1908-1974 yılları arasında Türkiye'de solun dine bakışı
The left's view of religion in Türkiye between 1908-1974
Yazar: HÜSEYİN ARSLAN
Danışman: DOÇ. DR. YUSUF DOĞAN ÇETİNKAYA ; DR. ÖĞR. ÜYESİ MUSTAFA GÖRKEM DOĞAN
İstanbul Üniversitesi / Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü / Siyaset Bilimi ve Kamu Yönetimi Ana Bilim Dalı
Derece: Doktora, 2024
Konu: Siyasal Bilimler = Political Science

Özet:
Türkiye'deki sol partilerin, hareketlerin ve aktörlerin din ile görüşleri üzerinde hem ortodoks Marksist külliyatın hem SSCB ve Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti gibi ülkelerin hem de Türkiye siyasal hayatının önemli bir yeri bulunmaktadır. Dinin toplum üzerinde geniş bir etkisi olması nedeniyle sol hareketlerin dine olan ilgisini artmıştır. Bu yüzden sol hareketler ve partiler ortaya ilk çıktıkları andan itibaren dine dair teatiler geliştirmişlerdir.
Türkiye'deki sol hareketlerin dine genel olarak pozitivizm ışığından baktıkları ve dinin yerine bilimi yerleştirmeye çalıştıklarına dair bir kanı bulunmaktadır. Türkiye'deki sol hareketler çok fazla fraksiyonlara ayrıldığından dine dair algıları da farklılaşmaktadır. Bu nedenle sol hareketlerin dine dair görüşleri tek bir paradigma ekseninden incelenemez.
Teze 1908-1974 yılları arasında din ile ilgili tartışmalarda bulunan sol hareketler, partiler ve siyasi mücadelede bulunan aktörler konu edinmiştir. Bunun yanında Türkiye'deki sol düşünce üzerinde etkisi olan Marksist teorilerin dine yaklaşımı, SSCB, Arnavutluk Sosyalist Halk Cumhuriyeti, Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti'nin din algısıyla birlikte kurtuluş teolojisi, İslam sosyalizmi ve Arap sosyalizmi gibi din ile sosyalizmi mezcetmeye çalışan siyasal hareketlere ve fikirlere de yer verilmiştir.
1908-1974 yılları arasında Türkiye'de solun dine bakışı incelendiğinde üç parametre ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu parametrelerin ilki dini doğrudan gericilik olarak ele almakta ve onu gericiliğe eşitlemektedir. İkincisi dine pasif laiklik ekseninden yaklaşarak onu siyasal alandan arındırmaya çalışmakta ve devletin ona müdahalesine karşı çıkmaktadır. Üçüncü parametre ise sosyalizm ile din arasındaki müşterek noktalara referansta bulunarak onları bir arada ele almaya çalışmaktadır. Din ile ilgili söz konusu bu üç yaklaşım sadece Türkiye'ye has değildir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Sosyalizm, Marksizm, din, laiklik, Alevilik

Abstract:
Religious debates in Türkiye have also affected leftist movements such as Kemalism, Islamism and nationalism. For this reason, many leftist movements, political parties and leftist actors have participated in the debate on religion. Some of them took part in these debates by directly referring to religion and some by referring to clergy or religious people. Others have expressed their views on religion through secularism. In the end, religion became an important element of debate for leftist factions.
The views on religion of leftist political parties, movements, individuals and publications that emerged between 1908 and 1974 are analyzed in this thesis. In general, it has been claimed that the left's views on religion developed on the axis of radical secularism and positivism. However, it is seen that this judgment is not generally valid in the periods analyzed in this thesis.
The left's view of religion in Türkiye between 1908 and 1974 can be analyzed in terms of three paradigms. The first of these paradigms is the understanding of "religion=reactionism/insurgency". The classical TKF/TKP tradition, the Kurdish left, the Dersaadet Tetebbuat-ı İctimaiyye Cemiyeti, the Kadro Movement, Şefik Hüsnü, Nazım Hikmet, Gün Zileli and Aziz Nesin treated religion as a reactionary phenomenon. They approached religion in parallel with the orthodox Marxist understanding and the policies of the USSR. Since these movements see religion as a reactionary phenomenon, it can be said that they favor an exclusionary understanding of secularism. Therefore, those who state that the left's view of religion has developed under the influence of radical secularism and positivism are generally based on those who adopt the "religion=reactionism/insurgency" paradigm. In addition, other political movements' identification of the left with irreligion is based on their reference to those who adopt this paradigm. According to this group, religion is a tool used by the bourgeoisie and compradors to legitimize their actions and exploitation. Religion is conceived as an ideological apparatus of the bourgeoisie. It was argued that the faculties of theology, imam hatip schools, Koran courses, sermons given in mosques were incompatible with the ambitions of the revolutionary proletariat.  In addition, the opening of masjids in the Prime Ministry and ministries and the prayers of civil servants were portrayed as reactionary activities.  In addition, Harun Karadeniz, while narrating his memories of the 6th Fleet events, stated that pure and innocent religious people were exploited by the imperialists and the bourgeoisie in the name of religion. "Poor and pious people exploited by the 6th Fleet and its allies" sided with those who prayed towards the fleet and exploited religion in order to save it.  In this sense, this is the first paradigm that comes to mind when it comes to the left's view of religion in Türkiye. On the axis of this paradigm, theses on the relationship between the left and religion have been put forward.
Leftist intellectuals who advocate the paradigm of "religion=reactionism/insurgency" have generally dealt with religion through rituals that they see as superstition. This is seen when explaining the reasons for the weakening of intellectuals' relations with religion. For example, the fact that Aziz Nesin's sister was taken away and left in a grave to be cured seems to have negatively affected his approach to religion. Similarly, Hasan Yalçın's feelings of coldness towards religion after he was told as a child that he would be struck if he did something that he was told he would be struck if he did it, but was not struck, can be cited as an example. Both Nesin and Yalçın actually developed their discourses on religion by reading their past lives. Here, as in Nesin's memoir, superstition versus anti-science can be said to be at the forefront. Ataol Behramoğlu's thesis of the anti-science of religion also lies in the fact that he constructs technology as a God and places it in opposition to the mystical belief in God. 
Some of the leftist movements in Türkiye, on the other hand, have criticized the clergy rather than directly targeting religion. There is no clear information as to why they did not engage in a discourse on religion but expressed harsh discourses against the clergy. However, the clergy were fictionalized as collaborators with the bourgeoisie and compradors, and as henchmen for the exploitation of workers and peasants. This is clearly seen in the texts of İbrahim Kaypakkaya and in films such as Kibar Feyzo. It can be said that leftist movements and works that construct clergymen as enemies of socialism also indirectly defend the paradigm of "religion=reaction/insurgency".
According to the "religion=reactionism/insurgency" paradigm, one of the most important elements that enables religion to serve the bourgeoisie and the "Bey team" is the belief in the afterlife and destiny. The belief in the afterlife and destiny offers a utopia to workers and peasants by keeping them silent against existing injustices and oppression. This is why religion forbids them to rise up against injustices on the ground. Liberation theologians and proponents of Islamic socialism have also criticized this interpretation of religion. Like Ernst Bloch, they emphasized the revolutionary aspect of religion and stated that religion promises a paradise on earth.
Leftist movements and actors who developed policies on the axis of the "religion=reactionism/insurgency" paradigm expressed views on religion on the axis of the exclusionary secularism pursued by Kemalism. They thought that society should be liberated from religion, as in the USSR, the Socialist People's Republic of Albania and the People's Republic of China.
Another paradigm that explains the left's view of religion in Türkiye is the passive understanding of secularism. This paradigm directly addresses secularism as the separation of religion and state affairs, in other words, it assumes religion and state as two separate sets. The most important representatives of this paradigm are the Workers' Party of Türkiye, the National Democratic Revolution and the Socialist Party of Türkiye. The TİP, MDD and TSP opposed the interference in the religion of citizens under the name of reaction. According to them, the state should not interfere with religion and religion should not interfere with the state. In this sense, the state should respect the religion adopted by citizens. The discourse of the TİP, MDD and TSP was in line with Rosa Luxemburg's thesis that socialism would not interfere with people's religious beliefs. Those who took this paradigm as a reference identified reaction with the bourgeoisie, the "gentry" or compradors. Therefore, the clergy who serve them can be considered reactionary. Otherwise, religion cannot be directly addressed as reaction. Along with the TİP, MDD and TSP, Mehmet Ali Aybar, Behice Boran, Yaşar Kemal, Çetin Altan, Esat Adil Müstecaplıoğlu and Kemal Tahir expressed their views on the same paradigm. According to them, socialism was based on the struggle against religionists who used religion as a tool for colonialism, and not against religion itself.  For this reason, Yaşar Kemal stated that true Muslims and religionists should not be confused with each other. Mümtaz Soysal also referred to the religionists as comprador religionism, referring to the aforementioned distinction.
According to leftist movements defending a passive secularist understanding, theocratic states and political structures with theopolitical arguments serve imperialism and the bourgeoisie. Therefore, a secular state does not allow such structures. These leftist movements do not look favorably upon the Islamist movement because of its political aims.
Another paradigm that explains the left's view of religion in Türkiye between 1908 and 1974 is based on the relationship between socialism and religion. This paradigm mostly touched upon similar issues with the arguments of Gramsci, Althusser and Bloch. Therefore, Arab socialism, Islamic socialism and liberation theology have a lot in common with the proponents of this paradigm. It can be said that İştirakçi Hilmi, Yeşil Ordu, Kerim Sadi, Türkiye Halk İştirakiyun Fırkası, Yön-Devrim Movement, İdris Küçükömer, and Hikmet Kıvılcımlı, who took part in the leftist movement in Türkiye, expressed their thoughts on the axis of this paradigm. They focused on the common themes between socialism and Islam and tried to establish a relationship with the people. In addition to Islam's transformative and revolutionary qualities, they focused on the potential of utilizing the spirit of solidarity it creates for socialism due to its strong asabiyyah among people. In fact, it was thought that religion should not be left alone, otherwise it would be used for the interests of imperialism and the bourgeoisie. This paradigm indirectly included in its content the use of religion as an ideological apparatus for socialism. Because through Islam, it would be easier to establish contact with the people and ensure that the people embrace socialism. Ertuğrul Kürkçü expressed this situation as follows: "In a country where almost 90 percent of the population is nourished by Islamic culture, it is unthinkable for socialists to conduct practical politics without taking this cultural background into account."
The left's relationship with Alevism in Türkiye should be evaluated outside of these three paradigms. This is because the left's contact with Alevism was influenced by its revolutionary aspect and its marginalization by the official ideology, rather than its religious factor. In addition, the values of social justice, human rights and equality that exist between Alevism and socialism have brought the two groups closer. In this sense, there is a historical and sociocultural connection between the left and Alevism.
Keywords: Socialism, Marxism, religion, laicism, Alevism