Does Reality Change Depending on How You Look at It?

Why do today's Turks always dream of getting rich in a short time and always focus on saving the day? What is different about us from the other nations of the world? In this article, I will try to answer this question with examples from history. 

Cultural heritage is the most important phenomenon in shaping the future of a country. Let me say at the very beginning; the reason why people living in this geography generally think short-term is a cultural heritage that has lasted for centuries. More precisely, it is the genetic heritage imposed on people born in this geography. It is a sociological reality that has not yet been solved. 

The Ottoman Empire established an imperial system in the period between 1300-1600. This system was the product of a conquering approach that constantly expanded its borders with a well-functioning economic structure that had its own rules. During this period, the state gave confidence and hope for the future to all the people living in this geography. The era of Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror, a strong and charismatic leader and one of the greatest intellectuals of his time, marked the transition from a state to an empire. Thus, the functioning of the system was optimized. 

On the other hand, the Ottoman Empire, which conquered Istanbul in 1453, had difficulty in reading the developments in Europe. The period of exploration of new geographies, which began in these years with the invention of the compass, also triggered the beginning of Europe's transformation process. The change that Europe experienced shifted the tide of historical achievements in favor of the Western world. The transfer of natural resources and riches from the newly discovered lands to Europe paved the way for social changes. In the meantime, religion was reformed and the Church's control over the people began to decline. With the development of science and technology, European societies began to acquire superior firearms and the ability to dominate other societies one by one. Thus, while Europe was suddenly on the rise, the Ottoman Empire remained almost completely outside this process of change. 

The reality I am trying to express here is that the period of stagnation in Ottoman society did not actually begin in the last years of the reign of the Magnificent, as our history books simply tell us. We can almost say that it started in 1481 when Fatih passed away. Or rather, history shows this. It is also clear that we started to decline not during the reign of Sokullu, but before him.

In fact, after the spread of the Renaissance movements in Europe, our superiority over Europe was almost over. The failure of the First Vienna Campaign should have awakened the Turkish society of the time, but it was not emphasized much. In fact, until the Treaty of Karlofça in 1699, when we lost a considerable amount of territory, Ottoman society did its best to turn a blind eye to the advances made by the West. The Treaty of Karlofça was the first treaty in which the Ottoman Empire lost a large amount of territory in the west. After that, the Ottoman Empire wanted to pursue a policy of reclaiming the lost territories. But in time it painfully realized that it was too late.

The Ottoman Empire, which could not experience the geographical discoveries in Europe, the renaissance, reforms, the age of enlightenment and especially the industrial revolution that started in the mid-1700s and had difficulty in adapting itself to the changing world, was becoming a country that made concessions to foreign countries and whose structure was gradually deteriorating, despite some successes and territorial gains from time to time during the period until its collapse. The deteriorating balance of superiority over Europe led to modernization efforts that began with Selim III and became more organized with Mahmut II. The monetary system also began to deteriorate due to the low revenues to finance all these reforms and the failure to fully establish an administrative structure to collect tax revenues properly. As a result, the entire financial system of the state collapsed with the Crimean War and foreign borrowing was resorted to with the guidance of Western "moneylenders". 

The complex monetary situation of the Ottoman Empire at that time made the banking system a very profitable mechanism. For this reason, the Armenian, Greek and Jewish bankers of the period, who were seen as part of the Ottoman society, began to avoid investments that brought long-term profits. The era of making money with money, rather than industrialization, haunted Turkish society during this time. It was during this period that we Turks were introduced to the realities of the new world. The way of earning easy money, as it is called today, found its counterpart among the Turks. 

The point I want to make here is that the political stability and the level of prosperity of the country in which one lives directly affects the mindset of the people of that country. This is a reality for all societies. The influences that change societies are formed at the end of a long period of time, as seen in Ottoman society, and are passed on to future generations as cultural heritage. The Ottoman Empire's shrinking territory and deteriorating financial structure also served a function in diminishing the self-confidence and hopes for the future of the people living in these lands.

In the early years of the Republic, the country inherited from the Ottoman Empire was not very complex in terms of socio-economic classes. There was a very small upper class minority, a middle class, which was also a small minority, and a large lower or peasant class, mostly engaged in agriculture. The urbanization rate was very low. There was a population that had been defeated, exhausted and impoverished in the recent wars, and their hopes for the future had diminished. 

With the proclamation of the Republic, the reforms and modernization movements carried out between 1923 and 1938 under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal ATATÜRK, the founder of the state, aimed to make the Turkish people regain their self-confidence and look to tomorrow with hope. Undoubtedly, this was not easy. With slogan-like discourses such as "Turkish Nation is Hardworking, Turkish Nation is Intelligent", "Turk, Be Proud, Work, Trust", "Ne Mutlu Türküm Diyene", it was aimed to positively change the psychological codes of the Turkish people who had lost their self-confidence. To a certain extent, this was successful. 

In 1938, Atatürk's premature death marked the end, in a sense, of the movements he had initiated to change the country and its people. Historians may have tried to find a handle for the slowdown in the Turkish reform and change movement by offering explanations such as "World War II intervened, the state's priority became security". In fact, the perception that the security of the state and the nation was threatened after the war, and that the only priority was security, using the territorial claims of the Russians as an excuse, may be presented as a "fact". However, aren't great changes already the fruits of wars? How can anyone justify not continuing the process of change and transformation of the new Republic, which did not even go to war?

In the post-war period, with the 'negative' impact of American aid, the Turkish people's understanding of working and producing was disrupted and the country's industrialization moves were hampered. With the inflow of large amounts of hot money, it became more 'expensive' to produce in Turkey. Turkish industry was put into a period of stagnation before it had matured. The expectations of the people of the country to become a developed society and a welfare society were dashed. 

To give a few vivid examples of what happened during this period; our national and domestic aircraft factories were closed down. The mass production of our first domestic automobile, the revolution car, could not be started. In particular, the Devrim automobile, which deserved to be a real success story but for some reason was turned into a symbol of failure, turned the modernization and development process of the country's people into a cultural code with a strange look like "not from us". 

However, the state should have stood behind such projects that would have reduced foreign dependency. Had this been done, the development of industry in our country would have accelerated and perhaps the fate of the country would have been different from today. But it didn't. Although Turkey started to focus on industrialization again in the 1960s and started to implement the requirements of the planned economy, it could not achieve the desired industrialization momentum. As a natural consequence, the welfare level in the country could not rise. This, in turn, led to the continuation of the structural imbalance between socio-economic classes in the country and the weakening of the middle class. We are now experiencing the pains of these together.

As such, our people have started to think in a very 'selfish' and individual-oriented way in terms of achieving prosperity as a society and realizing the development of the country by working and striving. Getting rich in a shortcut has spread throughout society like a genius formula for salvation. Transitions between classes were made with money earned through fraud, if necessary by 'cheating', rather than through the acquisition of wealth based on hard work. Such class transitions continue to this day. 

Although the middle class in Turkey has seemingly grown, its structure is still not at the level of developed countries. This is because the level of individual welfare is still very low. Turkish people continue to worry about the future and their self-confidence remains low. In fact, this situation does not change immediately with class passes, which are supposedly achieved with the money in one's pocket. 

In Turkey today, many university students, recent graduates, entrepreneurs or people who have reached a certain career level come from lower or lower middle class families. Due to the cultural heritage of these families, even if economic prosperity is achieved, the perception of risk in these people does not change immediately. As I said before, cultural change only takes place when it spreads over several generations. In Europe, entrepreneurship started with geographical discoveries. Explorers' projects that sold dreams of the future were financed by governments. We Turks only took our soldiers to the places we invaded, whereas the Western world took scientists and clergy with them as part of their mission when they made discoveries and invasions. So there was always a scientific curiosity in European society. And this investment paid off. In addition to scientists, the western world also heavily financed technology entrepreneurs with the industrial revolution. Unlike Europe, an America that pursued its dreams has achieved much higher success than Europe and has become a world leader. Western society 

The driving force behind America's prosperity is the pervasive entrepreneurial spirit that people have. As a country, we have not inherited such a cultural heritage, because we have not gone through any of these stages deservedly. That is why those of us in the entrepreneurial ecosystem are afraid to take risks. Projects that require patience and high effort are not accepted by us. Instead, for example, construction is more popular. Most of the people who earn money in society immediately turn to construction because it is more profitable. Any person who has a lawyer's office or is a physician can also become a contractor. In other words, they see it as a more realistic way to make money in a shortcut rather than by working. On the other hand, we occasionally come across entrepreneurs with real vision, and such entrepreneurs give us hope. However, it is quite ambitious to say that there is a real entrepreneurship culture based on institutional projects in this geography. Even a project management mechanism is unfortunately not fully operational in modern dimensions.

Due to the mentality we have inherited for centuries and the inability to increase individual welfare, the average person thinks about what will happen tomorrow, does not like to risk himself and his savings, if any, and therefore chooses the easiest option and focuses on saving the day. 

We don't like to think long term because there has not been a fully functioning political and economic stability in these lands for a long time. People with hope for the future, self-confidence and vision undoubtedly exist among us, and they should, but they are in the minority. Hormonal rich people like "Tosuncuk" should not be seen as role models for Turkish youth. Visionary entrepreneurs should be seen as role models for our youth. 

Stay with respect and love.