Independence and other fantasies

Turkish capitalism is in a deep economic crisis. No road map is in sight. The AKP is trying to cover up this absence with fantasies: We were rising up as an independent Muslim world power in the face of imperialism. We are under attack from a Christian imperialism that was trying to halt this rise.

In reality, things are different. When the AKP came to power, Turkey was a country dependent on “imperialism”. This dependence grew exponentially in the AKP period with the onset of political Islam’s state taking control of resources and transitioning from periphery country neo-liberalism to a totalitarian “crony” capitalism.

With the outbreak of a crisis manifesting itself in the form of foreign currency and debt repayment woes, a dependent country in need of foreign resources becomes even more prone to “imperialist” countries’ crisis-escalating blackmail and its strength to withstand pressure rapidly weakens. This is the point Turkey is currently at, and the responsible party is the AKP leadership that was incapable of managing this dependent capitalism.

 On dependence

Displaying stubbornness against the leader of a centre country does not amount to fighting imperialism and a neo-nationalist stance. Imperialism has to do with the system. Not with a country or leader.

Dependence on imperialism was initially based on a model of exploitation through military or financial means that aimed to access natural resources and defend them against the other major powers. This model, which was demolished in the period of the wars of distribution, took the form of integration into the world economy under the USA’s hegemony following World War II. With colonies acquiring the right of self-governance, they attained virtual political independence. However, these countries remained available for use by “imperialist” countries’ capital as markets for the export of goods and capital and as a source of cheap labour. The function of the new “independent countries” was to preserve this availability, and they were governed through democratic means for as long as the people’s consent could be attained and, once objections started, under increasingly authoritarian regimes.

Given that the dependent countries are shaped in line with international capital’s need for appreciation, a chronic “outward” transfer of resources out of the surplus value created inside the country comes into play. Offsetting the chronic savings deficit resulting from this transfer calls for the ability to manage chronic borrowing (financial capital inflow) to be able to run the economy. The chronic fund deficit – constant borrowing dialectic causes foreign exchange and debt crises at certain intervals.

Dependent countries’ crises have become more frequent within capitalism’s structural crisis: there came the debt crisis at the beginning of the 1980’s, the Mexico, Turkey and then Asian crisis of the 1990’s and the Argentina and Turkey crises in 2001. “Imperialism” used these crises to reshape dependent countries’ economies, sometimes adapting their political structures to the neoliberal model, in a way that speeded up the transfer of value. In this simplified model, the need for external funds and constant borrowing forms the basis for dependence on “imperialism” and the chain around politics’ legs. Talk of independence without discussing the breaking of this chain is merely a fantasy that props up the situation.

 A vicious circle

To break this chain, funds are needed that will preserve the people’s standard of living during the breaking process and will support the restructuring that the “breaking” requires. This amounts to nothing more than the endeavour to benefit from competition between the major powers and transferring dependence from one “imperialist” power to the other so as to meet this need. The geopolitical bill for this transfer may be hefty enough to result in the dissolution of the country’s social fabric.

In short, independence in the true sense requires a structure that will enable the breaking of this vicious circle and the keeping of the country’s resources within the country. If such a structure is to be realized within the bounds of capitalism, where are the funds that will support the structure to come from? We can find the answer to this question by looking at foreign debt and the distribution of income: the plunder mechanisms of crony capitalism must be broken and ways must be found to draw wealth deriving from unearned income and plunder into the economy.

The AKP government cannot find such ways. On the contrary, for as long as it consents to conditions that foreign funds insist on for their inflow, a serious decline in the people’s standard of living will be experienced in the economy. With the ruling class also continuing to augment its wealth rather than sharing in this decline, it will continue to intensify nationalist fantasies, state violence and totalitarian control so that the burden remains on the people’s shoulders. Political Islam’s fantasies, naked political ambition, greed and relations with imperialism as represented in the AKP have landed Turkish capitalism in this blind alley.

 Bağımsızlık ve diğer fanteziler