What is Atatürk’s Nationalism and Philosophy?
Atatürk was a leader who had read and analysed, line by line, the models of the nation-state across the world and in Europe, as well as all schools of political philosophy from Machiavelli to Rousseau.
Since you’ve asked, let us lay this matter out on the table, without hiding behind words, but in the light of the unflinching realities of history and sociology. On what foundations was the structure we call the nation-state established in the world and in Europe today? Where do we stand within this structure, and when Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk inscribed this idea upon these lands, what did he adopt from the West, and what did he reject outright? Let us take a look at this together through my lens.
The birth of the modern nation-state idea in Europe is not, as is often assumed, some kind of humanitarian Enlightenment fairy tale. In the West, the nation-state emerged as a necessity following the collapse of feudalism, the Church’s loss of its secular power, and the bloody religious wars that ensued, culminating in the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. It was during this period that Niccolò Machiavelli, regarded as the father of modern state philosophy, laid the groundwork for the nation-state with his secular outlook, which prioritised the state’s survival and power above all else. According to Machiavelli, the state acted not out of theological or moral concerns, but out of the impulse to preserve its own existence, fortify its borders and retain power. The West adopted this logic and built upon it with the Industrial Revolution, followed by the race for colonial expansion. The defining characteristic of the nation-states in Europe was the endeavour to create a homogeneous—that is, standardised—race internally, whilst seeking to establish economic and military supremacy externally. From France to Germany, and from Italy to Britain, the West’s conception of nationalism was largely based on blood ties, chauvinism and, ultimately, the production of self-serving prosperity at the expense of the ‘other’. We have all witnessed how this self-serving philosophy turned the world into a bloodbath in the 19th and 20th centuries, and how it gave rise to monsters such as Hitler and Mussolini. It was precisely at this turning point, in a geographical landscape of an empire awaiting rebirth from its ashes, that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk emerged onto the stage of history.
Atatürk was a leader who had read and analysed, line by line, the models of the nation-state across the world and in Europe, as well as all schools of political philosophy from Machiavelli to Rousseau. Atatürk had a profound grasp of that rational, secular and realistic strand in Machiavelli’s political philosophy, which prioritised the survival of the state above all else. To forge a new and vibrant state from a crumbling empire, it was necessary to act not with romantic dreams, but with a stern and unadorned realism, much like Machiavelli’s. The foundation of the state could not be religion or a communal bond; the state had to be built upon a modern and secular national consciousness. However, Gazi did not simply copy the West’s understanding of power and survival.
He rejected outright the dark, racist, colonialist and aggressive DNA of the Western nation-state. He took Machiavelli’s concept of survival but infused it with the Turkish nation’s spirit of justice, independence and humanity. He synthesised the foundations of cultural nationalism laid by thinkers such as Ziya Gökalp with a down-to-earth, strategic realism rooted in the Misak-ı Millî. The nation-state model of the Republic of Turkey that we established is based on a moral axis entirely distinct from other examples in the world. Ours is not a movement of conquest, colonisation or coveting another’s land; our nation-state is the result of an anti-imperialist, noble and legitimate defence.
Consequently, Atatürk’s nationalism, which forms the very bedrock of the Republic of Turkey, is a rejection of Europe’s blood-based, chauvinistic nationalism. The fact that all communities existing within the borders of the Republic of Turkey are constitutionally referred to as ‘Turkish’ is, first and foremost, a legal and national right. Under this umbrella, everyone—regardless of race, language or religion—is equal to one another through the bond of citizenship and is an equal member of this state. Yet, despite this, certain reckless individuals have emerged who feel as though they are strangers on this land and who seek to undermine the indivisible unity of the state by exploiting micro-nationalism, particularly ‘Kurdish’ nationalism, for political gain. No true patriot can remain indifferent to these destructive and ethno-separatist efforts, for such negligence amounts to directly planting dynamite at the very foundations of this state. We did not create internal enemies or practise racism in order to uphold the state; on the contrary, by transitioning from the ummah to the nation, we have united everyone in the crucible of equal citizenship. Whilst the West’s nation-states sought colonies abroad, the nation-state founded by Atatürk adopted the principle of ‘Peace at home, peace in the world’ as its banner. This is precisely why prefixing the term ‘Atatürk’ to our nationalism means drawing a clear line between it and the West’s fascist, blood-soaked colonialist state philosophy, as well as all forms of ethnic division.
Whilst state philosophies around the world today continue to revolve around selfish economic interests and covert colonialism, the nation-state structure we have established on this land since 1923 remains the most advanced model, aiming for modernisation, prioritising the preservation of human life and upholding constitutional citizenship. Those who accuse this state, its founding philosophy and national unity of fascism, or who seek to undermine them through ethnic strife, should look back at the West’s bloody history. Our nationalism is love of the homeland; our state is the eternal shield of that homeland and the nation.
REFERENCES:
1. Atatürk, Mustafa Kemal, Nutuk, Turkish Historical Society Publications. (A fundamental work setting out, in the author’s own words, Atatürk’s rational and strategic steps regarding the national struggle, national survival, full independence and the construction of the nation-state).
2. Gökalp, Ziya, The Principles of Turkism, Ötüken Publications. (The seminal work forming the theoretical foundation of the concept of nationalism based not on ethnic origin but on cultural and civilisational unity, as well as the transition from ummah to nation mentioned in the text).
