What is Intra-Party Discipline?

Discipline? Democracy? Where should common sense be in this?

The word discipline, like democracy, dates back to Ancient Greece.

Latin decere, meaning to behave, to learn, discipulus, meaning one who learns manners, apprenticeship with the suffix "in", student... disciplina.

And democracy is the kratesi of demos, the sovereignty and power of the people, the commoners.

During the week a politician said that there is too much democracy in our party. I think it was a very unfortunate thing to say. Naturally, there were critics.

He said we don't have party discipline.

***

In fact, for someone like me, who comes from a cadet background, discipline is really one of the most important concepts.

Was I very disciplined myself? No, of course not. In our school years, there were consequences such as being deprived of weekends off and having your discipline points broken. Like many others, I completed my Kuleli years with a few disciplinary points every year.

I remember I even spent time in jail during my university years because of the accumulated disciplinary penalties when everyone went on summer vacation. A couple of friends locked us in a barrack for about 10 days with a soldier on guard outside the door.

I don't remember the reason now of course, who knows what disciplinary offenses I had committed.

***

But when it comes to discipline within the party, I think discipline is something that should not happen in parties. Yes, the party has a stance and its members should not act against this stance.

At the very least, it would be inappropriate for them to engage in behavior that publicly humiliates the party. These behaviors can be personal mistakes, for example, if the party is negatively affected by this person as a result of an inappropriate behavior, of course, the disciplinary board should impose the necessary punishment.

But there is also something called internal party democracy. A party is made up of members who come together with the rules set from the beginning and with a view to governing the country. 

If these principles are not followed in the party, members should be able to criticize the decisions taken by the party with their own democratic stance. This is a requirement of democracy. You cannot say that he is acting undisciplined because he objects to the wrong decisions taken. Indiscipline is another thing.

But there is also common sense. If the party has taken a common decision, aren't the cracked voices that emerge later a sign of indiscipline?

This is where the concepts start to clash.

On the one hand, there is indeed a decision taken with common sense, on the other hand, there is internal party democracy in taking that decision, and on the other hand, there are those who do not comply with the decision taken, that is, those who are undisciplined.

So you will not object to the decision taken as a matter of discipline for the party? Even if that decision is against the general principles of the party, will you not oppose it?

What if the decision is not taken through sufficiently democratic methods?

For example, the decision may have been taken by the most authorized decision-making body of the party, but what if it is not the common opinion of the organizations?

There is something called internal party discipline. They will obey the decision taken, even if they are organizations! Because the most authorized body took that decision!

This is the point at which the shit hits the fan.

These things change according to the level of belonging to the party. Belonging is either if you are a party with ideological and ethnic views, or if you are a party with deep roots and strong organizations.

When you are a party that has just been founded and is searching for its identity, neither internal party discipline nor internal democracy is enough for the party to gain enough social support.

In this case, some people find intra-party democracy too much, others find intra-party discipline too much.

But we took a decision with common sense!

Yes, but does that common sense decision you took have an equivalent in the society?

What is your party's response and support in the society?

Without knowing all this, even if you take a decision with common sense, it does not work. Then your members start to make cracked voices on their own. 

We have internal party discipline, brother, if someone does not comply with the decision taken, we cut them off from the party.

And you are right, but then you play by yourself.

Isn't this what democracy is like? 

Someone puts forward an idea, whatever the demos' krata says, that idea is either accepted and implemented or it is put on the dusty shelves of history along with those who put forward the idea.

***

I haven't been writing about political issues lately.

But I couldn't resist when people said we have too much democracy.

Of course there will be democracy, what else is there?

There is a cacophony, but too much democracy!

If you internalize democracy, there will be no cacophony. 

Don't be afraid of democracy. Even if it has its faults and problematic aspects, democracy is still the most just form of government.

The important thing is not to reduce democracy to the ballot box. There are methods of implementing democracy at every stage of governance. The right thing is to put all these methods into practice at every stage.

Actually, it is not my place, but as a citizen, I felt the need to express my opinion. I hope the IYI Party will one day find the identity it deserves. I think it should never give up its internal democracy, it would be a pity for the party. 

After all, it had emerged with the claim of filling a gap in the Turkish political arena. If it wants to achieve this goal, it should resolve its internal party problems as soon as possible and continue on its way without leaving the founding principles of the party.

This is my humble opinion as a citizen. 

Love and respect to everyone from Moscow.