Turkish Revolution. The Writer Explores

¶ … Turkish Revolution. The writer explores what caused it, who the key players were and how it led to the new law, education system and other changes in the nation. There were six sources used to complete this paper.

The Causes and Impact of the Turkish Revolution

One of the most defining moments in Turkish history was the revolution because it led to the multiple party system of government that the nation enjoys today. Prior to the revolution the people of Turkey were ruled by a single party system that left little room for choice, desire or change if the people did not approve of what the government was doing.

The revolution brought about changes that led to the multi-party system which in turn became a life changing movement for the nation.

In more concrete terms, popular mobilization and participation in politics through elections and parliaments has been a hallmark and source of pride in Turkey since the late 1920s, while multi-party competition and real voter choice has been the norm for most of Turkey's post-1946 life (Salmaoni, 2004)."

Even given the changes that the revolution caused Turkey does not currently enjoy the same support of its multi-party democratic system as one would think it would.

The revolution also created other changes including a new education system. In the Turkish education system the changes promote the free and diverse thinking of its students as well as promote the importance of education and secondary education so that the nation can compete in the world trade market successfully.

Addressing democracy in Turkish education thus allows us better insight into the global cultural affiliations engaged educational thinkers desired for Turkey, just as it illuminates the foreign and domestic political impact on socio-political priorities in a key arena for legitimizing regime views (Salmaoni, 2004). More broadly, looking at the educational process in Turkey during these years renders more concrete the convictions borne by citizens from the 1930s into the multiparty years of the 1950s and 1960s regarding the nature and functioning of democracy, just as we gain greater understanding of the reasons for Turkey's problematic yet continuing commitment to this form of politics (Salmaoni, 2004)."

Over all the revolution created a new beginning for the people of Turkey, one in which they are still working to define and improve upon.

How it Changed Things

The Turkish revolution created many new beginnings. A democracy was something the nation had never experienced and as with any new system the nation found it had those who were in support of such a change and those who were against it. For the most part, those that supported the revolution were also in support of a new form of government while those who fought against the revolution were not easily convinced that a new governmental form was a positive step for their country.

One of the key players in support of the revolution was Ismail Hakki Baltacioglu who "throughout the 1920s (Salmaoni, 2004). Referred to as the 'father' of republican Turkish educational thought and practice, by the 1920s he had already had a career as a teacher, had visited foreign countries' educational institutions, and was a prominent participant in the young republic's official educational debates of the late 1920s and 1930s, as an administrator and academician (Salmaoni, 2004). Though removed from his position during the transformation of the Darulfunun into Istanbul University in 1933-4, he continued working as a publicist, scholar, and parliamentarian well into the 1950s, permitting him to influence rising generations of Turkish educators (Salmaoni, 2004)."

The revolution occurred because those who wanted changes were not happy with the class system, the lack of political flexibility in the nation and other issues with the way Turkey was being operated. It was a nation of the privileged receiving all of the goods and the poor receiving nothing. This was true when it came to education, policy, funding and all other elements that are important to industrialized living (Salmaoni, 2004).

The revolution was not the first attempt to install a democratic style of government. There had been an attempt to do exactly that in 1876 when the upper class Turkish residents made the move to overthrow the autocratic system lead at the time by a Sultan (Maloy, et al. 2006).

The earlier attempt to secure constitutional government, connected with the name of Midhat Pasha and resulting in the constitution of December 23, 1876, was a failure, due to the lack at that time of any feeling for its necessity among the ruling caste (Maloy, et al. 2006). "

Following that attempt was a three-decade era in which a government that was becoming increasingly centralized made life uncomfortable and miserable for many. Those who opposed the existing regime in any way at all were stripped of their station in life as well as any land or property that they might own at the time.

It became harder and harder to live and have a fulfilling life because the regime removed all freedoms and abilities to have free speech and free thinking (Maloy, et al. 2006).

During the three decades of this regime many upper class Turks became angry about losing their territories and not being able to openly express their discontent. The economic penetration of foreign powers also began to weigh heavily on the minds of those who resided within Turkey. It soon became apparent to all socioeconomic classes that the way to a better life was to overthrow the current government and replace it with a democratic government (Maloy, et al. 2006).

In February of 1908 as tempers were heating up and quiet discussions were taking place behind closed doors about how to make the needed changes, an announcement came that there was going to be a railroad constructed that would go through Movibazar (Maloy, et al. 2006). The purpose of the coming railroad was to link Bosnian and Salonika lines thereby providing an Australian influence to the entire Western region.

At the same time a large number of Turkish troops were in Macadonia to work through a disturbance that had recently happened there (Maloy, et al. 2006).

The common soldiers were unpaid and wasting their time, the officers were unable to preserve order and dissatisfied with the presence of the foreign officers, who were a constant reminder that the days of the Empire were numbered. Emissaries, sent out front Paris found a good reception, and the revolution was proclaimed July 6, 1908. At first foreigners thought little of it, but adhesion was rapid (Maloy, et al. 2006). Troops sent against the rebels refused to fight (Maloy, et al. 2006). Freedom was proclaimed for the Christians, and safety for foreign interests (Maloy, et al. 2006). The Sultan suddenly surrendered by granting a constitution all calling for an election (Maloy, et al. 2006). The rule of Abdul Hamid had been supported by Germany, even through the Armenian massacres (Maloy, et al. 2006). Popular feeling naturally turned against it, while France, the home for many years of the leaders of the Young Turks, and England, the friend of liberty, were much favored (Maloy, et al. 2006). In their turn, they acclaimed the revolution as a marvel, which it was in many respects (Maloy, et al. 2006). During this period, the grand vizier, Kiamil Pasha, was Anglophile (Maloy, et al. 2006). English and French aid largely was used in reconstructing the government (Maloy, et al. 2006)."

Reconstruction

Following the revolution there began a reconstruction of the Turkish government and way of life that included economic, education and political changes.

The Turks spoke in a collective voice when they boycotted Australian goods and services enmasse.

As the new parliament began to assemble for the purpose of constructing government blueprints the were stirrings of racial hatred as well as many instances of fraud that were born of the residual anger from the revolution itself (Maloy, et al. 2006).

In many instances of revolution, the problems had been building for so long and anger had become so ingrained in those who felt abused by the government that when a revolution finally did occur those who were still angry from past issues often demanded that there be retaliation against those they overthrew in the way of boycotts, political and sometimes physical punishments.

The Turkish revolution was no different and there were many people who called for retaliation and also fueled other issues including racial hatred (Maloy, et al. 2006).

In addition, any time a revolution occurs, other nations look at the nation that is rebuilding and there is always a possibility of foreign troubles or takeovers that are spurred by the temporary weakness experienced by the reconstructing nation.

In other words once a nation has undergone a government overthrow and are in the middle of reconstruction there are many unanswered questions, as well as unresolved issues. It is a time of weakness for that nation and foreign factions interested in a take over see it as a prime time to make the move.

When the Turkish revolution was complete and the reconstruction began the nation was under a threat of foreign invasion or economic problems from other countries.

Against the party supported by the Committee of Union and Progress, devoted to centralization, Ottomanization, and destruction of special privileges for national, religious, or foreign interests, was the liberal party, in touch with Greek, Armenian, Bulgarian, Arab, and Albanian nationalists, suspected of alliance with the Sultan and reaction. Kiamil Pasha, found his support here and was forced to resign (Maloy, et al. 2006). Himil Pasha was less strongly English (Maloy, et al. 2006). As the revolution became more military, those who remembered Paris played less part (Maloy, et al. 2006). The Adana massacres and the failure to adequately punish those responsible, caused a corresponding coolness of the English and French toward the Young Turk (Maloy, et al. 2006). The growing power of Enver Pasha, the "hero of the revolution," was also thrown toward Germany (Maloy, et al. 2006). In spite of all this, it is probable that at the beginning of the World War the majority of responsible officials and thinkers in Turkey were not pro-German (Maloy, et al. 2006)."