Görüntüleme
35
İndirme
3
Yirminci yüzyıl Türk düşüncesinin Anadolucu milliyetçiliğinin önemli bir figürü olan Nurettin Topçu’nun ahlak, din ve irade ve eğitim konusundaki görüşleri oldukça sık irdelenmiş ve bu alanda düşüncesinin özgünlüğünü ortaya koyan pek çok çalışma olmasına rağmen onun parlamenter demokrasi fikrine yönelik görüşlerini ele alan çalışma sayısı pek fazla değildir. Topçu’nun benimsediği Anadoluculuk fikri 20. Yüzyılın başında ortaya çıkmış bir düşünsel akımdır ve farklı Anadoluculuk ekollerinin varlığından söz edilebilir. Topçu’nun ruhçu milliyetçi sosyalist bir Anadoluculuk fikrini savunması, onu diğer milliyetçi yaklaşımlardan farklı kılmaktadır. Özellikle Topçu’daki kapitalizm eleştirisi onun parlamenter demokrasi fikrine de eleştirel yaklaşmasına neden olmuştur. Nurettin Topçu geliştirdiği devlet anlayışı çerçevesinde demokrasiyi milliyetçiliğe aykırı bir sistem olarak görür ve bu yönden eleştirir. Bu eleştirinin sonucu olarak da parlamenter demokrasiye dayalı çoğulcu bir siyasal yapı yerine korporatif otoriter bir siyasal sistemi önerir. Bu makalede düşünürün milliyetçilik anlayışı diğer milliyetçilik anlayışlarından ayrıldığı noktaları ortaya koyarak, kapitalizm eleştirisine dayalı olarak parlamenter demokrasi fikrine getirdiği eleştirileri ele alacağız ve parlamenter demokrasi yerine otoriter bir korporatizmi önerdiğini göstermeye çalışacağız. Bu çerçevede yazarın demokrasi kavramına getirdiği eleştirinin de popülist bir romantizm temelinde getirilen bir eleştiri olduğu gösterilmeye çalışılacaktır.
The views of Nurettin Gunçu, an important figure of the Anatolian nationalism of the twentieth-century Turkish thought, on the issue of morality, religion and will and education have been very frequently discussed and although there are many studies that reveal the originality of his thought in this field, the number of studies that address his views on the idea of parliamentary democracy is not much. The idea of the Anatolucity was adopted by the Gunman 20. It is a thought stream that emerged at the beginning of the century and it can be mentioned about the existence of different Anatolic ecoles. The defense of the gunman’s spiritual nationalist socialist idea of Anatolucity makes it different from other nationalist approaches. In particular, the criticism of capitalism in Gunçu has led to a critical approach to his parliamentary democracy idea. In the framework of the state understanding developed by Nurettin Gunçu, he sees democracy as an anti-nationalist system and criticizes it in this direction. As a result of this criticism, the parliamentary proposes a corporate authorized political system instead of a democratic-based multi-political structure. In this article, we will discuss the criticism of the idea of parliamentary democracy based on the criticism of capitalism, by revealing the points where the thinker’s conception of nationalism is separated from the other conceptions of nationalism, and try to show that he proposes an authoritarian corporatism instead of parliamentary democracy. In this context, the criticism of the writer to the concept of democracy will also be sought to show that it is a criticism based on populist romanticism.
Nurettin Topçu is an important figure of the Anatolian nationalism of the 20th century. Scholars have frequently examined Turkish thought, views on morality, religion, will, and education. Although many studies have revealed the originality of his thought in this area, studies addressing his views on the concept of parliamentary democracy are few. The idea of Anatolianism, as adopted by Topçu, is an intellectual movement that emerged at the beginning of the 20th century, such that various schools of Anatolianism have been established. Topçu’s advocacy of a spiritual, nationalist, and socialist Anatolianism idea makes him different from other nationalist approaches. In particular, the criticism of capitalism in Topçu’s thought critically led to the formulation of the idea of parliamentary democracy. Nurettin Topçu has regarded democracy as an anti-nationalist system within the framework of the understanding of the state he developed within the framework of populist romanticism and criticizes it from this point of view. As a result of such a criticism, he has proposed an authoritarian corporate state system instead of a pluralist political structure based on parliamentary democracy. This study puts forward the points where Topçu’s nationalism differs from other conceptions of nationalism. Moreover, the study examines Topçu’s criticism of the idea of parliamentary democracy is based on a critique of capitalism and demonstrates that he proposes an authoritarian corporatism instead of parliamentary democracy. Using this framework, the study intends to illustrate that the author’s criticism of the concept of democracy is also a criticism resulting from populist romanticism.
Alan : Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler
Dergi Türü : Ulusal
Makale Detay 
Benzer Makaleler
PDF Görüntüle
Dergi Bilgisi
Eseri Dinleyin
Alıntı Yap
Bu Sayfayı Yazdırın
Paylaş
Mendeley
