SOCIETY, STATE AND BUREAUCRACY
IN
PRINCE SABAHADDIN
Levent AĞAOĞLU 1982 / 1983
CONTENTS Page
I. Sources of His
Thoughts 3
II. Society 3
Social
Structure 3
AA.
The Two Versions of Social Structure 3
AAA.
Individualist Structure 3
BBB.
Collectivist Structure 4
BB.
Social Structure within Itself 4
(Private
Life, Administrative Life)
Social
Structure of The Ottoman State 5
AA.
Individualist Enterprise 6
BB.
Decentralization 8
III. State 13
IV. Bureaucracy 15
V. Conclusion 18
References 19
Prince Sabahaddin(1879-1948) who is one of
the initiators of sociological thinking in Turkey is a liberal thinker. He is
firstly a Young Turk regarding his political ideas. Later he is a doctrine man
fighting against political power with science and idea in the period of
constitutional government. At the same time he is a revolutionist: he has
determined the form which will replace the political regime he wishes to
abandone. Lastly he is a revolutionary: he wishes to abandone the despotism
(Tunaya, 1979: 173-176).
1-Sources
of His Thoughts
The two French sociologists greatly affected
Prince Sabahaddin; Le Play and especially Edmond Demolins. His direction of
ideas began to be formed after the first congress of Young Turks in-1902. The
famous book of Edmond Demolins-“What is the reason for the superiority of
Anglo-Saxons ?" had been the Bible of Sabahaddin (Ramsaur, 1972: 102).
Sabahaddin borrowed his basic concepts from that book. Demolins's main thesis
was that Anglo-Saxons had rapidly developed because of the two interrelated
elements they set out: Decentralization and private enterprise (individualism).
Sabahaddin examined the basic parts of the book and established "The
Association of Private Enterprise and Decentra-lisation". The aim of the
association was to improve the aspects which had been described as the main
errors in the Ottoman Empire. His general views and detailed movement plan was
the evidence of his complete acceptance of Demolins's ideas (Ramsaur, 1972:
99-105). The two concepts borrowed from
Demolins- Decentralization and Private Enterprise- formed the basic
ideas of Sabahaddin. Le Play, Demolins and Social Science (îlm-i İçtima) were
the sources of his thinking.
2.
Society
A.Social
Structure
AA.The Two Versions of Social Structure
If we
want to understand a society we have to look at its social structure. This
structure is seen in two different versions; Individualist Structure and
Collectivist Structure. All social problems gather around the "structure
problem" which is a main problem and have suitable or unsuitable forms for
the society. Differences between the societies do not originate from the
differences of the forms of government, education, religion and morals. When we
attempt to analyze to any social event, main linkage to structure appears.
Humanity (social structure) is divided into the two big and completely opposite
structures. The most important discovery of the Le Play school is that the
division of world communities being individualist and collectivist.
The eastern part of the world completely
represents collectivist structure and the western parts of the world especially
represent individualist structure. Because in the east community, in the west
individual is superior. But it is possible to pass from one structure to the
within the required conditions.
AAA.
Individualist Structure
Individualistic Structure gives rise to
individualistic development and independence. Effective physical work and
production which is continually developing for adapting to the changing
requirements of life creates this structure. Western European and Northern
American societies represent individualistic structure. This structure
originates from an agricultural development which begins individually and
creates private enterprise and private ownership. Western societies are
especially under the effect of this structure. Because individual is superior
in these societies. According to the discoveries of Social Science that kind of
structure had been borned in the fiords of Norway, had passed Sacsonia and Heri
basin within the primitive form and consequently had much more developed in
Anglo-Saxon countries.
The superiority of these societies comes from
the development of individual ability and power. lndividuals have been got free
from the trust-eeship and oppression of family, tribe, parties and government.
Individualist structure which comes from the
strictness of physical work prepares the complete development of social ability
through creating personal enterprise, effective production and depending
individual not upon an individual but upon firstly land with an effective and
hard agriculture which creates private ownership and after upon the other
production activities and creates an effective society which made up of
independent ad superior individuals who find their point of support within
themselves. This structure makes superior private life to administrative life
and causes social superiority. This superiority is called as "fortunate
superiority" by Sabahaddin,
BBB.
(State) Collectivist Structure
Collectivist Structure comes from the
looseness of physical work-and causes individuals not to be productive
entrepreneurs but to become consumers. For that reason it is an obstacle to the
development of social ability and personality. Individuals are dependent on
family, community, political party and government and they seek for their point
of support out of their personality. These kind of individuals form a static
society and they hope for wealth and freedom from administrative offices
although they could not find any time what they hoped for.
Collectivist Structure has occurred before
individualistic structure and according to the Law of Evolution the opposite
direction was impossible. Asian, Eastern and Southern European, African,
Southern and Middle American societies represent this structure. All of the
eastern societies are under the effect of this structure. Because community is
superior in these societies.
Administrative life is dominant to private
life in collectivist structure. This dominance is called as "unlucky
stress" by Sabahaddin. A real democracy has not been originated from
collectivist structure.
BB.Social
Structure within Itself (Administrative and Private Lives)
There are two lives within a social
structure:” Private Life" and "Administrative Life". The
transformation of social structure is related to the transformation of these
lives. The organization of administrative life is always dependent on the
conditions and requirements of private life. The natural balance of the society
requires the superiority of private life upon admin¬istrative life. Individual
enterprises of citizens create private life. This is the social organizations
of individuals. Productive activities in agriculture, commerce and industry
make stable and healthy the private life. Administrative organization of
society represents its administrative life. In collectivist structure this is a
centralized organization and in individualist structure this is a decentralized
organization.
The reform programme of Sabahaddin is
basically related to these lives. For transforming from collectivist structure
into individualist structure we have to make superior private life to
administrative life. This also means to develop private life through individual
enterprise and to weaken administrative through decentralization.
B.Social
Structure of the Ottoman State
There are two elements in the Ottoman State.
First villagers-who are major in the society- who have got free from migrant
and tent life that continued centuries along but who have not lose their moral
cleanliness. "Villagers are the most basic and unchanged part of the
Ottoman people. Although they feed and develop Turkey they are being oppressed
in every place and much more from any other class. Second, intellectuals-who
are minor in the society- who are in contact with the West and who are
increasingly opposing the despotism in every contact. But these intellectuals
have been limited to "officialism".
Describing the problem is not sufficient. To
start action is necessary. At first stage despotism has to be abandoned.
Secondly, a new form which will replace the abandoned form have to be found?
This form (revolution) must not only be political but also social and economic.
Because the period in which Ottoman State was based only upon military and
politics has passed. Social revolution will occur when Turkish intellectuals
will attempt to provide their living not through bureaucratic activities but
through agriculture, industry and commerce. They can secure their freedom and
independence only and if only they change their way of life. These activities
will result in a way that villagers and intellectuals who have been far from
each other will unite (-Tunaya, 1979:175-176). It is not difficult to approach
ignorant majority to learned minority by the help of strong determination. The
world of civilization has to know that social Turkey which admires justice and
work is rising behind official Turkey (Ege, 1977:114).
From other perspective Ottoman system has two
characteristics: Ottoman society has two divided and opposite parts as the
people who govern and who are being governed; oppression of the economy of the
society by bureaucracy which dominates the first and its causing not to develop
the productive power of villagers and tradesmen (Berkes, 1975: 342).
In the first paragraph of "How can
Turkey be saved?” Sabahaddin analyzes social structure of the Ottoman State as
follows:
"Social Science" has discovered earlier
that our social life does not base upon a strong base and they starting point
of "Social Doctrine" which was born from "Social Science"
has been the defense of that reality. Everybody began to comprehend that our
private and administrative lives have any point of support. People, government,
parties... are always living unfounded, rootless, completely untied life. We
are always living an inadequacy of production, a scarcity of social ability and
a poorness of personality (Ege, 1977: 325-326,240).
Point of support was "Social
Science" and "Social Doctrine". He analyzed the Ottoman social
structure within the conceptual framework of "Social Science"»
The problem of the Ottoman system was a
structure problem". It was not important to abandone Abdulhamid unless we
realize revolutionary changes in society. Otherwise much more Abdülhamids would
come after him. The person who firstly analyzed the concept of "social
structure" with respect to the transformation of civilization was Prince
Sabahaddin. Main problem was to pass from Asian social structure to western
social structure. This view has opened a new way for the first time and
affected the later thoughts. The defectiveness was that the structure of the
Ottoman society was not individualist but collectivist. The solution was to
create independent and to remove the collectivizing rules and values of the
society. Individualist Anglo-Saxon education and individualist enterprise would
realize these objectives (Berkes, 1975; 223-225).
All of the social problems gather around the
"structure problem" which is a main problem. From this perspective
main direction is to pass from collectivist structure to individualist
structure. For securing the natural balance of the society, private life must
reach to a strong position it has to be.
He analyses the Ottoman structure in his book
under the heading of "Our Social Structure". In this chapter he
examines cultural development, education, the form of ownership, governmental
organization, military and politics.
The problem was that a custom which is not
functional, a way of living which prevents the development of personality and a
negative training which causes the continuation of that kind of living in
private life and centralization which passes the laziness from private life
into administrative life which does not suit local requirements and causes
great and unnecessary expenses in administrative life.
AA.
Individualist Enterprise
Individualist enterprise is that individuals
who form a society have not to depend upon their family or government but have
to trust directly themselves, seek for their success in their enterprise.
A nation makes progress not through the
freedom that government offers but through the earnings be provided with his
works. Honest governments are already seen within the nations in which private
enterprises develop.
The base of the publications of
Ittihad-Terakki before the period of Constitutional Government was that all of
the disasters are originating from despotism and government so that if we
abandone government and replace it with the constitutional government we can
save the country. When we began to oppose this opinion we went far away from
our friends.
Experiences clearly show that Turkey cannot
be saved with only opposing government. The winning of rights is possible only
and if only we increase our productive power. We wanted freedom but did not
think that how the free people won it. We did not critize our social weakness
(Ege, 1977:194-195)
Consumption without production causes bankruptcy.
This is a point which we have to pay attention between Christians and Muslims.
Although we think to provide our living through government offices, Christians
are becoming rich through their private enterprises in his lands. Although the
elements that are not Turkish could have the possibility to busy with
agricultural, industrial and commercial activities, the dominant Turkish
element has been lost with military obligations.
We have to direct our efforts to the three
origins of wealth- agriculture, industry and commerce. A nation’s wealth and
richness develop with private enterprises and developments in production.
Personal interest is the part of general interest in societies in which
individual enterprises develop. Personal interest is mostly the opposite of the
general interest in societies in which individualist enterprise does not exist.
Thus the mere way of salvation is to try to increase individualist enterprise
that is to say a nation’s production power.
When we occupy the countries we occupied
politically we can solve "The Eastern Problem" as being suitable to
our interest and general interest, National independence can only be provided
with personal freedom. We can assure this result through education and
decentralization. Individualist enterprise and Decentralization cannot be
isolated from each other. The former is a form of working which keeps alive a
nation. The later is a form of the administration which assures the
independence of that form of working (Ege, 1977:86-89).
These concepts which form Sabahaddin's basic
thoughts were the tools that will be used for passing from collectivist
structure to individualist structure.
Commerce is the spirit of any country.
National wealth is impossible without commerce. One of our greatest desires is
to be in good relations with European merchants in our country and to see our
citizens being busy with commercial and industrial activities in various cities
of Europe and America (Ege, 1977=92).
Although other nations were successful in
heightening their education and training level out of or despite their
government we are ignorant of administering of government in that way.
Government that is dependent on the wills of the nation is absolutely superior
in our society.
Freedom or independence comes from the
abilities or inabilities of individuals. Greatest power which creates social
ability is individualist enterprise. But our education -in school- and family-
does not develop the ability of individualist enterprise. We are not growing up
with a kind of Education which will cause to earn our living independently, and
develop business through our own enterprise. Consequently after we have lost
our most valuable times through methods which oppress personality we are
graduating from school only as being an official, a customer.
Individuals who have to fight alone against
difficulties in life struggle will certainly see that their social abilities
are developing. But we are recognizing that our social abilities are
decreasing. Although going beyond the difficulties is a fun to them, it is a
torture for us. Instead of securing personal interest through agriculture,
industry and commerce we are seeking personal interest in bureaucratic
professions.
We have not entrepreneurial class out of the
administrative forces. Indivi¬duals who have the capacity to form this class
are always becoming public officials and forming a consuming class under the
protection of government. Producers are villagers, artisans and small
merchants. Because of not owning material and moral capital they cannot develop
their business and also cannot preserve their business under the oppression of
government Ege, 1977 166)
Competitions within the commercial area are
rapidly becoming dense under the economic circumstances of the world. The
period finished in which it is easy to make money and live. We are now in the
new world with new requirements and new men. The tool of these men is
individualist enterprise. We have to change the kind of education which
families and schools give us. We have not to develop private life through
laziness which destroys personality but through enterprises which develop
personality by the help of positive and practical education. We have to
decrease the number of politicians- dangerous consumers who are increasing in
number- but increase the number of entrepreneurial producers within
intellectual class.
By examining Turkey's geography we can see
that it is possible to get free from social disasters that suffer to us through
settling solidly to the land and through reforming private life. The only
solution for the time being is agriculture. For assuring development we have to
create healthy and developmental relationships between villagers and
intellectuals.
As a result of an oldest and unlucky thinking
social development, wealth, power, honor and every happiness are being expected
from the government. We want to prove that the most valuable of these merits is
the one earned in private life. For assuring this the reform of administrative
life must be directed toward the reform of private life. If we do not begin
reformation firstly from ourselves political and social dangers will increase.
The development of the human communities is
dependent on the law of social selection. Any nation which shows greater
ability and effort in earning his life will secure his future and will develop.
The key of success in social selection is
individualist enterprise. In any community in which an individual is more
entrepreneurial, productive and independent, this community will relevantly
become free, civilized, powerful and developmental.
We are telling when we address the members of
the private life that you will secure your independence and power with your
personal enterprise and seek your point of support within your own personality.
The effectiveness of this personality will increase in relation to its
productivity, intellectuality and virtuousness. Thus, first of all we have to
develop and strengthen personality.
We cannot abandone despotism through changing
only the form of government. If we do not change the centre of gravity of
reform from administrative life to private life Constitutional Government will
go bankrupt. Any society which does not try to develop the freedom of
individual cannot protect its political independence.
The concept of individualist enterprise is
related to the reform of private life in Sabahaddin1s thought. This reform is
much more vital from the reform of administrative life. "Main Direction" is the reform of
private life. Decentralization is secondary in importance related to
individualist enterprise. The base of the reform programme is individualist
enterprise.
BB.Decentralisation
This concept was firstly offered by
Sabahaddin after the first congress of Young Turks (1902). His first writing about
decentralization was published in Terakki in 1906("Though the Christians
are making use of decentralization in our country, Muslims are being oppressed
by centralization. He borrowed this concept from Edmond Demolins. But he was
not the first man who put forward to decentralization in the Ottoman Empire.
Midhat Pasha defended and also applied-when he was governor in various
provinces of Ottoman Empire-decentralization (Berkes, 1975: 223-225).
He had been called as "The Father of
Liberals" because of his views. Midhat Pasha had put the word of
"deconcentration" into the text of law when he was preparing
Constitution. Deconcentration that Midhat Pasha Thought had been stated as
Decentralization by Sabahaddin. According to them these two words have the same
meaning (Toros, 1978: 5).
While Sabahaddin uses the concept of
individualist enterprise for strengthening the private life (society) he uses
the concept of decentralization for weakening the centralist power of the
State. Thus while society really emerges State would be weakened. He states
that he desisers a happy superiority that private life (society) will have on
the administrative life (State). The organization of the administrative life is
always and every time depended on the conditions and requirements of the
private life.
The kind of decentralization he offers was
not a political but an administrative one. Decentralization, deconcentration,
self-government were all have the same meanings in his thought. Thanks to
administrative decentralisation the Ottoman Unity (political centralization)
could be strengthened. The aim of his thesis is to seek the solution which will
cause to last the collapsing Ottoman State (Abadan, 1964:4o), His disagreement
with Ittihad-Terakki mainly based on decentralization.
Persons who have any idea about
decentralization are evaluating the method we defend as an effort for cueing
favor with Christians and Europe. They do not know that the various rights that
decentralization provides has greatly-sometimes abundantly- been assured to
Ottoman Christians. The most important ones of these rights are in the area of
taxes, courts and education.
Decentralization is a kind of administration
which will not prevent the development of individualist enterprise. We can
catch up with our Christian citizens firstly through developing Muslims’
private enterprises and secondly diffusing the method of decentralization to
Turks and whole Muslim citizens. The future of our country is closely related
to the assurance of the destroyed social balance between Christians and
Muslims. History has showed us that centralization has caused the catastrophe
of Turks, (Ege, 1977-86-89).
It cannot be denied that Turks are important
balancing element for Muslim and Christian citizens. But for assuring this
social advantage Turkey has to have a decentralized constitutional government.
Because that kind of administration is suitable for the development of private
enterprise which is the source of wealth and happiness. Ottoman Empire can
assure the Ottoman unity- within the social variousness of different elements
within itself- only in this way. (Ege, 1977:111)
Considering that the base of our publications
is not only to defend the policy of "Ottoman Unity" but also is the
necessity to strengthen this policy it is clarified that we are not in favor of
administrative autonomy under the programme of decentralization.
If Constitutional Government means the
establishment of the right of supervision in the centre through Deputies
Assembly, administrative decentralization also and undoubtedly means the
diffusion of same rights to provinces through Provincial General Assemblies...
The idea of enterprise cannot develop in our country while we have centralized
administration. Lacking of the idea of enterprise, provinces cannot be
developed and country lives poverty.
With what Deputies Assembly will be
interested in when it is opened tomorrow? Whole of the provinces are in a
miserable position. Deputies Assembly certainly will have to change the form of
administration of these provinces. Will this change base upon centralization
that creates miseries? Will provincial officials, provincial assemblies are
strictly depended on the centre like babies in arms? If their ties will be
untied and they will have rights and duties, the form of administration of
provinces will be decentralization that is deconcentration.
Because it is impossible to develop our
country without decentralization and the same application of the form of
administration of any province into the other province is also impossible. For
example there are great differences between the way of living of the people of
Yemen and Salonika provinces. The officials who will closely see these
differences and perfectly perceive the real needs of these provinces certainly
are not the ones who are in Istanbul but the ones who are in Yemen and
Salonika. So that the reform which we want under the name of
"Administrative Decentralization" for some time is that to in rease
the authorities of governors and other officials, to ensure the opening of
general assemblies thus to accustom people to supervise and determine the state
of expenditure of the tax they give. The point of support of our publication
about decentralization is the 108th article of the Constitution. We are trying
to explain the vital importance of this article to public opinion. Thus
decentralization is the same as deconcentration and separation of duties.
However deconcentration is the name- but not the definition- of administrative
decentralization.
Although there is any contrast between these
terms, the term is being confused with the definition in the publications and
public opinion is being mistakenly informed. I hope that this matter has been
clarified after my ex-planation. (Ege, 1977: 159-165).
The form of the administration I defend is
not anything from the application- of the 108th article of the Constitution and
the application of the system existing in the regulation of provinces. While we
are accepting the administrative decentralization we are opposing to the
political decentralization (Ege, W: 173-174).
Centralization means to monopolize the
freedom, to permit the oppression of minority by majority, to destroy the idea
of private enter-prise... But through rooting the national supervision not only
in Istanbul by means of Deputies Assembly but in every parts of provinces by
means of provincial general assemblies decentralization will expand national
commerce which will deeply tie the Ottomans to the Ottoman State, display the
necessity to act unitedly against the outside world and form a powerful tool to
eliminate national competitions. Thus administrative decentralization will
strengthen the Ottoman Unity being a tool for assuring political centralization
(Ege: 1977, 187).
Bloody fights which we always face are the
result of the administration's inability to evaluate and to cure local needs.
This inability comes from the non-existence of private enterprise and existence
of centralization that digs the grave of the centre and the whole country. The
application of administrative decentralization will ensure the stability of
public security, diffuse the spirit of civilization and also will prevent the
rebellions which we cannot solve through military forces, decrease military
expenses and increase military power (Ege, 1977:24-4—24-5).
It is meaningless to evaluate the form of
administrations and the organization of the whole administrative life without
searching their relationships with private life. There is not any form of
administration which exists only by itself under the name of centralization or
decentralization. But the deprivation of private life from freedom and
independence create centralization and its solidity and freedom create
Decentralization
The independence that an individual gains by
means of private enterprise and strong regulation of local life by concerned
personas a result of individual's dependence lessen the authority of central
power within nations which have individualistic structure and which are the
most developed and wealthy societies of existing humanity. The regular and
steady direction of the social development and economic development which is
the result of social development in these societies can only originate from the
happy superiority that private life has upon the administrative life.
Administrative life is established upon
similar bases behind the different names and the forms of government like
kingdom, republic or parliament and federalism in England Kingdom, colonies
that have been created by Anglo-Saxon colonist, United States of Northern
America and in small Norway which is the cradle of individualism.
The power of private life necessitates the
limitation of the services and duties that are assured by the government.
Services are administered by the concerned and most authoritative of concerned
people. Duties have been diffused to separate committees. Thus a definite
authority corresponds to every definite affair and responsibility.
Affairs which are left over the State- which
are reducing to smallest degree- are the ones which correspond to public
interest and which cannot be provided through private and local activity.
Continuous and regular activities of the
citizens who have a real power and practical knowledge that have been gained
through the regulation and administration of business life all over the country
ensure the suitable satisfaction of the needs by the administration and also
this activity which is the continuation of personal freedom in the political
area is becoming a real sign of political freedom and ensuring the defense of
this freedom.
This is a decentralization which creates a
real development in the administration of government. English’s call this as
"self Government".
In the cases of the non-existence of citizens
which will provide an effective role in the organization of government, the
whole of the administration of the state is completely kept by the centre and
the power of administration and sovereignty is centered by an individual or a
committee.
In that case the positions that local forces
left empty will be captured by a committee which is made up of officials who
have gained a great power. The operations of this committee -are always very
hard and arbitrary and cannot be saved from the abuse of government influence.
Centralization is born from weaknesses and
disorders of individuals in their private life and it is the organization of
underdeveloped administrative life. To tie the centralized sovereignty to the
right of sovereignty of the nation instead of basing it to the rights of
emperor that passes through descendants cannot change the position of private
life against administrative life. The positions of individuals against State
cannot change in this case. The problem is not the functioning of sovereignty
by a person or an assembly on behalf of the all of the individuals of the
society but it is the centralization of sovereignty and power by a political
group and the continuous oppression of the organization of administrative life
(government) upon the private lives of the individuals.
It is clear that
decentralization-self-government of the citizen- is a phenomenon which creates
the administrative life of individualist societies. National sovereignty on the
other hand is a theory which lives in collectivist societies.
Decentralization is the separation of
administrative power according to the characteristics of affairs and the
existence of an authority corresponding a clear responsibility.
Centralization is the confusion of affairs,
responsibilities, authorities and the collection of all of the responsibilities
in the centre. So that the rule of the Sultan and the sovereignty of the nation
are causing the same result through the same direction: Despotism... collapse.
This is also the cause of having the same
characteristic and facing the same dropping danger of absolute, constitutional
and parliamentary governments before and after the Tanzimat period. The reason
for the solidness of the English Kingdom than the French Republic is the
limited responsibilities of the central power. But through centralizing the
whole responsibilities of the government affairs and failing in the
administration of different interests corresponding various needs- despite the
steadily increases of officials- kingdoms, assemblies, empires have been collapsed
and the republic that has been based upon centralized organization has depended
on the same social law.
It is clearly seen that the names that
government has -and also the organization of government have any importance by
themselves. The real development in the administrative life originates from
neither constitutional government, parliamentary nor republic. But from the
private enterprise which brings power and order to the lives of the citizens.
It is a general belief that we are developing
in the direction of developed nations after the beginning of the period of
Tanzimat. But the principle of Tanzimat is to collect income into the general
treasure of the persons who have sovereignty and to depend upon the officials
of the administrative life who have to live through the payment that will be
provided from treasure to the centre.
The social meaning of that is to create great
government power (administrative life) instead of various communities of
administrative life which is dominant to the private life. We know that the
administrative lives of the developed and strong societies are not regulated in
this way. Contrarily the administrative power is not centralized within the
hands of public officials.
Tanzimat could not create a movement toward the
direction of individualist structure for administrative life and also it is not
a sign showing that society is in the way toward social happiness. Because the
order that is desired to be given to administrative life with Tanzimat was not
the result of the development occurred in private life. Private life has not
changed. For that reason the characteristic of Tanzimat is that to depend upon
government officials to the centre who are feeded by private life.
Social pattern of this direction is
"public official" and social structure is "statist collectivist
structure". In that kind of social structure, individual will lose
independence through seeking his provisions by capturing the administrative
power. Struggles for capturing the official positions and moral weakness highly
increase.
The organization that Tanzimat created shows
the social weakness and the dominant position of the administrative life
created by collectivist structure. The organization of the administrative life
is depended upon the needs and requirements of the private life. The
administrative and political reform cannot be solved by itself (Ege,
1977:356-361).
If we could have a decentralized
administration the organization of the government of the Ottoman Empire would
not be monopolized by only a city and by the members of the government but on
the contrary our country would begin to develop through the administrative
power of the persons who have the ability about local affairs. The
administration of government affairs through decentralization would strengthen
political unity and state which is the representative of political unity. Thus
the internal and external positions of Turkey would be promoted (Ege,
1977:401).
Decentralization is not a regulation for
politically satisfying various components and thus we do not offer a political
and particularistic but offer administrative and local decentralization (Ege,
1977:410).
Sabahaddin has clearly differed the political
and administrative aspects of decentralization. He has defended administrative
aspect of decentralization; the abolition of red tape, the partial provision of
the centralized administrative power to local administrations, the
participation of people into the administration. The obtainment of liberal
regime through decentralization in England and America was his ideal (Tunaya,
1979:177).
Sabahaddin's ideas were strongly opposed in a
historically centralized environment. Turkish Republic also continued this
tradition. As Mumtaz Soysal says "The fear of the centre is about local
(self)-administration which is called as decentralization since Prince
Sabahaddin (Soysal, 1983:2).
Sabahaddin had offered some institutions for
developing decentralized administration like Regulation Committees, Provincial
Committees, and Local Governments. Provincial General Assemblies and governors
would have more authority about provincial matters. The authority of financial
and administrative control would be given to the people through establish-ing
Provincial Committees, members of which are the inhabitants of the locality.
The authority of local administration would be expanded up to the villages. All
of the regions of the Empire would have the right of self-government about
administrative, municipal and judicial affairs. This must also be so for the
affairs of finance and public works.
Sabahaddin examined the reform of
administrative life based on decentralization in his book under the heading of
"New Direction" (Ege,1977:365-371) The subdivisions of this chapter
was local governments, military police, administration of justice, ownership,
the organization of public works, administration and sources of country,
education and schools, finance, regulation committees. He elaborated the
authorities of local governments in this chapter. These authorities had also
been shown in the programme of "The Association of Private Enterprise and
Decentralization"(Ege-l977:71-72).Provinces would be administered with the
method and rule of decentralization. These authorities were highly wide.
3.
State
Sabahaddin's way of thinking about State can
be drawm from the concept of administrative life. The dominant influence of
administrative life- as opposed to the private life (society) - will be
weakened with decentralization. State must be under the influence of society.
But the inverse relationship in the ottoman system would be changed through
strengthening society (private life) with private enterprise and weakening the
influence of state (administrative life) with decentralization. Moreover he
sometimes refers to the” collectivist structure" as "state
collectivist structure". State is dominant in collectivist structure. This
dominance is an unlucky one.
The organization of the administrative life
must be depended on the conditions and requirements of private life. Decentralization
will secure the weakening of the influence of the State. We have to pass from
"State Collectivist Structure" to "Individualist
Structure". In other words from "Extreme Transcendentalism" to
"Moderate Instrumental ism". Society has to orient the State.
Demolins's views on State are also another
source on subject. Demolins refers to “Statist Patriotism” which occurs in
France, Russia, Italy and Spain. These are the examples of "Statist
Patriotism" which are depended on political desires. The most developed
forms of Statist Patriotism are seen in societies which provide great
authorities to central administration and to the public. This organization is
in favor of the war. Because the tendency of officials in wide bureaucracy
directed by administrators does not recognize any authority (will) out of the
will of the State which pays their salaries. If the administrators of that kind
of governments are generally in favor of the war: they prefer to fight for
gaining or keeping power and for directing the attention of the people from the
defectivenesses toward other directions.
As opposed to "Statist Patriotism"
we see the patriotism of Anglo-Saxons. This patriotism is based on the
independence of private life: individual defends his country for protecting his
freedom. The reason for the existence of State is to facilitate his
independence. They believe that the mother country is for men. But men are for
the mother country in "statist patriotism"; Anglo-Saxons can easily
leave their country. They carry off their countries with themselves and accept
as their country any place which provides them freedom. The independent
attitude which the colonies of England Empire have against mother country and
disappearance of the tradition of war prove our claims. (Ramsaur, 1972:101-102)
Sabahaddin was an Ottomanist and reformist.
He desired to change the tissue of the Ottoman Empire according to the
requirements of the century. His thesis was the policy of enlivening and the
formula of reformism. Ottoman society has to be kept alive. The policy of
Islamic unity is necessary. Emperor is again caliph. The form of State is
Constitutional Sultanate which is based on Constitution (Tunaya, 1950:174,176).
The aim of the revolution is to save the
empire. A contemporary form has to be accepted for the Empire through adapting
the new political circumstances of the time and thus the lifetime of the empire
has to be prolonged. Only a constitutional government cannot provide these
objectives. Reform that has to be done in this area must be more radical and
broader. The form of administration also has to be changed from centralization
toward decentralization. Empire has to be transformed into the form of
"national community" which will be formed through the mutual wishes
and decisions of the elements that form it. Thus Empire would be saved from
dispersion (Kongar, 1932:95-96).
He will tell us the international position of
the Ottoman Empire (Eastern Problem). According to the foreigners who have
superficial views, the thing which keeps alive the Ottoman State was not its
substance or vividness. There were two foundations of the Ottoman State:
military and the competitions of the States. Sabahattin will say that Turks are
not the tenants of their countries. Social developments of Turks will prove to
the humanity that they are the real and legal owners of their countries. Thus
Turks will individually solve the” Eastern Problem". (Tunaya, 1979: 175)
It cannot be denied that Turks are an
important balancing element for Muslim and Christian citizens. But for assuring
this social advantage Turkey has to have a decentralized constitutional
government. Ottoman Empire can assure the Ottoman Unity- within the social
variousness of different elements within itself- only in this way (Ege, 1977:111)
Balkan nations who have been separated from
Turks for a long time also need the society of Ottoman Empire which has been
reformed. Because there is only Ottoman Empire against northern nations (that
is Russia) who have greatest power against Balkan nations (Ege, 1977:110).
We must have a decentralized constitutional
government which will suit local needs that are increasing, which will
strengthen political centralization and create Ottoman Unity, which will
develop social activities and which will provide sovereignty and national
independence under the necessary presidency of the Ottoman Sultanate
(Ege,1977:261).
In his opinion State is one of the points of
support for individuals who have not their own point of support.
State is one of the points of support for
individuals who have not individual freedom. Official services are thought of
as more respectable than productive professions and moreover state officials
are earning their living -more easily like in all other collectivist societies
(Ege, 1977:348)
He has written also some notes about the
establishment of the Ottoman State.
"Villagers who are the most basic and
unchanged part of the Ottoman State are living collectively in the villages.
Cavalrymen who established the State faced with village communities which are
busy with agricultural activities in definite fields."
"The provision of village fields to the
villagers was assured by
cavalrymen at the beginning of the
establishment of the State. Thus the presidency of the village communities was
captured by the State, all agricultural land passed to the ownership of the
State as state-owned land and farmer transformed to share-cropper who is
dependent on village cavalryman. The instability of the organization of
cavalrymen caused the unfastening of village communities through the
deprivation of the power they highly needed.”(Ege, 1977:353-354).
4.
Bureaucracy
Sabahaddin was an intellectual who opposed
bureaucratic intellectuals. His main criticism about bureaucracy is related to
the officialism existing in the Ottoman State. The social structure of the
Ottoman State -that is the dominance of administrative life upon the private
life-should be changed for possessing a legal-rational bureaucracy.
Intellectuals preferred administrative professions instead of productive ones
because of the unnecessary and harmful wideness of the administrative life. It
is impossible to change bureaucracy through the governmental and political
activities. We could lessen the harmful effects of bureaucracy only through
strengthening private life.
The base of the dominance of the Ottoman
bureaucracy is the social structure of the society. This structure is feeding
the Ottoman bureaucracy. Any regulation or change without changing the social
structure of the society would transform the patrimonial bureaucracy into the
legal-rational bureaucracy. In a country in which the administrative life is
dominant, administrative officials certainly would have great power. The most
-important characteristic of the Ottoman bureaucracy is its centralism. For
transforming Ottoman bureaucracy first of all private enterprise should be
supported and strengthened and after centralized administration should have to
be transformed into the decentralized administration.
"Government is continuing to set new
schools for expanding education. But attempt is being directed only by
government and that government is trying to train public officials who will
continue its career. The aim of the education it establishes is to train
officials who will live through the salary payed from the government treasure
without having any responsibility and performing any enterprise. Young men who
obtain excellent diplomas from official schools cannot earn their living in
careers which are out of the officialdom. Careers which are the fundamental
base of the society like industry, agriculture and commerce are despised among
Muslims. Greatest desire is to become government official" (Ege, 1977:87).
"We are seeking individual interest in
officialdom instead of providing it through industry, agriculture and commerce
which are the three sources of wealth. For living and becoming rich through
personal interest it is necessary to have merits like knowledge, experience,
effort, stability and precaution. Being deprived of these merits we want to
become rich without working and to live without earning as a result of the
education we had since the childhood and naturally we desire to become a public
official." (Ege, 1977:166)
"Public officials in every country act
as a stooge to despotism because of their dependence upon a custom related to
their duties. But the effects of them are much more negative in our country...
Because we have not an effective and entrepreneurial class out of the
administrative forces. Individuals who are most capable of forming this class
are becoming public officials... And composing a consuming class under the
protection of government. Producers are villagers, artisans and small
merchants. Because of not owning material and moral capital they cannot develop
their business and also cannot preserve their business under the oppression of
government" (Ege, 1977:166)
"The whole of young men are earning
their living through salary they provide from somewhere. Authors, teachers,
soldiers, officials are compelled to seek their economic base upon the other
point. We need these people. But these officials can operate in an environment
which earns more than its expenses. But we are spending that we did not
earn." Ege, 1977:218)
"We are sending hundreds of students to
Europe. What is its aim? To increase consuming persons in a society in which
its producers are deprived of intellectuals, that is to increase the public
officials of the State which cannot pay their salaries without loans and to go
bankrupt rapidly." (Ege, 1977:218)
"We may have educated public officials
as well as we want in administrative affairs; we may also suppose that each of
them is a genius. Will they supervise the agricultural activities and private
lives of the villagers?.. Will they administer scientific farms?... Will they
establish factories and firms?... (Ege, 1977:218)
"Conscientious and capable public
officials may increase when the condition of progress is not the partisanship
of political party but to perform fast and clean service within the circle of
rules and order."(Ege, 1977: 219)
"The single remedy for possessing an
administrative duty in the government which has unnecessarily excessive public
officials is not qualification but protection." (Ege, 1977, 166)
"The positions of officers, judges,
teachers and other civil officials are the same in Turkey; to say that they
should not interest in politics means the administration of the country should
not be kept by these officials. But administration is necessarily kept by the class
of public officials in a collectivist country where the administrative life is
dominant upon the private life. Oppressions, abuses and crisises again
necessarily cause reactions and continuous political struggles without creating
any fundamental change in social life.
The Army naturally interferes with these
struggles; because it is the part within the class of officials that has
especially been prepared for the war. Thus the position of the army that will
regulate the internal politics and basing of the government upon the army prove
that our society belongs to a weak social structure. In this unbalanced society
it is impossible to hinder the occupation of the officers and the other public
officials with politics.
The government which is strong, favorable to
evolution and which does not need revolution for the correction of his errors
should be based upon a strong private life that is created through
individualist structure and thus the role of the army consists of its main
duty."(Ege, 1Q77: 361-363)
5. Conclusion
Social
Structure
EXTREME
MODERATE
TRANSCENDENTALISM
INSTRUMENTALISM
STATE State SOCIETY ORIENTATION
ORIENTATION Collectivist Individualist Structure
Structure
State
Collectivist
Structure
SOCIETY STATE SOCIETY STATE
Private
Life
Administrative Private Administrative
Life Life Life
Centralization
Individualist Decentralization
Enterprise
-REFERENCES-
Abadan, Yavuz
"Ademi Merkeziyet Problemi" SBF Dergisi 2o.4(1965)
Berkes, Niyazi Türk Düşününde Batı Sorunu. Istanbul, 1975.
Bilgi Yayınevi
Ege,Nezahat Prens Sabahaddin. Hayatı ve İlmi Müdafaaları.
Istanbul,1977
Kongar, Emre Türk Toplumbilimcileri I. Istanbul,1982.
Remzi Kitabevi
Ramsaur, Ernest Jön Türkler ve 1908 İhtilali.
Istanbul,1972. Sander Yayınları
Soysal, Mümtaz "Hassasiyetle Cesaretin Ortası"
Milliyet. 14 Ocak 1985.
Toros, Taha
"Ölümünün 100. Yılında Prens
Sabahaddin" Milliyet, 16-21 Şubatl97
Tunaya, T. Zafer İnsan Derisiyle Kaplı
Anayasa. İstanbul, 1979. Çağdaş Yayınları
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder