A deep power struggle continues between factions within Türkiye’s main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP). Teams close to Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, the former leader of the CHP, do not want to be left behind. The intense internal fight has now shifted its focus to “who is better at opposing.”
Members of the party launch slurs at President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his supporters as a strategy of “effective opposition.” They also see this as a weapon to use against each other. Most recently, a former deputy chairperson of the CHP, currently a member of Parliament, insulted Erdoğan.
The CHP has a deep-rooted habit. When the Democrat Party (DP) came to power, the CHP, not knowing how to oppose the ruling party, mistook insults for political action. By the third term of the DP government, the language of insults had almost become institutionalized.
The insults were not limited to DP officials. The broad masses, who brought the DP to power, were also targets. The large voter base of the DP was described as “useless remnants from the dark ages.” Unfortunately, this scorn was perceived as a necessity of the “modernizing paradigm” at the time. Moreover, those who held this view saw such derogatory definitions as their right.
Fast forward to today, the practice of insulting a section of society and its representatives has been historically normalized in CHP politics. For instance, during years of his leadership, Kılıçdaroğlu repeatedly referred to Erdoğan as the “so-called president.”
He also made derogatory remarks about his supporters. In one speech, he said, “I wouldn’t call anyone who still supports the government a teacher. Such a person cannot be a teacher.” In another, he targeted farmers, saying, “If you still go and vote for the AK Party in the next election, I will hold you accountable.”
Özgür Özel, the current chair of the CHP, follows the steps of his predecessors. His criticisms against pre-school religious education, which holds great importance for a large section of Turkish society, and descriptions of it as a “medieval mentality” demonstrate that.
Some CHP members, particularly during the periods leading up to elections, have acknowledged that the derogatory language they and their supporters once directed at the society and their representatives was problematic and have started to discuss “reconciliation,” often mentioning “normalization.”
Even if these steps are taken for tactical reasons, they are still significant. However, since they lack genuine intent, their sustainability is challenging. This is because insulting the elected officials directly targets the electorate itself.
Political competition is a prerequisite of democracy and there is room for harsh criticism. If the criticism allows voters to make comparisons, it has merit.
The CHP members’ insults are primarily a result of their internal conflicts. There is a tiered distribution of duties among them. While some actors make declarations about normalization, others, as part of their assigned roles, focus on maintaining a harsh political environment.
The division of roles serves the purpose of creating multiple narratives from the CHP’s perspective. As in the past, the narrative will likely claim that the government is responsible for polarization. The strategy of polarization aims to unify various factions within the opposition and obscure the service shortcomings of opposition-run municipalities.
Additionally, this politics of insult may be aimed at undermining the government’s positive agenda, laying the groundwork for early electoral discussions, and driving new sociological groups away from the People’s Alliance. However, the intended results often do not materialize as Turkish politics has often demonstrated.
