World War Three?

I came across a curious article the other day while skimming through various news sources. The headline was:

The Queen has a SECRET speech prepared and ready for WORLD WAR 3

royal family

World War 3, anyone? A show of knees, please. The royals’ll be right there, of course – fighting them on the beaches etc.

Dear old Elizabeth, I thought. Well, she’s been sitting on that throne for a long time now, so you’d have to think she’s got pretty much every possible event covered. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, as we used to say.

The UK Express published this little piece as accusations against Russia were surfacing over the alleged poisoning of Sergei Skripal, former spy and double agent. Now talk of a Third World War seems to have become the latest buzz topic in the salons of the well-off.

“The Queen”, readers would no doubt have been comforted to hear, “has a speech prepared in case this terrible event does happen. It may have been written nearly forty years ago and is of its time, but it is still relevant today.”

‘Now,” says Lilibet, “this madness of war is once more spreading through the world and our brave country must again prepare itself to survive against great odds.’”

But, hang on – forty years ago? Yep. Apparently, this “incredibly prescient” speech was written on 4 March 1983, a year after the much-faded British Empire had launched an attack by land, sea and air on that major threat to world peace, Argentina, over a tiny archipelago 1,800 km from Buenos Aires, and 12,686 km from London. Great Britain, it seems, had claimed sovereignty over the Falkland Islands in 1690. There was some debate, however, in international circles over this claim, with Spain, France, Argentina and later the United States all expressing interest. The Brits, nevertheless, World Number One at the time, backed up their own argument in 1833 with the time-honoured strategy of gunboat diplomacy – and has exercised “de facto sovereignty” ever since.

soviet-union-is-the-focus-of-evil-in-the-modern-world-ronald-reagan-67-54-70

OK, they’ve gone – so who is it now?

1983: Geriatric former Hollywood actor, Ronald Reagan, was in his first term as President of the USA. He was much-mocked at the time – but his tenure has since come to be viewed with wistful affection in the light of subsequent horrors. Those were the days when Soviet Russia was, allegedly, still the main threat to world peace – and Reagan “The Gipper” was planning to locate missile bases in outer space to get a better coverage of earth-bound targets.

thetcher-1

There wasn’t much sadness when Maggie went on her last journey

Maggie Thatcher, a one-term wonder if ever there was one, had ensured her re-election to the UK premiership by waging that outrageous little war against a third-world South American dictatorship, swept back in on a wave of nostalgic jingoistic patriotism. “The Witch” then proceeded to destroy the unions, create widespread unemployment and poverty, and hand the UK economy over to the financial leeches of London City. The retributive hand of Divine Justice sentenced her to spend her declining years in demented insanity – before casting her into the fires of perpetual damnation. But of course, I don’t really believe in that stuff 😉

The really important question, however, is, whose mortal hand is working behind the scenes of these exemplary democracies to ensure that these looney ideologues are “elected” as leaders of the so-called “Free World”?

lawrence

Apparently he was quite keen on a spot of flagellation

I recently read a history of the First World War by John Keegan – lauded by some as one of the world’s great military historians. I have to say I found it pretty heavy-going, and I mostly skipped over detailed accounts of pointless battles of attrition on the Western and Eastern Fronts. I was really interested in the “theatres” that received little attention in the “history” I was brought up with – especially British attacks on Ottoman territory in Palestine and “Mesopotamia”. With the exception of TE Lawrence’s romanticised, self-aggrandising tales of sado-masochistic adventures in “Arabia”, we knew little of the British government’s plans to establish a Zionist state in Palestine, and seize the Middle Eastern oil-fields for themselves.

But empire-building was what that war was really all about – overcoming rivals to control the world’s resources and enslaving the poorer people in one’s own and other countries. State propaganda was widely used to persuade the public that war was necessary to preserve freedom and defeat an evil enemy. Thinking citizens who refused to believe the lies were ruthlessly punished.

A second more terrible war broke out a mere twenty years after that one ended. The propaganda was more sophisticated, but the Second World War was really a continuation of the First – a continuing struggle for world dominance by competing empires. And a conflict manufactured by financial-industrial oligarchs to establish a new world economic order after the disastrous depression they themselves had created.

With Germany and Japan defeated and laid waste, and the British Empire disintegrating, the United States emerged from that second war as the world’s number one military and economic power. “United” however, it certainly wasn’t. The North-South divide had never gone away. Racial tensions seethed below the glamorous surface illusion created by Hollywood and Madison Avenue. Extremes of obscene wealth and abject poverty were preserved by armed force when necessary. Relaxed open societies flourished in coastal cities contrasting with the religious conservatism of inland states. An existential danger posed by an outside threat was needed to unite a divided people – and for forty years Soviet Russia’s “evil empire” provided that unifying service.

So, what’s changed? Let’s list the changes:

rust belt

Rust Belt, USA

  • The United States’ economic engine has long-since stalled. Its manufacturing sector has been exported to poor countries where the labour force can be exploited to generate greater profits for owners and “shareholders”.
  • Once-great cities have been turned into deserts of poverty, crime and systemic unemployment, with enclaves of super-wealthy guarded by private police, high walls and razor-wire.
  • Real economic growth has ceased. An unsustainable illusion of growth has been maintained by media-driven consumption and shopping.
  • The USA has been transformed from the world’s banker into its greatest debtor.
  • The country’s pristine natural environment has been increasingly ravaged and sacrificed to the greed of industrialists and commercial interests.
  • The anarchy of the internet has brought into the open the dirty secrets of governments that had previously portrayed themselves as representatives of freedom, democracy, justice and equality. More and more people all over the world are discovering the real truth about how the US has used its military and economic power to overthrow democratically elected governments, install puppet dictators and condone their use of torture and murder.
  • The USSR fizzled out of existence, removing the long-standing danger that had prevented the “United” States from disintegrating into its multitude of component parts.

No credible external enemy has been found to replace the evil Soviets. They’ve tried Muslims, but Islam is just about as divided as Christianity – although retaining perhaps a little more faith and sincerity. No one can really believe in a unified Islamic monster opening its jaws to swallow Western civilisation.

trump-kin jong un

Who would you say poses the bigger danger to world peace?

North Korea? With a population of 25 million, and economy ranked 125th in the world, it’s hard to see Kim Jong-Un as a major threat, no matter how hard you try.

Russia again? It may be the largest country by land area, but according to Forbes, its economy is smaller than that of Texas. You may not like Vladimir Putin, but Russians seem to – and he has given them some self-belief back after the shame of the Soviet collapse. Nevertheless, Mr Putin’s probably got enough problems in his own backyard without challenging for world domination.

bankers-warsSo, are we on the brink of a Third World War? In whose interests would it be? Certainly not the tens or hundreds of millions of human beings who can expect to die quickly or slowly if it does break out. As in all other wars, it is the power elite who will do none of the actual fighting, suffer few of the hardships, but expect to reap major financial benefits. Who will start it? As in the past, it is that elite and their minions who will instigate provocations until some other government decides enough is enough and begins to fight back. Then they will be blamed for the ensuing conflagration.

God save us!

Advertisements

Quotes we all need to read!

Image: http://www.izquotes.com {Hat Tip to Information Clearinghouse} The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles. Mohandas K. Gandhi: “The person that loses their conscience has nothing left worth keeping.” Izaak Walton: “Every outcry against the oppression of some […]

via Even More Quotes #9 — An Outsider’s Sojourn II (The Journey Continues)

Thoughts on rioting

We had a work party last Friday evening. It was a fairly restrained affair, as festive season work parties go. We were a mixture of ages – but as the evening progressed, oldies began to dominate the music selection.  At one stage, we found ourselves listening to “House of the Rising Sun “a big hit in 1964 for the British band, The Animals.

Well, would you believe it? It emerged that one of our number had gone to school with Eric Burdon! And that her gran and Alan Price’s gran had been friends, in Newcastle, way back when! For those too young to know, Burdon became synonymous with The Animals, but Price had been the original founder, later leaving to start another band, more conventionally, if less modestly, named The Alan Price Set.

My memory of the latter band was limited to a couple of strangely memorable tracks, “Simon Smith and the Amazing Dancing Bear”, and “The House that Jack Built”. Our Geordie friends, however, were insistent that, in their part of the world, Price is better known for his 1974 ballad, “The Jarrow Song” – so I had to check it out.alan-price-jarrow-song-warner-bros-3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=198t_7lOjpg

It’s not great music, I’m sorry to say – but its cheery tune contrasts somewhat incongruously with its subject: an event that took place in October 1936 during the Great Depression, when two hundred men from Jarrow in the north-east of England, marched 500 km to London to draw attention to the plight of their families and fellow citizens in a town where unemployment had reached 70%.

Ellen Wilkinson, the local MP, later wrote that Jarrow at that time was:

“… utterly stagnant. There was no work. No one had a job except a few railwaymen, officials, the workers in the co-operative stores, and a few workmen who went out of the town… the plain fact [is] that if people have to live and bear and bring up their children in bad houses on too little food, their resistance to disease is lowered and they die before they should.’” (The Town that was Murdered, 1939)

The Jarrow marchers, in a gesture remarkably peaceful given the circumstances, presented a petition to the British Parliament – who more or less ignored it, possibly demonstrating that peaceful protests rarely achieve much in the way of meaningful change. Perhaps more surprisingly, the British Labour Party at the time refused to support the march for fear of being branded as Communist-sympathisers. Clearly, attempting to bring about change by working through the system has its limitations too.

BBC History writes that, “In Jarrow, a ship-breaking yard and engineering works were established in 1938 and the Consett Iron Company started a steelworks in 1939. However, in areas such as Jarrow the depression continued until World War Two, when industry prospered as a result of the country’s need for rearmament.”

Which exemplifies an important but often overlooked benefit of war in a capitalist economy.

Battle of Cable Street

London bobbies protecting pre-Fascist demonstrators, Cable Street, October, 1936

While doing a little background research on the Jarrow march, I came across a contemporaneous event: the Battle of Cable Street. Sir Oswald Mosley, a former Conservative MP in the British Parliament – later switching allegiance to the Labour Party – was an enthusiastic supporter of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, and apparently saw Fascism as the way forward for Britain. He founded and financially supported a para-military group, the Blackshirts, modelled on similar groups in Italy and Germany.

On October 4, 1936, he organised an event of his own, gathering 5,000 uniformed Blackshirts to march from the Tower of London to the poorer districts in the East End. Al-Jazeera writes that, On the day of the march, the response was the mobilisation of the immigrant communities of the East End, together with British trade unionists and leftists, to stand against Mosley with barricades, bottles, bricks and fists.”

They were met by “thousands of policemen, including many on horseback, swinging batons as they charged the crowds” since Mosley “had official permission to stage his demonstration.”

Daniel Tilles, a historian and specialist on British fascism in the 1930s, has written that “On the day itself, it was a great victory for the anti-fascists, who greatly outnumbered the Blackshirts and stopped them from marching through the East End of London.

“But Mosley’s deliberate aim had been to provoke counter-violence to what was a lawful demonstration. In a way, he got exactly what he wanted. It allowed him to portray what happened as immigrants, aliens, violent communists stopping British citizens from exercising their lawful right to demonstrate.

“In the months after Cable Street, British Jews suffered far greater violence, intimidation and abuse than they had beforehand, So Cable Street unleashed this wave of anti-Jewish violence and abuse and gave the fascists a boost in popularity.”

A well-tried technique of those in power: provoke a violent incident, then use it as a reason for forcefully suppressing groups expressing dissenting views.

Similar occurrences took place in New Zealand during the 1930s, although the Labour Government there, elected in 1935, still retained some remnants of a commitment to relieving the suffering of the poor and unemployed.

soup kitchen

A soup kitchen feeding unemployed men during the Great Depression in NZ

Predominantly a farming economy in those days, New Zealand was badly hit by the Great Depression, and its effects perhaps struck sooner than in industrialised countries. There were major riots in the main cities in 1932, the worst happening in April when a large crowd of unemployed relief workers joined Post and Telegraph Association members marching to a Town Hall meeting, swelling their numbers to around 15,000. Angry at being turned away from the overflowing hall, some demonstrators scuffled with the police barring the entrance. When a leader of the unemployed, Jim Edwards, rose to speak – apparently to urge calm – a policeman struck him down. The crowd erupted and surged down Queen St. Armed with fence palings and stones . . . they smashed hundreds of shop windows and looted jewellery, liquor, clothing and tobacco.“

Conventional reports of the incident tend to focus on the looting and window-smashing, while soft-pedalling on the poverty and misery caused by widespread unemployment; and implying that the felling of Jim Edwards may have been accidental. However, the presence of navy sailors and Territorial Army troops with rifles and bayonets, and a thousand mounted volunteer “special” constables” armed with clubs, suggest that the government was all-too-ready to meet protest with deterrent violence.

Several leading lights in New Zealand literature focused on the Depression and its attendant human suffering: among them, novelist John Mulgan, playwright Bruce Mason, and poets Denis Glover and ARD Fairburn. Glover’s poem, “The Magpies”, uses the call of the magpie to represent the heartlessness of an economic system that drives a hard-working couple to bankruptcy, insanity and death. Fairburn’s “Down on my Luck” pursues a similar theme of a man who loses job, woman and possessions as he struggles his way “to the end of his tether” and probably suicide.

social-credit-prognostications

Still going round in circles on the “tax, borrow and hope” road.

Unfortunately, attempts to perpetuate the memory of those days have been gradually forgotten, assisted on the road to oblivion by the capitalist propaganda machine that distorts and discredits their true significance.

Bruce Mason’s dramatic monologue, “The End of the Golden Weather”, was adapted to an award-winning film in 1991 – unfortunately omitting the act that described the Night of the Riots in Central Auckland. The financial strategy of CH Douglas, expounding a middle road between communism and capitalism, was undermined by JM Keynes’s legitimisation of deficit budgeting, and the financial “stimulus” of the Second World War.

As Alan Price sang, back in 1974:

“Well I can hear them an’ I can feel them
An’ it’s as just as if they were here today
I can see them, I can feel them
An’ I’m thinking nothing’s changed much today.”

 

Guatemala to move embassy to Jerusalem

Guatemala, the most populated country in Central America, was one of the eight countries that supported the United States in the United Nations vote to censure the USA for its recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel. Today we read that Guatemala will move its Israel embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – a move which apparently makes the Israeli and US governments very happy.

As a matter of interest, here are some extracts from the Wikipedia entry on Guatemala:

Former_comedian_Ji_3549912k

President Jimmy Morales – apparently a former comedian. Now in a more serious role.

“From the mid to late 19th century, Guatemala experienced chronic instability and civil strife. Beginning in the early 20th century, it was ruled by a series of dictators backed by the United Fruit Company and the United States government. In 1944, authoritarian leader Jorge Ubico was overthrown by a pro-democratic military coup, initiating a decade-long revolution that led to sweeping social and economic reforms. A U.S.-backed military coup in 1954 ended the revolution and installed a dictatorship.

From 1960 to 1996, Guatemala endured a bloody civil war fought between the US-backed government and leftist rebels, including genocidal massacres of the Maya population perpetrated by the military. Since a United Nations-negotiated peace accord, Guatemala has witnessed both economic growth and successful democratic elections [?], though it continues to struggle with high rates of poverty, crime, drug trade, and instability. As of 2014, Guatemala ranks 31st of 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries in terms of the Human Development Index.

The Great Depression began in 1929 and badly damaged the Guatemalan economy, causing a rise in unemployment, and leading to unrest among workers and laborers. Afraid of a popular revolt, the Guatemalan landed elite lent their support to Jorge Ubico, who had become well known for “efficiency and cruelty” as a provincial governor. Ubico won the election that followed in 1931, in which he was the only candidate. After his election, his policies quickly became authoritarian. He replaced the system of debt peonage with a brutally enforced vagrancy law, requiring all men of working age who did not own land to work a minimum of 100 days of hard labor. His government used unpaid Indian labor to build roads and railways. Ubico also froze wages at very low levels, and passed a law allowing land-owners complete immunity from prosecution for any action they took to defend their property, an action described by historians as legalizing murder. He greatly strengthened the police force, turning it into one of the most efficient and ruthless in Latin America. He gave them greater authority to shoot and imprison people suspected of breaking the labor laws.

Ubico continued his predecessor’s policy of making massive concessions to the United Fruit Company, often at a cost to Guatemala.

Coup and civil war (1954–1996)

us puppetsDespite their popularity within the country, the reforms of the Guatemalan Revolution were disliked by the United States government, which was predisposed by the Cold War to see it as communist, and the United Fruit Company (UFCO), whose hugely profitable business had been affected by the end to brutal labor practices. The attitude of the U.S. government was also influenced by a propaganda campaign carried out by the UFCO.

Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected U.S. President in 1952, promising to take a harder line against communism; the close links that his staff members John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles had to the UFCO also predisposed him to act against Árbenz. Eisenhower authorized the CIA to carry out Operation PBSUCCESS in August 1953. The CIA armed, funded, and trained a force of 480 men led by Carlos Castillo Armas. The force invaded Guatemala on 18 June 1954, backed by a heavy campaign of psychological warfare, including bombings of Guatemala City and an anti-Árbenz radio station claiming to be genuine news. The invasion force fared poorly militarily, but the psychological warfare and the possibility of a U.S. invasion intimidated the Guatemalan army, which refused to fight. Árbenz resigned on 27 June.

The Guatemalan Civil War ended in 1996 with a peace accord between the guerrillas and the government, negotiated by the United Nations through intense brokerage by nations such as Norway and Spain.

Abdel Fattah el-Sisi

Israel-friendly president installed in Egypt with US assistance

Retired general Otto Pérez Molina was elected president in 2011 along with Roxana Baldetti, the first woman ever elected vice-president in Guatemala; they began their term in office on 14 January 2012. But on 16 April 2015, a United Nations (UN) anti-corruption agency report implicated several high-profile politicians. The revelations provoked more public outrage than had been seen since the presidency of General Kjell Eugenio Laugerud García. The International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) worked with the Guatemalan attorney-general to reveal the scam known as “La Línea”, following a year-long investigation that included wire taps.

Officials received bribes from importers in exchange for discounted import tariffs, a practice that was rooted in a long tradition of customs corruption in the country, as a fund-raising tactic of successive military governments for counterinsurgency operations during Guatemala’s 36-year-long civil war.

On 2 September 2015, Otto Pérez Molina resigned as President of Guatemala due to a corruption scandal and was replaced by Alejandro Maldonado until January 2016. Congress appointed former Universidad de San Carlos President Alfonso Fuentes Soria as the new vice president in substitution of Maldonado.

Jimmy Morales assumed office on 14 January 2016.”

I guess Mr Morales knows which side his bread is buttered on.

Who owns the President of America?

Soros_Obama

Behind the scenes . . .  who?

“I’m against very wealthy people attempting to or influencing elections. But as long as it’s do-able I’m going to do it.”

Sheldon Adelson, speaking to Forbes magazine in February 2012.

So, who is Sheldon Adelson? According to the people at Forbes, he is the 12th richest human being on the planet, with a net worth of around $38 billion . . . give or take a couple of hundred million dollars – small change when you’re that rich.

His Forbes bio adds that he’s a “self-made” man, who grew up sleeping on the floor of a Boston tenement.

Wikipedia provides a little more info:

  • He’s an “American business magnate, investor and philanthropist.”
  • He owns casinos in Las Vegas, Singapore, Hong Kong, and who knows where else.
  • He was the largest donor to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign ($25 million).
  • His father’s family was of Ukrainian-Jewish and Lithuanian-Jewish ancestry.
  • His beginnings on the road to self-made mega-wealth were assisted by loans from a rich uncle.
  • In 2015, he paid over $9 million dollars to the Securities and Exchange Corporation to sidestep charges under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
  • He owns newspapers in Israel that corner more than 50% of readership exposure.
  • While not actually owning any TV channels, he seems to use lawsuits to get rid of unfriendly journalists and ensure positive personal coverage for himself.
  • He has “waged some bitter anti-union battles in Las Vegas” and is an outspoken opponent of the Democrat Party whom he sees as sympathetic to trade unions.
  • In addition to that $25 million “donation” to Trump’s campaign, he handed over a further $40 million to the Republican Party and another $5 million to help them celebrate their victory in the presidential election.
  • He is on record as suggesting that US negotiations with Iran would be facilitated by dropping a nuclear warhead in the desert as a warning of what might follow.
  • He “hijacked” the Israeli-American Council, turning it into a “political lobbying group on Israel-related issues.”
  • George W Bush took him to Jerusalem in 2008 for Israel’s 60th anniversary celebrations.
  • He is on record as agreeing with Newt Gingrich “that the Palestinians are an invented people.”
banksters

Wake up, America!

Why am I telling you this? According to a report in the New York Times yesterday:

“Ten days before Donald J. Trump took office, Sheldon G. Adelson went to Trump Tower for a private meeting. Afterward, Mr. Adelson, the casino billionaire and Republican donor, called an old friend, Morton A. Klein, to report that Mr. Trump told him that moving the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem would be a major priority.

“He was very excited, as was I,” said Mr. Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America, a hard-line pro-Israel group. “This is something that’s in his heart and soul.”

So, my dear liberal friends in America – Stop getting your knickers in a twist about your “democratically elected” President, Mr Trump. Start doing something about your corrupt electoral system that allows amoral, selfish mega-rich tycoons, whatever their religious or ethnic background, to pull the strings of your country’s economy, foreign policy . . . its very existence!

If you don’t think there’s a conspiracy, you’re not paying attention

An interesting article I came across in Time Magazine: “Why Smart People Still Believe Conspiracy Theories”

wall street conspiracyA coterie of academic stooges set out to prove that people who believe in “conspiracy theories” are of sub-normal intelligence. Unfortunately for them, their findings did not confirm their initial hypothesis – so they had to come up with another one, ie people believe what they want to believe. Which is probably equally true of people who insist that there is no conspiracy.

The researchers’ fundamental error was to assume that people who believe there is a conspiracy have no solid evidence to support their belief. Not true, guys and girls.

  • Take a look at the Roman Catholic Church. One huge international conspiracy to keep the poor in slavery.
  • Take a look at Wall Street and the world of international banking and finance. Another monumental conspiracy to hide the truth behind global economic imperialism.
  • Take a look at the United States political system. Another major conspiracy aimed at convincing poor Americans that they actually have a say in how their government rules the country.

trumps-favorite-mcdonalds-meal-is-a-catholic-conspiracyA few extracts from the Time article:

“Millions of Americans believe in conspiracy theories — including plenty of people who you might expect would be smart enough to know better.

Despite mountains of scientific evidence to the contrary, at least 20% of Americans still believe in a link between vaccines and autism, and at least 37% think global warming is a hoax*, according to a 2015 analysis. Even more of us accept the existence of the paranormal: 42% believe in ghosts and 41% in extrasensory perception. And those numbers are stable. A 2014 study by conspiracy experts Joseph Uscinski of the University of Miami and Joseph Parent of Note Dame University surveyed 100,000 letters sent to the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune from 1890 to 2010 and found that the percentage that argued for one conspiracy theory or another had barely budged over time.

Now, a study published online in the journal Personality and Individual Differences provides new insights into why so many of us believe in things that just aren’t true: In some cases, we simply want to believe.

The second study was similar but also sought to correlate belief in conspiracy theories and the paranormal with overall cognitive ability. To determine this, the people answered a number of questions that measured their numeracy — or basic mathematical skills — and their language abilities.

us democracyWhat’s most troubling — and a little mystifying — is the fact is that so many people in the studies score high on all of the rational and intellectual metrics and yet nonetheless subscribe to disproven theories. That’s the case in the real world too, where highly educated people traffic in conspiratorial nonsense that you’d think they’d reject. In these cases, the study concluded, the reason may simply be that they’re invested—emotionally, ideologically—in believing the conspiracies, and they use their considerable cognitive skills to persuade themselves that what’s untrue is actually true. If you want to believe vaccines are dangerous or that the political party to which you don’t belong is plotting the ruination of America, you’ll build yourself a credible case.”

_______________________________

*Interestingly US presidents and CEOs of large corporations seem to subscribe to this one!

Neo-Kemalism: Turkey’s new political compass

This opinion piece appeared in our English language daily today under the byline “Sinan Baykent”. I’m always happy when I find someone who agrees with me 🙂

10 kasım 2The July 15, 2016 coup attempt turned regular political references upside down in Turkey. Even ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) cadres started to multiply their eulogies to the first and original Republican era. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, too, gradually began to accentuate Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s importance and significance to Turkish people in his latest speeches. Meanwhile, streets all over Turkey are covered in giant Atatürk posters.

Fans in football stadiums are chanting patriotic and republican marches, putting all antagonisms aside. Big companies are broadcasting ads commemorating Atatürk’s beloved memory on TVs, radios and newspapers. Great popular mobilization occurred during Republic Day on Oct. 29 and Atatürk Memorial Day on Nov. 10.

For a long time AKP cadres always mentioned the founder using different political formulas without referring to the word “Atatürk.” However, the July 15 coup attempt annihilated these unnecessary contortions. The day following the coup attempt, a magniloquent Atatürk poster was hung at the AKP’s headquarters in Ankara. Since then and especially after U.S. pressure on Turkey escalated, Erdoğan and AKP cadres espoused a somewhat “Kemalist” image. Even if some analysts evoke a “pragmatic electoral shift” in order to gain votes for the 2019 presidential elections, I consider this to be the result of a mandatory state-level initiative.

Turkey’s raison d’état has been gravely shaken by the July 15 coup attempt. It triggered the necessity to take state-level immediate actions to eradicate intra-national threats. At the same time vertiginous incidents happened in the region. U.S. support to the People’s Protection Units (YPG), the Israeli-backed referendum in northern Iraq and recent developments in Saudi Arabia forced Turkey to adapt itself to a new and changing equilibrium.

10 kasımKemalism has always been seen as the “official ideology” of the Turkish Republic. Nevertheless, it is an ideology of the previous century and it has been largely misinterpreted over the past decades. Nowadays, Turkey’s raison d’état is reshaping itself. As one of history’s ironies, it is the conservative Erdoğan who partly initiated this crucial task. A new and vital paradigm is currently under construction. I find it appropriate to name this original conceptual sketch “neo-Kemalism.” In my opinion, neo-Kemalism is a blend of the founding will, and modern necessities for national sovereignty, prosperity and peace. It embodies the attempt to re-actualize the classical Kemalist thought by cropping its radical edges. In this framework, Kemalism would reconcile with its old “demons” in order to fit in the new scheme of the 21st century.

Erdoğan and Abdullah Gül seem to be the sole political actors to ensure the right inclusion of conservatives into the neo-Kemalist body. However, the neo-Kemalist paradigm also needs Kurdish, Alevi and Christian actors. In sum, it needs actors from all political sectors who would be willing to carry the Turkish Republic to the 21st century.

Neo-Kemalism represents Turkey’s new political compass, and down this road lies a free, united and truly democratic Republic of Turkey. While stubborn ones shall gently disappear from the national political scene; faithful ones, on the other hand, shall achieve political salvation.