Confused Neo-Ottomanists

During the celebrations marking the 100th anniversary of the liberation of Izmir, Mayor Tunç Soyer's speech was suddenly met with intense reactions.

Let's take a look at what Soyer said that caused the reactions.

In one part of his speech, Soyer said, "One hundred years ago, those who ruled these lands were in heedlessness, delusion and even treason." 

The neo-Ottomanists objected to this sentence in unison, claiming that it insulted our ancestors with intense criticism.

But wasn't the situation exactly as Soyer said? 

Yes, unfortunately, it was exactly like that. 

How do we know? 

It is in the history books. It is also written by Atatürk himself, it is in the speech, it is in his address to the youth. 

Then why this attack? 

Is it because of the fact that a huge crowd joined the celebration and went wild with Tarkan? Is it jealousy of the organizational success? Is it inability to gather similar crowds despite all kinds of support? 

I don't know, but the 100th anniversary of the liberation of Izmir really suited Izmir.

A similar debate took place in the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Assembly. Condemning Tarık Balyalı, the CHP group spokesperson who said, "Vahdettin is a traitor," the session chairman said, "You cannot call an Ottoman sultan a traitor." The chairman, still stuck in the Ottoman Empire and unaware of the rupture, then intervened in the speech of CHP group deputy chairman Doğan Subaşı and said, "Sultan Vahdettin did not flee, he was exiled. Sultan Vahdettin is the sultan of this country." 

Inconsistent statements any way you look at it. 

Let us first establish this fact. 

Vahdettin is a person who sentenced Atatürk to death, caused the signing of the Treaty of Sèvres, which disintegrated the country for the protection of his throne, made all kinds of flattery to the British Correspondents' Society, fought the National Struggle, lost this struggle, and because he predicted what would happen to him because he lost, he used the title of the last Ottoman Caliph and asked for asylum from England. Therefore, it is absurd to discuss "Is he a traitor or not?". 

Let us once again explain what is what to the Neo-Ottomans who cannot fully grasp the relationship between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey. 

The Republic of Turkey has the status of a continuation of the Ottoman Empire that preceded it, the foundation of which was laid with the Treaty of Lausanne. Therefore, Turkey paid the debts of the Ottoman Empire. Both have similar flags. The capital of the previous country, Istanbul, is within the territory of the new one. When we add the international recognition of other states, the continuity is obvious. Therefore, it would not be right to ignore the Ottoman Empire and start history from the 20th century. The events that took place between the dissolution of the last Ottoman Parliament and the opening of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey also support this continuity. The law on the Agnam tax, which was discussed during the dissolution of the last Ottoman Chamber of Deputies, is a clear indication of the continuity as the first law at the opening of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. 

On the other hand, it is also a fact that a new state has been established, that this new state has very different fundamental qualities from the old one, and that the old one has been destroyed and disappeared. It is one thing to love the Ottoman Empire, to respect the past, to honor ancestors; it is quite another to try to revive the Ottoman Empire and to see the Republic as a commercial break. 

In the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Turkey, there is both a rupture and a continuity, and both go hand in hand. It is not right to emphasize only the rupture or only the continuity.

As such, the fact that Neo-Ottomanists constantly emphasize the continuity of the Ottoman Empire and ignore the rupture is an indication that they have not internalized the philosophy of both continuity and rupture. Naturally, it is inevitable that the descendants of the ancestors who founded the Republic with blood and wisdom will react harshly to such an irresponsibility.

In short, there is no point in insulting Turkey while trying to flatter the Ottoman Empire, and in bashing the Ottoman Empire while trying to glorify Turkey. Internalizing rupture and continuity is only possible through respecting ideas and reading history correctly.