We are witnessing great transformations in every field of our country. Even the “Resolution Process”, which is only a “section” within this great transformation, is including turnovers, which other communities qualify as “revolution”, and mind transformation. The old characteristic of Old Turkey was the guardianship supporting, soldier-civilian intellectual group’s pursuit of an arbitrary modernization. As for New Turkey, it is in an effort to be known by liberalist and pluralistic democracy that is based on the nation. It’s easy to speak about New Turkey; however, actualizing the transition is equally difficult…. The path is long and full of traps and misfortunes.
The biggest enemies of New Turkey are the opinions and disbeliefs, which are originated from pride and arrogance that had been inherited from the past. It’s being hard for some to be on the same page with yesterday’s oppressed and despised. Even though they find it hard to explain, as the differences between them and the poor and uneducated are being lifted off, they are experiencing this as a tragic offense. They are frequently showing people sceneries that don’t correlate with the ideals of New Turkey, asking, “Will these people establish the New Turkey?”, thus making fun in their way. The answer is simple. Yes, they will be the people that will establish the New Turkey. All together we will establish the democratic administration and community, where all the differentiations can live all together fraternally… If you like, now let us try to explain it in a complicated way:
According to Alan Page Fiske, who had presented a crucial theory about communal relations, the human is a communal living creature and they come to life with equipment suitable for this. Throughout history, in all the cultures, the human’s communalism presents itself fundamentally under four essential relation styles. No matter if we are rich or educated, we cannot exceed ourselves outside these four essential relation styles. These four essential relation styles all have a different group, objective, condition, symbol and ideology that is unique to them. The cognitive diagram related to these can be found in every human’s mind as a frame; but the culture they experience is the decider for how they will shape this. Fiske doesn’t agree with the “every culture has a unique relation style” opinion. He finds the statement, “every culture can benefit from these four essential relation styles while forming their own unique form” more suitable. In the same way, regarding these four essential relation styles as unchangeable patterns is also wrong. Instead of this, we should say, these four relation styles can show up in different times and different situations and quite different appearances.
The following are the four essential relation styles, which Fiske had seen in all the cultures throughout the history of humans:
Communal sharing: In this relation style, the group identity is always ahead of individual identity. There is no me, you; there is us. Collectivism, helpfulness, generosity, self-sacrifice are the most important values. The risk of war can be taken in order to preserve the communal life and its values.
System according to the authority: The inequality is the essential in this relation style. Obeying to the decisions of the leader and to the hierarchy he makes, is above everything. The decider of the leadership and power is alterable to the cultures; but the position and identity of the individual is designated according to this arrangement. The obedience to the leader and hierarchic system shapes the moral principles. A battle is being fought in order to expand the power field.
Mutual equality: The essential in this relation style is reciprocity. The group members are making the same work, in turns or simultaneously. The leadership function is being handled in turns or by lot. They are independent from one another at the same rate they are equal. As for the solution for conflicts like aiding, it is being handled according to the equality principle.
Market value: In this type of relation, the market designates everything and the benefit objective is essential. Possessing goods is crucial, since it has been obtained by paying its price. Since time itself actually has a value, the interest comes up. The economic principle is valid in the evaluation of the behaviors; behaviors are being rewarded or punished.
As it’s seen, the structures in Fiske’s theory, which we name as capitalism, socialism, feudalism and communal community, are presenting themselves as different outlooks of human’s communalism. Communal structures and relations are being shaped according to these four essential formats. These are not patterns unique to the culture and time. Even in one of the relations, all of these four relation styles can be on top of the agenda if need be. For example, when we make a detailed observation of the relations of partner and parent-child in a modern house life, we can see that communal sharing is effective in the eating arrangement, authority or mutual equality is effective in the decision-making processes, and the market value is effective in the measuring of individuals’ successes.
Fiske’s theory had come to our minds, when we were thinking that the pride and arrogance, which had been inherited from the Old Turkey, are the unseen enemies of the construction of the democratic community. Instead of being an obstacle in New Turkey’s way, by falling in to the pride and arrogance trap, let us spend all our knowledge and energy for the sake of reinforcing our democracy. We wanted to explain this in order to be able to say, “Let us understand the essential relation styles in our culture, and ponder on what should be done for these to transform into a democratic style.” If we are regarding democracy as a good model, then we should look for a way of constructing it for our community. Bemoaning from the towers of arrogance is possible; however, choosing the difficult one is more humane…