Citizenship Transforming: Support for Different Citizenship Norms in Turkey

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 1, 111 - 122, 02.05.2023

Didem Çakmaklı

https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.1217378

Öz

This research compares the importance attributed by citizens to liberal-rights-oriented, republican-active, dutiful and critical citizenship norms in Turkey. Liberal and democratic citizenship norms point to the strength and sustainability of liberal democracies. Hence, a study on the nature of the values that define good citizenship in Turkey will also contribute to the debate on democracy. The relevance of this debate is even greater considering the global rise in authoritarian and populist politics. This study utilizes data from the International Social Survey Program’s (ISSP) 2014 module on citizenship in Turkey. Findings indicate that all of the four norms compared are supported in Turkey. However, the highest support is for liberal, rights-oriented citizenship norms and dutiful citizenship norms. The literature on citizenship in Turkey emphasizes its hierarchical, passive and dutiful nature. The findings of this study support this narrative. However, the findings also point to more liberal and active practices in Turkey especially since the 1990s and, more recently, to a reactionary citizenship understanding in response to shrinking spaces for participation. Strong support for dutiful and rights-based citizenship norms simultaneously points to two important results: 1) Rights-based citizenship in Turkey is not independent of civic duties, 2) In addition to the value given to civic duties, there are liberal and democratic citizenship norms that work to protect and strengthen liberal democracy in Turkey.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Citizenship Norms, Turkey, Active Citizenship, Liberal Citizenship, Dutiful Citizenship.

Vatandaşlığın Dönüşümü: Türkiye’de Farklı Vatandaşlık Normlarına Eğilimler

Öz

Bu çalışmada Türkiye’de vatandaşların, liberal-hak eksenli, cumhuriyetçi-aktif, görev odaklı ve eleştirel vatandaşlık normlarına atfettikleri önem karşılaştırılmaktadır. Günümüzde liberal ve demokratik vatandaşlık normları liberal demokrasilerin gücüne ve sürdürebilirliğine işaret etmektedir. Bu çerçevede, Türkiye’de iyi vatandaşlığı tanımlayan değerlerin niteliği üzerine yapılacak bir çalışma, demokrasi tartışmalarına da katkı sağlayacaktır. Bu tartışmanın önemi küresel seviyede yükselişte olan otoriter ve popülist siyaset düşünüldüğünde daha da artmaktadır. Çalışmada, Uluslararası Sosyal Saha Çalışmaları Programı’nın (ISSP) 2014 yılında Türkiye’de vatandaşlık üzerine yaptığı anket çalışmasının verileri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, karşılaştırılan tüm normların Türkiye’de destek gördüğüne işaret etmektedir. Fakat liberal, hak eksenli vatandaşlık normları ile görev odaklı vatandaşlık normları en yüksek desteği görmektedir. Türkiye’de vatandaşlık literatürü görev odaklı vatandaşlığın hiyerarşik ve pasif özelliklerine vurgu yapmaktadır. Dolayısıyla bulgular literatürdeki bu anlatıyı desteklemektedir. Bulgular, aynı zamanda, özellikle 1990’lardan itibaren Türkiye’de vatandaşlıkta daha liberal, aktif pratiklerle dönüşen ve günümüzde de daralan katılım alanlarına tepkisel bir vatandaşlık anlayışının da güçlendiğine işaret etmektedir. Görev odaklı ve hak eksenli vatandaşlık normlarının eşzamanlı olarak kuvvetle desteklenmesi iki önemli sonuca işaret etmektedir: 1) Türkiye’de hak eksenli vatandaşlık, vatandaşlık görevlerinden bağımsız değildir, 2) vatandaşlık görevlerine verilen değerin yanı sıra Türkiye’de liberal demokrasiyi koruyacak ve güçlendirecek nitelikte liberal ve demokratik vatandaşlık normları mevcuttur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Vatandaşlık Normları, Türkiye, Aktif Vatandaşlık, Liberal Vatandaşlık, Görev Odaklı Vatandaşlık.

Kaynakça

• Arat, Y. (1998). Türkiye’de Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Vatandaşlık. A. Ünsal (Ed.), 75 Yılda Tebaa’dan Yurttaş’a Doğru Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, İstanbul, 67-76.
• Ayata, G. & Karan, U. (2015). Sivil Topluma Aktif Katılım: Uluslararası Standartlar, Ulusal Mevzuattaki Engeller, Öneriler. TÜSEV Yayınları, Istanbul.
• Aytaç, S. E., & Öniş, Z. (2014). Varieties of populism in a changing global context: The divergent paths of Erdogan and Kirchnerismo. Comparative Politics, 47(1), 41–59.
• Başer, B., & Öztürk, A. E. (2017). Authoritarian politics in Turkey: Elections, resistance and the AKP. I.B. Tauris.
• Başer, Z., & Çelik, A.B. (2014). Imagining peace in a conflict environment: Kurdish youths’ framing of the Kurdish issue in Turkey. Pattern of Prejudice, 48(3), 265-85.
• Bee, C. & Kaya, A. (2017), Youth and Active Citizenship in Turkey: Engagement, Participation and Emancipation. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 17(1), 129-143.
• Bellamy, R. (2008). Citizenship: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Borsuk, İ, Dinç, P., Kavak, S. & Sayan, P. (2021). Consolidating and Contesting Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Turkey: Towards a Framework. İ. Borsuk, P. Dinç, S. Kavak, ve P. Sayan (Eds.). Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Resistance in Turkey: Constrution, Consolidaiton and Contestation. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör Analizi: Temel Kavramlar ve Ölçek Geliştirmede Kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32, 470-483.
• Castaldo, A. (2018). Populism and competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 18(4), 467–487.
• Cenker-Özek, C.I., Çakmaklı, D. & Karakoç, E. 2021. Rights and Responsibilities: Citizenship Norms and Protest Activitiy in a Cross-Country Analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 102(4), 1394-1407.
• Cenker-Özek, C. I. (2018). 1990’lardan Günümüze Türkiye’de Sosyal Sermaye ve Sivil Toplum: Bölgeler Arası bir Karşılaştırma. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F Dergisi, 2018 Özel Sayısı, 44-77.
• Civicus Monitor. https://monitor.civicus.org/. Accessed 01/06/2022
• Çakmaklı, D. (2015). Active Citizenship in Turkey: Learning Citizenship in Civil Society Organizations. Citizenship Studies, 19 (3-4), 421-435.
• Çayır, K., & Gürkaynak, İ. (2008). The state of citizenship education in Turkey: Past and present. Journal of Social Science Education, 6(2), 50–58.
• Çayır, K. (2011). Turkey’s new citizenship and democracy education course: Search for democratic citizenship in a difference-blind polity? Journal of Social Science Education, 10(4), 22–30.
• Çelik, A.B. (2005). Transnationalization of human rights norms and its impact on internally displaced Kurds. Human Rights Quarterly, 27(3), 969-997.
• Dagger, R. (2002). Republican Citizenship. Işın, E.F. & B.S. Turner (Eds). Handbook of Citizenship Studies, Sage Publications, London, 145–57.
• Dinçşahin, S. (2012). A symptomatic analysis of the Justice and Development Party’s populism in Turkey, 2007–2010. Government and Opposition, 47(4), 618–640.
• Doyle, J.L. (2018). Government Co-option of Civil Society: Exploring the AKP’s Role Within Turkish Women’s CSOs. Democratization, 24(2), 244– 264
• Esen, B. & Gümüşçü, Ş. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1581–1606.
• Eslen-Ziya, H. & and Kazanoğlu, N. (2020). De-democratization Under the New Turkey? Challenges for Women’s Organizations. Mediterranean Politics. 27(1), 101-122.
• Eyüboğlu, E. (1998). ‘Dar zamanlar’ cumhuriyetinde ‘ölmeye yatmak’. A. Ünsal (Ed.), 75 yılda Tebaa’dan yurttaş’a doğru. Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, İstanbul, 37-42.
• Göksel, N.G. and Güneş, R.B. (2005). The Role of NGOs in the European Integration Process: The Turkish Experience. South European Society and Politics, 10 (1), 57-72.
• Heper, M. (1998). Türkiye’de unutulan halk ve birey. A. Ünsal (Ed.) 75 yılda Tebaa’dan Yurttaş’a doğru. Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, Istanbul, pp.43-48.
• Heper, M. (1985). The state tradition in Turkey. Beverly: Eothen
• ISSP Research Group. 2016. International Social Survey Programme: Citizenship II - ISSP 2014. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA6670 Data file Version 2.0.0.
• Isin, E.F. & Nielsen G.M. (2008). Acts of Citizenship. London: Zed Books.
• Işın, E. F. & Turner, B.S. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of Citizenship Studies. Sage Publications, London.
• İçduygu, A, Meydanoğlu, Z. & Sert, D. (2011), Türkiye’de Sivil Toplum: Bir Dönüm Noktası: Uluslararası Sivil Toplum Endeksi Projesi Türkiye Ülke Raporu II. TUSEV Yayınları, Istanbul.
• İşyar, B. (2005). The origins of Turkish republican citizenship: The birth of race. Nations and Nationalism, 11(3), 343-360.
• Kadıoğlu, A., Keyman, F. & Çakmaklı, D. (2016). Vatandaşlık Araştırması 2016. İstanbul Politkalar Merkezi.
• Kanci, T. (2009). Reconfigurations in the discourse of nationalism and national identity: Turkey at the turn of the twenty-first century. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 9(3), 359–376.
• Kaya, A. (2017), Right to Public Space: Social Movements and Active Citizenship in Turkey. Research and Policy on Turkey, 2 (1), 1-9.
• Keyman, E. F., & Öniş, Z. (2007). Turkish politics in a changing world: Global dynamics and domestic transformations. İstanbul. Bilgi University Press, Istanbul.
• Keyman, E. F. (2005). Articulating citizenship and identity: the ‘Kurdish Question’. E.F. Keyman, & A. İçduygu (Eds.), Citizenship in a global world: European questions and Turkish experiences. Routledge, London, 267-288.
• Keyman, E.F. & İçduygu A., (Eds.) (2005). Citizenship in a global world: European questions and Turkish experiences. Routledge, London.
• Keyman, E. F., & İçduygu, A. (2003). Globalization, civil society and citizenship in Turkey: Actors, boundaries and discourses. Citizenship Studies, 7(2), 219-234.
• Kymlicka, W. (1996). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Kymlicka, W. & Norman, W. (1994). Return of the Citizen: A Survey of Recent Work on Citizenship Theory. Ethics, 104 (2), 352–381.
• Linklater, A. (2007). Critical theory and World Politics: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Humanity, Routledge, London.
• Mounk, Y. (2018). The Undemocratic Dilemma. Journal of Democracy, 29 (2), 98-112.
• Oldfield, A. (1998). Citizenship and Community: Civic Republicanism and the Modern World. G. Shafir (Ed.), The Citizenship Debates, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 75-89.
• Öktem, K., & Akkoyunlu, K. (2016). Exit from democracy: Illiberal governance in Turkey and beyond. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 469– 480.
• Öniş, Z. (2016). Turkey’s two elections: the AKP comes back. Journal of Democracy, 27(2), 141–154.
• Özbudun, E. (2014). AKP at the crossroads: Erdo˘gan’s majoritarian drift. South European Society and Politics, 19(2), 155–167.
• Özler, Ş. İ. & Obach, B. (2018). Polarization and the Environmental Movement in Turkey. Journal of Civil Society, 14 (4), 311-327.
• Paker, H. (2020). Politicizing the environment: the ecological crisis of Turkey. C. Sokullu (Ed.), Turkey in Transition: Politics, Society and Foreign Politics. Peter Lang Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
• Polat, R. K. & Pratchett, L. (2014). Citizenship in the Age of the Internet: A Comparative Analysis of Britain and Turkey. Citizenship Studies, 18 (1), 63-80.
• Rumelili, B. & Çakmaklı, D. (2017). Civic Participation and Citizenship in Turkey: A Comparative Study of Five Cities. South European Society and Politics, 22(2), 365-384.
• Rumelili, B. & Keyman, E.F. (2015). Enacting multi-layered citizenship: Turkey’s Armenians’ Struggle for Justice and Equality. Citizenship Studies, 20(1), 67-83.
• Sandel, M. (1996). Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
• Schuck, P. (2002). Liberal Citizenship. E.F Işın & B.S. Turner (Eds.), Handbook of Citizenship Studies. Sage Publications, London, 131–44.
• Sen, A. (2020). Three Evils of Citizenship Education in Turkey: Ethno-religious Nationalism, Statism and Neoliberalism. Critical Studies in Education, 63, 307-322.
• Sen, A., & Starkey, H. (2017). The Rise and Fall of Citizenship and Human Rights Education in Turkey. Journal of Social Science Education, 16(4), 84-96.
• Somer, M. (2016). Understanding Turkey’s Democratic Breakdown: Old vs. New and Indigenous vs. Global Authoritarianism. Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 481–503.
• Sözen, Y. (2020). Studying Autocratization in Turkey: Political Institutions, Populism, and Neoliberalism. New Perspectives on Turkey, 63, 209–235.
• Steenekamp, C., & Loubse, R. (2016). Active Citizenship: A Comparative Study of Selected Young and Established Democracies. Politikon, 43(1), 117-134.
• Şimşek, S. (2004). New Social Movements in Turkey Since 1980. Turkish Studies, 5(2), 111-139.
• Ünsal, A. (ed.). (1998). 75 Yılda Tebaa’dan Yurttaş’a Doğru. Istanbul, Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.
• Üstel, F. (2004). Makbul Vatandaş’ın Peşinde: II. Meşrutiyet’ten Bugüne Türkiye’de Vatandaşlık Eğitimi. İstanbul, İletişim Yayınları.
• White, P. J. (1999). Citizenship Under the Ottomans and Kemalists: How the Kurds were Excluded. Citizenship Studies, 3(1), 71-102.
• Yabanci, B. (2019). Turkey’s Tamed Civil Society: Containment and Appropriation Under a Competitive Authoritarian Regime. Journal of Civil Society, 15(4), 285-306.
• Yeğen, M. (2004). Citizenship and ethnicity in Turkey. Middle Eastern Studies, 40(6), 51-66.
• Yılmaz, İ. (2018). Islamic Populism and Creating Desirable Citizens in Erdoağan’s New Turkey. Mediterranean Quarterly, 29(4), 52-76.
• Yılmaz, V., & Göçmen, İ. (2016). Denied Citizens of Turkey: Experiences of Discrimination among LGBT Individuals in Employment, Housing and Health Care. Gender, Work and Organization, 23(5), 470-488.
• Zihnioğlu, Ö. (2019). The Prospects of Civic Alliance: New Civic Activists Acting Together with Civil Society Organizations. Voluntas, 30(2), 289-299.