Özet:

Attilâ Ilhan has been in a tendency in the way that the main problems of Turkey can be solved in the near-term history. This is why Turkey has turned to its last two hundred years of history with a great deal of interest. The question is whether there is a continuity or a gap between the last period of the Ottoman Empire and the Republic period. The reforms of Tanzimat and the Alliance and the Terakki period have brought root criticisms. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk insisted that the revolution, with its formation against the Batıcı cultural policies, with its anti-imperialist attitude and the pursuit of a civil, liberalistic, democratic socialist regime, has made a breakthrough from the prehistory. He found that these fundamental qualities of the Kemalist period began to exacerbat from the late 1930s. After Atatürk's death, Turkey was again under the control of the Western-centric imperialist system, a approach in the form of a totalitarian power in the internal politics, and the military reverses have made the main axis of the texts. These values have brought Attila Ilhan to the minds of both Mete Tunçay and Idris Küçükömer, and have opened the line between the left-Kemalism in the line of Doğan Avcıoğlu.

Özet:

Attila İlhan has long held the view that Turkey’s fundamental problems can be resolved through an examination of its recent history, which is why he has studied with great fervor the last two centuries in the history of the country. Addressing the question of whether the transition from the late period Ottoman Empire to the era of the Turkish Republic constitu-ted a continuity or a rupture, he has raised harsh criticisms of the reforms brought in by the Tanzimat (Reorganization) and the İttihat ve Terakki (Committee of Union and Prog-ress) period. Attila İlhan argues insistently that the opposition to Western cultural policies, the anti-imperialist stance and the search for a regime based on a civil, free and democratic society brought by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s revolution marked a deeply-rooted break from the country’s prior history. He claims further that these fundamental characteristics of the Kemalist period began to erode at the end of the 1930s. The central perspective expressed in his works is that following Atatürk’s death, Turkey fell under the tutelage of a Western-centered imperialist system, with internal politics veering towards totalitarian ten-dencies, and military coups further reinforcing this situation. Such opinions have pitted Attila İlhan against the views and theses supported by Mete Tunçay and İdris Küçükömer, while also distancing him from the leftist-oriented Kemalism followed by Doğan Avcıoğlu.

Anahtar Kelimeler: