Thoughts on Ataturk?

[Kizaru]

Saved turkey from colonisation.
But tried to westernised the country and was not kind to Islam. What are your thoughts on this man?

View attachment 303317View attachment 303318View attachment 303319

I don't blame or have any grudges against him but I think his Europe or cadaan bootlicking was turned to max. Imagine having your entire empire collapse because some sand monkeys betrayed you. This is why somalis should never claim arab ancestry.

 

[Emir of Zayla]

It's a wonder why Af-somali was so conservative and wasn't hugely influenced like that. When we had much larger sedentary population of Ethiopia next door.

It was more like Muslim Somalis were doing the influencing rather than the other way around. We formed sultanates and emirates in the North like Ifat and in the south like Ajuran and Hirab Imamate all the way over to the west in Bali and Dawaro.

 

[Khaem]

It was more like Muslim Somalis were doing the influencing rather than the other way around. We formed sultanates and emirates in the North like Ifat and in the south like Ajuran and Hirab Imamate all the way over to the west in Bali and Dawaro.

Somalis ethnically rule half the horn as is. But our cultural influence stretches beyond that to afars and eastern oromo. Our culture is strong in a majority of the horn. Our problem has never been land but population. The Habasha are tiny in land and isolated, yet they are a feudal agricultural state with a bursting population which is the only thing they have on us.

Cities and urbanisation? Somalis were superior. Ethiopia had no big cities to speak of, they were feudal. Their whole population lived on farms ruled by Lords who lived in petty castles. Compared to Somalia with Zaylac, Mogadishu, marka ect.

Technology? Somalis were superior. The Ethiopians had to import guns from Russia to fight Italy yet Somali rebel state Dervish was building fortified cities and manufacturing their own guns and bullets whilst figtuing the British, ethiopians and italians on all fronts for 23 years.

 

[Emir of Zayla]

Somalis ethnically rule half the horn as is. But our cultural influence stretches beyond that to afars and eastern oromo. Our culture is strong in a majority of the horn. Our problem has never been land but population. The Habasha are tiny in land and isolated, yet they are a feudal agricultural state with a bursting population which is the only thing they have on us.

We need to push eastern Oromos that border is and those in Hararghe into learning the Somali language and assimilate them culturally. Since being Oromo is a culture and isn’t a real ethnicity, it can be easy to assimilate them whether that be an Amhara or Somali that’s doing it.

 

[Bazed]

A man who saved his nation but could not save himself. He was a great military leader and his reforms saved turkey but it also stripped the nation of its unique culture and faith. I respect his work however the cult of personality that has popped up around him is disgusting. Erdogan is righting the wrong buy not only being a hardline nationalist but also a man of faith.

 

[Omar del Sur]

كفر (Ataturk, not OP of course)

 

[Bundasliga]

you're a kafir

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

 

[Three Moons]

He is the reason why the Turks for the last 100 years have not lost a single war or suffered humiliation and he left them with an intact homeland. You cannot annex or cede away territory that belongs to a unified people. Neither the Ogaden or Palestine would have been lost today if the locals had the same mentality as the Turks and fell in line with their greater nations rather than their tribes or clans.

 

[Bison]

Crypto Jew

 

[The alchemist]

This was an example of how nationalism in Islamic-majority countries that want to use it as a force of independence from the Western clutches is a contradiction. Ataturk fought off the Europeans to ultimately shift toward Europe in the end, internally. Why is this the case? Because modern nationalization is a Western tradition and philosophy. Nation-states might claim it is indigenously inspired. This is never the case.

Embarrassingly, whenever people say "modernized," it is in the form of Western developmental alignment. Modernization theory formed from the thought that civilization moves predictably in captured linear stages - platforming Western powers as the epitome and near-optimal level of human organizational, ideological, and sociological growth.

In that sense, I would characterize the Ataturk movement as a complete failure since it did nothing but incorporate Western ideals, values, and concept of Western European "Enlightenment" on a modal pedestal, suppressing Turkey's history with its rich Islamic disposition as a potential source of juncture as inferior worthy of nothing but suppression.

 

[Qeelbax]

They were angry at the Arab revolt many Turks never thought that the Arabs would betray them. Till today even Turkish nationalist remind their fellow Turks that the Arabs are not to be trusted

That’s a turkish lie. Most Arabs fought for the Ottomans. Ottomans had minorities fucked up and they caused their own downfall. They were obsessed with Europe, they lost their way and everything crumbled.

 

[Qeelbax]

This was an example of how nationalism in Islamic-majority countries that want to use it as a force of independence from the Western clutches is a contradiction. Ataturk fought off the Europeans to ultimately shift toward Europe in the end, internally. Why is this the case? Because modern nationalization is a Western tradition and philosophy. Nation-states might claim it is indigenously inspired. This is never the case.

Embarrassingly, whenever people say "modernized," it is in the form of Western developmental alignment. Modernization theory formed from the thought that civilization moves predictably in captured linear stages - platforming Western powers as the epitome and near-optimal level of human organizational, ideological, and sociological growth.

View attachment 303339

View attachment 303340
View attachment 303368

In that sense, I would characterize the Ataturk movement as a complete failure since it did nothing but incorporate Western ideals, values, and concept of Western European "Enlightenment" on a modal pedestal, suppressing Turkey's history with its rich Islamic disposition as a potential source of juncture as inferior worthy of nothing but suppression.

Correct. They say he modernized Turkey but how did Turkey modernize? They were a poor shithole before Erdogan.