ahmet Şık recently said the following to Ruşen Çakır: “I think the period of change of government through elections is over.”

The “wolf terror” that has been frequently mentioned recently is a representative expression of the pandemic. It is quite natural that the pessimists who give up and raise the flag of surrender due to the weariness of the agendas that the CHP, struggling with things that do not happen to a cooked chicken, is dragged along with, are increasing. On the other hand, there are those who continue to be optimistic despite everything and tirelessly list their reasons: Like me and Ruşen Çakır. A warning I came across on social media seemed very serious to me: Someone who said they were hopeful was warned by another member of the pessimistic team, “Don’t read and listen to too much Ruşen Çakır and Mümtaz'er Türköne!”

That's right, I'm an incurable optimist. I'm also trying to understand why pessimists in the "cover up so I can die" mode are falling into despair. The answer I found to the question "Why are people pessimistic?" is very simple. The trauma that 25 years of AKP rule has created in people's minds. How many times have they been hopeful, then experienced deep disappointments. These are the ones who will think they're in a dream for a long time after a CHP member sits in the presidency. The explanation is only in psychology. You need to look at the very subtle theories that start from social psychology and extend to political psychology.

The reasons of the optimistic wing are based entirely on logic, reasoning and, most importantly, harsh realities.

The wolves systematically and organizedly attack the flock of sheep that Karabaş is protecting. Karabaş runs, barks, attacks, but to no avail. The wolves keep trapping him. Finally, he gives up? What happens when he gives up? This is the crux of the story of the wolf-intimidated dog: The sheep are torn apart one by one, and there are no sheep left in the flock.

Let me explain so you don't misunderstand the metaphor: The sheep herd represents the economy. Without wool, milk, meat, and oil, you can't feed the people. In the meantime, the people may hold Karabaş responsible for the loss of the sheep, despite the forest laws in force.

Okay, Karabaş is alone, the Wolves are very strong. But it is not him who lives by eating the sheep, it is the Wolves. The question we will seek the answer to is this: What will the Wolves do when the sheep are gone?

Answer: They will eat each other. Let's remember Kemal Tahir's one-sentence Wolf Law that he engraved in our memories: "In wolfhood, it is the law to eat what is assigned to it."

The wolf pack is falling apart.

It is because of this law that the steel core shrinks as its specific gravity increases. Karabash cannot see what is happening in the wolf pack, the helplessness of the wolves, because of his discouragement. Otherwise, he can follow the herd that is skin and bones in the pen due to hunger and continue his rule in the free pastures.

In politics, everything is connected to everything else, but some things are very closely interconnected.

What kind of a reciprocal relationship (the word “correlation” is used when referring to the interaction) is there between the “I will not go” crisis that has taken democracy hostage (officially, “until the right thing happens”), which Ahmet Şık calls “the end of the era of the government that changes with elections”, and the deepening, chronic economic crisis accompanied by stagflation? What kind of a relationship do causes and results have, and the dynamics that feed and grow each other?

Economic rationality may fail in our spiritual world, you may burn a blanket for fleas; but the material of politics is reality. You cannot govern the people you cannot feed. If the “I will not go” crisis leads to hunger and misery, you will have to go at a leisurely pace.

You answer: What is the share of the "I won't go" insistence in the impoverishment of the people? If there is no one who says "there is none", the result is obvious as a pumpkin.

What happened to the CHP and our people's agenda for the CHP are not the result of the determination to "not go" or the CHP's doing.

So how long does this determination last?

To answer this question, we need to look at the Law of the Wolf.

If you have a huge country to govern and a bunch of problems, your job is very difficult. Thank God you have the tools to govern. Even if you have hesitations, in the end, what you say happens.

The postponement of the Absolute Nullity case until September 8 means the end of this small crisis for the CHP. There were hesitations at the top for the last week and in the end, this operation was abandoned. Sometimes you can reach the truth of the matter from the details. If Kılıçdaroğlu had not received assurance that he would take over the party with a court decision, would he have opened up so much? Since he cannot sustain this tension for three months, it means that the bird has escaped from the cage.

Direct some of your empathy toward those in power.

The wand will be taken from you, what will you do?

If you hold on tightly, those who will come after you and those who will come after you will think deeply and will move away from you. Because if you hold the staff in your hand by committing a crime, tomorrow or the day after (i.e. when the command of truth comes true) your partners will have to give account because they will no longer have any connection with the staff. This is the wisdom of being alone at the top.

If you show with words and actions that you will hand over the baton in accordance with the law and the will of the people, those around you will have a chance to use it after you are gone. You will cause a regrouping, a gathering, and a coming together.

The psychology of the person in power goes back and forth like the wind between these two options. He measures, weighs, weighs and makes his decision. He backs down and goes back. He hesitates. Possibilities gradually run out.

Just as the possibility of “ending the period of change of government through elections” melts away amidst the realities of politics.

It is difficult to be in power.

He also has a certain discouragement of his own.

As you can see, for the change of government, we need to look at the facts and the psychology of the government instead of the pessimists.