Kemal Ataturk 1938-2020: the World’s Greatest 20th-century Statesman betrayed by Islamists, Pan-Turanianists & Kemalists

Exploring the Inexorable Constellation of Kemal Ataturk

A tribute in loving memory …


I. Several 20th-century Statesmen

II. What it takes to be a Statesman

III. The Dreadful Disaster that Kemal Ataturk averted

IV. Kemal Ataturk compared to Several Western Statesmen

V. Who was the Real, Historical Kemal Ataturk?

VI. Kemal Ataturk & Lenin: today’s Islamists are closer to Lenin

VII. Kemal Ataturk, Islamic Spirituality, and the Secular Nature of the Islamic State

VIII. Kemal Ataturk and the Origins of his Spirituality: an Embarrassment for All Western States and Secret Societies

IX. Kemal Ataturk and the Nature of his Accomplishments

X. Kemal Ataturk’s Everlasting Legacy and Turkey’s Betrayers

A – The Islamists

B – The Pan-Turanianists

C – The Kemalists

Many people consider Hitler as the world’s greatest 20th-century statesman, but the Führer (1889-1945) was still fighting when almost the entire territory of his earlier expanded country was already invaded by foreign armies; if we don’t take into consideration the factors ‘failure’, ‘results’, ‘endurance’, ‘posterity’ and ‘legacy’ when evaluating statesmen, then eventually anyone of them could be described as ‘the world’s greatest statesman’.

I. Several 20th-century Statesmen

Hitler’s legacy was rejected in his own country by means of military victory of his enemies, and Germany remains still occupied by World War II’s victorious allies 75 years after Hitler’s disappearance. This is not an example to follow.

Others show a predilection for an array of Communist theorists and dictators, finally selecting one of them as the world’s greatest 20th-century statesman: Lenin (1870-1924), Stalin (1878-1953), Mao (1893-1976) or even Fidel Castro (1916-2016). The differences among these undoubtedly influential personalities are great, but none of them left enduring state structures, although all of them marked their times with tumult. Lenin’s theory about the dictatorship of the proletariat was swept away by his successor; Stalin’s appalling practices had nothing to do with anything written by Marx, Engels, Lenin and many other theorists whose either incomprehensible or debased concepts fascinated mostly those who never understood them; thank God, Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971; Никита Сергеевич Хрущёв) terminated that lethal legacy. And today, 29 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, only the inhuman paranoids of today’s totally corrupt American Left attempt to revive a most farcical version of those statesmen’s worthless concepts and absurd theories that evidently disfigured and calamitously destroyed Russia.  

Only 44 years after his death, Mao (毛泽东) has almost no place, even as a picture, on the walls of Zhongnanhai (中南海), the Chinese Imperial Gardens that became the headquarters of the Communist Party of China (中國共產黨), and on the walls of the central government (State Council). Memorabilia from an almost totally forgotten past, the hammer and sickle are by now amiable decorative themes for participants to watch every five years in the otherwise meaningless and ceremonial, national congresses of the CPC. In all of these cases of statesmen, legacy is tantamount to irreverence.

Several other 20th-century statesmen are still revered for the political marketing needs of the decayed states of Western Europe and North America: Roosevelt (1882-1945), Churchill (1874-1965) or even the picturesque and tragi-comical figure of Charles de Gaulle (1890-1970). Since the needs for this deceptive propaganda are related to today’s politics, one realizes quasi-automatically that these personalities are still referred to by the criminal forgers of the Western World’s mainstream media and by the various representatives of the lawless regimes of the West only for the commemoration of the 20th century’s most nefarious and most disastrous event, i.e. the allied victory in 1945. But for the outright majority of the Mankind, these nonexistent statesmen, who were mere caretakers in times of war, are totally insignificant or rather unknown. In fact, they left no legacy, because their deeds had nothing ingenious, nothing innovative, and nothing inventive.

There were certainly important statesmen during the 20th c., but it would be absurd to consider as great statesman someone who either introduced catastrophic innovations or viewed his tenure as a mere service to the cause of an immoral and inhuman regime’s continuity – and this is the type of regime that prevailed in England, the United States, and France during the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Neither can a statesman be viewed as great, if his deeds impacted negatively or even disastrously vast parts of the world. In this sense, Georges Clémenceau (1841-1929), Lloyd George (1863-1945), and Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) were as disastrous and as ominous as Hitler or Stalin, because, due to their deeds, practices, choices and decisions, more people were either involved in unnecessary strives, rebellions, battles, and wars or oppressed and persecuted, killed and massacred in Asia, Africa and Europe than those persecuted or killed by the aforementioned German and Soviet statesmen. However, for the needs of generation comparison, one must admit that the three Western statesmen of World War I were ostensibly superior to their WWII counterparts.

II. What it takes to be a Statesman

All accounts made, a remarkable statesman must

i- accurately discern the environment in which he finds himself, see the past and the recent developments in perspective, and identify exactly where they lead to, if no other factors intervene and no effective reaction is undertaken, 

ii- dissociate himself from a flawed, immoral, hypocritical, tyrannical, and nefarious regime,

iii- identify the real, diachronic values of his culture and land, act accordingly, and eventually reinstate them,

iv- demonstrate virtue as per the terms of his nation’s historical traditions and moral values,

v- become known for his ingenious choices, decisions and practices,

vi- deliver innovative and inventive approaches to the needs of his society,

vii- defend, promote, consolidate and expand national identity and cultural integrity,

viii- found, transform or restructure a state that will be exemplary, enduring and based on Justice, Equality, Equity, Truthfulness, Solidarity, and Love,

ix- re-organize or re-engineer his society toward knowledge, wisdom, creativity, productivity, equilibrium and tolerance,

x- promote individual initiative, amelioration and expansibility, and

xi- be an example in terms of accurate perception, conceptual and active thinking, self-criticism, adaptability, and alternative option identification.

III. The Dreadful Disaster that Kemal Ataturk averted

The search for the world’s greatest statesmen is a quest for human advance. People have the tendency to turn to sizeable or powerful states in order to identify great statesmen; that’s an extremely wrong practice. Across History, great states involve basically unimportant rulers; the great sovereigns are an exception in the great states. Either in a small or big country, a great statesman is certainly someone, who can go against the stream, stop the decay, and reverse the trend. And this is exactly what Kemal Ataturk did to the Ottoman Empire, which was abandoned for Türkiye Cumhuriyeti (Republic of Turkey) to rise totally unrelated to, and absolutely unaffected by, the otherwise agonizing caliphate’s burdens, crimes, errors and decadence.

Even among Turkey’s most enthusiastic admirers and supporters of Kemal Ataturk, today many fail to realize that, without Kemal Ataturk, the entire territory of Turkey would be divided into many parts, which would be annexed and administered by either local elites ‘educated’ (i.e. taught how to hate their own land and those of the neighbors) in Western capitals or the criminal colonial regimes of the West that were setup by the historical enemies of Anatolia (i.e. the fake Popes of Rome, the Franks and the Anglo-Normans) as per below:

a) a part of Western Anatolia, Eastern Thrace, and Constantinople (in that case not Istanbul anymore) for Greece,

b) a part of Eastern Anatolia from Kars and Rize down to Malatya for Armenia,

c) a northeastern part of Anatolia for a minor coastal Pontus state,

d) a southeastern part of Anatolia for a multinational (Zaza, Turkmen, Kurmanji, Aramaean Christian, Arabic-speaking, and Yazidi) state fallaciously called “Kurdistan” (which would be plunged into interminable strife, war, oppression and massacres),

e) a minor southern part (Antioch/Antakya) that would be disastrously placed under French colonial rule, and

f) another southern part (from Mersin to Bodrum) under Italian mandate.

Even worse, the rest of the territory, i.e. the Central Anatolian plateau of Cappadocia (which means ca. 25% of today’s Turkey’s territory), would be deliberately plunged into incessant strives and civil wars generated by the colonial powers, which would greatly utilize all the idiotic Muslim theologians, ignorant muftis, uneducated cadis, uncultured sheikhs and lunatic imams for their colonial plans that all these cretins had no chance in a billion to possibly identify, let alone oppose (as it happened in the case of so many French and English colonies in Africa and Asia). Therefore, an enormous ethnic cleansing, an atrocious genocide, and a real Christian Reconquista in Anatolia would ensue (if Kemal Ataturk did not appear as a deus ex machina), totally changing the face of the wider region between Italy and Iran, which was at the time another great Islamic empire (under the Qajar dynasty) at the brink of total collapse and disintegration, just like the Ottoman Empire.

All this was prevented only because of Kemal Ataturk.

IV. Kemal Ataturk compared to Several Western Statesmen

Through another viewpoint and in comparison with the other three great European monarchies that collapsed in the aftermath of WWI, the founder of Modern Turkey

i) first, managed to save the inhabitants of the parts of the Ottoman Empire that he controlled, namely he achieved to

a) thwart the colonial invasion, which would be disguised under the lawless and criminal name of ‘Mandate’,

b) liberate the people from the burden of the past and from the darkness and the ignorance of the Ottoman Empire, which had already fallen in decay since the end of the 16th c. (date in which the Islamic Civilization ended),

c) rescue the people from the absurd and paranoid pseudo-Islamic theology of the Istanbulite indoctrinated ulemas, and

d) fully rehabilitate and empower the people, thus making them able to compete at the international level – in striking contrast with what happened in backward Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, Algeria, etc. whereby the compact imposition of Western colonialism triggered all the chaotic reactions that ended up with Islamic terrorism. and

ii) second, ensured that all the inhabitants of Modern Turkey avoided the following disastrous conditions that befell on Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary:

a) the unprecedented persecution, the inhuman slavery, and the incredible horrors and hecatombs that the criminal ruling minority of Soviet Union reserved for all the populations of Czarist Russia that were not lucky enough to have the destiny of the Baltic states and other western extremities of the Romanov realm,

b) the descent into the nether world that the Germans have experienced, after the departure of Kaiser and until today, because Germany is still not an independent state, because the country has been governed by an alien elite, which consists of puppets of the Allied Occupation, and for this reason, this elite does not express in any sense, let alone defend, the German national interests, and

c) the irrevocable pulverization of Austria-Hungary {which was dismembered and its territory was distributed into twelve (12) states (as of today), after the lawless treaties of Saint-Germain-en-Laye (1919) and Trianon (1920): Italy (Tyrol), Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Romania, Ukraine, Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Austria.

In other words, Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey did not experience

– either the massacres and the destructions that took place in Germany (1919-2020) and Russia (1917-1991)

– or the fragmentation that was imposed on Austria-Hungary after 1919.

Similarly with the territories lost to Austria, the Ottoman lands robbed by the colonial powers (namely today’s Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, and UAE) constituted the majority of the Ottoman territory; however, in striking difference with the Central European monarchy, the territories lost for the Sublime Porte (باب عالی‎ / Bab-i Ali) were insignificant, marginal, and to large extent, they were empty deserts.

Kemal Ataturk died in Istanbul at 9:05 am of Thursday, 10 November 1938. How symbolic! How impressively does it highlight the diametrically opposed world concepts of Ataturk and Hitler! In fact, Ataturk died after the terrible Kristallnacht was over! Since then 82 years have passed.

If the legacies of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao are by now extinct, rejected and mostly reviled, can one claim that the political heritage left by either the WWI generation of colonial statesmen (Georges Clémenceau, Lloyd George, and Woodrow Wilson) or their WWII counterparts (Roosevelt, Churchill and Charles de Gaulle) has survived?

Although today’s Western countries and sociopolitical elite pretend to represent a continuity of sociopolitical, economic, intellectual and academic tradition, in reality they serve purposes, they believe theories, they diffuse delusions, they promote practices, and they implement agendas that are at the antipodes of the world as conceived, desired and respected by both earlier generations of Western statesmen.

Despite their fake claims that they respect freedom of speech, today’s Western statesmen prohibit free speech and penalize everyone, who denies the falsehood of the so-called Holocaust and the forgery of the so-called Armenian Genocide. At the same time, they conceal other, real (i.e. planned) and worse genocides, like the Oromo Genocide carried out by the Amhara Abyssinians in Eastern Africa over the past 150 years and the Turanian Genocide carried out in Russia over the past 450 years, after the Muscovite expansion undertaken by Ivan IV the Terrible (Иван Грозный). The Western World’s bogus-‘freedom of speech’ means that you demand ‘freedom’ for the ‘Kurds’ (who are not one nation, but many different nations, namely Kurmanji, Zazaki, Bahdinani, Yazidi, Shabak, Sorani, Gorani, Faili, Ahl-e Haq, Hawrami, Ardalani, etc.), but not for France’s oppressed and persecuted nations, i.e. the Basks, the Corsicans, the Catalans, the Occitans, the Alsatians and the Bretons.

Due to grave distortion of concepts, total disregard of values, and absolute perversion of connotation, Western European bogus-freedom ended up in criminal acts (abortion), abnormal practices (homosexual marriages), and corruptive operations (adoption of children by homosexual ‘couples’).

Gender-based linguistic tyranny and demented dogmatism, mainstream media dictatorship, social media degeneration, lifestyle debasement, educational degradation, and finance capitalism laced with the idiotic Modern Monetary Theory brought fourth destructive conditions of socioeconomic-sociopolitical life that would have been totally denounced as defective, nefarious and inhuman by all the aforementioned Western statesmen of the 20th c.

In other words, today’s West has nothing to do with early 20th c.’s West anymore, and the above mentioned WWI and WWII statesmen’s heritage is null and void.

Contrarily to the Soviet Union and to Nazi Germany, Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey still survives; contrarily to the morally degenerated Western European and North American states and societies, Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey demonstrated impressive resistance to social corruption, lifestyle decay, and cultural decomposition; and contrarily to today’s China, Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey did not shift from Mao’s version of Communism to the mixed socialist market economy that Xi Jinping (1953-; 习近平) has successfully managed to keep in balance.

But has Kemal Ataturk’s legacy survived?

V. Who was the Real, Historical Kemal Ataturk?

Kemal Ataturk was not a man of theories, ideas, and words; he was a man of action, deeds and effective practicality. Many theorists and ideologists wanted and tried to implement concepts and ideas; but their effort ended up in monstrous deliveries about which all realized that they were at astronomical distance from the original thought. Contrarily to the delusional theories of these ominous persons and to their calamitous implementations, there was never a theory or ideology such as “Kemalism”.

Kemal Ataturk did not write a treatise, did not compose any theory, and did not elaborate an ideology about

– how 20th c. Muslims can best organize their societies and establish a pertinent system of governance that will enable them to fully compete with the world’s leading states,

– the way Turkic nations can achieve national independence, comprehend historical identity, preserve cultural integrity, set up a fully functional and efficient system of governance, and establish an interstate organization, and

– the method through which Anatolia would synchronize with Western Europe and North America in the early 20th c.

He wanted only to exactly implement the correct solution to an urgent problem that would become lethal to vast populations: the problem’s name was ‘Ottoman Empire’.

As a matter of fact, Kemal Ataturk did not act based on text, program, ideology or theory, and if we refer to his early conceptualization of a state and to its ultimate implementation of the concept, we soon understand there is no such distance as the chaos that separates Marx’s theory from Lenin’s adaptation of Marxism or even the enormous space between Lenin’s published works in the 1900s or 1910s and Lenin’s newly proclaimed state in early 1924.

Only 19.5 years separate Kemal Ataturk’s death from his start as a statesman (his disembarkment in Samsun: 19 May 1919 – 10 November 1938); but if one compares his early speeches and the condition to which Turkey was risen few months before the Halâskâr Gazi (‘the victorious savior’) died, one concludes that the founder of Turkey delivered exactly what he promised. This testifies to an exceptional foresight in terms of both, human nature and human society. Ataturk understood in full depth the human being at the personal level, namely how humans function, act, perform and react; and at the same time, he realized very well the human being at the collective level, namely the way human communities tend to behave, operate, produce, create and eventually destroy their own deeds and achievements.

There is a key point of differentiation: contrarily to all theorists, ideologists and intellectuals, who rose to power, Ataturk knew exactly where each and every of his decisions was leading to. As personal qualification, this outstanding trait can be attributed to both, an innate talent and the formation of a military. Ataturk was the Geometer of Governance.

Ali Rıza oğlu Mustafa (as his original name was back in 1881) graduated from the Ottoman Military College (Istanbul) in 1905 and started then his legendary military career that brought him to the four corners of the Ottoman Empire, before making of him the great hero of Gallipoli in the portentous Battle of Çanakkale that Western historiographers rather call ‘the Dardanelles campaign’. Leading the Ottoman 5th Army (along with Enver Pasha and the German General Otto von Sanders), the then Mustafa Kemal Bey prevailed over the worldwide colonial military elite, namely the English Ian Hamilton, Herbert Kitchener, John de Robeck, William Birdwood, and Winston Churchill, and the French Henri Gouraud and Maurice Bailloud some of whom were more than 30 years older than him, therefore having enormously richer experience at the battlefield. Without a unique talent of foremost exactness of movement, Mustafa Kemal Bey would have lost the battle or even been killed.

However, the innate vocation of the young Ali Rıza oğlu Mustafa became evident quite earlier, notably when he enrolled at the Ottoman Military Academy (1899), and even earlier, when at the age of 15 (in 1896) he enrolled in the Monastir Military High School (today’s Bitola in Macedonia). His inclination toward exactness, practicality, effectiveness and discipline was however demonstrated as early as 1893, when at the age of 12, he took the entrance exam for the Salonica Military School (Selanik Askeri Rüştiyesi).

Of all the other personalities suggested as the world’s greatest 20th-century statesman, only Charles de Gaulle was a career military. These people remind us at times of the great conquerors of past historical periods; their world perception is such that they believe utterly that their deeds and achievements speak for themselves. In this regard, Kemal Ataturk is far closer to Timur (Tamerlane), to Genghis Khan, to Caesar, to Alexander, to Darius I the Great, and other earlier great Oriental monarchs.

These people never view life as related to human theories, baseless ideologies, arbitrary doctrines, useless thoughts, or circumstantial feelings and desires; these people live at a spiritually much higher level. They have -due to their intuition, education, traditions and culture- a well-structured conceptualization of the world and an accurate perception of the existing balance of power and of their abilities; then, they set their absolutely realistic targets of action and they deploy their maximum effort to achieve them. Last, to the aforementioned, they add their energy, practicality, resourcefulness, persistence and commitment.

VI. Kemal Ataturk & Lenin: today’s Islamists are closer to Lenin

Contrarily to Lenin’s action, which was a mere translation of his unrealistic theories and dogmatic ideology, Kemal Ataturk set his targets and tried to achieve them in the easiest and shortest way. Practicality involves automatically a realistic and accurate approach to and evaluation of every situation. Many opponents attempted to denigrate Kemal Ataturk as an opportunist, but this is irrelevant, because opportunism is related to theories, ideologies and efforts of materializing them. The difference between Lenin and Kemal Ataturk already at the start was tremendous.

Lenin wanted to eliminate the czarist establishment, because of his own theory and ideology. Lenin did not consider the czarist monarchy as impossible to improve and unable to catch up with the rest of the great powers; simply he did not want the monarchical system to improve, because he became captive of the theory about the dictatorship of the so-called proletariat (a nonexistent, arbitrarily formulated, entity), which he inherited from Marx and later expanded.

Quite contrarily, Kemal Ataturk wanted to improve, empower and strengthen his country; he simply knew that the Ottoman Caliphate was an impotent and obsolete institution, which -because of many reasons- was ostensibly damaging the future and the potentialities of its inhabitants, while at the same time, it was totally impossible to rectify and ameliorate. In fact, the Ottoman Empire was a dead corpse that needed merely to be buried; because of its own numerous inadequacies, misperceptions, misconceptions, malpractices, mistakes, and catastrophic inadaptability, the Sublime Porte had become the Gate of the Hell for its unfortunate inhabitants.

Due to prevailing theological rigidity, doctrinal sterility, social counter-productivity, intellectual enslavement, and economic impotence, the state of the sultans and caliphs had reached its end – already long before Mustafa Kemal was born. But Kemal Ataturk pursued his targets and fought for his cause, without theorizing about the forthcoming end of the Caliphate. When a significant part of Kemal Ataturk’s targets were already materialized (1923), it became evident to all that the Caliphate was already part of the past.

If one clearly understands the colossal difference between the empty and unwise theoretician and the experienced and high-calibered military officer, one easily comprehends how divergent their respective systems and methods of governance were. When his theories proved unrealistic, Lenin was forced to start improvising; and he did so constantly and in desperate search of a success that would never come. Quite contrarily, Kemal Ataturk did not have to advance “one step forward, two steps back” (шаг вперёд, два шага назад) like Lenin, but he went ahead like an experienced military who knows the terrain.  

This clarifies the present situation very well: today’s Islamists are closer to Lenin than to Ataturk. By being totally deprived of any sense (let alone practice) of Spirituality, by incessantly desecrating a religion that they never understood and which they currently ideologize as a Modern European political ideology, all groups of Islamists only distort a cultural heritage that they never felt, studied or comprehended. So, all of them, without understanding Kemal Ataturk’s conceptualization of the world, targets, achievements and legacy, renounce hysterically his deeds and exploits.

In fact, they are merely theorizing (like Lenin did), while being totally disconnected from the down-to-earth reality. If they were able one day to get absolute power, they would destroy Turkey in months, if not weeks. Czarist Russia and the disastrous consequences of the October revolution are a very good example indeed. Similarly, if Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey were to end, immediately civil war, famine, massacres, and chaos would ensue, not because of other powers’ inimical stance to Islam (which is the typical Islamist excuse) but due to the Islamists’ absolutely unrealistic targets, ignorance and paranoia.

Extremists of both sides, Islamists and atheists alike, have constructed a fictional Kemal Ataturk against whom they have made of sorts of nonsensical reproaches and to whom they have attributed all types of lies and distortions. Kemal Ataturk was not a historian or a historian of religions, but he knew briefly and very accurately the History of Islamic Caliphates, the Islamic search for Spirituality, the decomposition of the Islamic religion across the centuries, its degradation into a worthless and purely shameless theological system whose often evil proponents were able to ‘justify’ all monstrous deeds of ignorant, inhuman and criminal caliphs, sultans and shahs. The utilization of the religion of Prophet Muhammad for the material and often monstrous purposes of governance had become an extremely lenthy and absolutely nauseating story.

Today’s pathetic sheikhs, imams and theologians are illiterate enough to think that Knowledge, Understanding, Perception and Wisdom need volumes of endless texts to be achieved; this quantitative approach is a subtly and imperceptibly formed misthought of materialistic nature that can easily destroy the Mankind. Supreme human wisdom, accurate perception, deep understanding, and creative knowledge pertain to Truth; only a qualitative approach to them allows humans to plainly attain them. One man spends 100 years in the study of 100000 volumes and learns nothing substantive, whereas another man during one initiation that lasts only few hours learns much more; and a third man in a momentary intuition gets an otherwise unreachable perception and overview of the spiritual and material reality. Real wisdom is a transcendental faculty, not a mental-material(istic) apperception, and this is so, because the mind is part of the body and therefore totally unrelated to the soul of a man.

VII. Kemal Ataturk, Islamic Spirituality, and the Secular Nature of the Islamic State

Kemal Ataturk did not reject Islam, but the petty and worthless Ottoman evildoing in the name of Islam. As early as March 1924, at the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi), he meaningfully stated:

The religion of Islam will be elevated, if it will cease to be a political instrument, as had been the case in the past.

It is very clear, through this brief sentence that, as per Kemal Ataturk’s personal evaluation and understanding, Islam had been degraded into mere theological fornication; there can never be a discussion about “elevation”, if something has not been degraded first.

Two days after Kemal Ataturk said this sentence, the degraded and God-damned Islamic Caliphate was finally abolished (3 March 1924), after having already shrunk into a wrinkled territory accommodating (in the early 20th century) less than 5% of the world’s Muslims, due to the decadence and the impotence of its worthless sultans and to the deplorable ignorance and the evil dementia of its clueless sheikhulislams.

In total contradiction to the false theories and the historical distortions propagated today by Western Orientalists and pseudo-Muslim Islamists alike, Kemal Ataturk knew that there is a vast difference between spirituality and religion, and that Islamic spirituality prevailed many times over Islamic theology throughout History, thus changing the character of the Islamic states, re-orienting them toward creativity, inventiveness, originality and expressiveness in any field, from sciences to arts to wisdom. Under those circumstances, which occurred in many different historical periods (from the Abbasids to the Buyids, the Seljuk, the Ilkhanate, the Timurids, the Safavids, and the Mughal to name a few), the real nature of the Islamic states was secular, because the Shariah was not interpreted literally as per the modern pseudo-Muslim Islamists’ manner; then in these cases, the Islamic Law was stated and recommended, but not imposed.

And indeed, Kemal Ataturk’s state was not the first secular Muslim state; however this topic is vast and goes beyond the limits of the present article. How Kemal Ataturk envisioned the state that would substitute the decadent caliphate, which were his sources of inspiration, and on what past traditions of Spirituality he was based in order to materialize his targets we can understand only when we focus on and study in-depth

– his formative years,

– his relationship with the great German mystic Rudolf von Sebottendorf (who had recovered earlier lost keys of Bektashi-Qizilbash Spirituality, and also the rites of other earlier Islamic and Oriental Orders),

– his total opposition to the Freedom and Accord Party (Hürriyet ve İtilâf Fırkası),


– his resolute distance from the new CUP (Committee of Union and Progress; İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti / إتحاد و ترقى جمعيتی) leadership (the ‘three pashas’).

However, all these topics have long remained taboo in Turkey and worldwide for various reasons. The true presentation, in-depth analysis, and correct interpretation of the aforementioned contacts and positions of Kemal Ataturk are by definition an embarrassment for today’s Turkey’s main political entities, namely

– the Islamists, who -evoking but misinterpreting the Ottoman History- represent a theoretical and ideological background that the last Ottomans totally rejected and fully repudiated as heretic,   

 – the Pan-Turanianists, who constitute the direct offspring of the CUP (the three pashas), and

– the Kemalists, who for many long decades obscured Kemal Ataturk’s concepts, targets, practices and heritage in order to subtly misinterpret them, adjust them to their own interests and needs, and in the process, rule in his name, but in a most opposite manner to his.

VIII. Kemal Ataturk and the Origins of his Spirituality: an Embarrassment for All Western States and Secret Societies

At the same time, the true presentation, analysis and interpretation of the aforementioned contacts and positions of Kemal Ataturk are an embarrassment for today’s Western regimes and the (severely conflicting with one another) forces, lobbies, secret societies, and various Orders that control and use governments and states, namely

1- the Zionists (all the different branches and groups), who identify in Kemal Ataturk’s concept of state (so, not exactly today’s Turkey) the only powerful state able to resume worldwide prevalence. All branches and groups of Zionism reviled Rudolf von Sebottendorf’s spiritual supremacy, because its results would cancel once for all their power and targets. For this reason, they asked the help of the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge, which is one of their allies, to disastrously disentangle Rudolf von Sebottendorf’s young disciple Adolf Hitler from his master’s authority in the early 1920s: if the German novice were to be effectively initiated, like the great Turkish Bektashi mystic, Germany would become a totally different empire and no other state would be able to oppose Berlin. In brief, Zionists were the cause of the catastrophe that befell on them.

2- the Fake Freemasons of various pseudo-rites that operate at the antipodes of the original Freemasonry, which after the mid-1930s has operated in a most surreptitious manner, pending the anticipated fracture, demolition and disappearance of both, the Fake Freemasons and the Zionists. These fake Freemasons operated against Rudolf von Sebottendorf in the 1920s, infiltrated Thule Gesellschaft that he had founded, totally distorted the rite and the works of the society, forcing the founder to leave and leading the novices, the disciples and the other members to the materialistic dementia of Nazism and to the paranoid practices of that evil political ideology. At this point, one has to recall that the state founded by Kemal Ataturk involved no politics and no ideology, which are perverse and inhuman endeavors that degenerate governance and culture.

In this regard, it is noteworthy that, the various Islamist groups, which operate as low level agents of either the various groups of Zionists or the different lodges of today’s desecrated Pseudo-Freemasonry, carry out an idiotic propaganda of defamation of Kemal Ataturk, whom they portray as Freemason, ‘Jew’ or Dönmeh (i.e. a Sabbatean crypto-Jew hypocritically converted to Islam; as a matter of fact, Sabbateans were believed to secretively perform the Kabbalist practices of Sabbatai Zevi, despite their claim that they were Muslims). All this stands in total contrast with the historical reality, because Kemal Ataturk closed all Freemasonic lodges in Turkey (1935), a fact that shows how well informed he was about the degeneration of most of the world’s Freemasonic lodges into desecrated temples of blasphemous Satanists. Actually, after losing control of Thule Gesellschaft in Germany, Rudolf von Sebottendorf returned to Turkey and lived there for some years, before further proceeding to Central Asia and Tibet.

3- the Jesuits, who supported to some extent the Pan-Turanianists after having successfully infiltrated both, Freedom and Accord Party (Hürriyet ve İtilâf Fırkası) and CUP (Committee of Union and Progress), although the latter had initially been an outfit of the Fake Freemasonry in the 19th c. Ottoman Empire.

IX. Kemal Ataturk and the Nature of his Accomplishments

As a brief commemoration of Kemal Ataturk’s groundbreaking, innovative, and resourceful accomplishments, one must point out the following:

A- Kemal Ataturk accurately discerned the wider context in which he found himself, assessed his forces, and identified where his limits were.

Kemal Ataturk did not advance against the territories of the French and British mandates, not even up to Haleb (Aleppo) and Mosul, although his vision of state could be fully implemented in Mesopotamia, Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine and beyond. Kemal Ataturk realized that his new state needed time to be re-organized and re-arranged, re-affirmed and fully homogenized. This understanding and this attitude were also demonstrated in the case of Caucasus where all the Adjarians, Abkhazians, Azeris, Circassians, Dagestanis and Chechens would very much welcome a union with Turkey. And it was also shown as regards Iran, a country that has always been home to Turanian nations because in reality Iran and Turan have been identical throughout History.

B- Kemal Ataturk took gradually distance from his own state.

Seeing the ailing Ottoman Empire’s impotency and proven disability to cope with the imperative needs of contemporary states, Kemal Ataturk pursued his path and advanced toward his targets for almost five years (1919-1924), thus fully dissociating himself from the dying relic. By 1924, the state to which Kemal Ataturk belonged for most of his life was reduced to just one useless building: the palace of the last sultan. Compared with the groundbreaking deeds of the liberator and savior of Anatolia, the state of the family of Othman was a hilarious joke!

1922: Mustafa Kemal Pasha Ataturk (1880 – 1938), Turkish commander and later President, with camel drivers during the Turko-Greek War. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)


C- Kemal Ataturk first identified the real, diachronic values of the Anatolian Civilization, then acted accordingly, and finally reinstated all the various Anatolian populations’ shared values.

Kemal Ataturk placed the diachronic values of the Anatolian Civilization and Culture at the epicenter of the new, contemporary society and secular state that he instituted. The Village Institutes (Köy Enstitüleri) were only one of the methods implemented to educate and update villagers, while also strengthening their attachment to their common traditions, moral values, and Anatolian culture. About:

“Darülfünun’dan Köy Enstitülerine” (

“Darülfünun’dan Köy Enstitülerine – 10 kasım 2011 –”


and notably:öy_enstitüsü#Dersler

(The entry published in the English Wikipedia is improperly short, particularly distorted, and absolutely useless, as it deliberately gives readers a minimal idea about the topic, thus promoting the Islamist agenda that the secret services of the colonial Western countries have set up.)

D- Kemal Ataturk demonstrated virtue as per the terms of his nation’s historical traditions and moral values.

This approach was highlighted in the Turkish Constitution of 1923. In the 1924 Constitutional Law Article 2, Clause 1, the following is stated: Türkiye Devleti, Cümhuriyetçi, milliyetçi, halkçı, devletçi, lâik ve inkılâpçıdır. Many of the terms used are almost impossible to easily understand, because they have ostensibly different connotations than those attested in Western Europe and North America. This becomes very clear in the definition of the term “milliyetçi” that many political scientists with no background in History would simply translate as “nationalism”, which is absolutely confusing and totally meaningless. About:

Milliyetçilik – this principle has nothing to do with what is called ‘nationalism’ in Central and Western Europe and North America. In striking opposition to West European ideologies of racism, race superiority, chauvinism, and nationalism, in Turkey it was declared that Türkiye ahalisine, din ve ırk farkı gözetilmeksizin vatandaşlık itibarıyla Türk denilir (irrespective of religion and race differences, the population of Turkey is called Turkish as regards the citizenship).

The use of the term Milliyet in Atatürk’s Turkey and in the Ottoman Empire is completely different. In structural terms, this word of Persian origin (milliyet) was used by the founder of Turkey as the word Ummah was used in the very early periods of the Islamic Caliphate. It involves a supra-national community with a common history within the same state. And this was said explicitly: ‘ortak mazi, tarih, ahlak ve hukuk Türk milletini bir araya getiren değerlerdir’ (common past, history, morality and law are the values that bring together the Turkish nation). This has nothing to do with the evil notion of racial ethnic identity; it alludes to cultural ethnic identity.

So, milliyetçilik means literally ‘supra-national identity founded on land-based communal unity, shared historicity and integrity of cultural heritage’. This connotation does not exist anywhere outside Turkey, and this is not a concept particularity but full evidence of human superiority over the forces of darkness, division and evilness of today’s inhuman elites.

Few people understood that it was quite normal for a great mystic like Mustafa Kemal, who was neither a historian nor a philologist, to have this approach. The constituent elements of the state that he had already envisioned (as a successive form to the ailing Ottoman Empire) before 1919 had to encompass many ethnic groups. As a matter of fact, when Atatürk took full control of Turkey’s territory, it was still expected that more than a million ethnic ‘Greeks’ (i.e. Romioi – Rumlar) would be Turkish citizens in the future. It is the Greek side at the Lausanne Conference that came up with the proposal for the exchange of populations that took place between Turkey and Greece in 1923-1925.

Furthermore, this approach to a ‘supra-national identity founded on land-based communal unity, shared historicity and integrity of cultural heritage’ reflects perfectly well the Celestial Order of the Oriental Empires, which was the cornerstone of Rudolf von Sebottendorf’s universal vision of an Imperial State enshrined in individual spirituality and human welfare as per the Ancient Oriental Monarchical Model and the Assyrian Sargonid Originality.

Because the 20th century’s leading German hierophant, and mentor of Kemal Atatürk, Rudolf von Sebottendorf remains an unknown figure to most, truly few understand the uniqueness and the truthfulness of Turkey as a conscious supra-nation rightful heir of more than 20 Oriental and Occidental, northern and southern civilizations’ achievements and accomplishments. And this was eminently reflected in Kemal Atatürk’s practices, as he rejected Pan-Turkism and Turanism as improper falsifications able only to distort the historical reality and plunge Turkey into chaos.

Turkey was geared to be the total rejection of the fallacious and unhistorical, racist concept of racial purity, chauvinism, race superiority, skin color supremacy, colorism and all the associate, nonsensical and evil constructions.

One can therefore understand that Hitler’s Germany was at the very antipodes of Atatürk’s Turkey’s and this is due to the fact that the spiritual exercises and other practices, the evocations, the divine conceptualization, the revelations of the Sacred, the initiation rituals, the Spiritual Ontology, the Cosmology, the Moral Order, the Royal Art, the Weltanschauung, the historical contextualization, and the admonitions of imperial rule changed totally in the Thule Gesellschaft after the organization was taken over by Anglo-Saxon fake Masonry, Zionists and other Satanists.


Turkey & 21st c. Geopolitics: the Advice I gave to the Turkish Establishment back in the mid-90s

(notably in the part:

III. Factors that prevented the Turkish Establishment from timely Disentangling from the ‘Western bloc’

B. The Real Meaning of the Six Principles of Kemal Ataturk’s State)

E- Kemal Ataturk became known for his ingenious choices, decisions and practices.

In this case, the introduction of the Latin alphabet for the writing of Modern Turkish was a truly ingenious decision that helped Turks become familiar with the major European languages and learn them more easily than others do. Suffice it to compare the German handwritings of a Turk and of an Egyptian or a Yemeni living in Germany, and one understands immediately how far-reaching Kemal Ataturk’s innovations were. Turks during the 20th and 21st centuries have been more conversant in European languages than the Arabic speaking people of Asia and North Africa, despite the fact that Turkey was never colonized, whereas all the former Ottoman provinces from the Emirates, Oman and Yemen to Eritrea, Abyssinia and Algeria came under French, English or Italian control (which implied obligatory courses of the colonizing power’s official language in the local primary and secondary education).

Because of this differentiation, the Turks have been used to learn foreign languages in order to cope and compete with the great European powers (Russia, Germany, Italy, France, England and Spain), whereas all Arabic-speaking people, who were driven and dehumanized by the psychological complex of inferiority (which is a form of colonial manipulation and cultural-educational-political maneuvering), have been hating the languages of their colonial masters and either have not been learning them at all or have not been learning them properly and impartially (and this has been done deliberately, out of the hatred which has traditionally been implanted in the pupils’ minds at the primary and secondary education level).

Contrarily to the Turks, who benefitted from Kemal Ataturk’s drastic changes and have an identity, Arabic-speaking people have no identity at all or have a fake identity, which is even worse. As a matter of fact, Arabic-speaking people are not Arabs; they belong to totally different nations with very diverse historical, ethnic and cultural backgrounds (Aramaeans in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, SE Turkey, SW Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Emirates; Copts and Nubians in Egypt; Cushites and Nubians in Sudan; Berbers in Libya and the Atlas region; Yemenites in South-Southeastern-Eastern Arabian Peninsula).

Each of these different nations never managed to achieve a proper and adequate nation-building because they were all confused with the fake, colonial ideology of Pan-Arabism or Arab Nationalism. This development generated the chaotic situation that currently prevails in countries like Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq – in striking contrast with what happens in Turkey and Iran. About:

circa 1916: Mustafa Kemal Ataturk ( 1881 – 1938 ), Turkish general, nationalist leader and president. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)

F- Kemal Ataturk delivered innovative and inventive approaches to the needs of his society.

Of course, entire books have already been published to narrate and analyze the numerous changes (devrimler) introduced by the founder of Turkey. However, it must be pointed out that the historical evolution from Caliphate to Cumhuriyet (Republic) was not just a state transformation or renewal, but an overwhelming replacement. Kemal Ataturk created his own state, and when the Caliphate could not function anymore, Turkey as a new state substituted the useless relic of the sultans and caliphs.  

Beyond the aforementioned, Kemal Ataturk’s most seminal, most ingenious and most trailblazing reversal was the termination of the old, Ottoman capital city and the proclamation of Ankara as the capital of the new state. The ominous, calamitous and dire role played for almost 1600 years by Constantinople – Istanbul was over, and the disastrous, ill-fated and accursed city was thrown once for all into the abyss of obliterated solipsism. Thanks to the founder of Turkey, the city that destroyed two great empires was forever condemned to permanently remain an otiose vestige of the past.

August 1922: Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (1881 – 1938) Turkish statesman and leader with the Turkish Diplomatic Corps at Ankara during the Greek-Turkey war in 1921-22. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)

G- Kemal Ataturk defended, promoted, consolidated and expanded national identity and cultural integrity.

A great number of people in Turkey and abroad misunderstood Kemal Ataturk’s innovations and considered them all as a form of intentional and comprehensive Westernization (or Occidentalization). This is actually a grave mistake and a serious misunderstanding or eventually a purposeful distortion. The founder of Turkey was neither a Westerner nor a Germanophile (or a Francophile, an Anglophile, etc.). It is misleading to believe that Ataturk ‘admired’ the Western progress or that he was enthusiastic about the Western culture. He simply viewed the world in pragmatic terms. What does the expression “pragmatic terms” mean?

This is what all the Islamists do not want to see, let alone understand. It is however very simple: in just 400 years, from 1500 to 1900, England, France, and Russia, which were smaller, weaker in every sense, poorer, less developed, less educated and less civilized than the Mughal Empire of South Asia, the Safavid Empire of Iran, and the Ottoman Empire in 1500, expanded and in 1900, became larger, stronger, richer, more developed, more educated and more civilized than the aforementioned three Muslim empires. Even worse, the three northern European states during the said period expanded at the prejudice of the three Muslim states, dismantling already one of them (the Mughal Empire), dangerously destabilizing and remarkably reducing the second (Qajar Empire of Iran), and comfortably and irreversibly decomposing the third (i.e. the Ottoman Empire, which in 1900 controlled already less than 50% of the territories that it possessed in 1790). The destruction of the Muslim Empires was so extensive and so detrimental that it would be suicidal for Muslims to pretend that nothing happened and that they could continue with their stupid theology and their useless Sunna. This is viewing the world in pragmatic terms.  

In 1920, Turkey had by definition to compete with the countries that were advanced in terms of scientific knowledge, industrial technology, socio-economic organization, civic discipline, and behavioral adaptation. There could not be any other choice: either the Turks would follow this path or ultimately every ignorant and idiotic religious leader or theologian (let alone low level ‘politician’) would end up as slave, lackey or puppet of the colonial powers without even understanding it.

However, this approach does not mean that Kemal Ataturk introduced Western European or North American customs, “because he wanted to change or eliminate the traditional Turkish culture” (as his irrelevant critics have always pretended); actually, the founder of Turkey did not try to copy and paste habits and lifestyle. On the contrary, he selected the essential, the functional and the necessary elements of Western behavior and scrupulously adapted them to the socio-cultural context of Anatolia (and he did exactly the same as regards the system of governance that he launched). In 1935, the average Turk was more “European” than the average Russian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Albanian – let alone Greek. As an eclectic thinker, Ataturk simply wanted the Turks to be able to perform like the Germans, to be free of the incommensurate complex of inferiority of the Egyptians and other Arabic speaking people, and to be acquainted with the customs, practices, and formalities of the world’s most advanced nations.

Any Turk traveling to Central and Western Europe for studies, research or work in the 1920s would make a ludicrous spectacle if dressed in the old Ottoman fashion. How could Turkey cope economically and financially with the world’s advanced countries, if the Turkish companies, banks and stock exchange did not function according to the Western standards of Free Market economy? It was therefore totally impossible for the workweek in Turkey to break for one day (namely Friday), due to traditions that were the reason of Ottoman Empire’s decay and collapse; ultimately Friday had to become a working day. The question when a Muslim will find some time to pray is his strictly personal affair – not the affair of the society, the state or the government. Companies cannot afford to accord ‘break time’ for prayer, because in such a case, the employee’s mind is stuck in unnecessary topics unrelated to work and performance indices.

There is a Modern Turkish word (constructed by Kemal Ataturk’s grammarians) that helps realize which the top priority was for the founder of Modern Turkey: “çağdaş”. This constructed word means ‘contemporary’ and also ‘up-to-date’. The word became also a personal name for men and women in Turkey, and it is quite indicative of the effort made by the secular establishment of Kemal Ataturk for the entire nation to get disentangled from obsolete structures and ineffective manners that engulfed the Turks in worthless forms of pseudo-religion. About:çağdaş andÇağdaş

The combination of traditional Anatolian Turkish culture preservation and scientific, technological, educational and socio-economic modernization is characteristically described in the title of a leading article published by the influential Prof. Erol Manisalı in Cumhuriyet (24 July 2018): “Atatürk’te zeybek, tango ve ‘yön’” («In Atatürk, there is zeybek, tango and ‘direction’»).

H- Kemal Ataturk founded a state in which every inhabitant was treated as equal with the rest and on the basis of justice, equity and solidarity.

Until its final collapse, the Ottoman Empire was the shameful realm where the brothers of a new sultan were almost institutionally massacred (for fear of eventual rebellion), the harem’s nauseating intrigues impacted many important state affairs (obviously catastrophically), the idiotic, ignorant and biased theologians scrutinized the sultan’s decisions (with disastrous results as it could always be expected), and the overwhelming majority of the population (Muslim, Christian or other) was viewed as a mere tool for tax extraction and any further utilization. Following the disastrous model of the so-called “bureaucratic byzantinism”, the Istanbulite theological circles consisted in a real cancerous tumor, as they treated the empire’s populations in a most disgraceful manner, as if human lives mattered only when compatible with their targets.

The iniquitous, partial, mendacious, utilitarian, and perverse nature and intentions of the Istanbul theological institutions were such that all the influential Ottoman theologians intended to rule the Empire by

a) tyrannically imposing their pseudo-Islamic fallacy on the Anatolian populations, which -being the vertebral column of the Ottoman Empire- vehemently rejected the Istanbulite meaningless theological doctrine and preserved their Islamic spirituality (being organized in Orders like the Mevlevi and the Bektashi),

b) viciously exploiting the Anatolian populations economically and militarily, and

c) incessantly oppressing, persecuting and eventually deporting them. This situation alienated the bulk of the Anatolian populations up to the extent that this situation contributed to the debilitation of the Ottoman state.

In other words, the same pattern that caused the collapse of the Eastern Roman Empire impacted also the Caliphate during the Ottoman times. The Patriarchate of Constantinople had tremendously contributed to the devitalizing and impairing the imperial state, because of its ceaseless religious-spiritual clash with the Anatolian populations that rejected the pseudo-Christian fallacy of the Constantinopolitan theologians. There were ceaseless revolts, unbearable Constantinopolitan oppression of the Anatolian populations, interminable massacres, and all forms of tyranny carried out by the every now and then dispatched imperial guards; at the end, the Eastern Roman Christian Anatolian populations accepted Alp Arslan and the Seljuks as true liberators. The exactly same story occurred in Ottoman Anatolia with the Şahqulu (Şahkulu) movement, the Bektashi, the Qizilbash, and the Mevlevis.

With Kemal Ataturk, Anatolia finally took its well-deserved and most necessary revenge over the elites of the caliphate’s capital. In 1924, thank God, all the imperial magistrates and potentates were reduced to the level of every simple farmer and cattle-keeper of Anatolia.

I- Kemal Ataturk re-engineered the Turkish society toward knowledge, wisdom, creativity, productivity, equilibrium and tolerance.

It was clear that, if the state itself was to be replaced by a totally different structure of governance, the society would have to be fully transformed, so that the inhabitants of the country be in a position to duly cope with the totally new environment and to effectively perform under the new rules. This was an experiment that Kemal Ataturk undertook without an ideology as a point of reference; this is another important point of differentiation between Lenin and Ataturk. The former had already written articles, speeches and books as to how to organize the state (the dictatorship of the proletariat) that he wanted to impose by using the support of the communist party – or of a faction of it, to be accurate. But when Kemal Ataturk liberated the country from foreign thugs, gangsters and invaders, no one knew what orders, measures, rules, and changes he would introduce. No one was able then to assume when this or that new law and measure would be launched and in what order the new rules would be introduced; and the founder of Turkey had never written before even a brief note or a list of the groundbreaking measures that were necessary to implement in order to remove the Turks from the Ottoman apathy and the “Islamic” putrefaction in which they found themselves.

Kemal Ataturk made it clear that human life has no value, if productivity and creativity do not characterize the activities and the targets of the human being. He wanted to take Turks out of the counterproductive, useless, abnormal and lethargic lifestyle that the Ottoman theologians had imposed whereby it was ‘enough’ for every Muslim to make five prayers per day, fast during the daytime in Ramadhan, carry out few more tasks and then live without discipline, target and commitment. However, the founder of Turkey was a moderate and balanced person, and thanks to this fact, his new country did not live atrocious and inhuman situations like the Soviet Stokhanovism; the Communists used to denounce the exploitation of humans by other humans, but did indeed exploit humans more than any other tyranny did in the History of the Mankind. In fact, the USSR had to wait until Nikita Khrushchev launched the de-Stalinization era in order to get rid of the useless medals “За трудовую доблесть” that bear witness to dehumanized beings reduced to robot-like lives for the sake of the state and its profitability.

With Ataturk, illiteracy was almost totally erased from Turkey; knowledge, science and education took central part in the life of a society ‘en pleine mutation’. Contrarily to the 19-year span of time when the Halâskâr Gazi was in power(1919-1938), the supposedly ‘Islamic’ society of the Ottoman times was gradually plunged into abject misery, despicable illiteracy, pathetic ignorance, and abysmal darkness, despite the fact that Islam, as religion, promoted knowledge over absurd belief, investigation instead of blind acceptance, and learning instead of lethargy. In fact, after 1580, the Ottoman Empire regressed instead of progressing.

Although, in the early 16th c., the Ottoman Empire was the inheritor of an entire millennium of Islamic Civilization, which was in fact the first World Civilization that encompassed the spiritual, cultural, moral, intellectual, scholarly, scientific and artistic heritage of all earlier civilizations, after the middle of the 16th c., the so-called ‘Sunni Islamic’ theological cholera prevailed at the level of the Istanbulite-Ottoman society and governance, notably during the reign of the gullible, suggestible Murat III (1574-1595). The prevalence of those theological circles in the Ottoman court brought forth the irrevocable demolition, elimination and expiration of the Genius of Islamic Civilization.

Ignorant people, who should have been killed as enemies of the Mankind, the then theologians, sheikhs, imams, etc. became influential in the Ottoman court, and due to their disastrous choices and utter paranoia, every scholarly-scientific exploration, every intellectual investigation, every artistic innovation, every conceptual re-evaluation, every transcendental reconfiguration, and every spiritual meditation were prohibited and labeled as “black magic”, “sorcery”, “witchcraft” and the like.

Those backward and silly fools considered as “evildoing” everything that they did not know, and due to their barbarism, they put an end to spirituality, sciences, arts, culture and civilization within the Ottoman Empire. After 1580 and the destruction of the Istanbul Observatory by the fanaticized mob that was guided by these evil and asinine theologians and imams, Islamic Civilization is considered defunct. It was only normal for the Ottoman Empire to progressively collapse and disintegrate afterwards, since its inhabitants were forced to live as per the inhuman orders that derived from the moronic Sunna-doctrine of the uneducated theologians who prohibited any other education than theirs.

In only 19 years, Kemal Ataturk overwhelmingly and spectacularly reversed this 350-year enduring, deplorable and self-disastrous situation; in this regard, his undertaking was far more difficult, far more unconventional, and far more staggering than Lenin’s, because the founder of Soviet Union did not find Czarist Russia in a state of long decadence but only of slow rise, progress and modernization in comparison to Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the countries of Western Europe and North America.

J- Kemal Ataturk promoted individual initiative, amelioration and expansibility.

There is one key point in which Life was not fair to Kemal Ataturk: he died very early. The founder of Turkey was only 57, when he passed away. Had he lived another 20 years (which is a modest estimate of life expectancy) we would have got a far more complete understanding of his vision, achievements, mindset, world conceptualization, and stance toward major world events (notably WW II, the Cold War, the so-called decolonization process, etc.). Speaking of Kemal Ataturk, few realize that in his time, there was no India, China was occupied by Japan, and the entire African continent was still divided in colonial zones (French, English, Italian, Belgian, Portuguese and Spanish).

Although the founder of Turkey dedicated most of his time after 1922 to the implementation of the changes that he introduced, we still do not have a complete idea about his view of the human being and about the extent to which he wanted to carry out a deep personal transformation in every Turk. Many scholars, historians, political scientists, intellectuals, analysts and commentators published thousands of books and articles about Ataturk as the founder of a brand new state, as the social transformer of Modern Turkey, and as the supreme educator of his nation. But no one viewed in the founder of Modern Turkey the spiritual mentor of every Turk and of every human.

At this point, we can accept that Ataturk did not only want to found a new, lawful, competent and effective state with social solidarity and free market economy, but he also desired to invigorate the average Turk and make him an unrestrained, extrovert, daring and entrepreneurial person well versed in taking risks and gambles for the benefit of his career, business, expansion and commitment. For Kemal Ataturk, every Turk’s best contribution to the national cause would be his own personal initiative in every field he would prefer to express his initiative, dynamism and inventiveness. We can therefore conclude that the founder of Turkey had exactly the same idea and the same wish for every human anywhere on Earth, if we take into consideration his famous motto (first said in one speech given in a town in Anatolia on the 20th April 1931) “Yurtta sulh, cihanda sulh” (Peace at Home, Peace in the World), which proves that Ataturk evidently demonstrated a sheer interest not only in Turkey but also in the world affairs.  

This critical trait was not however visible during the tenure of Ataturk’s ineffectual and uncharismatic successors, starting with Ismet Inönü and the cursed figure of Adnan Menderes. With the catastrophic and totally treacherous introduction of Western ‘politics’ in the governance of Turkey, with the constant involvement of the army in the politics, and with the untrue, mean and unreliable character of many ‘Kemalists’, after 1938 Turkey was progressively transformed into a bureaucratic state in the epicenter of which there was an enormous military-industrial complex. This situation was totally opposed to Kemal Ataturk’s vision of Turkey and harmed the average Turk enormously, by reducing him to a docile citizen who was asked to blindly obey the orders, the routine, and the Kemaluist doctrine of the public sector’s officials, who were in reality at the very antipodes of Ataturk. The gradual (1940 – 1970) bureaucratization of Turkey was one of the heaviest blows made against the state founded by the Halâskâr Gazi and a real disgrace to his memory.

K- Kemal Ataturk was an example in terms of accurate perception, conceptual and active thinking, self-criticism, adaptability, and alternative option identification.

From the aforementioned, one can safely hypothesize that Kemal Ataturk was not a dogmatic person; contrarily to his idiotic opponents, who are manipulated by the colonial Western powers without even understanding it, the founder of Modern Turkey was a balanced and tolerant person, known for his temperance and for accepting constructive criticism. Although he was a man of strong convictions, he knew very well that the best way to reconfirm the validity of one’s own arguments and decisions was to continually challenge them by examining several experiments. Ataturk experimented potential alternatives to several issues quite often and at times in cases of very serious and critical topics; the form of the state that he instituted was one of them!

The text itself of the Constitution of 1923 makes it clear that the founder of Turkey was convinced that a state made, manned and controlled by the people, governed and administered truthfully for the people, and advanced in parallel with the people (i.e. the entire society) should have the social support of only one organization, in which every person could become a member and every opinion could be debated sincerely. Contrarily to the disreputable constitutions of tyrannical Western states, which are shamelessly masqueraded as “democracies”, Turkey’s first and only real constitution did not allow any separate group of people to have the chance of separating themselves from the rest, the possibility of forming a fake and always unnecessary ‘opposition’, and the ability of cheating or deceiving others, let alone the outright majority, by means of debased and absurd theories, pathetic ‘political ideas’, comical and evil ideologies, and the nonsensical doctrines of the racist Western intelligentsia.

This testifies to two critical points:

First, Kemal Ataturk knew that the so-called modern democratic multiparty system is a permanent fallacy, an inhuman deception, and an evil distortion that severely harms the societies, misrepresents the people’s will, and ends up as a concealed form of monstrous tyranny. This is due to the fact that in the governance of a society there cannot be any ideas, theories or ideologies involved, because these mental endeavors consist in overwhelming misrepresentation of the reality, and as such they divide the unsophisticated people, who need no theories and no ideologies to duly perceive the reality and then normally live their lives.

Governance relates to reality; theories and ideologies are unreal fantasies and unrealistic fallacies of every eventually counter-productive or paranoid individual whose unnecessary assumptions and disastrous projections confuse the entire society. In any case, the paradoxical and deceitful scheme of ‘political parties’ reflecting falsely different ideologies (that are all equally impracticable, fictional and inhuman) is a modern times’ neologism and aberration that did not exist in any previous systems of non-monarchical states. That’s why Turkey’s Constitution of 1923 did not provide any details as regards the absolutely unnecessary establishment of various so-called ‘political parties’, simply because the Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (Republican People’s Party, founded on 7th September 1919) was the venue of all Turks, thus automatically canceling the dispensable ‘need’ for any ‘other’ party, let alone an ‘opposition’.

Second, the aforementioned situation clearly demonstrates how fake, wrong, mendacious and evil are all of today’s critics of Kemal Ataturk, when accusing him for having ‘westernized’ Turkey. The founder of Turkey did not ‘westernize’ but merely updated his society, empowering Turks with perefct tools of governance that guaranteed success in the effort of catching up with the technologically developed countries of the West; he did not copy any Western political system. Quite contrarily, he prevented Turkey from becoming a socio-political, ‘republican’, contamination like the US or France. When Ataturk launched his ingenious and multifaceted program, there were many non-monarchical states in Europe and America, which consisted mostly in multiparty establishments. However, these states were not accepted by Ataturk as trusted models or acceptable paradigms.  

The example of Italy’s 1923 elections (or parody of elections) was certainly studied very well by the man who conceived the pillars of Turkey’s Constitution of 1923; Turkey would not need either a Benito Mussolini or a Giacomo Matteotti. All people could express their own opinions within the Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, exactly because it was the venue for all the people (halk). This shows very well that Kemal Ataturk was not someone limited to mere copying & pasting Western systems and practices, but he introduced his own, new, and genuine system that best suited the Turkish nation of Anatolia.

However, despite Kemal Ataturk’s evident predilection for a one-party system of social organization and governance, he willingly accepted to test how a second party would function within the context that he had just established. This shows that he always examined various alternatives in diverse issues. As a matter of fact, in 1930, the founder of Turkey asked the former Turkish ambassador to France Ali Fethy Okyar to take the initiative and launch a new party, which would offer an alternative viewpoint on, and a different venue for, debates pertaining to Turkey’s social organization and governance. Consequently, soon afterwards, Okyar established the Serbest Cumhuriyet Fırkası (Liberal Republican Party) as a party of constructive opposition.

The experiment was quite indicative; within few months, the cancerous tumor of backward, ignorant and blind Islamists, i.e. Kemal Ataturk’s earliest opponents, enrolled in the new party and gathered there in order to voice their paranoia. These Islamists were filthy liars and hypocritical crooks, who did not give a damn about the ideas of liberal economy that the party founder wanted to promote with the support of Kemal Ataturk. These Satanic Muslims could cooperate even with the most squalid demons in order to express their sick hatred against the founder of Modern Turkey. Inevitably, even before the end of the year (!), Ali Fethy Okyar decided to close down the ill-fated party, before these uneducated gangsters managed to spit their ideological, pseudo-religious venom and impair the new, free and moral society that was being formed at the time. In Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey no one had the right to contaminate the entire nation by shamelessly uttering silly sentences of the type: “democracy is like a streetcar. When you come to your stop, you get off”.

Indiscriminate freedom of speech is the worst enemy of the Mankind and the bitterest adversary of Human Freedom. Why this is so is easy to grasp: there is no freedom beyond the limits of Moral. Freedom is only a moral value; without Moral, there is no freedom. Otherwise, the Mankind will sail adrift and, after the immoral, absurd and totalitarian pseudo-concept of “indiscriminate freedom of speech” is imposed worldwide, humans will be asked to also revere the freedom of murder.

The fallacy of the modern Western tyrannies, which are euphemistically called ‘democracies’, is a vast topic that evidently goes out of the scope of the present article. However, the aforementioned example clearly shows that Kemal Ataturk, although he had the foresight to understand that multi-party system and partisan differentiation on the basis of various nonsensical ideologies is an absurdity and a deception, he gave it a try and wanted to check how a multi-party system functions in the daily life.

X. Kemal Ataturk’s Everlasting Legacy and Turkey’s Betrayers

Many people presently believe that the most determined enemies of Kemal Ataturk have been the various branches of Islamic Fundamentalism, Extremism, Radicalism, and Terrorism, i.e. the tenebrous realm of Political Islam, Wahhabism, and the other ramifications of today’s fake Muslims. But this is only a superficial reading of Modern Turkey’s History.

A – The Islamists

Every paranoid, who imagines that it is possible to establish today a state based on a modern theological interpretation of Islam (or any other religion), cannot be the enemy of anyone else except himself. The world of the Islamic Caliphates (as long as they were not in decay or coma for some centuries) and the modern world are two totally separated universes that have nothing in common and can never meet, let alone amalgamate. This was already known to Kemal Ataturk; that’s why he relied on Islamic princples, values and culture to create something new, authentic and absolutely Islamic, Anatolian and Oriental of nature.

The dogmatic idiots, who think it is possible to change Turkey, will see their own destruction with their own eyes; these ignorant people, like Turkey’s post-2002 parliamentary and presidential fake majorities (produced through electoral trickery and foreign interference in the backstage), in their fanatic and berserk effort to put an end to “secular Turkey” and substitute it with their fictional “Islamic Turkey”, will simply be left with no ….. Turkey at all! Then, it will be too late for them to regret and repent.

All states are structures erected as per their own particular rules; when these rules are breached, the structure falls apart. There is no need to wait for a conqueror, who will destroy a state, when the structure ceases to serve its purpose and to be what it was geared to be. In today’s world, contrarily to the Pre-Islamic Antiquity or to the times of the early caliphates, there is no vacuum left across the Earth. This parameter changes everything, because if a state falls apart nowadays, there will be no chance for rehabilitation and reunification; there will be either permanent division and strife (as in Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, etc.) or loss of territory (USSR).

Although colonial fabrications and pseudo-states, like Egypt, Pakistan, India, Sudan, Algeria, etc., can eventually be multiparty ‘democracies’, ‘one-party’ tyrannies, military dictatorships, religious-theological autocracies, ‘constitutional’ monarchies or lawless despotic realms, a genuinely new and innovative state structure cannot be re-engineered. This happens because all pseudo-states constructed by the colonial powers were programmed in a way to best suit the variable interests of their colonial masters and consequently, they never had a proper infrastructure. These fake states never were (and they can never be) proper states, because they were geared to be mere caricatures of states, able to be transformed as per their masters’ desires.

Contrarily to these pseudo-states, the USSR could never be re-engineered, and that’s why it fell apart, and Russia lost an important part of its territory. Similarly, the US cannot be reinvented. And Western European ‘democracies’ cannot be restructured. For some decades, it was thought as possible that Communists could eventually rise to power in some of these Western European states (Italy, France, Portugal), but this would simply imply that these states would fall apart. Falling apart is tantamount to territorial loss in most of the cases. The example of China’s transformation into a form of “Socialism with Chinese characteristics” (中国特色社会主义, lit. “China-especially-colored Socialism”) is a unique case that had earlier been systematically developed and debated among the supreme hierarchy of the Chinese Communist Party (中國共產) as regards its cultural, intellectual, ideological and socio-economic dimensions and then implemented and crosschecked at all levels. But there have never been another Muslim Deng Xiaoping (1904-1997; 邓小平), except Kemal Ataturk himself.

Post-1938 Turkish Islamists, either they showed their real face or were masqueraded as Kemalists, were – all – unaware of the realities of modern world; most of them were totally unable to envision how their doctrine could possibly be implemented. The only honorable exception was the first ‘Islamist’ (the term is only conventionally used here) prime minister of Turkey Prof. Necmettin Erbakan (1926-2011), who was already a veteran statesman, when he became prime minister (June 1996 – June 1997) in coalition with Tansu Çiller as deputy prime minister. However, he had published his Manifesto for his Millî Görüş (National Vision) as early as 1969, i.e. five years before the first of the three times he was appointed as deputy prime minister in coalition governments. Necmettin Erbakan’s cultural, theoretical and socio-economic conceptualization had nothing to do with Political Islam; it merely consisted in an effort to revitalize the state of Kemal Ataturk by restating Anatolian Turkish Culture, promoting traditional values and moral integrity, reasserting Turkish national identity, reinvigorating the economy (with the then much needed privatizations), and modernizing the technical infrastructure of Turkey’s vast rural areas. Had Erbakan remained in the power for long, he would truly have become Turkey’s Deng Xiaoping.   

The scope of the present article is neither to enumerate the various rebellions started by incorrigible and retarded sheikhs, who could not comprehend Kemal Ataturk’s innovative initiatives and the reasons for them, nor to describe the failure of various ignorant imams, fallen mystics, and worthless theorists to realize that what they (during the 20th c.) used to think of Islam was not anymore the true, historical Islam (as spirituality, religion, wisdom, knowledge, literature, epics, science, art, culture, philosophy, architecture, tradition and civilization), but a decomposed and putrefied remnant that had no value at all anymore. In reality and despite all appearances, there is no continuity between the Historical Islam and today’s Muslims; there is a rupture, a gap.

In brief, what Ataturk’s opponents called and still now call ‘Islam’ is in reality ‘their Islam’; and disastrously enough for them, their Islam had nothing to do with the historical Islam as evidently (and on the basis of innumerable historical sources) practiced, revered and expanded throughout the centuries in many, variable forms and dimensions. This concerns notably Said Nursî, who is viewed as the source of inspiration of all posterior Islamist movements in Turkey, although he can by no means be described as an ‘Islamist’.

In reality, Said Nursî’s arbitrary acceptance of Western science and rationalism, and his demented effort to amalgamate two systems that are diametrically opposed to, and cannot intermingle with, one another were due to his

a) lack of knowledge (he did not study either the historical Islamic sciences of the Golden Era of Islamic Civilization or the Modern Western sciences),

b) erroneous assumption that the Modern Western sciences derived from the sciences of the Golden Era of Islamic Civilization (which is at the antipodes of the historical reality because, despite the enormous transfer of knowledge that took place between the civilized Orient and the barbaric Western Europe across the centuries, all the constituent elements, moral principles, basic concepts, and known data of Oriental sciences were first either rejected or misperceived, then erroneously contecxtualized, deliberately distorted, and finally used malignantly for the fabrication of a counterfeit, inhuman system of sciences),

c) confusion between the historical Islamic rationalism and the modern Western rationalism, and

d) limited understanding of the sources, dimensions, nature and targets of the Western materialism and atheism.  

Said Nursî was not opposed to the entire spectrum of Kemal Ataturk’s reforms. Before the rise of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) to power, Said Nursî was a lukewarm supporter of Pan-Ottomanism, if one correctly comprehends the term as a vague, non-systematized array of ideas and proposals as to just how to reinstate and reinvigorate the Ottoman Empire. Of course, he defended the Caliphate against the CUP, by participating in the Ottoman coup against CUP (1909), and later he opposed every notion of Pan-Turkism or Pan-Turanianism. But he had already comprehended very well the failure, the ineptness, and the ultimate corruption of the Constantinopolitan theologians and of the worthless bureaucrats of the Office of the Sheikhulislam. Actually, Said Nursî, despite all the lies said about him by the various pseudo-religious groups and bogus-spiritual orders instituted in Turkey over the past few decades, was happy with the fact that Kemal Ataturk destroyed the formal Ottoman religious establishment (an institution that had lasted 600 years: 1424-1924).   

Said Nursî (1877-1960), although he had almost the same age as Kemal Ataturk, was a man of very different background and orientation than the founder of Turkey. Said Nursî could not understand the mentality of a military officer, who became a unique reformer and statesman, after liberating parts of his endangered country. Contrarily to Said Nursî’s inclination to theoretically-intellectually accept the Modern Western sciences, Kemal Ataturk did not either ‘accept’ or ‘reject’ these academic disciplines: he simply wanted the average Turk to be well-versed in them in order to became able to catch up with the scientifically and technologically advanced countries and adequately modernize the newly founded state. It would be up to the prospective generations of Turkish scientists to fully accept, criticize, disapprove of, modify or even attack the foundations of the Western sciences, by establishing totally new approaches (other than mere material observation and experiment) to the study, the exploration, and the evaluation of the material and the spiritual worlds.

There was one thing that Kemal Ataturk would never accept: that an uneducated and ignorant person, after obtaining an undeserved position of authority, rejects beforehand something that he does not know; this is tantamount to utter paranoia. And this is exactly what all the pathetically indoctrinated and idiotic Islamists of today’s Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and so many other countries (Muslim Diaspora in Western Europe, North America, and Australia included) do ceaselessly, thus bringing forth calamitous developments and disproportionate disasters for the entire Muslim World.  

Kemal Ataturk and Said Nursî could have easily cooperated and set common targets within the national effort of reasserting the Anatolian Turkish culture, but this was prevented by the common enemies of both men. At this point, it is necessary to add that the ‘Ustadh’ or the ‘Bediüzzaman’ (‘master’ or ‘marvel of the time’: honorific appellations for the greater Turkish theologian of the 20th c.) did not champion any idea related to the Pan-Islamism or to the so-called Islamic Modernism (two distinct ideological forgeries that were geared by the criminal colonial academia of France and England in order to deceive many gullible and ignorant sheikhs, ideologists and activists, like Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, Muhammad Rashid Rida, Sayyid Qutb and others).

Said Nursî’s farness from, and rejection of, the aforementioned figures and their ideas and thoughts was due to his strong acquaintance with, and knowledge of, the Ottoman administration, to his affiliation to Pan-Ottomanism, and to his ability to distinguish between

a) imperial-level understanding of the intentions, the targets, the methods and the practices of the colonial powers, and

b) village-level absolute inability to assess colonial countries’ methods, such as political intrigues, psychological manipulations, divisive schemes, machinations geared to trigger self-damaging behavior and reactions to the enemy, and many other types of evil plots (theoretical, academic, scientific, intellectual, educational, behavioral, cultural, ideological, political, economic and other).

In other words, the Constantinopolitan Ottoman theological elite around the Sultan and the Sheikhulislam had certainly failed to oppose the sophisticated plans and plots of the evil colonial empires, but they were still experienced magistrates, who definitely had enough knowledge, wisdom, perspicacity and foresight to identify strengths pulled by foreign powers and to thus avoid falling in ideological and theoretical traps – in striking difference with the aforementioned ignorant sheikhs and ideologists. Having frequented these Ottoman elites, Said Nursî was able to discern accurately at the level of governance, although he missed other capacities and qualifications.

Many Turkish preachers, ideologists, theologians and activists associated themselves with Said Nursî quite often, claiming theoretical vicinity and ideological affiliation; gradually, an entire movement (Nurculuk or Nurcular) was formed and expanded by referring to him, but quite often the references to and mentions of him involved slight or grave distortion of his positions. Then, an avalanche of further falsifications followed and from Said Nursî’s unrealistic ideas back in the middle of the 20th c., we finally, at the end of the century, reached to the very bottom of the shameful alteration, utilization and politicization of the Islamic spirituality,religion, culture and civilization as carried out by many pathetic pseudo-sheikhs and ignorant imams, who soon became the tool of Western countries’ secret services, like the most famous and most pathetic among them, the notorious, villainous and ominous Fethullah Gülen. His secretive and seditious movement (Gülen hareketi) ended up as the well-known and worldwide active, terrorist organization (Fethullahçı Terör Örgütü) that has financed many other dozens of thousands of corrupt and idiotic preachers, when they were not already bribed by the secret services of several Western states. 

The politicization of Islam, as carried out over the past 40 years in Turkey, was a crucial stage of worldwide degradation of the spiritual, mental, intellectual, academic, educational, cultural and religious conditions of all the Muslims of the world. The extent of the degradation was worldwide, because Turkey has always been the de facto leading country and the driving force of the Islamic world. In fact, the groundbreaking measures introduced by Kemal Ataturk in Turkey back in the 1920s should have been progressively accepted and implemented in all the Muslim states, so that they all manage to reach the level Turkey did, and reject the darkness and the obscurantism in which they had been fallen over the past 400 years. But the colonial powers prevented this development in order to maintain control over, and keep exploiting, all the other Muslim countries and the fake leaderships that the Westerners appointed there as local slaves and stooges in the first place. The method that the colonial powers employed to achieve their calamitous targets in their colonies across the Islamic world was precisely the formation of Political Islam (or Islamism), the promotion of the Wahhabi cholera, and the diffusion of the racist bogus ideology of Arab Nationalism.

In this regard, the politicization of Islam in Turkey was a form of late, indirect and covered colonization and barbarization of Turkey that I denounced very early (January 2009):


This phenomenon was not the revivification of the Islamic religion as its demented supporters claimed, being empowered by the evil colonial academics, who composed false and ludicrous terms (like ‘Islamic Revivalism’) in order to obscure the reality and confuse all the people worldwide. In fact, this disastrous phenomenon was the return of Islam’s counterfeit revenant, i.e. the corporeal and mental reconstitution of undead, demoniacally possessed, Muslim zombies that spread terror, darkness and permanent dementia. There is nothing Islamic in any form or branch of the Political Islam (let alone in Wahhabism); when today’s Muslim zombies read the Quran, they understand all major terms in another, erroneous connotation that is diametrically opposed to the perception of the text by true Muslims of the Golden Era of Islamic Civilization. Because this happens to modern times’ Muslim zombies, they are cannot reproduce the Islamic Civilization, precisely because they are not Muslims.

Only Necmettin Erbakan made a honorable exception in this nefarious development. And this is so, because his effort was evidently creative: he composed a totally new, authentic, synthesis (titled ‘Millî Görüş’) made out of traditional Anatolian culture, Muslim moral, Turkish national education, and modern technology & engineering (Erbakan was a mechanical engineer, with a PhD in Engineering from the RWTH Aachen University, and later a university professor in Turkey). Millî Görüş had nothing in common with any branch of Political Islam and, as theoretical system, it was not related to the politicization of Islam or any theological interpretation. It was totally unrelated to religion.

As a matter of fact, Millî Görüş was not a political ideology that utilized religious prescriptions to fanaticize people; it was rather a theoretical socio-cultural and moral system that stressed the need of the Anatolian Turkish society to retain cultural traditions and moral values while economically, technologically and academically coping with Western countries. It consisted in a very conscious and well-thought effort to overwhelmingly reject the post-WWII theoretical, ideological, educational, moral and behavavioral corruption of the Western world, as well as the irreversible putrefaction that characterizes already the Western world. To put it in simple words, Erbakan tried to retain whatever he deemed as constructive and rewarding element of the Western science and technology, while keeping the Anatolian Turkish society intact from the Western moral and socio-behavioral contamination. Toward the Western world in its entirety, Erbakan was so eclectic in the 1970s as Ataturk was in the 1920s.

If thoroughly implemented, Millî Görüş would guarantee economic independence (instead of pathetic Erdogan’s sellout of Turkey’s organizations, companies and cogglomerates to forces of economic globalization), optimized industrialization (instead of worthless Erdogan’s inconsistent economics and unsustainable public debt), and advanced competitiveness in the world markets. Necmettin Erbakan was a most serious threat to the Western plan that provided for Turkey’s colonization via the scheme of Political Islam. The colonial countries’ local stooges, be they generals and colonels or preachers and imams, described Erbakan as ‘Islamist’, whereas he was the last stand of Kemal Ataturk’s paradigm against the either hypocritical or idiotic Kemalists. It is quite indicative: Prof. Necmettin Erbakan never met the miserable, disreputable and vicious enemy of Turkey, Fethullah Gülen.

The politicization of Islam was in fact imposed across Turkey’s politics via systematic intereference of many foreign institutions in Turkey’s military, economic, socio-political life during the 1990s and the 2000s. The local Islamist stooges and puppets of American, English and French politicians, diplomats, military and intelligence officers, academics, and businessmen were not actually the first Turkish servants and lackeys of the Western powers. Historically, these corrupt and treacherous elements constituted the next stage of Western interference in the affairs of the 19th c. ailing Ottoman Empire; when the caliphate was already defunct, they deliberately masqueraded into Kemalists during the period 1918-1924 and survived as part of the new establishment, having at times high positions next to Kemal Ataturk. Their only target was to progressively sabotage Ataturk’s efforts to create an incorruptible and formidable state that would belong to all the people and not to the treacherous, secluded, indoctrinated, pseudo-Islamic elites of silly theologians.

The first traitors of Kemal Ataturk were therefore some hypocritical elements that appeared as supporters and admirers of the founder of Turkey; some of them were even high magistrates belonging to Ataturk’s immediate entourage. These early Kemalists were used by Western diplomats in their effort to destroy the state of Kemal Ataturk, which was – in total contrast with the Western elitist, pseudo-democratic tyrannies – a state that fully reflected a free society of equal nationals with strong cultural-historical identity and moral integrity, and not (as it already happened in the corrupt and useless Western countries) a disunited community made of distinct, mutually in conflict, social classes exploited by criminal, secretively segregated Orders and hierarchical societies. In fact, all the methods that the Turkish Islamists used recently in order to further distort the nature of the state of Kemal Ataturk had already been employed for decades by the Kemalists; the reason is very simple: the guidance was always the same – alien and evil!

Thus, after 2002, many Turkish Islamists progressively started believing that, by means of dissimulation, step-by-step deception, and silly lies said one after the other, they could cheat the Turksh people and promote their pseudo-Islamic doctrine, while also corrupting the masses with a fake socioeconomic improvement and spectacular but unnecessary public works. Despite their encroachment in the government for 18 years (thanks to the failure of the anti-Ataturk Kemalist parties, the existence of paranoid electoral laws, the orchestration of repeated electoral fraud, and the systematic neutralization of vast, non-Islamist masses by means of massive flattery and bribery that took the form of financially disastrous salary increases and numerous other material benefits), the Islamists failed to implement a proper, let alone advanced, Islamization agenda.

If one carefully observes the legislation and the policies implemented over this very long period, one concludes that Turkish Islamists will need 300 years to implement their agenda. Populist rhetoric, half-uttered references to past stories, emotional expression of memories, symbolic gestures, posthumous glorification of failed Islamist ideologists and poets, like Necip Fazıl Kısakürek, lessening of strict secular rules, and commemoration of culturally meaningless, theoretically-educationally misinterpreted, and politically insignificant events, like Alp Arslan’s victory at Malazgirt (Manzikert) in 1071, are not methods to bring the Ottoman Caliphate back. Turning the Ayasofya Museum to a mosque does not bring the Ottoman Empire back; it pushes it farther and farther to the past.

First, they faced steadfast and fierce opposition from the military and the Kemalist opposition (despite the incessant interference of many Western powers in favor of the Islamists); second, they never managed to truly deepen and widen their main electoral basis (the real nucleus of Turkey’s Islamists never went above 20-23%; the rest are not Islamists but mere, provisory voters, who get financial benefits from the long-term disastrous governmental policy); third, they were divided among them (covertly before 2012; overtly between 2012 and 2016; and frontally ever since); and fourth, their necessary alliance with the Pan-Turanianists (after July 2016 and more ostensibly after early 2017) significantly modified their targets and possibilities, forcing them to be more realistic and less agenda-driven.

In fact, 18 years of Islamist governments in Turkey fully prove that Ataturk’s assaulted state and beleaguered heritage demonstrate enormous resistance to all types of destructive efforts. Either Kemalist or Islamist, any dissimulative policy can quantitatively modify and modulate but never qualitatively transfigure and alter the state founded by Kenal Ataturk as per the Qizilbash spirituality and the Bektashi transcendental illumination provided by Rudolf von Sebottendorf. Only a very radical -Islamist, Pan-Turanianist or other- attempt or a revolutionary act could really endanger Turkey and cause the total disappearance of Türkiye Cumhuriyeti. But then, the tectonic movements that would be triggered would not only change the contents and the form of the state but break it to pieces.

Turkey’s Islamists do not have the means to turn Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey to an Islamic state; and they will never acquire them. This is the reason for which there will never be an ‘Islamic Republic of Turkey’, although the venomous serpents of the Foreign Office, the criminals of the Intelligence Service, and the nonsensical, corrupt and villainous English academia would very much rejoice with that perspective.

However, due to the fact that, after 2016, the Islamists do not govern Turkey alone but share power with the Pan-Turanianists leaves minimal space for the English evil hopes to be possibly materialized. The same concerns also the similarly wicked plans of France and America that have been geared long ago in order to bring about the dismemberment and destruction of Turkey. Paris and Washington cannot and will never understand that the state launched only in 1923 by Kemal Ataturk is founded on principles and concepts superior to those proclaimed by their own Founding Fathers and stated in their own constitutions. With the Pan-Turanianists in power at Ankara, with Russia and China as strategic allies of Turkey, and with the ever expanding New Silk Road, it is more plausible that the US and France break down and disintegrate first.

B – The Pan-Turanianists

Many believe that the Islamists have been the main danger for Turkey over the past century; however, this is not quite true. It is only due to a superficial reading of the nature and of the character of the state of Kemal Ataturk, and of its enemies. In reality, the worst, the most perilous, enemies of the Founder of Modern Turkey have always been the Pan-Turanianists, and that’s why Ataturk kept them at distance and out of Turkey. This truth is not easily understood because first, many people make the terrible mistake to consider the Pan-Turanianism as a nationalist movement with a typical nationalist ideology similar to many other, and second, numerous colonial diplomacies, academies, intelligentsias and administrations have done their best to defame, denigrate and demonize the Pan-Turanian ideal. Pan-Turanianism is totally unrelated to any type of nationalism; in fact, it is at the exact antipodes of every nationalism.

It is also essential not to misinterpret the Pan-Turanianists’ familiarity with religious rituals, support for the cause of Islam, and professed Islamic faith; Pan-Turkists and Pan-Turanianists are Muslims. However, they are not strictly and politically religious like the Islamists; on another note, contrarily to the Kemalists, they are not irreligious, agnostics or indifferent to religion.

This is so because every nationalism is a theory, an ideology, and an academic-educational system elaborated to

a) alter (or at times monstrously distort) History (as History saved in original historical sources, i.e. textual evidence and epigraphic material),

b) romanticize numerous figuratively perceived (true or fake) moments of the past,

c) attribute to the ‘nation’ a racial and typically racist character (which is totally unreal and absolutely ahistorical; in total contradiction with all modern ‘nations’, all the various historical nations of the Antiquity and of the Christian-Islamic Ages never perceived themselves racially, but culturally-spiritually), and

d) utilize -within the context of politics (i.e. the modern, tyrannical and inhuman manner of governance)- the average people’s collective and personal sentimentalism (as machinated due to aforementioned points a, b, and c).  

The ultimate targets of every nationalism and of every nationalist regime, establishment, institution, party, etc. are to

i) divert the knowledge, interest, belief and fascination of the masses from the true historical past, from all current issues, and from down-to-earth reality;

ii) direct the knowledge, interest, belief and fascination of the masses toward the prefabricated delusions of a mythical role, an unequivocal vocation, and an ultimate salvation of their (otherwise fake) ‘nation’, and  

iii) exploit politically (either internally or externally) the ensuing situation of mass hypnotization, disorientation from the reality, obscurantism, and fictional existence.

All these fictional delusions are totally unrelated to each nation’s traditional culture and folklore, pre-modern national identity, historical past, textually evidenced historical perceptions of the past, and historically documented conceptualizations of the world/universe. It is therefore evident that every nationalism fabricates a new, previously nonexistent nation that we have to define as ‘political nation’, because the associated efforts originate from the modern system of governance and social organization that is called ‘politics’. In fact, every nationalism is a political ideology.

Every political nation is totally unrelated to the ‘historical nation’ that it had been, prior to the establishment of a modern political regime and to the diffusion of a nationalist ideology; every political nation has no roots in History, and that is why it is gradually cut off from its cultural-spiritual roots, traditions, and folklore.

A historical nation exists only in the past, in what we call ‘History’. A historical nation is real. All ancient nations were true and real; and more importantly, they were accurately perceived as such by all their natives.

A political nation exists only in the present, in what we call ‘mass delusion’ and ‘modern politics’. A political nation is fake; in reality, it does not exist. In modern times, what the masses perceive as ‘nation’ is a nonexistent delusion geared to absorb all the people across the Earth into the maelstrom of politics, the forgery of geo-politics, and the abomination of globalism/globalization. During this ominous process, all nations are transformed from ‘historical nations’ into ‘political nations’, thus totally losing

– their identity (in order to get as substitute a fake one),

– their integrity (in order to disappear among the disorderly pseudo-world of amalgamated pseudo-nations, bogus-cultures, relativized values, and immoral / amoral mindsets and behaviors), and therefore

– their raison d’être (because by historical standards they are not human anymore).

As such, a political nation is predestined to vanish to extinction; this is what we have exactly attested during the 19th and the 20th c., when politics and nationalisms were diffused via colonization; the present phenomenon of globalization is the natural consequence of colonization, politics and nationalisms.

Globalization is not the abnegation of nationalisms, but their continuation; the fake political nations were predestined to be amalgamated within the so-called global melting pot of

1- the politically correct, which is tantamount to morally incorrect,

2- the materialistic social context of industrialization, consumerism, marketing, advertisements, high technology, ceaseless crises, and mind controlling mass media, and

3- the farcical nonsense of the ‘social’ media, which involve the human defacement caused by the contamination called ‘Facebook’ and the human bestialization promoted by the diseases named ‘Google’, ‘Twitter’, MSN, etc.

In fact, only historical nations could successfully oppose, effectively counterbalance, and drastically outmaneuver the present phenomenon of globalization; that’s why they ‘had’ to disappear first.

Pan-Turanianism is not a nationalism because, in most of the cases of a Pan-Turanianist thinker, theoretician, intellectual, ideologist or activist, we don’t attest any effort to produce a political nation out of a historical nation. Furthermore and as I already said, Pan-Turanianism must be categorized at the antipodes of every nationalism; this is so because, instead of re-inventing one nation (i.e. forging a fake, ‘political nation’) and differentiating / distancing it from other nations, Pan-Turanianism tries to bring together and unite several historical nations that have common cultural and folklore background, spiritual-religious affinities, and linguistic – literary similarities. As such, Pan-Turanianism is rather a form of internationalism among all Turanian nations: Anatolian Turks, Azeris, Tatars, Turkmen, Circassians, Chechnyans, Qashqais, Hazaras, Uzbeks, Kyrgyzs, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Chuvashes. Uighurs, Mongoliansm Tuvans, Yakuts, and many others.   

The origins of Pan-Turanianism go certainly back to Mahmud al-Kashgari (Махмуд аль-Кашгари / محمود الكاشغري; 1005-1102), an outstanding scholar of his times, historian, geographer, ethnographer, linguist, lexicographer, mathematician, astronomer, sociologist and historian of religions. Although he mainly lived in Kashgar {in the southwestern confines of Eastern Turkestan, which has been known since 1955 as the ‘Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region’ (شىنجاڭ ئۇيغۇر ئاپتونوم رايونى /新疆维吾尔自治区) of China, because mainly Uighurs and Han Chinese live today in this area that is located in China’s northwestern extremities}, Mahmud al-Kashgari was not an Uighur; his father was a magistrate of the Turanian Afrasiab Empire, which modern historians usually call ‘Kara-Khanid Khanate’. That vast empire controlled most of Central and Northern Asiatic lands from the middle of 9th c. to the beginning of the 13th c. We know that Mahmud al-Kashgari’s family originated from the southeastern coast lands of the Issyk-Kul Lake in today’s Kyrgyzstan, and it is most probable that their origin was Karluk Turanians. Written in Arabic, his famous ‘Compendium of Turanian Languages’ (ديوان لغات الترك‎ / Diwan Lughat al Turk) is an ethno-linguistic, literary, religious, cultural survey, critical commentary and panorama of his times’ Turanian languages, traditions, faiths, history, culture and folklore; this historical treatise provides the very first textual evidence of a common understanding among all Turanian nations.  

The same can be said for Yusuf Balasaguni (Юсуф Баласагуни; known in Arabic as Yusuf Khass Hajib / يوسف خاصّ حاجب; Kyrgyz: Жусуп Баласагын; Kazakh: Жүсіп Баласағұни; 1019-1077), who was born in today’s Northern Kyrgystan and lived within the vast Afrasiab Empire (the Kara-Khanid Khanate). He was a great thinker, erudite scholar, poet, and statesman, who evidently realized the need for a unity among all Muslim Turanians, and this is extensively evidenced in his ‘Kutadgu Bilig’ (‘Blessed Knowledge’), which is the first entire book (saved down to our times) written in a Turanian language (namely in Kara-Khanid, through use of Farsi characters).

These early Pan-Turanian movements were intermingled with Islam; however, as the unprecedented and ever since unequaled conquests of Genghiz Khan (1158-1227) demonstrate, within the aureole of the Pan-Turanian circumference either Tengrism (which is a real religion in contrast with ‘Shamanism’, which is a Western projection and reconstruction) or Islam can easily be accommodated. However, there is an enormous historical obstacle to every Pan-Turanian concept, vision, theory or wish; the opposition between the Western and the Eastern Turanians has always been a determinant and almost permanent trait of all internal Turanian strives, conflicts and wars. Two calamitously sinister and apparently permanent characteristics seem to have always been inherent in the character, mentality and world conceptualization of almost all great Turanian emperors, conquerors, khaqans, shahs and sultans:

a) the deep polarization between nomadic and semi-nomadic or sedentary populations

{The Turanian nomads viewed always the sedentary Turanians as weaker, degraded, and fallen -if not even effeminate- people. Eastern Turanians viewed always as human shame the fact that Turanian tribes that moved to the West (in Central Asia) and to the South (China) preferred to abandon their nomadic life and to settle in various locations, building homes and becoming sedentary. This was not a matter of simple belief but of actual practice; when hundreds of years later, some Eastern Turanians raided in the West and found other Turanian tribes that had left Northeast Asia and settled in Central Asia, they treated them as slaves and did not spare their lives}, and

b) the customary division of an empire, khaqanate, sultanate, emirate, etc. among the ruler’s sons, who quarreled among themselves in extremis.

{Entire families went extinct because of the incessant fights among the brothers, the sons, the grandsons, the nephews, and the grandnephews of Turanian emperors, khaqans, sultans, khans, emirs, etc.; and along with them, entire empires collapsed and disappeared. Among the decayed Turkmen Ottomans family members, the assassination of a crown prince’s brothers was almost institutionalized in order to prevent younger brothers from eventually becoming a threat in the indefinite future.}

In Modern Times, the father of Pan-Turanianism is the Turkmen Magtymguly Pyragy (Махтумкули; Farsi: مختومقلی فراغی; Turkish: Mahtumkulu Firaki; 1724-1807). The father of Turkmen literature was a great mystic of the Naqshbandi Order, a multilingual poet, a rich conceptual thinker, an erudite scholar, and an unsurpassed traveler (from the Mughal Empire to the Ottoman Empire and across Central and Northern Asia). He expressed severe criticism for the divisions among Turanian nations and called for unity against foreign assaults that he was able to plainly document through his interminable travels. His social-cultural vision for a United Turan encompasses the cultural wealth, the linguistic affinities, the Muslim moral and spirituality, and the traditional system of social organization and governance of the Turanian nations. In his approach, there is no theological utilitarianism, no religious sectarianism, no ethnic racialism, no societal evolutionism, no governmental functionalism, no political-‘democratic’ delusionism, and no academic-intellectual elitism.

Magtymguly was a startling universalist, a fascinating symbolist, and a foremost transcendentalist; he must have appeared as the most unrealistic sage of his time, but in reality, he showed clearly to his innumerable readers across all Turanian lands that a conscious nation proud for the wealth of their folklore, the authenticity of their traditions, the clarity of their spirituality, and the strength of their virtues can be instituted as an infinite empire even without an emperor, if the selfishness of the various incompetent leaders and the introversion of a deliberately misled society are averted. For Magtymguly, a ‘nation’ is clearly a cultural entity with common ancestry, traditions, faith and language; Turan is therefore a constellation of many nations revolving around the same constituent elements. Some of Magtymguly poems must have certainly offered to Kemal Ataturk a great opportunity for prodigious reflection in his youth.

One century after Magtymguly passed away, a totally different environment had been formed across Asia due to the advance of the colonial powers (England, France, Holland and Russia). The diffusion of politics as a new but disastrous form of governance, the propagation of a wide range of political ideologies, the spread of numerous, sketchy nationalisms (hastily drafted mainly by foreign students of French and English academic seminars and Freemasonic lodges), the assault of the Western powers on the Sultans, the Shahs, the Gurkanian (: Great Mongols or Mughal), the Tianzi (天子, i.e. ‘Son of Heaven’, namely the Great Qing monarchs), the Czars, and the Kaisers, and the politicization of the religions formed a totally different and absolutely confusing environment. Misguided by this new milieu, many Turanians from the Balkans & Central Europe to North Africa to Central & Northeastern Asia started elaborating ways of national affirmation within the wider political, republican context.

Although the Western colonial capitals were ferocious and determined enemies of any perspective of a rising Turan across Asia and despite the ceaseless efforts of colonial academics and Orientalists to undermine and conceal all things Turanian, Paris and London agreed that a small dose of Pan-Turkism (diffused among Turkic peoples, i.e. only a part of the Turanian nations) would further destabilize both, the Ottoman Empire (the principal target of the colonial powers) and Czarist Russia (France’s and England’s most expendable ‘ally’). The Pan-Turkist and Pan-Turanian movements that initially started with Western help were predestined to fail pretty much like every other movement, party or state that was formed with Western colonial ‘assistance’. In fact, there were only few exceptions to this rule. The most impressive among them was Abdurreshid Ibrahim (Абдурашид Гумерович Ибрагимов; Turkish: Abdürreşid İbrahim; 1857-1944), an outstanding Tatar thinker, theologian, preacher, theoretician, activist, agitator, author, publisher of newspapers, reviews and magazines, founder of liberation movements, ambitious liberator and unifier of all Turanian nations, and adamant fighter for the cause of Pan-Turanian Muslim unity.

Unique personality of uncompromising discipline, foremost persistence, exemplary adaptation in different enironments, and paradigmatic readjustment under varied political conjunctures, Abdurreshid Ibrahim was born in Tara, a town then located in Tobolsk province, but currently incorporated in the province of Omsk in Western Siberia (Russia). Indefatigable traveler for the promotion of his cause, he pleaded for his vision almost everywhere between Tokyo and Istanbul, traveling perhaps more than any other explorer, military, intelligence agent, diplomat, entrepreneur or scholar of his time (from Japan to Italy to France – from NE Siberia to Mecca to Egypt). Risky adventurer, persuasive orator, and alternative visioner for almost all of his diverse interlocutors, Abdurreshid Ibrahim was able to explain why Pan-Turanian Muslim unity was useful to almost anyone except the colonial powers he was fighting against (namely Russia, England and France). Minor sample of his strong conviction and of his unmatched persuasion skills is the fact that, amongst other extraordinary circumstances of his fascinating life, he became the first imam of the first Tokyo mosque.

Abdurreshid Ibrahim had a very accurate and unbiased knowledge of Islamic and Asiatic History, particularly about the wider continent of Asia, which is now called ‘Eurasia’ by both, colonial forces whose constant preoccupation has always been to deceive all the others, and confused theoreticians whose ability to discern has evidently been insufficient to grasp that, during most of the last six millennia of History, Europe has permanently been the most underdeveloped, the most backward, the most barbarian, and the most useless peninsula of Asia.

Although not a traditional Muslim historian like Tabari, although not a traditional Muslim theoretician of governmental systems like Nizam al Mulk, although not a traditional Muslim conqueror like Timur, the self-instructed (thanks to his interminable travels) Abdurreshid Ibrahim had sufficient knowledge, perspicacity, and contextualization skills to conclude that     

a) Russia was a fake state, which not only subjugated an enormous swath of Muslim populations, illegally occupying their vast lands, but also -and during no less than 400 consecutive years- subjected millions of people to enforced Christianization and Russification under threat of mass extermination;

b) the English colony of ‘India’ (British Raj) was the result of an illegal foreign occupation and constituted a criminal, anti-Turanian and anti-Muslim tyranny geared to monstrously deface the Turanian Muslim identity of Hindustan, Bengal and the Deccan, impose a revisionist pseudo-historical dogma, and produce a pseudo-Indian political nation through numerous terrorist processes, like the infamous Sanskritization campaign;  

c) Japan and China were in reality parts of the Turanian world;

d) Shintoism and Confucianism consisted in earlier forms of monotheism similar to Tengrism; and

e) Iran and Turan were one ethnolinguistic, cultural and spiritual entity that incorporated nomadic, semi-nomadic and sedentary populations under the universal concept of a divine empire that was not different from similar conceptualizations attested in China.

Abdurreshid Ibrahim was neither a Pan-Islamist nor a modernist reformer (Jedid), as many colonial academics pretend today, thus fully distorting his vision and efforts; simply, it was an undeniable fact that the majority of the Turanians outside China and Japan were Muslims and those, who did not believe in Islam, ascribed themselves to forms of monotheistic spirituality that did not diverge much from the basic tenants of Islamic monotheism. Although an imam, he was not a rigid and strict theologian, because his incessant travels acquainted him with the multiple forms of perception and expression of the monotheistic spirituality.

He deployed his efforts not only at the level of popularizing his ideas and concepts among Muslims in Asia, Africa and Europe, but also by attempting to turn Japan, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Tibet, the Dalai Lama and the Buddhists, the Bogd Khanate of Mongolia, and the Ottoman Empre against Russia, England and France. He was able to extensively explain to each of them their respective interests in opposing the three colonial states, as well as the ensuing benefits for all of them. In parallel, he incited all the Turanians and all the Muslims exposed to European colonization threat against Russia, England and France. He was arrested many times and even more times, he was expelled from countries that he tried to turn against the colonial powers.

One has to admit however that, despite his unporecedented and ever since unrivelled zeal, Abdurreshid Ibrahim failed to achieve a substantive result. The reason for this is the fact that he basically acted without any proper, collective infrastructure, i.e. a movement, an organization, a front or an association. Actually, he needed what we would call today an international party. He did not realize the advantages deriving from the existence of various local nuclei of social activism and propaganda and from the organization of particular groups that would continue diffusing and popularizing his concepts, proposals, ideas, and vision, when he would not be anymore in that specific region or country, traveling to other locations and empires.

Abdurreshid Ibrahim was already expelled from the Ottoman Empire before the Young Turk Revolution (1908). As he was moving fast across vast distances, he returned to Istanbul at the time the Young Turks (Committee of Union and Progress) rose to power; he appeared as a most interesting thinker, thoughtful activist, and formidable agitator to the leading statesmen among the Young Turks, and they increasingly paid great attention to him, and to his proposals, calls and vision. His book ‘Alem-i-İslam ve Japonya’da İntişar-ı İslamiyet’ found many enthusiastic supporters among the Young Turks, who were trying to build lobbies of influence and to produce the necessary tools for their policies in various parts of the world. Many consider Enver Pasha (1881-1922) as the leading figure of Pan-Turkism, but there had not been a single seed of Pan-Turkism or Pan-Turanianism among the Young Turks prior to 1910.

It was only a proof of deep ignorance, shameless ingratitude, and pathetic populism from the part of the worthless and pathetic Turkish president that, during his a two-day visit in Azerbaijan (on December 9th 2020), while addressing the people of Azerbaijan, he praised Enver Pasha by saying “May the soul of Enver Pasha be blessed today” ( In fact, and irrespective of whatever Enver Pasha’s soul may or may not be doing now, without Abdurreshid Ibrahim’s earlier propagated vision, manifested struggle, and numerous publications, speeches, pleas, and calls, Enver Pasha would have not be remembered as a champion of Pan-Turkism nowadays, and even his Caucasus campaign may have not taken place.

Enver Pasha’s gradual change and shift of position from a nebulous Ottoman Modernism to an ill-defined Pan-Turkism is entirely due to Abdurreshid Ibrahim. This shift caused the rift between Enver Pasha and Mustafa Kemal Pasha, who then (early 1912) started taking an always greater distance from the Young Turks. It is however true that, at those days, due to the multifaceted colonial assault on the Islamic World and the Asiatic empires, there seemed to be a certain propinquity among many activists with divergent ideals and beliefs. In fact, to some extent, Pan-Turkism (and Pan-Turanianism), Pan-Ottomanism and Pan-Islamism functioned at the time as communicating vessels of the anti-colonial forces, because the major concern and interest was not the establishment and the nature of a future state, but the immediate and effective repulsion of foreign attacks. As one could have expected, Abdurreshid Ibrahim was shrewd enough to understand that fake constructions, like Wahhabism and Political Islam, were mere vehicles of colonial policies and to reject them.

Abdurreshid Ibrahim fought againt the Italians in Libya, got Ottoman citizenship, became a leading member of Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa special forces, published the legendary newspaper İslam Dünyası, was appointed as close associate of Enver Pasha, and, although 60 years old, was engaged in the Ottoman front against the English at Basra, Southern Mesopotamia. In 1917, he was in Berlin to better forge a Tatar-Muslim-German alliance, whereas in 1918, he was an ally of the Communist forces in Russia. Soon afterwards, he was considered as a counter-revolutionary element, and this forced him to move back to Turkey and to Arabia. For Kemal Ataturk’s systematic approach and methodic effort to launch a new, solid, strong, and well-organized state, Abdurreshid Ibrahim did not represent an enemy but a risk. The same was valid for Enver Pasha, who was not even accepted back in Turkey, when he reached Batumi and tried to return to the state of Kemal Ataturk, which was still under formation. In 1935, Abdurreshid Ibrahim was deprived of his Turkish citizenship, and he returned to Central Asia, China and Japan, deploying there further efforts for his cause for another decade.

Contrarily to Enver Pasha, his half brother Nuri Killigil (1869-1949) lived in Turkey, after participating in many battles; he was a former general of the Ottoman army, leading officer of the Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa forces against the Italians in Libya and the English in Egypt during WWI. His major achievement is that, as the main recruiter and the sole commander of the Islamic Army of the Caucasus (Kafkas İslâm Ordusu; Azerbaijani: Qafqaz İslam Ordusu), he fought against the Communist (Bolshevik Baku Commune) and Armenian army and he liberated Azerbaijan in September 1918, before being forced to withdraw after the capitulation of the Ottoman Empire at Mudros (Armistice of Mudros; Mondros Mütarekesi). Although arrested by the English in 1919 Batumi, Nuri Killigil escaped to Erzurum with the help of his supporters and lived in Turkey where he established a rather small private business and abstained from any other activity.

Nuri Killigil remained however a dormant champion of Pan-Turkism for two decades, and after Ataturk’s death, he launched a military industrial plant. In 1941, he negotiated with Franz von Papen (Knight of Malta;  Grand Cross of the Pontifical Order of Pius IX; 1879-1969), Germany’s ambassador in Ankara, the participation of Turkic and Turanian forces in the WWII at the side of the Germans, demanding in exchange the secession and independence of Turkestan (i.e. the entire Central Asia, Caucasus, sizeable parts of Siberia, and an important portion of European Russian territories). Thanks to his initiative and cooperation with von Papen, Nuri Killigil helped establish the Turkistanische Legion (Turkestan Legion) that coordinated actions with the Schutzstaffel (SS). After the end of WWII, English agents carried out a sabotage in his factory (in Istanbul’s Sütlüce district), assassinating him and many employees and workers. However, the Turkistanische Legion became a historically remarkable Treffpunkt of leading figures of Pan-Turkism and Pan-Turanianism, notably the Kazakh Mustafa Shokay (Мустафа Шокай; 1890-1941) and the Uzbek Baymirza Hayit (Boymirza Hayit Mahmudmirza o’g’li; Баймирза Хаит; 1917-2006).

For Kemal Ataturk, Pan-Turkism (and/or Pan-Turanianism) was not something inherently bad or necessarily pointless; but it was simply wrong under the then circumstances that prevailed from Western Balkans to India to Eastern Siberia. The timing for such an attempt was disastrous. According to Ataturk, attempts like the Basmachi movement in Central Asia (Basmacı hareketi; Басмачество; its peak was from November 1921 until August 1922, and under the leadership of Enver Pasha) were brave, heroic, and noble, but they were predestined to doom.

If we study the opposition between Kemal Ataturk from one side and from the other side all the tenants of Pan-Turkism and Pan-Turanianism, we will find an interesting parallel with another polarization that took place at those days within the sphere of Marxism–Leninism, namely the opposition between the doctrinal concept and theory of “socialism in a single country” (социализм в отдельно взятой стране) defended by Stalin and Bukharin in 1924 and the rather erratic idea of a permanent revolution, which -although insinuated by Marx and Engels- was propagated in the 1910s, 1920s and 1930s by Trotsky. It is the typical difference that we attest on many different occasions and about diverse issues; we commonly describe it as the divide between the two groups: “realists vs. idealists”.

Ziya Gökalp (1876-1924), an insignificant theoretician guided and ‘educated’ by French Orientalists in order to be locally used as per the needs of the colonial powers, is the enfant gâté of Western scholarship, when it comes to almost all things Oriental. Among other Western colonial falsifications, exaggerated flatteries, and nonsensical claims, he is portrayed as an important intellectual with a certain impact on the formation and the formulation of Pan-Turkic and Pan-Turanian ideas. That’s a lie. Ziya Gökalp was a Turk from Diyarbakır, who settled in Istanbul in 1895, and then, while studying, he was initiated in French Freemasonic lodges of the Ottoman capital. There, he received a most confusing and absolutely fallacious education meant to convert him to a tool for the promotion of catastrophic French theories, ideas, and ideologies in both, the Ottoman Empire and Turkey.

It was consequently normal for Ziya Gökalp to take strong positions against Pan-Ottomanism and Pan-Islamism. Attracted to and confused by different Western theoretical systems, he was practically unable to correctly perceive realities, whereas his attitude to ceaselessly theorize and to link his understanding of diverse situations to various Western pseudo-scientific dogmas and ideological aberrations led him to an impasse. In fact, Ziya Gökalp cannot be possibly considered either as an adept of Pan-Turkism and Pan-Turanianism or as a champion of Turkish nationalism and Turkism. As he was quite noticeable as a pro-French propagandist in the Orient, the English had to interfere, because Gökalp’s attraction to theories of the French Jew sociologist Émile Durkheim and to ideas of the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche did not bode well for their plans in the wider region; he was then exiled to Malta (1919-1921).

Kemal Ataturk realized that Gökalp would be dangerous if left alone, due to the ideological confusion that characterized him, To keep the devil close (and thus render him harmless), the founder of Modern Turkey appointed Gökalp in the Ministry of Education in 1922 and guided him as to how to best define the Anatolian Turkish cultural identity of the Turkish nation. The points included in Gökalp’s ‘Principles of Turkism’ (Türkçülüğün esaslari; 1923) reflect the determinant role that Ataturk played at the definition phase of Türkiye Cumhuriyeti. Gökalp was also elected in the Grand National Assembly, participated in the drafting of the 1923 Constitution, and contributed greatly to the monumental educational reform that Ataturk launched in 1923-1924. Presented by many anti-Turkish Western racists, chauvinists and white supremacists as “Kurd”, Ziya Gökalp constitutes one of the many existing examples that the “Kurds” (at this point I am referring only to the Kurmanji) are in reality “Turks of the mountains” (dağların Türkleri). Contrarily to Anglo-French Freemasonic and to American Zionist propaganda, this term does not express ‘denial of separate identity’ but ‘declaration of true identity’.

The case of Alparslan Türkeş, who participated in several right wing political parties before launching his Nationalist Movement Party (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi; MHP), demonstrates only the degree of the interference of the British Intelligence in Turkey during the 1960s-1990s. This party became the vehicle of an ill-fated, semi-covered, and poorly conceived Pan-Turkism, and it was disastrously patented as a typical Wedtern nationalist party, because any explicit reference to Pan-Turkism or Pan-Turanianism would trigger immediate and drastic reaction from the military. In fact, the Cypriot Alparslan Türkeş was hired by the English colonials to help them control, within the political spectrum of post-Ataturk Turkey, an entire political-ideological sector that they considered as dangerous for their interests in Turkey. This means that, if other major powers controlled this ideological-sociopolitical sector in Turkey and diffused through a political party various ideas, theories and approaches harmful for the English interests across Asia, the extent of disaster for the colonial schemes of England would considerable. This point must be taken seriously into consideration.

Unfortunately for the English and for the otherwise useless politician and founder of MHP, his extremist rhetoric revealed only the emptiness of his party’s ideology and the ineffectiveness of his Bozkurtlar (Grey Wolves) youth organization’s political action over several decades. Then, Alparslan Türkeş’ immediate successor at the party leadership, Devlet Bahceli, gradually eliminated all English stooges and the pro-English elements from the party, thus opening the path for a most determined anti-Western stance of MHP. Several Turkish military officers (previously thought to be Kemalist and pro-Western) became then members of the party only to prove how greatly beneficial for the interests of China MHP can be, particularly if in Turkey’s parliament the Islamists do not form the majority.

Pan-Turanianists in Turkey were catapulted to power in July 2016, due to the failure of the coup of their pro-Western Islamist rivals. Some events possess an inherent symbolism: on Wednesday, 28 September 2016, funeral rites were performed for Nuri Killigil (also known as Nuri Pasha) at Edirnekapı Martyrs Cemetery in Istanbul for the first time, no less than 67 years after his assassoination. In 1949, intensively pressurized by English diplomats and self-motivated against all champions of Pan-Turkism and/or Pan-Turanianism, the Turkish Kemalist government of Mehmet Şemsettin Günaltay ordered Turkey’s leading religious authority to issue a ruling as per which Killigil was buried without the traditional Islamic funeral rituals because his body was dismembered in the explosion. Rectifying a past ‘mistake’ (or simply taking revenge against a ‘wrongdoing’ perpetrated by political opponents before almost seven decades, shows clearly that the Pan-Turanianist agenda was in full motion already only two months after the failed coup of 15 July 2016,

C – The Kemalists

Kemal Ataturk was not a Kemalist, and he never asked anyone to be. As already described quite sufficiently in previous units, the founder of Modern Turkey did not elaborate any theory or ideology; and he never demanded from anyone among his associates, friends, and assistants to compose any. Societies do not need theories composed by irrelevant individuals to prosper and survive. States do not need ideologies to be established, developed and improved. Governments do not need philosophical systems to opt for the correct decision and to act drastically and effectively.

Societies can radiate and expand or regress and disappear due to the creative (or destructive) initiative of their members; societies’ welfare hinges on moral principles and virtues, cultural integrity, knowledge, wisdom, inventiveness, productivity, and solidarity.

States can thrive and triumph or decline and vanish because of the skills of their elites to comprehensively perceive the world, the ability of their rulers to creatively conceptualize the universe, the capability of their spiritual masters to inculcate the entire nation with the true meaning of their identity and the particular values of their culture, and the talent of their military in terms of proper contextualization (balance of power), foe identification, and threat prediction and elimination.

Governments can succeed and excel or fail and fall thanks to the accuracy of their assessments, the realism of their purposes, the effectiveness of their targets, the alternative approaches that they develop, the innovative methods that they employ, and the inventive tactics that they implement.

The above is enough to explain why Kemal Ataturk was always unrelated to theories, political ideologies, any worthless intellectualism, and every attempt to locally institute a cult of personality (in striking contrast with inferior rulers like Stalin, Mao, Hitler and others). The founder of Modern Turkey was a practical and effective ruler, and as such he was a simple person with no complexes of inferiority and no other detrimental psychological problems and anomalies like those that characterize many contemporary politicians and statesmen. Quite unfortunately, as it happened many times throughout History, several people around him did not have his dedication, commitment, courage and zeal; they paid only lip service to his instructions and did not follow his outstanding example. They were close to him not because they wanted to offer their lives for the national salvation and advance of Anatolia, but due to utilitarian calculations and to material benefits that they intended to extract.

In few cases, around Kemal Ataturk, there were also agents of the English and the French secret services; they reported to their masters insightful details, they were guided by the colonial powers in their steps, and they acted in many different ways in order to gradually divert the newly established state from its orbit, modify the fundamental concepts stipulated within the 1923 Constitution, and reduce Turkey to a mere tool of the colonial powers’ plans. For this to do, these agents, who were disguised as passionate admirers and followers of Ataturk, carried out a low intensity sabotage that lasted for long.

The basic colonial plan providing for the destruction of the entire Islamic World included also methods related to the following:

1- exploitation of the religious feelings up to turning the believers to narrow-minded idiots,

2- diffusion of bogus-Islamic theological systems that mentally incapacitate those who believe them,

3- promotion of pseudo-religious obscurantism that makes the people disregard -if not disrespect- other cultures, systems of spirituality, literatures, religions, arts and civilizations,

4- encouragement of abject ignorance, which is a guarantee that the targeted nation will be divided, plunged into civil wars, and incapacitated to cope with the world’s leading powers,

5- stimulation of vicious disregard for Turkey’s new, secular educational system, which should have been copied and implemented across all Muslim nations,

6- incitement of hatred against the secular state, whereas all Muslim nations should be organized in secular states,

7- exhortation for opposition against the authorities, whereas all Muslims, and all nations across Asia, Africa and Latin America must be educated, prepared and predetermined to destroy the colonial states and take revenge for the Crimes against the Mankind that were perpetrated during the colonial era and the post-colonial (or neo-colonial) times,

8- inspiration of accentuated religious division among Muslims, and

9- cultivation of disrepesct for Kemal Ataturk, etc.; the last five methods constitute an unprecedented discharge of venom that turns every unconscious recipients not only to fake Muslims and hypocrites but to inhuman beasts that have no place on Earth.

It would not be however strange to attest similar practices and policies in the territories of France and England in Africa and Asia, because the colonial gangsters did their best to spread barbarism and hatred from India to Egypt to Algeria. But it is impressive to notice that in Turkey, even at the time of Kemal Ataturk, several people among his associates and followers carried out some of the above methods in a clandestine manner, being confident that their colonial masters would later promote them to high positions in the government.  

This is the way all the so-called ‘revolts’ commenced in Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey; initially these events were nothing more than simple protests, which were due to the fact that the groundbreaking changes introduced by the founder of Turkey were not duly explained, extensively discussed, systematically propagated or -if you prefer- effectively marketed among vast populations that could not understand the essence of, and the need for, these changes. After the early stage of these demonstrations, when high dignitaries of the state were dispatched to villages, towns, and cities in Eastern Anatolia, the situation turned worse, because some of these officials were in reality agents of the colonial powers and deliberately worsened the troubles, causing havoc and bloodshed in an effort to shake the state of Kemal Ataturk from its foundations.

A typical example a similar state dignitary was the pathetic crypto-Islamist, disreputable traitor, and agent of the British Intelligence, İhsan Sabri Çağlayangil (1908-1993), former Minister of Foreign Affairs, President of the Senate, and Acting President of Turkey for five months in 1980 (before being overthrown – thank God – by the military coup of General Kenan Evren). There were several people like him back in the late 20s and early 30s; idiotic Muslim conservatives, so-called Sunni laymen, they hated Kemal Ataturk just ‘because he abolished the Caliphate’. They were unable to understand that, with the gradual collapse and the advanced decomposition of the Ottoman Empire over the period 1798-1923, the term “Islamic Caliphate” had already become -in and by itself- a synonym to “parody”, “misery”, “failure”, and “disgrace”.

Even before Kemal Ataturk abolished it, the Islamic Caliphate was the World History’s perfect example to avoid, i.e. the epitome of the most disastrous dereliction. These useless ‘Sunni’ conservative idiots were unable to understand the word ‘self-criticism’ in any language across the Earth. Consequently, they were easily recruited by the Istanbul-based agents of the English and French colonials, who -by means of flattery, bribery and false promises- employed them against Turkey and Kemal Ataturk. They were customarily instructed to publicly appear as pro-Ataturk, to become CHP party members, and to pretend to serve the cause of the secular state, while in reality they were continually instructed as to how to erode it from inside.

Çağlayangil, at the age of 29, was a low level official dispatched to Tunceli (then Dersim) with the task to supervise the trial of Seyit Riza (1863-1937), a Zaza Alevi imam, who protested against various omissions in the new manuals of History and other cultural-educational issues. Seyit Riza was personally known to Kemal Ataturk, whom he had met and discussed with. Contrarily to the unspeakable lies contained with the purposefully fallacious Western colonial bibliography, the Dersim protests did not have any national/ethnic character, and all the Zaza believed that they were Turks, which is actually the historical truth. What was at stake then was a matter of spiritual, cultural and educational nature. It was not an ethnic conflict at all.

The Dersim protesters demanded a more stressed presentation of the Anatolian Alevi culture within the historical manuals of the Turkish secular education. These demands exacerbated the rancor of the filthy crypto-Sunni traitors, the puppets and spies of the colonial powers, who used to posture as ‘Kemalists’ at those days. In this manner, the old Sunni theological odium against the Anatolian Spirituality and the Mevlevi and Bektashi Orders was rekindled. However, these two spiritual orders were already outlawed and banned by Kemal Ataturk, because they had already been infiltrated by evil theologians, gone astray, and become pointless, ineffective and worthless.

Although the vicious murderer Çağlayangil had the power to offer rightful guidance to the judges and to explain to them the reasons for which the evidently innocent imam Seyit Riza had to be acquitted and the whole issue had to be peacefully terminated, he deliberately forced them to condemn him to death. In this manner, the crypto-Sunni criminal Çağlayangil had Seyit Riza hanged, because his colonial masters wanted much blood to be shed, so that they can reactivate all sorts of sectarian divisions in Turkey anytime they would choose as per their interests.

After Ataturk’s death, Çağlayangil shamelessly continued comfortably posturing as ‘Kemalist’, which is of course a disgrace for Modern Turkey, but in Anatolia he is irrevocably remembered until today as the ‘malignant executor’ and the ‘Dersim butcher’.

In fact, the so-called Kemalists appeared as such only to stage manage the hijack and the holdup of the state of Kemal Ataturk. It was not a military coup, but a theatrical play staged after the death of Kemal Ataturk and interpreted by his vicious and venomous enemies, who had been earlier masqueraded as his associates, assistants and followers. The Anglophile pseudo-Freemason İsmet İnönü was the first among them; his catastrophic tenure (1938-1950) served only the English interests, and he was good enough only to materialize the three primary colonial targets:  

a) turn the unitary, solidary, and monolithic society of Turkey, which was organized on the basis of a one-party system (CHP), and the equitable and magnificent state of Kemal Ataturk into a Western political swamp, a monstrous ‘democratic’ tyranny, and a multi-party elite dissociated from the average people;

b) keep Turkey out of WWII as a neutral partner of England and the US – at the detriment of Turkey’s interests in Caucasus, Iran, Central Asia, and all the previously Ottoman territories. This policy did not have catastrophic consequences only for Turkey, but also for the wider region, and the entire world; and

c) prepare the terrain for the first Islamist ‘product’ of the West, i.e. the execrable and perverse crypto-Islamist Adnan Menderes, who became prime minister of Turkey only after being helped by İnönü, subsidized by Western stooges in Turkey, and promoted by the Western embassies.

Menderes’ primary task (ordered by his Western masters) was to dismantle the state of Kemal Ataturk. The fact that he signed Turkey’s entry to NATO (18/2/1952), thus abandoning Turkey’s neutrality, which had been the cornerstone of the state’s foreign policy for more than three decades, demonstrates very clearly that all Islamists are products of the colonial powers and traitors of their own countries. The shameful and treacherous Menderes worked hard for ten years in order to destroy the pillars of Turkey’s national independence, preparing Ankara for full American tutelage. Thank God, he was overthrown by a military coup d’état (27 May 1960) undertaken by young officers who had not been contaminated like most of the Turkish generals due to their contacts with NATO, English and US officers. However, the problem is that the treacherous policies introduced by İsmet İnönü and pursued by Menderes left deep traces in Turkey’s political life.

From the 1960s to the early 2000s, the tragicomical play of Kemalism was staged incessantly in full disrespect of Kemal Ataturk’s legacy and memory; some Kemalists would appear as conservative under Süleyman Demirel, an anti-American puppet of the English colonials, whereas others would propagate social democratic ideas under Bülent Ecevit, an American stooge, balanced politician, and intellectual with strong background in Bengali and Sanskrit. Both tendencies had nothing in common with the typical practices, approaches and perceptions of the founder of Modern Turkey; the former group was at the antipodes of Kemal Ataturk’s Devrimcilik (Reformism; also defined as inkılapçılık), whereas the latter promoted an enormous distortion of Kemal Ataturk’s Devletçilik, which does not imply ‘statism’ and ‘state-run economy’ but underscores the role of the state in promoting and guaranteeing modernization, economic sanitization, and free market economy.

Carrying out, step-by-step, the worst distortion of Kemal Ataturk’s heritage for more than four decades, Kemalists reflect Shakespeare’s following verses better than anybody else in the world, thus revealing what they truly are: 

“the best actors in the world, either for tragedy, comedy, history, pastoral, pastoral-comical, historical-pastoral, tragical-historical, tragical-comical-historical-pastoral, scene individable, or poem unlimited. Seneca cannot be too heavy, nor Plautus too light. For the law of writ and the liberty, these are the only men”

Hamlet: Act 2 Scene 2

The decades-long theatrical play involved also a most decorous scene: portraits, busts and statues of Kemal Ataturk started being placed everywhere. This is actually the way I, personally, came to understand that ‘Kemalism’ and ‘Kemalists’ for Turkey’s ruling classes meant simply “ruling in the name of Kemal Ataturk, while implementing coincidentally opportune policies that have nothing in common with the perceptions, the approaches, the methods, and the practices demonstrated by the founder of Turkey”.

I must confess that -thank God- I realized this troublesome situation very early, and more precisely in 1974, when I was just 18 years old; it was all due to my persistence to invite my father to the cinema so that we watch the famous Murder on the Orient Express, which was directed by Sidney Lumet and featured an exceptional, all-star crew. As my father preferred Maurice Leblanc’s Arsène Lupin to Agatha Christie’s Hercule Poirot as novel character, my only chance to convince him to come with me was the superb presence in the movie of his beloved Ingrid Bergman. Istanbul is an important setting in the early part of the movie, and several scenes were shot in the Sirkeci Railway station (built in 1890), which -back in the 1930s (when the novel plot is set)- was the eastern terminus of the Orient Express.  

My father was quick to understand that the filmmakers made several mistakes; in one shot, an enormous portrait of Kemal Ataturk appears on a wall. My father, who lived in Turkey during the major part of Ataturk’s tenure, laughed regrettingly and made a negative comment, stating that there were no portraits of the founder of Modern Turkey in Turkey while he was alive. Apparently, this was a major mistake of the film’s set designer. This can be easily noticed in this part of the movie: 12:19-12:22 (2:01:56); you can watch it here:

And this concludes the case of the Kemalists, who for many decades attempted to merge to good and the evil, and to combine virtue and depravity; their ‘Kemal Ataturk’ was therefore a caricature of Oriental pompous arrangments and Occidental hypocritical backstage. When the conservative and social-democrat Kemalists were divided, each into two parties, back in the early 1990s, many -even highly placed magistrates and military officers- believed that these divisions were due to personal feuds; they were all wrong. There was no personal antagonism; there was Western (US, English, French, and German) interference, manipulation and machination.

In 1995, there was absolutely no difference between Tansu Çiller (Doğru Yol Partisi; True Path Party – 19.18%) and Mesut Yılmaz (Anavatan Partisi; Motherland Party – 19.65%); and Bülent Ecevit (Demokratik Sol Partisi; Democratic Left Party – 14.64%) and Deniz Baykal (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi; Republican People’s Party – 10.71%) did not differ in anything. The two conservative parties had together 39% of the voters; and the two social-democratic parties together accounted for 25% of the voters. Refah Partisi (Necmettin Erbakan’s party) was first with only 21.38%. Only because of the electroral law, two parties (Refah Partisi and Doğru Yol Partisi) totaling 40.5% of the voters formed a majority government that was rejected by the parliamentarians of three parties (Anavatan Partisi, Demokratik Sol Partisi, and Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi) supported by 45% of the voters. It appeared as the total oxymoron, but it was carefully planned – by the criminal gangsters of US, NATO, England and France.

One must confess that, in the euphoria of those days, few people were shrewd enough to realize that the end was very close, and that to prevent the end from coming, Kemal Ataturk’s principles had to immediately and solemnly be restated, his values reinstated, and his practices reinvigorated. However, these people were persecuted, defamed, and kicked out, following the intervention of several Western ambassadors, consuls, and intelligence service agents; even Lady Diana’s murder organizers were involved in that story. These people however knew very well that there were no conservatism and no social democracy in Ataturk.

Revealing the truth to the average Turks would then be a very shocking experience, because the vast majority of the population was convinced that all the party leaders and members had undeniable and impeccable credentials of Kemalism. This was exactly the problem; Ataturk never demanded for a Kemalist ideology to posthumously substitute him. The founder of Modern Turkey wanted his successors to continue having the same perception that he had, deploying the same methods that he did, developing the same approaches that he exemplified, and carrying out the same practices that he introduced and indicated as correct.  

Even more ridiculous were the results of the fake elections of 2002. If Tansu Çiller (9.54%) and Mesut Yılmaz (5.13%), who had basically identical political programs, were united in one conservative party, they would surpass the 10% limit, enter the parliament, and prevent the Islamists from having majority. They would then form the next government, striking an alliance with Deniz Baykal (19.39%) as prime minister. This development would automatically place Turkey within the European Union, and this was exactly what several Western European countries did not want – not because of the fake pretext of Islamism (that they use now thanks to Erdogan’s unnecessary existence, and which did not exist at the time), but because they would lose their privileges, due to the simple fact that in such case the numbers would speak for themselves: UK, Poland and Turkey would destroy once for all the ominous ‘German-French axis’.

The Turkish general elections of 2002 were a shameful matter of unprecedented Western involvement, manipulation and machination; for the colonial targets  against Turkey to be easily achieved the entire Turkish political life was further multi-divided, and new parties appeared being generously subsidized by foreign embassies only for the fraudulent purpose of placing an Islamist government in Ankara.

Cem Uzan, a successful businessman (whose enterprises were later confiscated by the Islamists, following specific US-UK orders), launched a liberal party (7.25%) with the help of France; Ismail Cem, former Foreign Minister, formed his own party (fully financed by the CIA) and got 1.15%; Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu, a former MHP (Pan-Turkist) deputy (1991, 1995), who had already formed his party (Büyük Birlik Partisi–BBP; Great Unity Party) in 1993 with the help of some German international circles, was able to reach 1.02%, which was enough to force Devlet Banceli (Alparslan Türkeş’ successor and MHP leader) out of the parliament (because of his meager 8.36%), which was also due to the extreme political multi-division and to the participation of another, minor, Pan-Turkist party in the electoral fraud of 2002.

Thus, the stage was prepared for the next theatrical play, namely the false dilemma ‘Islamists vs. Kemalists’, which is nothing more than the Oriental version of the duel between ‘I Capuleti e i Montecchi’ (the Capulets and the Montagues). Deputies from all the political parties of today’s Turkey are idiotic enough to still believe that the founder of Turkey wanted to ‘please’ the French and the English and for this reason he ‘westernized’ the country. Only besotted and demented people can possibly believe this. Many brainless Kemalists support therefore various branches of pro-Western and Western ideologies only to deliberately express a sentimental reaction against the Islamists, and because they erroneously assume that the Islamists are anti-Western, whereas the Islamists are the very products and the true enfants gâtés of the Western colonial world. Some people would be ready to attempt to denigrate these pro-Westerners as ‘fake Kemalists’, but that is wrong indeed; all Kemalists are fake. The true supporters of Kemal Ataturk are those, who properly value without misinterpreting his example and comprehensively exemplify him in their own perceptions, approaches, methods, and practices.   

Pro-Western Kemalists are indeed the worst enemies of Kemal Ataturk’s legacy and example; they terribly distort the very words of the founder of Turkey. In this regard, the distinguished Prof. Erol Manisalı, widely considered as Turkey’s foremost Kemalist but in reality consisting in Turkey’s most genuine interpreter of Kemal Ataturk’s mindset, concepts, choices and decisions, reminded Ataturk’s true words to everyone in an excellent article that was recently published (1/12/2020)  in Turkey’s most acclaimed newspaper Cumhuriyet under the meaningful title “Erdoğan’ın ‘Avrupa çıkışı’nın arkası” (Behind Erdogan’s ‘European exit’). After a brief but very convincing analysis, the venerable academician made a sentence only to include a most crucial statement made back in the 1920s by Kemal Ataturk: «”İstikametimiz Avrupa değil, bilim ve çağdaş uygarlık değerleridir” dedi». («”Our destination is not Europe, but science and contemporary civilization values”, he said»).

Kemal Ataturk teaching the Roman alphabet in Constantinople, circa 1928. (Photo by Fotosearch/Getty Images).

Post WWII Europe abandoned the values of contemporary civilization and now, along with America, will get decomposed and disappear. It is high time for Turkey’s Kemalists to abandon their pseudo-ideology and to return to the true perceptions, approaches, methods, and practices of Kemal Ataturk, as enshrined in the 1923 Constitution. Otherwise, the theatrical play, i.e. the false dilemma ‘Islamists vs. Kemalists’ (Capulets vs. Montagues), will be performed in all its majestic tragedy. The vicious colonial propaganda, as per which the Turkish political life revolves around two poles, namely the Islamists and the Kemalists, is a poisonous lie; this is the poison, which at the end kills both, Romeo and Juliet.

Kemalists and Islamists have very little time left before they

– overwhelmingly break all negotiations with EU,

– unilaterally withdraw Turkey from NATO,

– immediately ensure full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation,

– re-organize and rearm the Turkish army after the Chinese model,

– offer China sizable naval bases in the Mediterranean (Bodrum) and in the Black Sea (Iğneada, Demirköy, Kırklareli province),

– launch a nation-wide alternative to the global Internet (dubbed Turannet) in cooperation with China, Russia and Iran (projected to also include Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Pakistan),

– open ten (10) Chinese universities in Turkey and ten (10) Turkish universities in China, thus progressively making Chinese the first foreign language in Turkey, and

– turn the region of Kaş (Antalya province) into the Sea Route’s major harbor and trade hub in the Meduterranean for the New Silk Road (OBOR – One Belt One Road) project, and link it with the Balkan Peninsula via a new highway and a high speed railway through Denizli, Uşak, Balıkesir, a Çardak – Gelibolu underwater tunnel (Çanakkale Boğazı; ‘Strait of Çanakkale’), and Edirne. Re-orienting 21st c. Turkey toward the East, and more specifically China, is the only correct, new strategic choice that corresponds exactly to what Kemal Ataturk did before 100 years, when he re-oriented the Ottoman Empire toward the West, thus founding Modern Turkey. Turkey’s Drang nach Osten is the only magnificent project that would  truly be as groundbreaking and as world-shattering as Kemal Ataturk’s enduring legacy. Such a move will be the world’s terminal endgame changer. It will catapult Turkey to worldwide supremacy as one of the five main superpowers of tomorrow’s world, impose the Anatolian-Mesopotamian-Iranian-Turanian Cultural Heritage as the Epicenter of World History, force the Mankind to revolve around the New Silk Road, and terminate the corrupt, useless and barbarian Western World irrevocably.


Download the article in Word doc:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s