Originally Posted by Golden_Pigeon
It's ridiculous and awful, but it's not the same thing at all.
Erdogan was jailed because he read a political poem, not because he insulted the current head of state. Let's remember that it's forbidden in many western democracies like France. Somebody got 1 month of jail because he insulted Sarkozy. Another man was charged of a 100 euro fine for saying "Sarkozy, i see you".
It's equally bad and i condemn both, but it's not the same nature. Erdogan was jailed by strict arbitrary standards, not because he insulted somebody.
İnsulting somebody is a strict arbitrary standard. Don't try to paint Erdoğan as any sort of victim here. French laws have nothing to do with the issue at hand. If both are EQUALLY bad, then why are you trying to distinguish Erdoğan's reasons for imprisonment from those he himself charged?
Penguen, a humorous opposition newspaper, recently had to shut down after more than a decade of publication. Why? A huge amount of legal fees accrued from cases filed by Erdoğan and the AKP. That's doesnt sound much different to me than imprisonment for a political poem.
I'd also love to see the Evil Secular-led Turkish Government (tm) of the past starting a diplomatic crisis and throwing a temper tantrum with a close ally over a foreign satirist.
I love how you always play the semantics to excuse Erdoğan's actions and downplay his evil deeds, but when it comes to actual oppressive decisions and measures tsken by him it's always "yeah that's bad, BUT western country X does it too/ secular Turks are ignorant too/ but you can still buy opposition media!/Seculars did it in the past too!". You just shift the blame to secular Turks (because they're ignorant, or because secular governments did similar things in the past, et cetera), but you yourself are saying that "Erdoğan's gone" with a single election (and that seems to be solution enough for you) yet you STILL seem awfully fixated on governments that ended their rule at least FIFTEEN years ago. Most of your arguments boil down to "but seculars/the West does it as well", but those are not the democratic and secular authority in Turkey right now- why not spare your words and effort on calling attention to the flaws of Erdoğan's government instead? The reason is that you're being intellectually dishonest. When you're confronted with evidence that your dream underdog-Muslims-claim-power government does authoritarian and bigoted bullshit, you just say "that sucks" and move on to trying to undermine some other point. I don't know how much you realize it, but you're twisting and turning to portray an authoritarian and conservative Muslim government in the least negative light possible
Edit: thought this was a good point to stop, but hoo boy am I glad I'm not getting any sleep tonight. Here have we yet another golden egg.
Originally Posted by Golden_Pigeon
Is USA a secular country ? I can totally see something like this happening in the States.
Mentioning Allah is worst than mentioning God ? In what sense ? God is everywhere in US politics, the country is still secular and democratic.
Secularism is not about not mentioning religion, or not having religion as the fundament of your political positionment.
About that political message broadcasted 1 year after the events, it's perfectly understandable. It's a major turn in turkish history. Of course, if you think it was a false flag by Erdogan himself there is no much to discuss...
Prayers about the coup is not political. There is nothing political about going down in the street and defending your elect governement against a military coup. It's patriotism and the defense of the democracy as a whole. It's why many anti-Erdogan have also protested and all political parties have sided against the coup.
I'll came back later to reply to your others questions.
Regarding your first two points, I addressed those already: Even with your definition of secularism-semantics!- Erdoğan's behaviour (really fucking obviously, at that) aims to politicize Islam. That in itself should be a red flag. I'd have expected more nuance from someone studying theology (if I recall correctly) and claiming to support secular government. Erdoğan has also made it really clear that his religion justifies a lot of bigotry in his mind, and has no issues exploiting religion (which, I'd assume, should be offensive to any self-respecting believer).
I don't know about you, but I (alongside others) want my privacy respected. This includes NOT HAVING MY PERSONAL PHONE CALLS INTERCEPTED WITH ANY MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNMENT. Read 1984. The telescreens. Read the first few pages of the book, ensure you understand what a telescreen is, then compare that with what you see here.
"Prayers about the coup is not political". Hahaha. Wow. Wooooow. Wooooooooooooow. This one is special. NINETY THOUSAND mosques are coordinating at once to read an irregular prayer to "celebrate" the very moment Erdoğan called the people to the streets. Mosques were used that very day last year to drive people to the streets. Do you believe that mosques were utilized solely because they have good speakers or something? Tying the mosques in to his call delivered a powerful message from the government: a Muslim should rally in the streets to defend the government.
Patriotism, IN ITSELF, is political! Any person who protested in the streets that day committed to a political belief and action. Namely, that the army must not interfere with the operation of its current government. For some, that held even if the ruler was leaning HEAVILY towards being an autocrat. It's fucking idiotic to suggest that prayers made to coincide with Erdoğan's statement aren't political in nature. It's mashing together supposedly secular politics and religious righteousness.