64
And, as many many many Turks will hate to hear: he was a strong and proud proponent of a secular state with equal rights for everyone.
this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
64 points (93.2% liked)
HistoryPorn
4640 readers
1 users here now
If you would like to become a mod in this community, kindly PM the mod.
Relive the Past in Jaw-Dropping Detail!
HistoryPorn is for photographs (or, if it can be found, film) of the past, recent or distant! Give us a little snapshot of history!
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
- No genocide or atrocity denialism.
Pictures of old artifacts and museum pieces should go to History Artifacts
Illustrations and paintings should go to History Drawings
Related Communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This really surprises me the most, he's revered as a great reformator yet what was one of the core points is thrown away and most pretend it did not exist
As I understand it, there's a strong divide between secular and non-secular Turks in the political and cultural arenas of the country.
Despite his great reforms and his secularism, he was still a turkish nationalist first and foremost. That included suppressing the Kurdish language and setting the "purification" of Turkey as his goal. Turkey, in Atatürk's vision, should become a nation inhabited by turkish-speaking and turkish-feeling people only. From 1931 onwards, speaking Greek, Armenian or Kurdish in public was heavily discouraged, foreign sounding first and last names were changed and so on.
Atatürk himself said:"Within the political and social unity of today's Turkish nation, there are citizens and co-nationals who have been incited to think of themselves as Kurds, Circassians, Laz or Bosnians. " In his eyes, such identification were delusions. Maybe its a bit crude, but you could say he tried to drive the Kurd out of the Turk. In modern terms, you could see that as cultural genocide.
Certainly a valid point. I think the only thing I would say would be that such forced-assimilationist thinking was common amongst post-WW1 nation-states.
Thats fair
Who says he is bisexsual? His only love letters are for woman?
The souls of 1.000.000 murdered Armenians entered the chat ...
At the time of the Armenian genocide, he was still a Lieutenant Colonel serving in Gallipoli (ie nowhere near Armenia), and furthermore condemned the genocide, including to the Turkish parliament later in life. The genocide itself was ordered by the Young Turks whom Ataturk had a cold, at best, relationship with after their seizure of power in 1908 did not lead to serious democratic reforms.
I had no idea. Thanks for pointing out those important details to me.
No worries. Ataturk has his own sins, but the Armenian genocide is not one of them.
I have a suspicion you're being sarcastic 🤔
You should maybe edit your comment then...