Skills focus:
Close reading/Critical thinking
“Discussion”/Turn-taking/Interaction
Task:
To what extent do you support Kinzer’s view that
Close reading/Critical thinking
“Discussion”/Turn-taking/Interaction
Task:
To what extent do you support Kinzer’s view that
“For Turkey to live, devlet must die”?
This is a blog discussion/debate in which all ECON students will participate. As such, each of your contributions should be fairly short to allow all students to have a turn. You should contribute as many times as you feel is necessary, responding to others’ comments, questioning them further, asking them for clarification, challenging them and so on. The teacher will moderate this discussion to ensure that everyone has an equal chance. You should log in to the blog every day for the duration of this discussion to read new comments and add more of your own. Please argue objectively rather than emotionally and do not participate until you have read the text carefully and thought about the arguments.
THE DISCUSSION WILL BE OPEN FROM 28TH NOVEMBER TO 6TH DECEMBER. The teacher will then provide feedback on the discussion as a whole.
Please COMMENT on the above question:
1.Go to www.blogger.com/start and sign in to your blog account.Under the “Labels” section on the right side of the page, click on *Discussions*. You will find my new post there.
2.At the end of the post, click on “Comments.”
3.Type your contribution in the “Leave your comment” box. You may click on “Show original post” to see the assignment as you type. Check carefully for spelling and language mistakes.
4.Click on the orange “Publish your comment” button.
5.NB: If you do not follow these instructions precisely, your comments will not receive credit.
Happy arguing!
This is a blog discussion/debate in which all ECON students will participate. As such, each of your contributions should be fairly short to allow all students to have a turn. You should contribute as many times as you feel is necessary, responding to others’ comments, questioning them further, asking them for clarification, challenging them and so on. The teacher will moderate this discussion to ensure that everyone has an equal chance. You should log in to the blog every day for the duration of this discussion to read new comments and add more of your own. Please argue objectively rather than emotionally and do not participate until you have read the text carefully and thought about the arguments.
THE DISCUSSION WILL BE OPEN FROM 28TH NOVEMBER TO 6TH DECEMBER. The teacher will then provide feedback on the discussion as a whole.
Please COMMENT on the above question:
1.Go to www.blogger.com/start and sign in to your blog account.Under the “Labels” section on the right side of the page, click on *Discussions*. You will find my new post there.
2.At the end of the post, click on “Comments.”
3.Type your contribution in the “Leave your comment” box. You may click on “Show original post” to see the assignment as you type. Check carefully for spelling and language mistakes.
4.Click on the orange “Publish your comment” button.
5.NB: If you do not follow these instructions precisely, your comments will not receive credit.
Happy arguing!
39 comments:
For Turkey to live, devlet must die or not?
I agree with Stephen Kinzer some points. But I can't understand why he thinks for Turkey to live, devlet must die. Everybody knows that devlet is an association in a society which share of a common life and culture, gets security, peace of mind, comfort for this people. An authority has to be which gets basic needs of its society or people and it can success just "devlet". For example, I think if devlet is not in the society, murderer will kill easily other people and a devlet won't be which to judge them.For this reason, the rate of crime will increase and public security won't be got in the society by anyone. Because of this, I think every citizen should be supporter "a powerful devlet mechanism" in a society. Briefly, a powerful authority or "devlet" has to be everywhere according to me. But this devlet must be democratic.
So, Merve if devlet is a "powerful authority", how can it be democratic? Doesn't this seem like a contradiction to you? Couldn't a democratic consensus decide the fate of a murderer?
I think devlet is "powerful authority".It is an organization that has the power to make and enforce laws for a certain territory,it's an association with a society.We faught against the powerful countries to take our freedom again and be equal with other countires.But the one way of being democratic is acquire the secularism.
In fact, I wanted to write just devlet is necessary in every society. But I accepted if devlet is a "powerful authority", it can never be democratic. When I sent it, I realized that it is illogical. But I want to say if devlet is, everyone will do less wrong thing. Devlet inspects its citizen. On the other hand, different types of government are communist,conservative,democratic,liberal,reactionary,socialist,etc. A country or state may also have a military,prvisional,central or federal,coalition,etc government. these are very important to develop a country. It is important which is the party or ideas in government. I think devlet must be, but it should get security and it must be democratic. According to me, devlet is effective for people. Because of this, I think if devlet is democratic and if its citizens or people trust it, devlet will be useful for the people and country and all the world. I wanted to explain my first comment.
I think, devlet should be in a form of regulator, not be in a form of commander. If devlet is the 'powerful authority',then it can't be democratic because it's very easy for someone to use their position in the government for their own profits without considering other regions on different sides.We need a devlet which protect our rights with laws, supply our security,makes us a united whole to develop. But, if it becomes an institution which makes all decisions alone so it should be die. Anyone can say how can we live without a devlet. It's a kind of death that living under a strict control without using our independence.
In my opinion, "powerful authority" and "democratic ruilng" are totally different. I don't think they are conradicting. The authority which was elected by the majority of the public has now power in political means and that does not make Turkey an undemoctaric country. Moreover, my personal idea about the current system in Turkey is that democracy seems not good for the future of Turkey because whatever political problems Turkey faces with is the result of "devlet" which is the product of democracy.
(I am not against democracy. I just wanted to mention to the negative results of current democracy in Turkey.)
I agree with Merve.Devlet should be to provide regulation in society.Even if laws can't judge "devlet", it can judge guilty with laws.This may not be democratic.However,maybe,this causes that we feel more confident. So devlet must exist.Because people trust devlet.
I agree with Merve that devlet does not need to die for letting Turkey to live. I think that devlet is an organization that provides the welfare in a society by connecting people to each other and forming a common nationality. Moreover I think that we can experience true democracy in the existence of the devlet. "A powerful devlet mechanism" does not mean the lack of true democracy.
I think in our comments we mixed up the meanings of devlet and government. Government protect us and liable to provide justice. Devlet is a word that contains everything in our country and it is invisible, we do not know what is holding the devlet. How can we say that an invisible one should protect us?
I agree with the people who agree with the existence of "devlet".Imagine that devlet does not exist and all rules are determined by people and everything is free.In this case, people will try to pursue their self-interests and selfishness of people will cause a chaos.Laws and rules prevent this chaos.
I agree with friends. Devlet must be because it provide regular life. Even if laws don't affect, it is the most powerful that people trust instution. However devlet should be democratic.
Devlet is absolute power, the populace receive power from devlet. This power is democratic right. Devlet do not ban democracy on the other hand devlet provide democratic right to protect people and order laws. For equity.
if devlet haven't existed, how people defend their rights. If it could be, everybody will say different things and it gives way to chaos.
there are many problems in country even if the existence of devlet. But, if the stability of devlet falls, it is fact that the country goes chaos
If want to live peaceful, devlet must be.Since death of devlet, İt causes many problem. Everybody want to design their own rules.Therefore, people cannot act sensitive and cannot be considerate to each other so I think that, devlet must be.
I agree with ezgi and funda, devlet organize many things which people can not do alone. But devlet use their power and laws to organize our life. However, could devlet do it well enough? (except last government, i think they do job well (MY opinion!))
Sorry first I sent it wrong place afteri realized that i have sent here..
For Turkey to live, devlet must die or not?
Turks believe that devlet is so important for them. I assure that turkey rule which is freedom of expresion must be changed. This rule band of people's opinion.Thus people can not reflect their ideas obviously. When they try to say their opinion they are judged by low court. For example Hrant Dink, Orhan Pamuk, Elif Şafak so on.
I think that devlet is also important for me so it is not necessery that devlet must die but there is something must be done like to give us a change for reflecting our opinions. This is only way to be democratic country.
I am agree wiht Melih Ozkan he says "if devlet haven't existed, how people defend their rights. If it could be, everybody will say different things and it gives way to chaos." He is completely right because Devlet is an authority which can control everybody at the same time whatever who or what they are. If devlet hadn't been, people wouldn't developed. This is valid for every country
I am so sorry about posting my comment at wrong adress.I apologize for that situation.
''For Turkey to live, devlet must die.''
I do not agree this statement from Kinzer text exactly. Because as I said in my blog assigment 'Can Turks be trusted their own future?', ' Devlet’ is a main blog that keep us on stand and protect us another caos on the subject of management. But I know there is something which is prevent to Turkish's opinion while they would like to say something counter to 'devlet'. Nobody has freedom about this issue. It shouldn't be occur in those milenium years.If ıt carry out like that, Turkey can't be devoloped in person right and free speech. So If there is no free speech, the science and democracy can't carry out in the public. Thus we can't catch twenty-one centuries contemporary. For that reason, I do not agree the statement 'For Turkey to live, devlet must die' exactly. It should be like that: 'For Turkey live, Devlet must revise and rebuilt its laws.'
I don't think so. "If 'devlet' hadn't been, people wouldn't developed." this is very weak idea,I think. Because people can develop by themselves, they don't need 'devlet' or they can develop instead of 'devlet'. I mean 'devlet' and people's development are unrelated concepts. Also, I think we couldn't say that 'This is valid for every country', we can not make this generalisation. But again I don't think that 'devlet' must die for Turkey to live. Our 'devlet' has a authority, surely. However, it is for keeping regulation between citizens and for providing fair citizens' lifes.
Also, I want to add that I don't agree with Ramazan.
If want to live peaceful, devlet must be.Since death of devlet, İt causes many problem. Everybody want to design their own rules. In my opinion devlet is an authority which can control everybody at the same time whatever who or what they are and ı think devlet is the most important thing for democratic country.
i agree with deniz about her opinion that devlet is a product of democracy.i think devlet shouldnt die.because its there for some reason.not only some people from elite class created it.its the choice of the society.it had its current shape and power by the time.in every society different waves have different affects and products.affect of democracy in Turkey is 'devlet'.
FEEDBACK
Wow, what an interesting debate!
There were some quite sophisticated comments made that showed critical thinking about what "devlet" actually means and its role in contemporary Turkey. I especially liked the way many of you tried to reconcile the idea of "devlet" with democracy.
One thing that should be mentioned is that some of you should be careful about contradicting yourselves. It's hard to know sometimes whether this is a result of flawed thinking or just flawed grammar...
You responded by name to each other and picked up on points made by your classmates, which helped the discussion to develop. Some of you challenged other students, which made the discussion more interesting, yet respect was maintained.
So all in all, very well done!
For Turkey to live devlet must not die. If devlet vanishes nation will collapse. Devlet is an organisation which keeps people in order. It is necessary and important. Ofcourse even devlet can make mistakes but it doesn't mean that it must die. If devlet dies everything will go wrong. Even with devlet things are very complicated and i can't think what will it be without it.
Besides "devlet" is the ruling autorithy and a political unit which makes laws and implements them and gives administrative desicions, it also missions to maintain the public security, order and welfare. On acount of this duty and purpose, any community without a central power, an administration like government would be disorganized, inexplicit and desultory. For these reasons, I don't agree with Tugce because actually "devlet" and the individual improvement are not irrelevant. Government also has expanded roles for the public such as military defense, economic and social security and reassurance.
So, how can we expect an individual improvement without these conusances and authorities of the government? How can an individual find the opportunity to improve him/herself in an insecure, disorganized and inequal society without any provision of goods and services.
In conclusion, government -if the regulations run well as it should be- is necessary not only for development as a whole but also as an individual. On the other hand, if the members of the public would not show any improvement, the public itself would not develop either.
I don’t agree with Tuğçe too as Deniz don’t agree. Okay, people can develop by themselves but they can’t make co-decisions (which have to be in a country) without devlet and I think they can’t apply these decisions precisely without forcing of devlet. Because, if all people were conscious enough, there would be no burglars, killers etc… If there are killers and burglars in spite of being punishments of devlet, I don’t want to think what would be without devlet. Therefore, some of us need to be forced by devlet and its rules.
Devlet has to be but it mustn’t be as seen these days. All people have to sound of their thoughts democratically and if there are dangers to them, they have to be protected by devlet . If this protecting had been implement, for example, Hrant Dink would have lived.
Devlet means something else than "government" to the Turkish nation. It is like a father and what ever the devlet does, no one can object to devlets' decisions. Whatever devlet does is right. There is absolutely no room for criticism. It is a taboo that has to broken to the Turkish nation. As soon as death of devlet happens, things will be different and devlet will have to be careful with its actions. This way there will be less cases where government officials serve their own needs and do whatever they want. Therefore, devlet should definitely die for Turkey to live.
Devlet is an abstract and multifaceted concept. It is ultimate power but this shouldnt be a problem for people because they create this institution. However legislation limits personal freedom the basic aim of devlet is to create real freedom so devlet is an important institution which is the guaranty of people's freedom, welfare and peace. I accept that although devlet is an indispensable institution,it has important problems about operations and improvements should be made in order to provide a better life for people but it is imposible to say''devlet must die ''.
As it is mentioned in the Kinzer's article that "devlet" means more than only "state". In my opinion, devlet must die to live in Turkey beceuse lots of things are faced some restrictions under the name of "devlet". Because some people see something as dangerous for devlet. For that reason, there are some restrictions and we can't see democracy completely in this situation. As a result, devlet must die to live and end the restrictions.
for Turkey to live, devlet is necessary because ı think if we have rights and we can defend freely,this is owing to devlet and
devlet regulates public so we do not face any problems!
We all know that government regulates the public. The argument is not about having rights or not. We are talking about whether devlet is necessary. We talked about how it means a different thing to Turkish people. That is why we use the word devlet rather than government. The actual question here is whether Turkey will be better off if it wasn't a paternal state. I felt like I had to clarify this.
''For Turkey to live, devlet must die.''
It is such a comment that flouts the authority which orginize social,economical,executive life in Turkey.The countries which had tried to live without the consept of "devlet" had serious crimes in community.After this period anarchism turned up.
I read the comments about the Kinzer Text which my friends wrote.The main discussion is about what the "powerful authorities" do mean? Yes! "devlet" is a powerful authority but I don't think like some of my friends about its democratical quality. One authority should have the power and administer the citizens in daily life unless there will be chaos.So finally;in my opinion if devlet dies than Turkey will have a hard conflict about its future.
In Koray Ercihan's comment it is mentioned that, in "devlet" situation there are lots of things that are illegal and that's why "devlet" should die! I agree whith him but to abate "devlet" isn't a real solution for Turkey's future.There should be a well-qualified devlet that thinks only their publics'demands.
Devlet is a form of public organization.Otherwise, it is a institution which includes execution,legistature and judiciary powers to provide prosperity,safety and regularity in a society that share a common past and culture. In this case ı do not agree the opinion " the death of devlet ". Because anarcy can rule in society without devlet. Also,social and infrastructure services, legal regulations are provided by devlet so devlet is a vital neccessity for nation.And ı don't think devlet is an implement of repression on public unless all powers are accumulated in same hands.
I hope all the 'devlet's will die in the future when societies will get educated and sensitive. But now both for world and Turkey 'devlet' must not die. Turkey is a very special country that faced to everywhere in the world. As a person who doesn't believe majority democracy, I think that devlet must be powerful, but the power's source must be public.
I agree with Erdi on the idea of which the power must be at public.But in my opinion death of "devlet" in the future shouldn't come true although the educated society.
ı think that ıf ın Turkey thre aren't elite rulling . this country is getting worst. at the present day ı am not like elite rulling however I agree with Stephen Kinzer some points. But I can't understand why he thinks for Turkey to live, devlet must die. Everybody knows that devlet is an association in a society which share of a common life and culture, gets security, peace of mind, comfort for this people.also; Kinzer said that the most extraordinary aspect of this confrontation is that both sides are seeking or claim to be seekling ,the same thing atruly modern turkey . we must run from this : modern Turkey
Post a Comment