The Looming Shadow of Violence and Loss: Alevi Responses to Persecution and Discrimination

Abstract

In the collective memories of the Alevis, three ‘acts of violence‘ mark the period spanning the 1960s to 1980s: the consequences of the rapid urbanization of the 1960s, the massacres of the 1970s and the state-induced persecution and oppression of the left-wing political movements in the aftermath of the 1980 coup. These ‘acts of violence‘ have left the imprints of two losses in the collective memories of the Alevis: the loss of the feelings of social and economic security, and the loss of political trust in the state. Recently, the Alevi community’s response to the AKP’s coming to power was that of a cautious ambivalence. This ambiguity did not last long, and, with the so-called Alevi opening of the AKP, governments ended up in a deadlock, and also with the outbreak of the civil war in Syria in 2011 and the Gezi protests in 2013, the looming shadow of violence and loss once again fell on the collective memories of the Alevi community. This article analyses this process from the 1960s onwards.

Notes

1. In-depth interviews carried out with Menekşe Poyraz and Gazi inhabitants in July 2013 published also in N. Mutluer, ‘Yol Bir Yürek Binbir’ [One road, a thousand and one hearts], Milliyet, 15 September 2013.

2. The state decided to carry out a comprehensive police operation following the Suruç bombing on 20 July, 2015, stating that the operation targeted the terrorist groups such as ISIS, PKK and so on. The Suruç bombing (20 July 2015) targeted a group of civilians who had been planning to carry out workshops with child victims of war in Kobane, a Kurdish canton fighting against ISIS. Many of them were university students from different cities in Turkey were killed in the bombing.

3. J. Butler ‘Afterword? After loss, what then?’, in D. L. Eng and D. Kazanjiyan (eds), Loss: Politics of Mourning, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2003, pp. 463–467. In Mourning and Melancholia Freud describes mourning as a regular reaction to the loss, which can be ‘a loved person or some abstraction which has taken the place of one, such as one’s country, liberty, an ideal, and so on’. Ego becomes free and uninhibited when mourning is completed. On the other hand, instead of becoming uninhibited from the abandoned object, melancholia ‘serves to establish an identification of the ego with the abandoned object’. Melancholia has an ongoing relationship, as Freud puts it, it has a ‘countless separate struggle’ with loss. Thus, it has an ongoing engagement with the past and Freud finds this engagement to be a pathological disposition in his early writings, as he argues that ‘object loss turned into a ego loss’ and it brings out a fixation and a little power of resistance to the loved/abandoned object. Later, in The Ego and the Id Freud comes to the point that ego itself is what is left over from past losses and in this sense it is structured by the remains of the loved/abandoned object. Thus, melancholia exists for the ego as well as for the work of mourning. For a detailed discussion please see S. Freud, ‘Mourning and melancholia’, in J. Strachey (trans. and ed.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 14, Hogarth Press, London, 1957, pp. 243–258; S. Freud, ‘The ego and the id’, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, J. Strachey (trans. and ed.), vol. 19, Hogarth Press, London, 1955, pp. 1–59; J. Butler, The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1997.

4. Throughout the article, by Alevi I refer to the Alevi-Bektaşi community mainly from central Anatolia, who regard themselves as Turkic in origin.

5. R. Jenkins, Social Identity, Routledge, London and New York, [2005] 2006. The identification process is both relational, as it includes relationships like kinship, friendship, business relations; and categorical, as it refers to categories such as race, ethnicity, gender, class and sexual orientation. In the identification process, people and collectivities identify themselves and/or other members of the society according to the similarities and differences in their social interactions with other people and collectivities. The main contradiction between the formation of personal and collective identifications, as argued by Jenkins, is the way people and collectivities use similarities and differences during the identification process.

6. D. L. Eng and D. Kazanjiyan, ‘Introduction: mourning remains’, in D. L. Eng and D. Kazanjiyan (eds), Loss: Politics of Mourning, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2003, pp. 1–25.

7. Even though Alevism is a word that it is used in the singular, Alevism incorporates ethnic diversity and multiple sets of collective memories and hence different narratives concerning its origins. In Turkey it is this plurality that shapes the social and political relations between different groups such as Arab, Kurdish and Turkish Alevis. For different narratives about Alevism in different ethnic settings please see M. van Bruniessen, Agha, Shaikh and State: The Social and Political Structures of Kurdistan, Zed Books, 1992; M. van Bruniessen, ‘Kurds, Turks and the Alevi revival in Turkey’, Middle East Report, Minorities in the Middle East: Power and the Politics of Difference, 200, July–September 1996, pp. 7–10; M. Irene, Hacı Bektaş Efsaneden Gerçeğe [Hacı Bektaş From Legend to Reality], Cumhuriyet Kitapları, Istanbul, 1999; A. M. İrat, Aleviliğin ABC’si [The ABC of Alevism], Profil Yayıncılık, 2012; A. Y. Ocak, ‘Alevilik-Bektaşiliğin Tarihsel Sosyal Tabanı ile Teolojisi Arasındaki ilişki Problemine Dair’ [On the Relational Problem Between the Historical and Social Basis of Alevism-Bektashi and its Theology], Türk Sufiliğine Bakışlar [Perspectives of Turkish Sufism], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2012, pp. 236–289; H. Mertcan, Türk Modernleşmesinde Arap Aleviler [Arab Alevis in Turkish Modernization], İstanbul: Karahan Kitabevi, 2013; H. Mertcan, Türk Modernleşmesinde Arap Aleviler [Arab Alevis in Turkish Modernization], Karahan Kitabevi, Istanbul, 2013; E. Gezik, Alevi Kürtler: Dinsel, Etnik ve Politik Sorunlar Bağlamında [Alevi Kurds: In Respect of Religious, Ethnic and Political Problems], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2014; E. Gezik, ‘Bu yol nereden gelir? Anadolu Aleviliği’nin başlangıcını aramak’ [Where does this road come from? In the Search for the beginning of Alevism in Anatolia], Birikim, 309–310, Birikim Yayınları, Istanbul, pp. 23–26.

8. K. Öktem, ‘Alevilerin Siyasal Katılımının Dönüşümü’ [The Transformation of Alevis’ Political Participation], Birikim, 309–310, Birikim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2015, pp. 57–64.

9. M. Ertan, ‘Örtük Politikleşmeden Kimlik Siyasetine: Aleviliğin Politikleşmesi ve Sosyalist Sol’ [From Covered Politicization to Identity Politics: The Politicization of Alevism and Socialist Left], Birikim, 309–310, Birikim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2015, pp. 43–56.

10. Ibid.; Ö. Laçiner, ‘Malatya Olayı: Türkiye’de Faşist Hareketin Yapısı ve Gelişimi’ [Malatya Event: The Structure and the Development of Fascist Movement in Turkey], Birikim, 39, Birikim Yayınları, Istanbul, 1978, pp. 15–16.

11. M. Küçük, ‘Mezhepten Millete: Aleviler ve Türk Milliyetçiliği’ [From Sect to Nation: Alevis and Turkish Nationalism], in Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce: Milliyetçilik [Political Thought in Modern Turkey: Nationalism], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2002, pp. 901–910; M. Dressler, Writing Religion: The Making of Turkish Alevi Islam, Oxford University Press, New York, 2013.

12. An example of such discourse can be found in N. Mutluer, Veliyettin Ulusoy ile Güncel Değerlelendirmeler [Evaluation of Current Issues with Veliyettin Ulusoy I], Serçeşme Yayınları, Istanbul, 2015.

13. T. Parla, ‘Dinci Milliyetçilik’ [Religious Nationalism], Yeni Gündem, 1986, pp. 40–41; T. Bora and K. Can, Devlet, Ocak, Dergâh: 12 Eylül’den 1990’lara Ülkücü Hareket [State, Ocak, Dergah: Nationalist Movement from 12 September to the 1990s], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 1991; B. Eligür, The Mobilization of Political Islam in Turkey, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010; N. Erdoğan, ‘Neo-Kemalizm, Organik Bunalım ve Hegemonya’ [Neo-Kemalism, organic crisis and hegemony], in A. İnsel (ed.), Kemalizm, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce 2 [Kemalizm, Political Thought in Modern Turkey 2], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2001, pp. 584–591; H. Çetin, Modernleşme ve Türkiye’de Modernleştirme Krizleri [Modernisation Crisis in Turkey], Siyasal Kitapevi, Ankara, 2003.

14. Ertan, ‘Örtük Politikleşmeden Kimlik Siyasetine: Aleviliğin Politikleşmesi ve Sosyalist Sol’ [From covered politicization to identity politics: the politicization of Alevism and the Socialist Left].

15. E. Massicard, Türkiye’den Avrupa’ya Alevi Hareketinin Siyasallaşması [The Politicization of the Alevi Movement from Turkey to Europe], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2007, pp. 89–93, 93.

16. For a detailed discussion please see A. Yıldırım, Ateşte Semaha Durmak [Praying Alevi Style in the Fire], Dinazor Yayınevi, Istanbul, 2008; O. Aksoy, ‘Sivas Katliamı: Öncesi, Sonrası, Medyası ve Avukatları’ [Sivas massacre: before, after, media and lawyers], 1 July 2015, <http://www.sendika.org>.

17. Even though there is a plurality among Alevis in terms of belief and ethnicity, they all regard Islamic Prophet Mohammed’s cousin and son in-law Ali, known as an egalitarian and fair person, as their symbolic religious leader. Alevis also share the feeling and the narrative of loss of the murder of Mohammed’s grandson and Ali’s son Huseyin and his disciples by the Emevi Khan Yezid in Kerbela in 680 ad. M. Özdağ, Türk Aleviliğinin Yükselişi [The Rise of Turkish Alevism], Avrasya Bir Vakfı Yayınları, Ankara, 2002; İrat, op. cit.

18. The Battle of Chaldiran was held between the Ottoman (Sunni) and Safavi (Shia) Empires. Yavuz Sultan Selim, the Sultan of the Ottomans during the Battle of Chaldiran is accused by Alevis of perpetrating massacres against Alevis. It was after the Battle of Chaldiran that the Sunni-based centralization policies started. Massicard, op. cit.; Rıza Yıldırım, ‘Barış Sürecine Diğer Taraftan Bakmak: Bir fay hattı (Türk-Kürt) kapanırken (Alevi-Sünni) diğeri derinleşiyor mu?’ [Looking to the peace process from the other side: is one fault (Turkish–Kurdish) line closing while the other (Alevi–Sünni) is deepening?], Türkiye Günlüğü [Dairies of Turkey], 114, 2013, pp. 60–69.

19. For one of the lawyers of the Sivas massacre, Şenal Sarıhan, there are three factors that prevent the massacre being forgotten: the active involvement of victims’ families in the case, the organized support of lawyers and the active networking of Alevi organizations. Sarıhan also adds that such involvement also led Alevi organizations to strengthen their role within the Alevi community. In-depth interview carried out with Şenal Sarıhan on 17 July 2013 in Ankara.

20. İrat, op. cit., p. 199.

21. N. Mutluer, ‘A case for pluralism: the Alevi’s latest struggle against discrimination’, Turkish Policy Quarterly, 13(1), 2014, pp. 149–158; N. Mutluer, ‘Aleviler’ [Alevites] Serial published in Milliyet, 13–27 January 2013.

22. For further discussion on Diyanet please see İ. Gözaydın, Diyanet: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nde Dinin Tanzimi [Diyanet: The Regulation of Religion in the Turkish Republic], İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, 2009; N. Mutluer, ‘Yapısı, Sosyal ve Ekonomi-Politik Yönleriyle Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı’ [Diyanet with its Structure, Social ad Political-Economic Aspects], in Sosyo-Ekonomik Politikalar Bağlamında Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı: Kamuoyunun Diyanet’e Bakışı Tartışmalar ve Öneriler [Diyanet in the Context of Socio-Economic Politics: Public’s Opinion and Suggestions], Helsinki Yurttaşlar Derneği Yayınları, Istanbul, 2014, pp. 4–72.

23. B. Can, ‘Irak, Mısır, Libya, Suriye Bağlamında AKP’nin Çıraklık, Kalfalık ve Ustalık Dönemleri’ [Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Syria in the context of AKP’s three periods], Ayrıntı, January 2014, <http://ayrintidergi.com.tr/irak-misir-libya-ve-suriye-baglaminda-akpnin-ciraklik-kalfalik-ve-ustalik-donemleri/>.

24. B. Can, H. Mertcan and H. Sivri, ‘Barbarlık Yayılırken: Suriye Savaşı ve Güneydeki Aleviler Üzerine Notlar’ [As Barbarism Spread: Syrian War and Notes on Alevis in the South], Ayrıntı (7), 2014, <http://ayrintidergi.com.tr/barbarlik-yayilirken-suriye-savasi-ve-guneydeki-aleviler-uzerine-notlar/>.

25. In-depth interviews carried out with Özgür Suriye Ordusu (Free Syrian Army) militants in Antakya in September 2012; in-depth interviews carried out with Arab Alevis in August 2013 in Antakya.

26. Some news about marking of Alevi houses are ‘Ev İşaretlemelerinde Şok İddia’ [Shocking claim in house markings], Haberturk, 28 March 2012; ‘Alevilerin Evleri Yeniden İşaretlendi’ [Alevi houses marked again], Cumhuriyet, 25 May 2015.

27. M. Özbank, Gezi Ruhu ve Politik Teori [Gezi Spirit and Political Theory], Kollektif Yayınları, Istanbul, 2013.

28. Very few studies have been carried out on DHKP/C which one of the very recent one is B. Köseli, Çelik Kapıların Ardındaki Örgüt DHKPC [The Organization Behind Iron Gates: DHKPC], Ufuk Yayınları, Istanbul, 2015.

29. D. Yonucu, ‘Türkiye’de Bir Yönetim Biçimi Olarak Mekansal Ayrıştırma: Tehlikeli Mahalleler, Olağanüstü Hal ve Militarist Sınır Çizimi’ [Spatial segregation as a technology of governance in Turkey: dangerous neighbourhoods, state of emergency and the drawing of militarized boundaries], in A. B. Candan and C. Özbay (eds), Yeni Istanbul Çalışmaları [New Istanbul Studies] Metis, Istanbul, 2014.

30. In-depth interviews carried out with Alevis in the cities of Amasya, Ankara, Antakya, Çorum, Dersim, Erzincan, İskenderun, İstanbul, İzmir, Malatya, Sivas ve Tokat in November 2012–September 2013.

31. H. Arendt, ‘On violence’, in Crisis of the Republic, Harcourt Brace, New York, 1972, pp. 103–184.

32. M. Weber, ‘The profession and vocation of politics’, in Peter Lessman, Ronald Spiers (eds), Political Writings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994, pp. 309–369.