What is the Situation of the Opposition as the Local Election Approaches?

While our country persistently tries to implement a form of government that does not fit into the understanding of democracy and law of the modern age, it is about to hold another unfair election. Although the government's disproportionate power to suppress the opposition by openly/secretly using all state resources eliminates the possibility of a fair election, it seems that they are trying to create the impression that a normal local election is taking place in the country. The media order that enables this to happen has been established step by step by the AKP government. Although there is a certain awareness on social media about the injustice of the election, it is difficult to say that this will be reflected in the election. To put it briefly, the opposition is trying to do its best in an unfair election in an environment determined by the government. However, it must be said that many people have hesitations about this issue.

First of all, we must say that major differences should not be expected between institutional structures in society in terms of the quality of human resources. Some of them are immoral, others are moral; some are ignorant, others are educated; Approaches such as some being very patriotic and others being traitors create a difference based on political discourse. It cannot be said that there are big differences between people trying to gain a place for themselves within the organization of political parties. The deterioration caused by using power for a long time should be considered as a result that can be valid for every political party that is a mass party.

The fact that the AKP government has managed to remain in power for a long time has actually led to great corruption both in its own mass and in Turkish politics. The fact that this dialectical phenomenon was not well understood has created a political process full of problems for both the government and the opposition. The deterioration in the government and its mass has gradually evolved into illegality, civil society organization has suffered major blows, and democracy has begun to turn into a concept increasingly reduced to elections. The necessary reactions to the disruption of the system have become impossible to give at either the individual or institutional level. In this process, the opposition was under the illusion that it could make room for itself in a conceptual area determined by the government, and could not escape from this area in which it was imprisoned.

Of these concepts, the one that caused the greatest damage was the concept of "national will". This concept, which has no equivalent in political science, is a concept used by the government to legitimize its practices that ignore all people except its own voter base and to suppress opposition reactions. The biggest problem for the opposition is that this despotic language has been used in the same context. The legitimacy of a government that half of the nation opposes is clearly imposed as national will. This situation has paved the way for disregarding the structure of democracy that protects different opinions. The mentality that considers everyone who does not think like it a terrorist, a traitor or an immoral person has managed to keep its own mass together by militarizing them against those who have opposing views. The opposition's share in this result is considerable. Those who indulged in the illusion of fighting within the law against an illegal attitude considered themselves responsible for preventing reactions while the country's regime was changed unlawfully. Worse still, they displayed an attitude and discourse that validated the concept of national will.

Of course, it is not possible to talk about a single structure that we call opposition. Perhaps the most important reason for the disappointing result for the opposition in the 14-28 May elections was the meaningless effort to unify political parties representing different ideologies. By the way, I am one of those who think that the "Common Policies Agreement Text" is a very valuable text in terms of content, even though it has no function. In addition, their attempt to introduce a de facto semi-presidential system called the "Strengthened Parliamentary System" has shaken all trust.

After the unsuccessful results in the 2023 Elections, the opposition began to appear completely fragmented as the actually existing fault lines began to act. Some parties began to advocate completely different ideas, as if they had not signed the agreement on common policies, and even declared that they could support the government regarding these changes, if necessary.

At this stage, ideological drift seems to be the biggest problem along with the fragmented structure of the opposition. But here it is necessary to distinguish between two different phenomena. It is a known fact that there are choices in the discourse and actions of opposition parties that may disturb their own voter base. In addition, there is a serious belief that a controlled communication strategy is being carried out by the government in order to provoke the opposition voters against their own party through social media and government-controlled media. Often there may be big differences between the facts and what is presented.

The government's main approach on this issue, as if it had found a gold mine, is to try to spread the perception that the parties mentioned with terrorism are acting together with other opposition parties. For this purpose, in the 2023 elections, montage (fabricated) videos were served to the national media by the government and moral boundaries were clearly exceeded. The ruling party, which tried to serve the same fiction in local elections, has to some extent lost the chance to demonstrate this approach in places where all parties nominate candidates. Although the possibility of the opposition falling into the trap it fell into again in the 2023 elections seems slim, it is not completely eliminated. For this purpose, placing the people's agenda at the center of the propaganda strategy, not the agenda determined by the government, seems to be the right choice for the opposition.

The government's propaganda strategy is based on perception rather than facts. In the face of this, it would be a big mistake for the opposition to try to change perceptions in order to be successful. Because the government does not hesitate to use state resources and media order while doing this. However, the opposition lacks these opportunities. What the opposition should do in this situation is to remind the people of their truth, instead of responding to the government's efforts to create perception. The difficulty at this stage is that the opposition's channels of reaching the public are also under the control of the government. But this difficulty must be overcome.

The fragmentation of the opposition is particularly exploited by the government. It is not possible to know the background of this other than speculation. However, the tone of anger, insulting language and emphasis in some leaders' speeches provide some clues. It is clear that opposing the opposition will benefit the candidates in power, especially in local elections. The question is why such a thing is desired.

Deviation in the leaders' general ideology, even on a rhetorical basis, may cause divisions in opposition voters. Discourses that can legitimize anti-secular actions in order to gain/not lose votes can cause damage beyond expectations. It is possible to say that such deviations will be among the biggest mistakes the opposition can make in the short time remaining until the election. It is also necessary to avoid discourses that alienate large masses. For example, a ridiculous statement such as "Those who do paid military service should not vote for us" may receive a huge reaction.

In fact, it is not a very realistic approach for leaders to demand votes based on their general policy preferences in this election in which local administrators will be determined. Because local governments can only make policy choices in certain areas within their own constituency. However, some leaders may take approaches that support the government in these local elections, without realizing that they are the opposition. Of course, it is also clear that if the ruling candidate wins, an approach far removed from the policies of the opposition party in question will be preferred. Politics starts locally. From this perspective, it is necessary to constantly evaluate the parameters and act in accordance with the institutional structure and the country's interests. The politically preferred discourses of some opposition leaders may also need to be evaluated from this perspective. What is important is whether the effects of all variables on the voters can be seen sufficiently.

In an environment where the effects of the economic crisis are intense, if the government achieves a result that will restore confidence, it may be the end of politics as it is known in Turkey. Because after these elections, there is a four-year period that is likely to pass without elections. Considering the economic policies of the current government, which entered this process with a "vote of confidence", it is clear that this will not be in the interest of the wage earner and retirees. Therefore, the interests of the country should not be sacrificed for small individual gains. As a final word, I find it useful to say this; It is possible to see that some parties have become completely ineffective after the elections and are about to disappear from the political scene.