In her column, Gülseren Onanç, the Founding Chair of the SES Equality and Solidarity Association, examines the dilemma that the youth in Turkey are confronting between leaving the country, obeying the system, or raising a voice.
This week we were shaken by the mass shootings in the US. As the New York Times reported, there is a new, “disturbing” trend: “Young Assailants.” Six of the nine deadliest mass shootings in the United States since 2018 were by people who were 21 or younger.
According to a recent study, 73% of young people in the 18-25 age group in Turkey state that they would like to live in another country if they had the opportunity. These findings hurt me deeply. The source of my sadness is not based on a nationalist reflex. I am one of those who advocate that every individual should have the right to live in the country they want. I believe that experiencing different countries and cultures, especially during youth, supports individual development. But I resent that young people seek hope in other countries and give up their roots. I feel responsible for not being able to establish a country that gives hope to young people.
Youth unemployment reaches 2.3 million
I understand that young people are looking for a better future in other countries. They have concerns about finding a job after graduating; they think that even if they find a job, they will not have the quality of life they deserve.
For this reason, it is justified that they seek their future in places where they can lead a dignified life. According to the data from the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions (Disk) youth unemployment in Turkey is 2.3 million. In the research conducted with young people between the ages of 15-24, it is stated that youth unemployment increased during the AKP era; young people with higher education mostly work for minimum wage.
What will the young people choose? Output, voice or fidelity
The current state makes me think of Albert Hirschman’s famous thesis named “Exit, Voice, Loyalty.” In his thesis, he defines the individual’s relationship with companies/brands or institutions (political parties, government institutions, etc.): You either stay loyal to the institution, criticize it, or leave it.
How will the youth take a stand against Turkey’s deteriorating democracy and economy?
Although this thesis is based on goods and services produced in a competitive environment, it becomes much more complicated when national identities are involved. In other words, we can leave a service provider or company that we are not satisfied with and move to another company, but the costs of changing our country of citizenship are much higher. In this case, will the young people remain loyal to the unsatisfactory institutions of the state of which they are citizens, or will they choose to leave and live in another country? Studies in Turkey say that 73 per cent of young people choose the exit path rather than being loyal or raising a voice against it.
Are young people “mandatory conformists”?
Demet Lüküslü, Head of the Department of Sociology at Yeditepe University and one of the Founders and Coordinators of the Istanbul Youth Research Center, says that instead of defining young people as a “silent mass” that does not question what is happening, it we should describe them as “mandatory conformists”.
Demet Lüküslü states that young people are not happy. They think that even if they object and rebel, nothing will change. In fact, young people refuse to stay in Turkey and accept the system. They rather seek EXIT and risk their conformity.”
Young people cannot find political actors
The generation that has been referred to as the “Generation Z” in the media is aware of their voting potential. This generation is more vocal and does not hesitate to emphasize their differences when necessary. However, although they begin to define themselves as possessing political power, they have difficulty in finding politicians or political parties that they can define themselves in politically and that will be an important political actor in the formation of the country they want. This causes despair.
We can do what Atatürk did 103 years ago.
We celebrated the 19th of May Youth and Sports Day a couple of weeks ago. The success story of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who embarked on the difficult journey of establishing the modern Turkish Republic, has set an example for a wide geography, and it gives hope to the youth even when they are at their most helpless. As an activist who always sees myself as young, I perceive Atatürk’s address to the youth as a text of duty given to me. He was a genius who was able to establish an independent, secular democracy in this geography and prevailed against both internal and external enemies. he also foresaw these days to come.
In order to rebuild the democracy that Atatürk dreamed of, our option should be to raise a voice before considering leaving the country. We must speak out with a loud voice what kind of politics we want and make sure that the political actors in the opposition hear us. If they do not hear, we should make the politics and build our future with our own hands. Instead of saying “Nothing changes in this country”, we should say “Atatürk did it under very difficult conditions, we can do it too”. We must be the change we want to see.