About Surveying the Intellectuals

(An article, written in 1947, by author Halide Edib Adıvar in Akşam Gazetesi)

Translated into English by Aysel K. Basci

Recently, many newspapers representing a wide range of political viewpoints, including old and new philosophies, have sent surveys to intellectuals soliciting their opinions. Topping the list of topics in these surveys is nationalism. Anyone assumed to be well read is in this circle. Therefore, I am among those who are being surveyed.

Because I have already expressed my humble opinion on the meaning and boundaries of nationalism throughout my life and writing, so far I have not spent much time responding to these surveys. But as I look through the survey questions in front of me sent by “Şark Yolu (East Road),” I am convinced that I must describe what nationalism means to me, one last time, because rightfully or wrongfully, during the past quarter of a century, this concept has been interpreted and defined in many different, and sometimes opposing, ways. 

This particular survey asks two questions:

1. What does nationalism mean to you?

2. Would you describe Turkish nationalism based on your own understanding?

1. I divide nationalism into two categories: cultural and political.

Cultural nationalism. In my opinion there should not be any separation between nations or individuals based on cultural nationalism. So much so, that even among those who have adopted an ideology based on the “Earth is my country, humanity is my nation” principal (1), there has not been a single individual or nation who forgot its own artistic or cultural inheritance from the past for any extended period. We see every day that, good or bad, those works of art, individuals, and periods we are attempting to diminish, look down on, even teach our children to forget, just because they come from the Ottoman era, still occupy a significant place in our conscience. We see the same thing in Russia, which experienced perhaps the world’s most serious revolution. In Europe and even in America, where a complex diversity of European cultures exist, from the most extreme conservatives to the most fanatical liberals – that is to say, communists – no one has remained indifferent to the artistic works created by their nations or to their nation’s cultural evolution. Although members of the entire Western world criticize themselves openly and deeply, cultural nationalism is a reality they have never dismissed.

Just as the gradual physical evolution of animals is an observable consequence of nature, this creature named man, who is differentiated from animals by his brain and soul, has been fashioned by his loyalty to the past’s spiritual values as a natural necessity. Erasing this loyalty means converting people from being human to numbered robots that function as tools of a gigantic machine. If evolution exists, and for the sake of people’s survival, attachment and character are required, then cultural nationalism is the number one requirement. Therefore, this loyalty to past values, which is found at different levels across the world, is the most general way of describing cultural nationalism. We are obliged to believe that irrespective of the relations between nations, no matter how good or bad they are, internally or externally these feelings will be everlasting. 

Political nationalism. Turning to political nationalism, this has been different from nation to nation. However, as soon as political nationalism becomes extreme, it is always bad for humankind and bad for nations over long periods, and its results are disastrous. In their external politics, nations that have a population of extreme nationalists see other nations as lower than themselves and attempt to invade, and even destroy, other nations as soon as they see an opportunity. 

The most harmful case of political nationalism was experienced during the last quarter century among those who believed nationality is based solely on race. They ventured outside their borders, attempting to invade other nations with different cultures and traditions. In Hitler’s Germany, this racist dogma was tied to a powerful institution, a sort of fake government science. I believe it is wrong to assume that the defeat of the racists proved how defective their mentality is, because sometimes even those who believe in what is right can be defeated for a short while. However, in the end, the racists and their ideas always collapse and those with opposing ideas will prevail sooner or later. For those who want to understand how extreme political nationalism and racism cause a departure from reality and science, I recommend Julian Huxley’s book, “We Europeans.” 

2. Turning to the definition of Turkish nationalism based on my own understanding, this question is more difficult to answer than the previous one, because over time Turkish nationalism passed through various phases. For example, during the early period of the Ottoman Empire, nationalism was nonexistent. During what we call the Ottoman period, the time when the near-east Turks were most powerful, politics did not involve nationalism. At this time, nationality was based on language and religion alone and in politics there was a democratic inclination in the broadest sense of the word. Any Moslem citizen who spoke Turkish could be appointed to any official position based on aptitude. Citizens with other languages and religions were free to practice their own religions and use their own languages, and they were equal under the law, but could not be appointed to the highest positions in government.

During the second phase, after the French Revolution, the near-east Turks went a little further, maintaining the principal based on language and religion, but keeping nationalism away from the political arena. They granted equal rights to all religion and language groups.  

After that, a new element, Western thinking and philosophy, began to become increasingly important. Yet, the near-east Turks still did not mix nationalism with politics. This way, although the empire had weakened, they were able to hold it together a little longer. 

The third phase began during the Balkan War, and following that, World War I. During this period, the near-east Turks began to take the road of political nationalism because of treacherous political conditions, pressures, and disasters. For this period, Ziya Gökalp (2) defined the meaning of nationalism and listed its main pillars as “nationality, religion, and western civilization.” Had he defined it as a culture generated by language and religion, perhaps there would have been less opposition to it and less divisive movements among the citizens. Partly because there was no satisfactory interpretation, and partly because of the German influence, an element of racism was introduced into political nationalism. Later, this same influence spread to our cultural nationalism too, creating a situation that was not based on reality and without any roots, causing great divisions. I will not talk here about the political ramifications of this because in my articles “Yeni Turan” and “Evimize Bakalım,” which were published right after World War I, causing some people to label me as “Türkiyeci (Pro Türkiye)” and even attacking me, I described my thoughts very clearly, and indicated my total opposition to extreme nationalism, meaning “Pan-Turanism.” 

This unrealistic and extreme form of nationalism is harmful to our language’s evolution too. I find such nationalization or control policies, applied fanatically not only to our language, which should be based on organic evolution and represents the expression of our spiritual values, but even to our most worldly needs, quite harmful. It’s true that during this purification process aimed at creating a new official language, selecting words based on racial roots alone has introduced many new phrases and words to our language. But, at the same time, attempting to eliminate many existing phrases and words (3) that our people and culture have added to the language in the past has made both the melody and vocabulary of our language poorer. In addition, the creation of a new official language has caused a loosening of ties between generations and separated us from some very important old literary works. This is the reason why it is difficult to describe Turkish nationalism during this transitional period, while confronting such impacts and others too. In my view, intellectuals today can only express their own thoughts and understanding of Turkish cultural nationalism, but not what it will look like in the future. 

I believe our language and the rich literature created with that language should include the traditions and tastes of a common past that unites us; it should also be inclusive of all the values born on this soil. 

What Turkish nationalism should avoid most is any claim or show of superiority based on a boisterous and sick romanticism. We must not forget that we are the children of a proud nation who believe in the future; we must love what is ours, and we must sift through our past values that have not surfaced yet, examine those values, and bring them forth. At the same time, we must maintain an ability for measured criticism. However, this ability for criticism should not turn into a mentality that looks down on everything we have and encourages the imitation of everything that comes from abroad. We are neither superior, nor inferior, to anyone. Those capable of reasoning with a clear head and carefully measuring the external values to determine which are ahead of us and which are behind, will serve Turkish nationalism in the cultural arena the best. Otherwise, an unrealistic form of fanatical nationalism will have a negative and diminishing influence on our language as well. 

* * * 

Footnotes were added during translation for improved clarity.

(1) Alludes to poet Tevfik Fikret’s famous verse “Yeryüzü vatanım, insanlık milletim” or, “Milletim nev’i beşer, vatanım, ruyi zemin.”

(2) Ziya Gökalp was a prominent Turkish sociologist, poet and politician, who is considered to be the “founder” of modern Turkish sociology. 

(3) Refers to the elimination of many non-Turkish words and phrases (mostly Arabic and Farsi) that had become a part of the Turkish language over a long period of time.

Halide Edib Adıvar (1884-1964) is a prominent Turkish author, nationalist, scholar and political leader for women’s rights. She is best known for her novels criticizing the low social status of Turkish women and what she regarded as women’s lack of interest in changing their situation. She remains one of the most exalted figures in Turkish history.

Aysel K. Basci is a nonfiction writer and literary translator. She was born and raised in Cyprus and moved to the United States in 1975. Aysel is retired and resides in the Washington DC area. Her writing and translations have appeared in the Columbia Journal, Michigan Quarterly Review, Los Angeles Review, Critical Read, Aster(ix) Journal, Adelaide Literary Magazine, Bosphorus Review of Books and elsewhere.