![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
Michels’ ‘iron law of oligarchy’ suggests that oligarchic party rule is inevitable, yet many parties have shown a strong commitment to intra-party democracy. However, Turkey’s akp is a typified case of Michels’ law, displaying an explicit commitment to intra-party democracy, only to later abandon it. I ask what factors have facilitated this transformation. Why does the iron law of oligarchy display itself in some parties but not in others? I argue that intra-party democracy owes its existence to three indicators – inclusiveness, decentralisation and institutionalisation. Conversely, it should be observed that a party shifting from democratic to oligarchic or personalistic intra-party rule will display decreasing levels of these three indicators in terms of policy formation and candidate selection. By tracing akp’s internal party operations since its founding in 2001, I demonstrate a gradual deterioration in these indicators, reflecting a gradual deterioration of democracy within the party to oligarchy and then to personalism.
Acknowledgements
I would graciously like to acknowledge several individuals for their suggestions, comments, revisions, advice and support throughout this process: Hakki Tas, Ahmet Kuru, Aaron Simmons, Dorianne Norwood and, most importantly, A Kadir Yildirim. I would also like to thank my anonymous reviewers for their comments and time.
Notes
1. Ojukwku & Olaifa, “Challenges of Internal Democracy.”
2. Michels, Political Parties.
3. Gurbuz, The Long Winter.
4. This is in line with Aristotle’s The Politics, in which he proclaims that democracy is a poor political system, for it tends to give rise to tyranny.
5. Tepe, “Turkey’s akp”; Muftuler-Bac and Keyman, “The Era of Dominant-party Politics”; and Kuru, “Constitution, Presidentialism, and Checks and Balances.”
6. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy, 3.
7. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa”; and Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
8. Gunlicks, “Intraparty Democracy in Western Germany”; and Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
9. Gunlicks, “Intraparty Democracy in Western Germany.”
10. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”. Although some scholars such as Amundsen cite coalition formation as a third area to be considered, it will not be considered in this discussion because of the relative rareness of the need to form coalitions, and because coalition formation can be seen as more of a pragmatic need than an ideological or party-centric one.
11. Tomsa, “Moderating Islamism in Indonesia.”
12. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; and Maiyo “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
13. Kabasakal, “Factors influencing Intra-party Democracy.”
14. Obler, “Intraparty Democracy”; and Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
15. Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
16. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
17. Obler, “Intraparty Democracy”; and Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”
18. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
19. Hartlinski, “Contemporary ‘Prince’.”
20. Ojukwu and Olaifa, “Challenges of Internal Democracy.”
21. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy, 6.
22. The very nature of newly formed parties precludes high levels of institutionalization, because organisational strength and formal procedures are not created instantaneously but develop overtime. Ibid. However, this does not imply that newly formed parties cannot be internally democratic.
23. Forestiere and Allen, “Formation of Cognitive Locks”; and Scheiner, Democracy without Competition in Japan.
24. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
25. Gerring, “What is a Case Study?”
26. George and Bennett, Case Studies and Theory Development.
27. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”
28. Ibid.
29. Croissant and Chambers, “Unravelling Intra-party Democracy.”
30. Tomsa, “Moderating Islamism in Indonesia”; Mimpen, Intra-party Democracy and its Discontents; and Duverger, Political Parties.
31. Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
32. Lotshwao, “Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
33. Ojukwo and Olaifa, “Challenges of Internal Democracy”; and Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
34. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy; and Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”
35. Obler, “Intraparty Democracy.”
36. Croissant and Chambers, “Unravelling Intra-party Democracy.”
37. Zudenkova, A Rationale for Intra-party Democracy.
38. Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties”; and Kabasakal, “Factors influencing Intra-party Democracy.”
39. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; and Obler, “Intraparty Democracy.”
40. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; and Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
41. Maiyo, “Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
42. Ojukwu and Olaifa, “Challenges of Internal Democracy.”
43. Croissant and Chambers, “Unravelling Intra-party Democracy”; and Mimpen, Intra-party Democracy and its Discontents.
44. Croissant and Chambers, “Unravelling Intra-party Democracy”; and Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
45. Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
46. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy; and Lotshwao, “The Weakness of Opposition Parties.”
47. Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
48. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”; Mimpen, Intra-party Democracy and its Discontents; and Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa.”
49. Scarrow, Political Parties and Democracy.
50. Amundsen, “Democratic Dynasties?”
51. Maiyo, “Political Parties and Intra-party Democracy in East Africa”; and Ojukwu and Olaifa, “Challenges of Internal Democracy.”
52. Heper and Landau, Political Parties and Democracy in Turkey; and Gorener and Ucal, “The Personality and Leadership Style,” 358.
53. Mecham, “From the Ashes of Virtue,” 349.
54. Tepe, “Turkey’s akp,” 73.
55. Mecham, “From the Ashes of Virtue,” 351.
56. Cosar and Ozman, “Centre-right Politics in Turkey.”
57. Mecham, “From the Ashes of Virtue,” 351.
58. Kumbaracibasi, Turkish Politics and the Rise of the akp.
59. Somer, “Moderate Islam and Secularist Opposition in Turkey,” 1272.
60. Elbasani et al., “Muslims’ Support for European Integration: Albania and Turkey Compared.” Citizenship in Southeast Europe, July 2, 2012. http://www.citsee.eu/blog/muslims’-support-european-integration-albania-and-turkey-compared.
61. Gorener and Ucal, “Personality and Leadership Style”; and Akser and Baybars-Hawks, “Media and Democracy in Turkey.”
62. Cornell, “Erdogan’s Looming Downfall.” It should be noted that Sener was the weakest link of the quadrumvirate. The other three members had their own followers within the rank and file of the party.
63. Dagi, “Turkey’s akp in Power.”
64. Yildirim, “New Democrats.”
65. Özbudun and Hale, Islamism, Democracy and Liberalism in Turkey.
66. Mecham, “From the Ashes of Virtue,” 351; and Onis and Keyman, “A New Path Emerges,” 103.
67. Tepe, “Turkey’s akp,” 74.
68. Onis and Keyman, “A New Path Emerges.”
69. “The chp Congress, Leadership Cults, and Turkish Democracy.” The Turkey Analyst, May 8, 2008. http://www.turkeyanalyst.org/publications/turkey-analyst-articles/item/122-the-chp-congress-leadership-cults-and-turkish-democracy.html.
70. Cosar and Ozman, “Centre-right Politics in Turkey.”
71. Tepe, “Turkey’s akp,” 74.
72. Cornell, “Erdogan’s Looming Downfall.”
73. Gorener and Ucal, “Personality and Leadership Style,” 357.
74. Hakki Tas’ recent review of the cult of Erdogan is instructive: “Yeni Türkiye’nin Yeni Kültü.” Radikal, April 27, 2014. http://www.radikal.com.tr/radikal2/yeni_turkiyenin_yeni_kultu-1188716.
75. Sambur, “The Great Transformation of Political Islam in Turkey,” 121.
76. Muftuler-Bac and Keyman, “The Era of Dominant-party Politics.”
77. A recent example of Erdogan’s favouritism towards those with a similar mindset was revealed in the disagreement between the long-time minister in charge of the economy, Ali Babacan, and Erdogan’s new chief economic advisor, Yigit Bulut, on how to respond to the aftershock of the corruption scandal in December 2013. “Yiğit Hiç öyle Demiyor Ama.” Taraf, March 7, 2014.
78. Gorener and Ucal, “Personality and Leadership Style,” 357.
79. Ibid., 369.
80. Ibid., 371.
81. Ibid.
82. Cornell, “Erdogan’s Looming Downfall.”
83. Colburn and Cruz S., “Personalism and Populism in Nicaragua,” 105.
84. Ansell and Fish, “The Art of Being Indispensable,” 286–287.
85. Gunther and Diamond, “Species of Political Parties,” 187.
86. Hadenius and Teorell, “Pathways from Authoritarianism.”
87. Jenkins, “Turkey’s Latest Crisis,” 8–9.
88. Fradkin and Libby, “Erdogan’s Grand Vision,” 49.
89. Muftuler-Bac and Keyman, “The Era of Dominant-party Politics,” 85–86.
90. Carkoglu, “Turkey’s 2011 General Elections,” 48.
91. Tepe, “Turkey’s akp,” 74.
92. Cornell, “Erdogan’s Looming Downfall.”
93. Muftuler-Bac and Keyman, “The Era of Dominant-party Politics,” 92.
94. Cinar, “The Electoral Success of the akp.”
95. As mayor of Istanbul, Erdogan was arrested and imprisoned for reading a poem with religious overtones, or for what was termed ‘provocative behaviour’, at a campaign rally. He was charged with ‘inciting hatred based on religion’. Tepe “Turkey’s akp.”
96. Amnesty International, Gezi Park Protests.
97. “pm Erdogan likens Gezi Protesters to ‘Piteous Rodents’.” Today’s Zaman, July 24, 2013; and “‘Just a Few Looters’: Turkish pm Erdogan Dismisses Protests as Thousands Occupy Istanbul’s Taksim Square.” The Independent, June 2, 2013.
98. Bilgin, Turkey Brief; and Turan, The Rule of Law is the Casualty.
99. Semih Idiz, “What does the Future Hold for Abdullah Gul?” Al Monitor, August 22, 2014. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/08/turkey-gul-erdogan-davutoglu-president-akp.html.
100. Hakki Tas, “Yeni Türkiye’nin Yeni Kültü.” Radikal, April 27, 2014. http://www.radikal.com.tr/radikal2/yeni_turkiyenin_yeni_kultu-1188716.
101. Soyler, “Informal Institutions,” 316, 326; and Unver, Turkey’s ‘Deep-State’, 2–3.
102. Soo Jung Ahn, “Turkey’s Unraveling Democracy,” 52.
103. Park, “Turkey’s Struggle”; and Tittensor, “Erdogan moves against ‘Parallel State’.”
104. “Turkey.” Human Rights Watch, April 29, 2014. http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/04/29/turkey-spy-agency-law-opens-door-abuse.
105. Gurbuz, “The Long Winter.”
106. Park, “Turkey’s Struggle”; and Tittensor, “Erdogan Moves against ‘Parallel State’.”
107. Gurbuz, “The Long Winter.”