Insight Turkey
Insight Turkey
Challenging ideas
On Turkish politics and International affairs

Insight Turkey > Articles |

Continuity and Rupture: The “New CHP” or ‘What Has Changed in the CHP?’1

This paper discusses the CHP within the paradigm of party individualization and the “political firm.” In what ways has the CHP made a break from its past? In what ways has it maintained historical continuity? Just how new is the “New CHP?” In this paper, the subject will be studied in terms of two dimensions: election campaigns and the discourse of the CHP on the one hand, and the organization and leadership on the other. This paper starts from the hypothesis that the CHP has transformed into a catch-all cartel party. To test this hypothesis the article first provides a short overview of what the CHP has been up to for the past year and a half. The developments which the party had lived through brought to the fore the claims of a “New CHP” and its “changing ideological axis.” Moreover, the article discusses the CHP’s dilemmas as a cartel party which attempts to appeal to every voter segment and its ideological status.

Continuity and Rupture The New CHP or What Has Changed
Pictures 1 and 2: Bihlun Tamaylıgil, Savcı Sayan and Canan Arıtman break into tears while listening to Deniz Baykal give his resignation. Milliyet, May 11, 2010.
 

Institutions and organizations are affected by the changes and evolutions that take place in their environment. At their core, institutions are a mode of social relation. In the words of François Dubet, institutions are a mode of activity persisting as a relationship between multiple individuals2. In this sort of relationship, the roles of individuals are subject to change as processes evolve3. In the end, today’s widely discussed institutional/organizational crises –such as political party crises– are a consequence of changes in the roles of individuals in organizations as well as changes in the relational qualities of an institution. In this framework, the trend toward individualization is often emphasized. Personal interests are becoming increasingly crucial in defining organizational activity. In fact, organizations have come to be defined as arenas of competition between individuals. In economic terms, parallels are often drawn between the functioning of firms and political parties4. Weber defines political parties as political firms whose main goal is profit maximizing. Michel Offerlé offers an alternative definition to a political firm from Weber; for him the main goals of a political firm are “constructing” and “succeeding” but not profit maximizing. In this context, the concept of the political firm refers to the concept of political market. In this “abstract space,” competing actors broker exchanges in political assets in exchange for active or passive support.

Already have an account? Sign In.
Print Subscription
4 Print Issues
Subscribe
Digital Subscription
4 Digital Issues
Subscribe
Premium Subscription
4 Print Issues
4 Digital Issues
Subscribe

Labels »  

We use cookies in a limited and restricted manner for specific purposes. For more details, you can see "our data policy". More...