Section 2: The Mortal Enemy of Economy

The saying goes, “children speak the truth.” When someone wants to know the truth, they ask the children. Once again, both due to my respect for all the children, and in order to be able to get to the source of the truth, I need to reinterpret my childhood imagery.

When I heard that Emin, the son of our neighbor, had begun to read the book called Ilmihal, my interest in Islam and the mosque increased. In return for memorizing a few prayers, I succeeded in slipping into the ranks right behind imam Muslim. I later heard and never forgot what Muslim said about me: “If Abdullah is this quick, he will fly off.” So I had started off well. I still remember my queries and discussions with my primary school friend Aziz about what kind of place a school is, and what teachers are like while embracing the trunk of the olive tree. When they talked about the school, I would have a monster like image in my head (the modern Leviathan). I was not mistaken, because the school was the location where we were made to memorize all aspects of the nation-state (the new god). Much later, I read Hegelian philosophy and saw how the new god came down to earth as the nation- state and began its walk in the shape of Napoleon. When I began to interpret what it meant for the teachers (the new priests) to have the children memorize all this I realized that as a child I recognized the truth. As I began primary school, Muslim’s “god of the mosque” became insignificant, while the primary school theism of Mehmet –the teacher from Corum– was on the rise. Another image I recall is how the headlights of the truck driver Haydar would blind me at dawn as I was half asleep on the pergola. The fascination I felt for the truck has permeated into my memories like a semi-god. The new god had a car. Much later, when I began to understand industrialism as the strongest pillar or attribute of the new Leviathan, I once again was sure that my childhood imagery provided me with another truth.

I must say, though, that no theism has become as monstrous as industrialism. Our village was around fifty kilometers from the Syrian border. The projectors at the border would hit my eyes like the lightning from a thunderbolt, creating the third state-god mixed image of my childhood.

The Republic of Turkey is one of the early examples of a semi-colonial country turned into a nation-state by capitalist modernity. When first established, such a state bears the stamp of the Republic of France. At the beginning, democracy and state are intertwined, just as in France, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the very first Islamic Republic in Medina, and even in the early USSR. As the democratic elements are pruned in time, these republics are transformed into unitary nation-states-a capitalist power format. (I will delve into these topics more comprehensively in the relevant sections.) The early examples always need to be interpreted with great care. I would like to describe my imagery of the republic in a novel, but for now let me say this in short: As I entered the final year of Faculty of Political Sciences at Ankara University-one of the most distinguished schools of republicanism-my emotional and analytical intelligence had become paralyzed. I could no longer sense or understand anything and had been turned by the Leviathan into an utterly ignorant person, totally hollow. I was to notice this about myself only later in life.

I was able to break free from the effects of the old religion of my village many years later through what I had memorized particularly from the real-socialist school –a denomination of capitalism. I must say that I had turned into a terrible skeptic. It was as if i was suffocating as i contemplated things. Much later, when I realized that what imposed itself upon me (whether in the guise of the Republic of Turkey or that of Soviet Real Socialism) was the modern Leviathan, I slowly began to come to my senses. I was up against the god of the modern religion (besieged by the numerous images and idols) which was more horrific than the gods of all the other religions.

After I had become aware of how it emerged and gained control, I understood that this religion and its god were not for me. From then on, I understood and felt that the more I was successful in not being immersed in this religion and in not deviating from my course,the more the option of free life would develop for me. For the first time my emotional and analytical intelligence cooperated in making me come to my senses. Indeed, I am still trying to interpret what happened back then by writing these lines. For now, let’s get back to what capitalism is and is not.

Marx and Engels described their sociology, their “scientific socialism,” an a synthesis of English political economy, German philosophy, and French socialism. These three schools of thought all attempted to develop a theoretical analysis of modernity-of the controlling forces reshaping life in Europe. While the English school of political economy set out to prove that the new economy was the victorious power (sounding more like the proselytes ofa new religion), German philosophy saw the nation-state (the new form of the god-king) as the main force, and French socialism (as the alliance of civilization and democracy) theorized on behalf of the entire society that the strongest force was the society of secular-positivism(the new religion of the system).

The revolution of thought that started in sixteenth century Europe was induced by the capitalist monopoly’s tremendous, subversive influence. In our attempt to depict this revolution of thought there are some historical examples we must recall.

Our first example is the birth of the Sumerian priest-state at the fertile cradle of the temple–the Ziggurat. The conditions under which the state-like organization organized itself around the surplus product should be evaluated together with the revolution of thought that took place. The central questions would have been: How can the surplus product be tucked away? How can the fundamental legitimization tools (so that the society would believe in the new order) be developed and rearranged? The remedy that was found was the state organization and the construction of new gods-the initial example of all civilizational religions. A very radical response was generated. The state –for the very first time– was organized as the priest-king. Economy –for the first time– was organizationally intertwined with the state and brought under control as state socialism. Traditional hierarchical forces were being constructed and masked as the new gods of air, water, sky, earth, and the city. The initial enslavement of humans is symbolized in the creation epic as “the creation of humans from the excrement of gods.” The location of all these inventions in the ziggurats. The highest level of the ziggurat is the pantheon (the unity of gods, the authority of the hierarchical upper layers); the floor below this is the floor of the priest-king (the creator of the system, the first hegemons and administrator). The lowest floor is left to the slaves and artisans that produce the surplus product and value. Indeed, we ascertained the formula underlying the entire civilization system when we established that the temple was the prototype of the city, state, and class system. All instances of the system, including the European one, have carried traces of this first example, the prototype. I thus see the Sumerian example as the superb, original source of civilization-none of its descendant versions or adaptations as splendid and impressive as the original.

The second version of the Sumerian system was that of the Hurrians from Upper Mesopotamia, intermingled with the Hittite civilization. The Ionian-Greek version was the third-with the only difference that the Greeks surpassed the mythological discourse and constructed the philosophical style. The main reason behind constructing the philosophy of nature and society was the increasing difficulty in explaining the city-states through mythology. Although the legitimizing power of the mythological narrative continued its effect on the lower classes, those who had to battle with concrete administrative problems needed a more convincing narrative. City life resulted in problems which required a philosophical explanation to the kind of social life experienced there. But the Olympian pantheon that began with Zeus was still quite effective. Socrates paid for his early skepticism with his life, but his students managed to make his teachings, albeit in draft form, the main source of Greek philosophy. it would not be wrong to call Plato and Aristotle especially the fathers of philosophy. The Hebrews can be described as the tribe who made the transition from the Sumerian and Egyptian mythologies to the first monotheistic religious expression. This was the construction of a different version from a separate branch that later gave me to Judaic, Christian, and Muslim derivatives by merging with various other side branches, especially Zoroastrianism and Greek philosophy.

The new material and immaterial cultural accumulations which generated the enormous power that enabled sixteenth century Europe to surge forward rested upon the original source and historical versions of the civilization system. To deny their role and to posit Europe as the start of history is tantamount to creating a new mythology or religion, one doomed to fail from the outset. Ideological constructions such as positivism, secularism, liberalism, and even socialism, all had their own novelties but were all formed under the profound influence of the historically original source. Essentially, their concepts and contents had been developed within the preceding versions. These rest not only on the Greco-Roman philosophy, science, arts, and law, but in the absence of the Egyptian and Sumerian heritage, the European Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment cannot be explained.

There is no doubt that Europe made its own contributions towards the new version of the system. Especially the expositions of Francis Bacon. Montaigne, Machiavelli, and Copernicus,blending science, philosophy, and religion determined the nature of the new version.However, civilization did not only introduce city, state, social class, merchant, money, and market –it also introduced philosophy, religion, science, and the arts. Europe proved able to examine and take the most from the ancient history’s material and immaterial culture,constructing a synthesis. The Indian and Chinese civilizations did not succeed in this; the Middle Eastern civilization could not gather the strength required tor the final step forward. It is important to keep these historical facts to mind when pointing out that the European civilization is the third biggest version within civilizational history.

Anthony Giddens uses the concept of discontinuities when attempting to determine Europe’s contributions; thus, he tries to illustrate the originality of the European system. Undoubtedly. the European civilization did bring its own innovations, but Giddens’ discontinuities (capitalism. nation-state, and industrialism) are only partial proof of its originality. I will attempt to evaluate the sociology of Giddens to show that he too tries to salvage capitalism. But in order to do this, we first need to do an in-depth evaluation of the three fundamental topics he analyzes.

Here I will briefly return to the three main sources of Marxism. Distinguishing between the three is important for understanding the sources of European thought. However, Giddens failed to establish the similarities between them. (Could it have been to avoid exposing himself?) The common ground between English political economy, German philosophy, and French socialism (and thus also Marxism) is the ideology of the Enlightenment. What really should be analyzed is this ideology, because it is still the influential and dominant ideology in the world. Although sociology is presented as science, it does not bring any innovations because it falls within the framework of the same ideology. If I am not mistaken, the famous sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein admits this when interpreting. European thought (which includes Marxism): “It is simply not true that capitalism as an historical system has represented progress over the various previous historical systems that it destroyed or transformed. Even as I write this, I feel the tremor that accompanies the sense of blasphemy. I fear the wrath of the gods, for I have been molded in the same ideological forge as all my compeers and worshiped at the same shrines.2 He is referring to the ideology of the Enlightenment. The famous admission by Theodor Adorno (1903-1969), one of the strongest representatives of the Frankfurt School of critical theory, that “There is no right life in the wrong one.”3 Nietzsche and his successors criticized the Enlightenment ideology much more openly. Nietzsche argued that all the concepts of the Enlightenment were obtained from religion; on the other hand, Carl Schmitt disclosed the religious roots of all the concepts and hypotheses of political philosophy. The long list of rich literature and exemplary individuals shows that skepticism about the European way of thinking is deepening.

The complex and dreaded character of the civilization in Europe cannot be blamed solely on the terrible colonial and imperialist or religious and nationalist wars. The European civilization has brought economy under its control and has manipulated it. it has also brought on the reign of economy. and of economy becoming the state. These are all equally to be blamed and have reached levels incomparable to any other time in history. At this point, no one can deny many of its “discontinuities”; indeed, from certain perspectives,capitalism, industrialism, and nation-state do constitute important “discontinuities.”

However, none of these descriptions, including those of the ideology of the Enlightenment, explains the “discontinuity” of European civilization. Whether intentionally or not, all devotees ultimately propagandize their own religion-the few exceptions do not negate but affirm the rule. We should not ignore the religious and metaphysical character of the European thought system which was shaped by a complex material civilization which had its own origins; its roots in the depths of history that passed through several versions. As with any religion, its devotees too are obliged to defend and eternalize the material culture their thought system represents. It is their strategic duty to spread it to the whole world. Thus,the European thought system has conquered the mind of the entire society on the local,national, and global levels: from the initial priests to its schools and academies; from official universities to military barracks; from the factories to the shopping mulls. press, museums,and remnants of the old religions; from hospitals in prisons and graveyards the system has used its techniques of political power and military might to wrap itself around society like armor. The whole society has been sealed in an “iron cage.”4

When religions or their associated thought systems are officialized, they turn into ideology.Ideologies, on the other hand, are the principles of a program for the defense of a group of people and their interests. The European thought system, or religion, that has become official around the World is now an ideology. As the civilization, it now has to use all its power to defend, perpetuate, and strive for the sovereignty of its upper classes.

Why has the ideology of the Enlightenment become so effective? Because it is the most advanced cosmopolitan religion which appeals to the members of all the religions that preceded it. It is national. A sociality and nationality that does not worship the nation-state is unthinkable: someone without a nation-state is deemed faithless. Nation-statist ideology is the weakest religion of all and therefore not that difficult to accept when compared to the religions of the past. It is continuously nourished with scientism. Its material life style has been turned into its religious ritual. Its immaterial cultural tools, and above all its media organs, ceaselessly propagandize it. It fully controls political and economic life. It has now become global.

I know that these generalizations are painting an image of a world inextricably ensnared.But a civilization presenting itself in this way must, like the Roman Empire, be living through its final stages with absolutely no self-confidence. No matter how magnificent and strong it seems because of all that it has destroyed, the activated ecological defense of the environment and the plurality within society have long ago begun their struggle against it. Just as the turning of civilization into an empire continues, so does the turning of democracy into a confederation. And remember, as I am part of this world, my criticism is not addressed solely to the European; it is addressed to myself, to my region, to my world –to the entire conquered humanity

Notes

1. The Ilmihal is a concise manual of Islamic faith, worship, and ethics.

2. Immanuel Wallerstein, Historical Capitalism and Capitalist Civilization (London: Verso, 1995), 98.

3. Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia; in Dennis Redmond’s 2005 translation (Available at http://www.marxists.org). Another translation is “Wrong life cannot be lived rightly.”

4. In sociology, the iron cage is Max Weber’s term for the increased rationalization of social life, particularly in Western capitalist societies. The “iron cage” thus traps individuals in systems based purely on teleological efficiency, rational calculation, and control.