Osmanlı İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti ile Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası'nın karşılaştırmalı incelenmesi
Özet
SUMMARY The periods of the establishment of the Ottoman Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) and the Republican People's Party (RPP) were also the periods of crises experienced by the state and the society. While the CUP was founded in a process of experiencing serious problems in maintaining the existence of the empire it self against the Western states which had been controlling the economic structure of the empire and had also been backing separatist movements of non-muslim groups in the empire, the RPP came into being as a successor to the Association for the Defense and Rights of Anatolia and Rumelia (ADRAR) which had been formed in another crises period caused by a war against the occupation of Anotolia by Greek troophs. Furthermore, it should be said that, in these periods, the economic structure of the country had features of an undeveloped and semi-colonial country of which importation was based on industrial materials while exportation was depended merely agrarian products. Thanks to similar social and economic background upon which they have been founded, some similarities between the CUP and RPP should be excepted. Essential similarities we should adress are; 1. The identity of their staff; It is evident that the staff of both the ADRAR and the RPP had also been members of the CUP in previous times. Due to this fact, another point should be added: That is, the social background of their staff. The dominant components of both of these organizations which had structures that had been composed of differint social classes and strata were the civil and military bureaucrats-intellectuals. 2. Organizational Structures; Both of the two organizations constituted a hierarchical structure which was in accordance with administrative division of the state. However, considering the issue of leadership, a point which should be counted as an important difference should be mentioned: The collective leadership notion of the CUP had given its place to the 'one-man' situation of Mustafa Kemal. 3. The similarity between their ideological bias; The civil and military bureaucrats-intellectuals had had a western-style education which gave them an opportunity of a new philosophy of life which, was not only differint from, but also in conflict with the traditional one. The remedy propounded by their bourgeois philosohy was to solve the problems of the empire by settling bourgeois political institution. To be 244sure, this was a question of 'creating' a new bourgeoisie that would be quite differint from non-müslim one in regard with loyality to the state. This, I argue, was the idelogical direction favoured by both of them. Of course, this is not to say that there was no difference between their ideological understandings. The first difference emerges from their conception of Westernization. Undoubtly, the RPP had gone more further in ideal and practice of Westernization than the CUP due to its consideration of the culture as an indivisible part of the civilization unlike most of the Young Turks and also the members of the CUP. Furthermore a great difference had arisen between them in connection with the question of political rejime. The CUP could not go further than attaching a constitutional feature to the monarchy and also, except some weak efforts, could not make a significant and bold attempt to secularize the political and social life. Despite the CUP, not only two of the six principles of the RPP were 'republicanism' and 'secularism' but also the RPP made these principles come into existence in political life. As a conclusion, it should be said that the CUP and the RPP had a veiy close relation which was affirmed by their identity of staff, sociological background and the similarity in essence of their political philosophy. 245