Kemalist Modernleşmenin Modernleşme Kuramı Açısından Önemi

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 40, 663 - 703, 31.01.2021

İbrahim Saylan , İlkim Özdikmenli Çelikoğlu

https://doi.org/10.21550/sosbilder.719120

Öz

Modernleşme Kuramı akademik çalışmaları 1950’lerin başından, 1970’lerin sonuna kadar derinden etkilemiş ve diğer Batılı olmayan ülkeler arasında Türkiye örneğine “özel bir yer” vermiştir. Bunu yaparken de Erken Cumhuriyet dönemi Kemalist modernleşmesinin önemini özellikle vurgulamıştır. Bu çalışma, Modernleşme Kuramı’nın başlıca temsilcileri arasında yer alan Walt Rostow, Dankwart Rustow, Daniel Lerner, Bernard Lewis and Shmuel Eisenstadt’ın akademik eserlerini inceleyerek, modernleşme kuramının Türkiye’ye neden özel bir yer verdiğini ve Kemalist modernleşmeyi diğer Batılı olmayan örneklerden farklı şekillerde nasıl konumlandırdığını araştırmaktadır. Adı geçen kuramcıların dâhil oldukları akademik disiplinlerin özgül etkilerini göz ardı etmeden, Türkiye örneği üzerine yaptıkları analizler bir dizi ortak tema çerçevesinde incelenmektedir. Sonuç olarak, bu çalışma “Türk modeli” tezinin tarihsel köklerine ışık tutmanın yanı sıra, Modernleşme Kuramı’nın Türkiye örneği analizinin daha ampirik temelli bir eleştirisini yapma yolunda gelecekteki araştırmalara da bir zemin sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Modernleşme Kuramı, Kemalist Modernleşme, Türkiye Modeli, Kalkınma, Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE KEMALIST MODERNIZATION FOR MODERNIZATION THEORY

Öz

Modernization theory, which dominated academic studies from the early 1950s until the late 1970s, attributed a “special place” to the Turkish case among many other non-Western countries, with a special emphasis on the Kemalist modernization of the Early Republican Period. This paper seeks to explore the reasons for Turkey’s special place and the ways Kemalist modernization is positioned vis-a-vis other non-Western countries by tracking the scholarly works by Walt Rostow, Dankwart Rustow, Daniel Lerner, Bernard Lewis and Shmuel Eisenstadt. Without ignoring the particular reflections of disciplinary perspectives they have, their analyses of the Turkish case are investigated with a focus on a number of common themes. Thus, this study does not only shed light on the historical origins of the so-called “Turkish model”, it also seeks to provide a basis for future studies in making a more empirically grounded critique of modernization theory’s analysis of the Turkish case.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Modernization Theory, Kemalist Modernization, Turkish Model, Development, Developing Countries

Kaynakça

• Abid, M. (2004). Political modernisation: the concept, contours and dynamics. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 590-602.
• Ahmad, F. (1993). The making of modern Turkey. Routledge.
• Altun, F. (2017). Modernleşme kuramı - Eleştirel bir giriş. İnsan Yayınları.
• Apter, D. E. (1965). The politics of modernization. Chicago University Press.
• Berkes, N. (1964). The development of secularism in Turkey. McGill University Press.
• Citino, N. (2008). Ottoman legacy in Cold War modernization. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 40, 579-597.
• Dumont, P. (1984). The origins of Kemalist ideology. J. M. Landau (Ed.), In Atatürk and the Modernization of Turkey (25-44. pp.), Westview Press.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1964a). Modernization and conditions of sustained growth. World Politics, 16(4), 576-594.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1964b). Breakdowns of modernization. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 12(4), 345-367.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1965). Transformation of social, political, and cultural orders in modernization. American Sociological Review, 30(5), 659-673.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1966). Modernization, protest and change. Prentice-Hall.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1973). Tradition, change and modernity. John Wiley and Sons.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1984). The Kemalist regime and modernization: some comparative analytical remarks. J. M. Landau (Ed.), In Atatürk and the Modernization of Turkey (3-15. pp.), Westview Press.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. (1997). The Kemalist revolution in comparative perspective. A, Kazancıgil, E. Özbudun (Eds.), In Atatürk - Founder of a Modern State (127-142. pp.), Hurst & Company.
• Eisenstadt, S. N. et al. (2002). Introduction: the context of multiple modernities paradigm. D. Sachsenmaier, J. Riedel, S. N. Eisenstadt (Eds.), In Reflections on Multiple Modernities - European, Chinese and Other Interpretations (1-23. pp.), Brill.
• Engerman, D. C. & Unger, C. R. (2009). Introduction: towards a global history of modernization. Diplomatic History, Special Forum: Modernization as a Global Project, 33(3), 375-385.
• Frank, A. G. (1967). Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America. Monthly Review Press.
• Garon, S. (1994). Rethinking modernization and modernity in Japanese history: a focus on state-society relations. The Journal of Asian Studies, 53(2), 346-366.
• Gilman, N. (2003). The Mandarins of the future- modernization theory in Cold War America. The Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Göksel, O. (2015). Assessing the Turkish model: the modernisation trajectory of Turkey through the lens of the multiple modernities paradigm. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Durham: Durham University School of Government and International Affairs.
• Huntington, S. P. (1968). Political order in changing societies. Yale University Press.
• Kongar, E. (1978). İmparatorluktan günümüze Türkiye’nin toplumsal yapısı. Cem Yayınevi.
• Kubicek, P. (2013). Debating the merits of the ‘Turkish model’ for democratization in the Middle East. Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 66-80.
• Lerner, D. (1958a). The passing of traditional society: modernizing the Middle East. Free Press of Glencoe.
• Lerner, D. (1958b). Introduction. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 22(2), 217-222.
• Lerner, D. (1968). Modernization: social aspects. D. Sills (Ed.), In Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (389-395. pp.), Macmillan.
• Lerner, D. (1973-1974). Notes on communication and the nation state. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 541-550.
• Lerner, D. & Robinson, J. (1960). Swords and ploughshares: the Turkish Army as a modernizing force. World Politics, 13(1), 19-44.
• Lewis, B. (1951). Recent developments in Turkey. International Affairs, 27(3), 320-331.
• Lewis, B. (1955). Turkey: westernization. G. E. von Grunebaum (Ed.), In Unity and Variety in Muslim Civilization (311-331. pp.), The University of Chicago Press.
• Lewis, B. (1956). The Middle Eastern reaction to Soviet pressures. Middle East Journal, 10(2), 125-137.
• Lewis, B. (1958). Democratic institutions in the Islamic Middle East. W. Burmeister (Ed.), In Democratic Institutions in the World Today (45-61. pp.), Library of World Affairs, Praeger Publishers.
• Lewis, B. (1964). The Middle East and the West. Indiana University Press.
• Lewis, B. (1968). The emergence of modern Turkey. Oxford University Press.
• Menzel, U. (2006). Walt Whitman Rostow. D, Simon (Ed.), In Fifty Key Thinkers on Development (211-217. pp.), Routledge.
• Örnek, C. (2015). Türkiye’nin soğuk savaş düşünce hayatı- antikomünizm ve Amerikan etkisi. Can Yayınları.
• Parsons, T. (1982). On institutions and social evolution, selected writing. L. H. Mayhew (Ed.), The University of Chicago Press.
• Parsons, T. (1991). The social system. Routledge.
• Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth - A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge University Press.
• Rostow, W. W. (1971). Politics and the stages of growth. Cambridge University Press.
• Rustow, D. A. (1956a). Politics and westernization in the Near East. R. Nolle (Ed.), The Modern Middle East, Atherton Press.
• Rustow, D. A. (1956b). Politics and Islam in Turkey - 1920-1955. R. N. Frye (Ed.), In Islam and the West (69-107. pp.), Mouton and Co.
• Rustow, D. A. (1959). The Army and the founding of the Turkish Republic. World Politics, 11(4), 513-552.
• Rustow, D. A. (1965). Turkey: the modernity of tradition. L. W. Pye, S. Verba (Eds.), In Political Culture and Political Development (171-198. pp.), Princeton University Press.
• Rustow, D. A. (1967). A world of nations: problems of political modernization. Brookings Institution.
• Rustow, D. A. (1968a). Modernization and comparative politics: prospects in research and theory. Comparative Politics, 1(1), 37-51.
• Rustow, D. A. (1968b). Atatürk as founder of a state. Daedalus, 97(3), 793-828.
• Rustow, D. A. (1970). Transitions to democracy: toward a dynamic model. Comparative Politics, 2(3), 337-363.
• Rustow, D. A. & Ward, R. E. (1964). Introduction. R. E. Ward, D. A. Rustow (Eds.), In Political Modernization in Japan and Turkey (3-13. pp.), Princeton University Press.
• Shah, H. (2011). The production of modernization - Daniel Lerner, mass media and the passing of traditional society. Temple University Press.
• Tipps, D. C. (1973). Modernization theory and the comparative study of societies: a critical perspective. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 15(2), 199-226.
• Toprak, Z. (1982). Türkiye’de milli iktisat (1908-1918). Yurt Yayınları.
• Tunaya, T. Z. (1960). Türk siyasi hayatında batılılaşma hareketleri - müşahedeler ve tezler. Yedigün Matbaası. Turner, M. A. (1976). Changing patterns of Turkish politics: a developmental perspective. Turkish Studies Association Bulletin, 1(1), 6-13.
• Wallerstein, I. (1976). Modernization: requiescat in pace. L. A. Coser, O. N. Larsen (Eds.), In The Uses of Controversy in Sociology (131-135. pp.), Free Press.
• Ward, R. E. & Rustow, D. (1964). Conclusion. R. E. Ward, D. A. Rustow (Eds.), In Political Modernization in Japan and Turkey (434-468. pp.), Princeton University Press.