Suchergebnisse

Türkiye'de kurulan Komünizme Mücadele Dernekleri ve bu derneklerin dillendirdiği anti-komünist söylem, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nun son dönemlerinden beri Türk toplumunda var olan ?Moskof? imgesinin oluşturduğu ?dış düşman? algısından büyük oranda beslenmiş ve Soğuk Savaş dönemi SSCB ve ABD politikalarının iç politikaya yansıması ile özellikle 1940'lı yıllardan itibaren belirginlik kazanmıştır. Aynı zamanda bu dernekler toplumda, Tek Parti dönemi politikalarının katı laiklik uygulamalarının milliyetçi ve dindar çevreleri susturması ve 1945-1960 arası dönemde CHP ve DP hükümetlerinin sol siyasal düşünceye bakışındaki dışlayıcı benzerlikten faydalanarak ortaya çıkmışlardır. Bu dernekler sırasıyla 1950'de Zonguldak'ta, 1956'da İstanbul'da ve son olarak 1963 yılında İzmir'de kurulmuşlardır. Bu dernekler toplumda var olan negatif içerikli ?Moskof? imgesi ve bir iç düşman olarak algılanan ?komünizme? ve ?komünistlere? karşı devletin dışında ama ona paralel bir biçimde engelleyici söylemler üretmişlerdir. Komünizmle mücadele sürecinde etkin olan dernek ve bu sürece dâhil olan kişiler, bu söylemleri üretirken milletin, dinin, devletin ve geleneksel kültürel değerlerin sahibi olunduğu ve bunları korumakla kendi geleceklerine sahip çıkacaklarını düşünmüşlerdir. Komünizmle Mücadele Derneklerinin kuruluşunda yer alanlar başta olmak üzere, komünizmle mücadele söyleminin üretilmesine ve siyasal yaşamın anti-komünizm yönünde politize edilmesine katkısı olan birçok önemli kişi de bu derneklerin ürettiği söyleme katkı yapmışlardır. Bu katkılar dikkate alındığında Komünizmle Mücadele Dernekleri ve sahip oldukları anti-komünist söylem, Türk sağı'nın 1930'lardan itibaren belirginleşen oluşumuna, 1950'li yıllardan itibaren açık bir biçimde katkı yapmış başka adı ve söylemi olan derneklerin ve söylemlerin en önemlilerinden biri olmuştur. Bu derneklerin üretmiş olduğu söylemin gücünden siyasal güç devşiren MHP ve AP gibi kimi partiler de olmuştur. Bu derneklerin ürettiği anti-komünist söylem Tek Parti döneminde devlete küsmüş/darılmış kimi milliyetçi, dindar ve muhafazakâr çevrelerin devletle barışmasını sağlamak ve onların siyasal alanda bir aktör olarak yer almaları gibi bir fonksiyonu da yerine getirmiştir. ; Anti-communist institutions and the rhetoric voiced by these institutions were inspired by the conception of ?external enemy? created by the ?Moskow? image that was seen in the Turkish society since the last stages of Ottoman Empire and began to be apparent after 1940s when United States and Socialist Block?s policies were reflected to interior policy. At the same time, these institutions appeared in the society as a result of the secularist policies of the single party regime that suppressed the nationalist and religious circles and the similarity between the Republican People?s Party and Democratic Party?s alienating attitude towards leftist discourse between 1945-1960. They were founded in Zonguldak in 1950, in 1956 in İstanbul and in 1963 in İzmir respectively. These institutions produced a negative discourse against the ?Moscow? image and ?communism? and ?communists? that were accepted as an internal enemy in the society. The discourse produced by those institutions was out of the government but in parallel with it. In the process of the struggle against communism, active institutions and people producing this discourse thought that they had the nation, religion, government and traditional cultural values and by protecting these, they would protect their future. Along with the people who participated in the founding of the institutions of anti-communism, several important people contributed to the producing of the anti-communist discourse and politicizing process of the political life towards anti-communism. When these contributions are taken into consideration, anti-communist institutions and their anti-communist discourse contributed to the formation of Turkish right beginning in 1930s and being apparent in 1950s along with the other institutions and discourses. There have been political parties like Nationalist Movement Party and Justice Party that gained political power from the power of the discourse of these institutions. This anti-communist discourse also realized a function of including the religious and conservative circles that were offended by the government in the single party regime as actors in political area.

The Professor Mykolas Romeris discussed about political systems advantages e disadvantages. He compared a multi-party system in which three or more political parties have the capacity to gain control of government separately or in coalition. And a two- party system which is a form of party system where two major political parties dominate the voting in nearly all elections. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected offices end up being held by candidates endorsed by the two major parties. The ruling party's majority may still be based on a smaller segment of the population than coalition governments due to lower turnout, and votes cast that do not lead to the desired representative. According to the professor M. Romeris the two-party system does produce stable governments, but this comes at the expense of the preferred outcome of stable democracy. M. Romeris was disposed that political corruption is the misuse by government officials of their governmental powers for illegitimate, usually secret, private gain. He was pointed that politicians forgot the main ethical, political, moral principals. Favoring relatives or personal friends became too many powerful. Professor was sure that the nations will have to try the way to identity and eliminate such kind politics and parties.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The doctoral dissertation examines party patronage in Lithuania. When analyzing the assumptions of the party patronage, the documents of the public sector organizations are analyzed, political parties and the party system that are active in Lithuania are discussed. Empirical research is based on semi-structured interviews with experts from different public policy areas. Empirical research has revealed that the party patronage practices in Lithuania have three main characteristics: the primary motivation of the application of party patronage is the control of the public sector institutions, the range of party patronage is larger than depth, which means that political parties seek to allocate persons to many institutions, but essentially - only in the most important positions, in addition, the Lithuanian public sector is characterized by significant differences in the level of party patronage between different fields.

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]