Nihal Atsız's World-View and Its Influences on the Shared Symbols, Rituals, Myths and Practices of the Ülkücü MovementCenk Saraçoğlu (Sabancı Üniversitesi)
May 2004
Download PDF:
www.let.leidenuniv.nl/tcimo/tulp/Research/cs.pdf[img src="http://atsiz.org/resimler/atsiz_resim[1].jpg"]
INTRODUCTIONThe shared symbols, myths and rituals have always had a vital importance in the
establishment, organization and maintenance of popular nationalist movements. While some
of these symbols and practices are common among all nationalist social movements, some
others are context-specific because they are meaningful, and have an organizing power only in
a certain social context. In fact, as the ideology of nationalism is constructed on the basis of
the idea of homogeneity and collectivity of a certain social group, the presence of contextspecific
shared elements in a certain form of nationalism becomes necessary to create the
sentiment of we-ness within the group so that the given social group could imagine itself as a
distinctive or sui-generis social entity and perceive outsiders as the “others.” For these shared
symbols, myths and rituals to be effective in constructing a group-consciousness, rather than
to be directly political and rigid1, they should be flexible and ambiguous enough to be
interpreted and internalized in different ways within the group.2 In other words, the shared
elements in a nationalist movement should be amenable to different interpretations, so that
varieties of individual perceptions of them would not create a dissolving crisis in this group.
That is why most of the nationalist symbols, myths and rituals are mystical and constructed to
be ineffable. When the mysticism and ineffableness becomes embedded in the shared
elements of nationalist movements, the range of the varieties of the individual interpretation
and of internalization of these shared elements becomes wider.
Although the group members consider these shared symbols and practices given and
self-evident, they are constructed and recognized within historical and social processes, and
through interaction within the group. Hence, their maintenance depends on the ability of the
social group to reproduce them within the realm of social relations. Art and literature are some
of the most appropriate spheres for the reproduction of the nationalist symbols, rituals and
myths4. However, apart from reproducing existing shared elements of a nationalist movement,
art and literature can be the spheres of the invention and creation of new symbols and new
myths; and in some cases the artistic and literal works, themselves, can be nationalist symbols.
Turkish nationalism is not an exception to the fact that literal and artistic works
effectively provide or reproduce nationalist symbols and practices. However, as Turkish
nationalism’s configuration has been subject to change along with the socio-economic
conditions of Turkish society, the shared symbols, rituals and myths that have been
incorporated into Turkish nationalism has varied throughout the history of modern Turkey.
This is, of course, not to deny the fact that there have been some continual symbols and myths
within the ideology of Turkish nationalism.
Turkish nationalism does not solely consist of its official interpretation by the Turkish
state; it has always had some variants. Although the main skeleton of Turkish nationalism was
historically created by Turkish state elite, how it manifested itself and was practiced inevitably
differed within the private sphere, because Turkish society has had a heterogeneous social
structure constituted by different social groups with different characteristics and hence
different tendencies and perceptions. For instance, one can easily realize that the practice of
Turkish nationalism in the urban context is strikingly different from its practice in the rural
context. As the Turkish society developed through capitalist lines and as new social classes
come into scene in the urban context and consequently as the new political identities started to
flourish in the political sphere, these differences have become even more visible. Especially
after 1960s, when various political ideologies came into the political scene, one could observe
that Turkish nationalism acquired different and even contradictory forms as a result of its
integration with different political ideologies. Therefore, the nationalist symbols, rituals and
myths utilized in Turkish nationalism varied according to also the political ideology with
which Turkish nationalism integrated. However, one should note that this does not mean that
such diverse manifestations of Turkish nationalism represent a complete rupture with official
Turkish nationalism. In most cases, the “unofficial manifestations of Turkish nationalism”5
was built on the basis of the ideological assumptions and symbols of the Turkish nationalism
of the Turkish state.
The Nationalist Action Party (MHP) or the idealist movement (ülkücü hareket) in the
popular language is one of the political and social movements who adopted and developed a
distinct understanding of Turkish nationalism. In terms of its dynamic structure, what we
claimed about the Turkish nationalism in general is also valid for the nationalism of the
ülkücü movement in particular: there is not one strict form of MHP nationalism. Its form and
even its content are subject to change according to time and also according to specific social
contexts. Therefore, the symbols, practices, discourses, assumptions, rituals etc. employed by
the Nationalist Action Party do not exhibit a homogenous and fixed character. However, at the
same time, it is still possible to argue that there have also existed certain continual symbols
and practices, which has been adopted by almost all sympathizers of the ülkücü movement. In
fact, the presence of these shared elements, without an exception among all ülkücüs make it
possible for them to develop and maintain a group identity. However, I should remark that
even if all ülkücü movement has collectively shared symbols and practices, how they are
understood, imagined or manufactured might vary. As I mentioned at the beginning such
flexibility is necessary for a shared element to be effective and influential in nationalist
movements.
While some of the shared elements in the ülkücü nationalism were produced by the
movement itself, through its own social and political practice, a great part of these shared
symbols, rituals and myths were transferred from official Turkish nationalism. For instance,
one can argue that the Turkish nationalist elements in the “dominant official ideology”6 of the
Turkish state were reproduced by the ülkücü movement in their extreme and crudest forms.
Apart from the elements in official Turkish nationalism7, the symbols and representations
used in some independent literal and artistic works have become a source of inspiration for the
organization and mobilization of the Nationalist Action Party. Nihal Atsız, for instance, was
one of the most important figures that have influenced the ülkücü movement.
This situation demands the following significant question: Although there never
emerged any complete correspondence between the ideology of the Nationalist Action Party
and the ideological outlook of Nihal Atsız as we shall see later, what factors prepared the
conditions for the fact the latter is very influential over the former? In this paper, I will
attempt to answer this question and my answer, at the end, would provide us some hints for
understanding both the nature of the ülkücü movement and Nihal Atsız’s perspective on the
world. While answering this question I will establish some links between some continual
structural characteristics of the ülkücü movement and the general political outlook of Nihal
Atsız. However, before undertaking such an attempt, first of all it will be necessary to define
and show some general characteristics of the ülkücü movement and then to present some
evidence that shows the idea that Nihal Atsız’s works were really influential on the
mobilization of ülkücüs. In the latter part, while discussing the factors that could facilitate
Atsız’s influence over the ülkücüs, I will explore the parallelism between the ideas, symbols
and notions in Atsız’s novels of Bozkurtların Ölümü, Bozkurtlarin Dirilişi and Deli Kurt ,
some of his articles, poems, stories and the practices, assumptions, on the one hand and
discourses of the ülkücü movement, on the other.
A) WHO ARE ÜLKÜCÜS?In this paper, as most of the scholars do, Ülkücü movement will be taken as the
political movement that developed under the leadership of Alparslan Türkeş. Türkeş, as a
former army officer, held the presidency of Republican Peasants Nation Party (CKMP) in
1965 and reconstructed the party through ultra-nationalist and anti-communist lines with its
Nine Lights doctrine8 and in the end, renamed it as the Nationalist Action Party in 19699.
Although it is the beyond the scope of this paper to discuss whether the formation of the
ülkücü movement was the direct the product of the deliberate attempt of the Turkish state to
counter a rising socialist political struggle in Turkey10 one can easily observe the fact that the
ülkücü movement until 1980s portrayed the “dangers” posed by communism as its raison
d’etre and as an important tool for organization, motivation and mobilization. The ülkücü
movement, then, will be thought of as the political movement that emerged under the actual or
symbolic leadership of Alparslan Türkeş and under the banner of nationalism and anticommunism
and then continued, after the death of Alparslan Türkeş, by persisting to convey
certain historically essential characteristics of ülkücü identity but with some changes, as we
shall see later. However, my identification of the ülkücü movement on the basis of its political
party and leader should not mislead us to consider the characteristics of this movement as
consisted solely of the party’s official political activities and perspectives. Ülkücü movement
is also a distinctive political and social culture, as well as a means to constructing a social
identity. This situation emerged as a result of the party’s distinct ways of popularizing itself.
The party established some additional institutions like Ülkü Ocakları (Idealist Club),
Komunizmle Mücadele Dernekleri (Associations for the Struggle Against Communism),
where the ülkücüs socialized themselves and, developed and reproduced their own ülkücü
identity and, got involved in the local political struggle with local agendas. This made it
possible for the Nationalist Action Party to create and maintain a “calcified” popular support
with a specific nationalist culture and identity.
As I mentioned before, political and ideological outlook of the ülkücü movement had a
very dynamic structure as its configuration changed according to social and economic
developments in Turkish society. At a certain level of abstraction and by disregarding the
variants within the ülkücü movement itself, it is possible to periodize the historical
development of the Nationalist Action Party by analyzing the changing political tendencies of
the ülkücüs. The first period of the ülkücü movement is the era between 1965 and 1969,
within which the party leadership prioritize the agendas of anti-comunism and Turkish
nationalism. The period between 1969 and 1980 marks the era in which the Islamic elements
were increasingly incorporated in the party’s Turkish nationalism and anti-communism11. In
the period between 1980 and 1990 the ülkücü movement experienced a political identity crisis
because of both the fact that Turkish left, increasing power of which had been one of the
important justifications for the existence of the ülkücü movement, lost effectiveness on
Turkish politics and that the ülkücü movement’s leadership remained indecisive and
inconclusive about developing a consistent attitude and policy towards the 1980 military
intervention, which hit also the most prominent ülkücü cadres and its party organization.
During this period, ülkücüs inclined to more intensify already existing Islamic elements in
their world outlook at the expense of Turkist sentiments.12 However, post-1990 period,
without completely leaving the Islamist discourse, witnessed the revitalization of the Türkist
elements in the ülkücü movement, as a result of the independence of the Turkic republics of
the former Soviet Union and of the rise of a Kurdish separatist movement13. Such a
periodization of the history of the ülkücü movement will be very helpful for us to set the
reasons for the changing intensities of Nihal Atsız’s influence on ülkücüs. This periodization
will be embedded in my analysis throughout this paper.
B) THE CONTINUAL INFLUENCE OF NİHAL ATSIZ OVER THE ÜLKÜCÜ
MOVEMENTGiven the facts that Nihal Atsız’s political outlook involves an extreme and pure
Turkish racism and that the ülkücü movement in the discursive level rejected and criticized
the ideology of racism, one can doubt the existence of an ideological and emotional link
between Nihal Atsız and ülkücüs. It is true that after 1969, when the ülkücü movement
incorporated Islamic elements into its Turkish nationalism, Atsız’s organic connection with
ülkücüs was completely broken.14 However, this does not necessarily mean that Atsız ceased
to be an important and inspiring figure for ülkücüs.15 Almost in all periods of the ülkücü
movement Nihal Atsız’s works have provided conceptional and symbolic inputs to the
cognitive world of ülkücüs and that he has always, but with different intensities, been an
important and respected figure within the ülkücü movement.
Once the similarities between the ülkücü practices, symbols and rituals, and the
elements used in Nihal Atsız’s literal works are traced, one can easily have the sense that
Nihal Atsız had many “contributions” for the ülkücü style of action. In fact, this reasoning can
be supported with some material evidences. For instance, a former ülkücü scholar, Mustafa
Çalık, who undertook an empirical study among “Gümüşhane MHP elite composed of 144
people” in 1977 asked the question to ülkücüs that “Which authors or books became the most
influential over you?” Interestingly nobody gave the name of Alparslan Türkeş’s works.
While Necdet Sevinç is the most frequent answer with 23 people, Nihal Atsız follows him
with 21. Osman Yüksel Serdengeçti is the third with 12 ranks.16 One can easily claim that
Necdet Sevinç is not a surprising answer when we consider the fact he was the editor of Bizim
Anadolu(Our Anatolia) that was the official newspaper of the Nationalist Action Party. In
1977, this was the only official party publication that can be distributed to rural places of
Anatolia. Therefore, what is much more important and surprising and hence worth analysing
than the readability of Necdet Sevinç is the popularity of Nihal Atsız among Gümüşhane
ülkücüs given the facts that there was not an organic connection between the Nationalist
Action Party and Nihal Atsiz in 1977 and that the publication and distribution opportunities
were limited in 1977 Turkey, and that after 1970s Nationalist Action Party started to give an
increasing emphasis on the Islamic elements in its ideology at the expense of Turkism, a
tendency which would clash Nihal Atsız’s world outlook.17
There are some other indications of the popularity and importance of Nihal Atsiz
among ülkücü community. The current party president Devlet Bahçeli’s following
interpretation of the 3 Mayis 1944 case about Racism and Turanism in Turkey (Irkçılık,
Turancılık Davası), in which the prominent Turkist figures like Nihal Atsiz, Rıza Nur and
Alparslan Türkeş were charged with having racist and Turanist ideas, shows that Nihal Atsiz’s
significance and prestige among the ülkücü community is still strong:
Bilindiği gibi, Türk Milliyetçiliği tarihinde önemli dönüm noktalarından biri olan 3
Mayıs 1944 hadisesinin üzerinden tam 49 yıl geçmiş bulunmaktadır. Ama 3 Mayıs 1944’ü
doğuran şartlar ve gelişmeler önemini ve sıcaklığını bugün de korumaktadır.İşte böyle bir
dönemde kararlı ve ilkeli bir grup Türk Milliyetçisi aydın, rejimin yarattığı baskıcı ortama
rağmen, tehlikeli gidişata “dur” demek için kamuoyuna ve devlet yönetimine uyarılarda
bulunmuşlardır. Büyük fikir ve dava adamı rahmetli Nihal Atsız’ın önderlik ettiği ve rahmetli
Başbuğumuzun da yer aldığı bu aydın hareketine duyarlı Türk gençliği de destek olmuş;
böylelikle Türk Milliyetçiliği, fikir akımı hüviyetinin yanında sosyal bir hareket mahiyeti de
kazanmaya başlamıştır. (…) Bu vesileyle, Başbuğumuz Alparslan Türkeş Bey ve kıymetli fikir
adamı Nihal Atsız Bey başta olmak üzere zorlu bir dönemde adını tarihe yazdıran bütün dava
büyüklerimizi rahmet ve minnetle anıyorum. Ruhları şâd, mekânları cennet olsun18.Some other examples and cases show not only the fact that today, among the
ülkücü community, Nihal Atsiz is a prominent figure, who became very effective in
the construction of the cognitive world of and style of action of ülkücüs, but also the
fact that Nihal Atsiz, himself, has become a symbol of ülkücü movement. The
following sentences from a popular ülkücü newspaper is an appropriate occasion to see
how Nihal Atsiz has become a symbolic personality for the ülkücü movement:
Değerli okurlarımız, geçen hafta verdiğimiz Başbuğ Alparslan Türkeş posterine gösterdiğiniz yoğun
alâkaya teşekkür ederiz. İlgi ve taleplerinizi dikkate alan yayın kurulumuz bundan böyle
Türk Milleti’ne hizmeti geçmiş abide şahsiyetlerin posterlerini siz değerli okurlarına armağan etmeyi
kararlaştırmıştır. Bu çerçevede gelecek hafta Türk Milliyetçiliği’nin ölümsüz önderlerinden Hüseyin
Nihal Atsız’ın 35x50 ebadında bir posterini vereceğiz. Hayatı Türk Milliyetçiliği mücadelesiyle geçmiş
bu Ülkü Devi’nin orijnal tablosunu kaçırmayın.19After this point, I will attempt to analyze the factors that could create the convenient
context for this situation to occur. I will claim that seven interrelated essential characteristics
of the ülkücü movement prepared a convenient context for Nihal Atsiz’s ideas, symbols and
myths to be influential over the cognitive world and action style of the ülkücü movement.