Democracy, Populism, and the Islamist Political Entrepreneurship in Turkey

• In Event: Islam and Party Politics

Abstract

In 2012, in the wake of the Arab Spring, Turkey was shown as a model to the Arab world with its democracy that was compatible with its Muslim identity. After the 1997 military intervention, Islamists implemented a political discourse based on human rights and democracy. They supported pluralism through which the marginalized groups including Islamic groups, Kurds and non-Muslim minorities would participate in politics actively. Only 5 years later, Turkey became an authoritarian regime with limited civil and political liberties and a rising Islamist populism under the same Islamists who built a democratic rule only a short time ago. After the 2011 Arab uprisings, Islamists implemented a populist discourse that prioritized a nationalist agenda with an authoritarian flavor. The Islamists took a hostile stance toward dissent, developed a contempt for civil and political liberties, and implemented discriminatory policies toward minorities. While the party changed its direction over the years, it did not lose its social support base; in contrast, it increased the popular support over time.

It is puzzling how the same Islamist political party, Justice and Development Party, justified both democracy and authoritarianism toward its constituency and was able to keep the popular support despite its changing positions. This study analyzes the mechanisms through which the Islamists in Turkey justified their political decisions toward their own base. In doing so, it looks at how they use religious discourses, media, and the prevalent anti-Western populist sentiment in justifying their political moves. I argue political actors utilize ideational resources in the support of their own interests. The Turkish experience gives me a unique research design opportunity to explain when Islamists change their political preferences and strategies. Setting the actors and national setting constant, the research design allows me to assess how Islamists renegotiated religious teachings in justifying democracy or authoritarianism in varying contexts.

The study challenges the findings of the literature on Islamist politics and democracy. While some considered Islamists as inflexible in their ideology and difficult to moderate their political discourse, others argued that political participation moderates Islamists either through social interaction with people from other ideological groups, or through cross-ideological cooperation or through taking part in liberal economic reform. In this research, I show that the ideology of Islamists can be transformed over time, but not necessarily in a progressive way toward democracy even when Islamists participate in electoral politics.

Author

• Ramazan Kilinc, University of Nebraska-Omaha