Saudi authorities did not allow the grotesque show that the two Turkish teams planned and put into action at the last minute on the playground. The clubs’ executives roared exhibiting more Ataturkism, the match was cancelled and the players returned home. The chorus of short-smart writers and “intellectuals” who consider it wise to oppose everything immediately began singing their usual song: Well, sir, this is the Erdoğan reactionism and Saudi reactionism joined hands, who aimed to spoil the centenary of the Republic by organizing the match in a “Medieval country”, that is in Saudi Arabia. However, our “hero” clubs and football players could not accept this spoiling and they prepared Atatürk t-shirts and “Peace at Home, Peace in the World” banners to impress the fans in the stands. They disturbed the Saudi reactionism. Our team broke this reactionary game by not playing the match and returned home…
The chorus simply sings this song. But nothing is as it seems as always and this time as well, the goose’s foot is again combed (a technical term introduced into phenomenology by our Institute, meaning that things in their very essential constitution are always different than how they appear to humans).
This narrative pigeonholes not only the reforms initiated inside the country (especially in the field of women’s rights), but also — even a more disturbing issue to the West — it’s foreign relations policy Prince Salman has started with Russia and China, the removal of the country from the Western minion for the first time in its history, and moreover, their biggest “sin”: establishing diplomatic relations with Iran for the first time since several decades. Thus, this puppet chorus’ narrative is a directed and dictated one aiming to ignore and wear down Salman by exploiting the long-established stereotypes in the past, precisely because of his more or less revolutionary Independent policy that he started in Saudi Arabia.
However, a critical mind listening to the chorus should first ask this question, even if he does not know the current facts they are suppressing: If Prince Salman were a Kemalist (let’s say, not a reactionary but a progressive revolutionary), would he allow this demonstration?
Every demonstration targets the person or audience it assumes to be on the opposing side. If someone comes up to you and loudly repeats the ideas you already defend, this action is in fact trying to put you at a place you do not want. This type of manipulation is the most difficult to deal with because it forces you to defend yourself against an adversary whose real concern is something else than the topic seemingly in discussion. It’s such a kind of manipulator who hides his real purpose and who has no intention of listening to you. Let’s give an example:
Let’s assume that two French football teams apply to play a match in Turkey on July 14. The teams take to the field wearing Voltaire t-shirts to warm up, and they display banners bearing Voltaire’s famous words against the Monarchy and the Church… First of all, how would the Kemalists (and considering that Mustapha Kemal is a true Voltaire supporter) react to this demonstration?
The duty of every Kemalist is to react by “fuck off!” to such a demonstration, “Who you are to teach us about Voltaire!”
Salman also said so.
An even more painful question:
Why the Frenchman (unless he has another secret agenda) wouldn’t have needed to stage such a demonstration abroad?
Because there is no need for Voltaire to be put on display so cheaply. He is already a universal figure in the history of mankind having built his own stage for his statue.
The latest incident showed once again that the biggest enemies of Kemalism are those who claim to be Kemalist.