Continued from Cynicism and Naivete. And again - with gratitude to this post.

The break of innocence

This concert ticket, the theme of the sitcom that is my life for the past month, exploded in my hands. But it was all worth it. It was so beautiful. So beautiful. Beautifully written, beautifully arranged, beautifully played and beautifully sung. He actually sang Famous Blue Raincoat, and when he sang "and yes - thanks, for the trouble you took from her eyes - I thought it was there for good - so I never tried" the whole audience sang with him. It was something that rang true, something sincere, to all those people. All his poems, if you open yourself and listen carefully, are beautiful.

When did "coolness" become cool? It grew out of the humanity's disillusionment and sorrow? After centuries of disappointment we finally built up our immune system and found the power in ourselves to not care? To forget? To hurt those who are naive and innocent, who haven't reached this wisdom yet? They have to learn too, right? This is the real world.

Let me tell you something. I will continue giving people the benefit of the doubt not because I don't know better, but because I choose to. They can feel free to prove me wrong or actually live up to their promise.

If you shield yourself so much from pain and disillusionment, you will end up missing out. You have to leave a crack open. So everything good and bad can seep in.

a little happiness

When nothing matters now and you're not sure if it ever did
When life is grey or black or whatever color it is
When the sound of his voice screaming in your ears
Melts with the television the noise disappears

You're letting him back in
To break you once again
You're crawling in your skin
You're forgiving him
You hold it in

Her mascara draws his picture on her face
And all these pictures that he's framed take up his space
These awkward elevator moments of happiness
Just keep her open to the cycles of viciousness

Letting him back in
To break you once again
You're crawling in your skin
You're forgiving him
You hold it in

Letting him back in
To break you once again
You're crawling in your skin
You're forgiving him
You hold it in
Holding on

For a little happiness
Holding on
For a little happiness

(Aimee Allen)

a theory about why values matter

Yesterday I met up with some friends to discuss things that we are all interested in. One of our friends talked about different value systems, and said that the thing that ties most people to a value system (and not another) is not rational choice, but habit and emotion. He said societies should have serious debates about "morality", what is right and what is wrong. I decided to think through this idea and its implications.

First of all, why is there a need to have a public discussion about moral issues? Because value systems do not stay contained within one individual's life or one clearly-defined group. The value system of a policy maker will bear on his policy choices and affect all groups in the society.

Secondly, what is a "value system"? My definiton of a value is "the best way of doing something or solving a problem" for an individual, and a value system is a network of (ideally) mutually consistent and enforcing values. At the core of all these values is one or more assumptions. The validity of these assumptions is often not tested (or by nature cannot be tested). However, they provide answers to big fundamental questions. The system, then, gives answers to all the smaller questions based on the big answer at the core.

I will give an example from my own value system first. Let's say the question is, "should I drink wine?" My core assumption is that my actions should not harm myself or anyone, because that's bad, useless and troublesome. Then the answer is a simple "yes, but in moderation!" Let's take a devout Muslim. When faced with this question, he will go back to his core assumption: That God is the creator of universe and Hz. Muhammed is His prophet, and the best way to live life is to follow the rules prescribed by the Kur'an. Drinking wine is a sin according to the Kur'an. Moreover, if this person has never seen their family or friends drink wine, he will view a sudden change of habit as betrayal to his heritage. If he breaks one rule, would he lose his anchor, would his life lose its consistence, coherence and meaning?

Now let's see how this person's value system would affect his policy making. He sees people drinking wine in restaurants and bars, and they seem a little too happy and annoying. They might go out and drive and commit indecencies. Even if he realizes that wine drinkers do not harm him directly, he might simply take upon himself to spread the good in the society. Then our policymaker would adopt policies that limit wine drinking.

This theory can be applied to other social issues such as religious rights, abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage and women's rights. More significantly, policymakers may impose their value systems on the youth through the education curriculum and the media. Debates over the teaching of "intelligent design" versus "evolutionary theory" in the US is a good example.

But the remit of value systems is not limited to social issues, and assumptions are not always religious (although they demonstrate "religious" qualities). Economic policy is influenced by its own value systems. For example, neoliberalism was the most popular value system until the most recent crisis. Its core assumption, that market forces will allocate resources more efficiently, and regulation should be minimal, was considered almost as a law of nature by its proponents. The latest crisis demonstrated that this assumption was not tested in all circumstances. Communism was its own value system, and it didn't stand the test of time.

Another example can be national security and freedoms. Civil servants in Turkey, for example, typically belong to one value system. The core assumption of this system is that "the unity of the Turkish territory and nation should be protected against divisive ethnic and religious forces at all cost". Now, the validity and effectiveness of this assumption is open to question, but because of it, national security takes precedence over individual freedoms.

Having blind faith in the truth of a value system may be comfortable, but what if your assumptions are wrong? What if there are better options out there? What if evolution makes more sense than intelligent design (or visa versa)? Wouldn't we be closing ourselves to other possibilities, turning a blind eye on lessons learned from experience and research, limiting our potential for growth?

What matters is what you learn after you know it all.

In some areas, a society of free-thinking individuals would converge to value systems whose truth stands the test of time. In other instances, it may decide that some issues are personal, and the society should have no bearing on an individual's choice. But we should be open to listening to each other and changing our minds, however difficult and disconcerting it is. This is the only way forward.

The Kurdish issue

I grew up with news of Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) attacks in the South East and East Turkey. Soldiers, teachers, doctors (most of them sent to the South East from other parts of the country) would be killed. I wrote a while ago that as more people die for a cause, the more difficult it is to find a solution acceptable to both sides. (If it's not acceptable to both sides, it is not a solution anyway.) I have never travelled to those regions. I don't see how I can claim that they are part of my country when I'm not able to travel there out of fear.

Now, our military could keep on destroying PKK cells and kill terrorists and carry on with their air raids and even carry out another cross-border operation into northern Iraq. Our judges could start investigations against pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) deputies as much as they want. The Constitutional Court can shut down the party. Turks all over the world can start nationalist groups in the Facebook. With all their capabilities, they could not eliminate the PKK or the DTP in the past twenty-four years. You might say "it's foreign countries helping PKK and DTP!" It's not the Dutch or the Syrians fighting on behalf of PKK. They are recruiting Kurdish youth, and the local population obviously sympathizes with the PKK and DTP.

But their support is not blind. Back in 2005, Erdogan was hailed during a visit to Diyarbakir as the first Turkish prime minister to recognize the “Kurdish issue” and acknowledge the responsibility of the state in the problem. Although the reform momentum stalled considerably after the negotiations with the EU started in October 2005, the AKP took some steps to relax bans on Kurdish education and broadcasting. The party won many votes at the expense of the DTP in the general elections in July 2007, branding itself as the only party capable of reaching out to Kurdish communities.

However, support among the Kurds for the party started to wane as the government gave the military free rein in its operations into northern Iraq. Although the government unveiled a $ 18-billion investment programme in May to revive the Southeast Anatolia Project (GAP), which will involve the building of new dams, expansion of irrigation networks and loans for entrepreneurs, the local populace seems far from impressed.

Moreover, the AKP, which narrowly escaped closure by the Constitutional Court in July, has remained silent about the closure case facing the DTP. The DTP, meanwhile, has adopted a harsher rhetoric as it views its closure imminent, and tries to secure support for its successor party in its last remaining strongholds in the region, such as Diyarbakir, Batman and Tunceli in the local elections in March. The protests they organized during Erdogan's 21 October visit to Diyarbakir drew large crowds, many of them children, and many shop-owners closed their shops either in support of the cause or in fear of violence. Support for the PKK and the DTP has never been so visible since the 1990s.

The AKP seems to lack a genuine interest in improving the democratic rights of the Kurds, and merely follows a pragmatic approach: Trying to secure the support of the Kurdish communities while avoiding discontent among Turkish nationalists. By not seeking a genuine solution in good faith, it is actually playing into the hands of the PKK and DTP, who derive their power from the continuation of the conflict. By not talking to them, we are speaking their language.

Famous blue raincoat

it's four in the morning, the end of december
i'm writing you now just to see if you're better
new york is cold, but i like where i'm living
there's music on clinton street all through the evening.

i hear that you're building your little house deep in the desert
you're living for nothing now, i hope you're keeping some kind of record.

yes, and jane came by with a lock of your hair
she said that you gave it to her
that night that you planned to go clear
did you ever go clear?

ah, the last time we saw you you looked so much older
your famous blue raincoat was torn at the shoulder
you'd been to the station to meet every train
and you came home without lili marlene

and you treated my woman to a flake of your life
and when she came back she was nobody's wife.

well i see you there with the rose in your teeth
one more thin gypsy thief
well i see jane's awake --

she sends her regards.

and what can i tell you my brother, my killer
what can i possibly say?
i guess that i miss you, i guess i forgive you
i'm glad you stood in my way.

if you ever come by here,
for jane or for me
your enemy is sleeping,
and his woman is free.

yes, and thanks,
for the trouble you took from her eyes
i thought it was there for good so i never tried.

and jane came by with a lock of your hair
she said that you gave it to her
that night that you planned to go clear

sincerely, l. cohen

sometimes, the beautiful things I discover (no matter what they are about, their beauty lies in their truth) makes me wonder what there is to come. there are so many beautiful things out there for me to discover. only if I'm brave enough.

I also wonder how I lived all those years without knowing them. how poor I was.

I guess I lived just like how I'm living now.

Burn after reading

I saw Coen brothers' new movie Burn After Reading over the weekend. It was really funny, but it left a bitter aftertaste in my mouth, I felt really down on my way home. I read some reviews and saw that some critics agree with me.

Then I started wondering what makes us like a movie. And I decided it should either make us forget about the ordinary-ness of our lives. Or it should go ahead and bring us face to face with our misery, but at least give some hope for some meaning. The miserable character transforms and ends up a hero, or finds love, something like that. I, personally, don't want to see miserable people ending up miserable.


***
Bir de bu haftasonu çok uzun zamandır görmediğim bir arkadaşımı gördüm. Yakında gidiyormuş, burdan gitmek istiyormuş. Onu görmek, kısacık zamanda neden, nasıl kendini o kadar sevdirdiğini hatırlamamı sağladı. Bütün kalbimle dilerim ki gitmesin.

Global financial crisis and Turkey

When there is a global financial crisis going on, our small daily duties may seem even pettier than usual. This is what happened to me – digging up data and news reports about Turkey as usual, I had an urge to drop what I’m doing and understand what is really going on in the global economy.

Unfortunately (or luckily) not everyone’s job involves developing a good understanding of the dynamics of the global economy. Even academics or finance professionals do not have to consider the currents of the global economy or how their area of research or daily tasks fit into the macro picture. Even central bankers focus on their own country, but not on global imbalances. The trade-off seems to be between joining the machine by specialising in a small, manageable section (this is what the overwhelming majority of us do) or becoming more of a popular intellectual, who is watching the great currents without going into specific knowledge of technicalities.

More extensive media coverage and analysis about financial markets, especially during this crisis, makes academics and technocrats household names, and leaves people wondering how the crisis could affect their lives directly. People grow more curious about how this crisis came about, and what its resolution will take. The public seems to have renewed interest in the regulation of the economy, a phenomenon that is reversing the neoliberal populism trend. We can say that politics is re-coupling with economics. I will use this post to think through the situation myself, largely drawing upon a special report that appeared in the Economist recently.

It might be surprising to some, including myself, to see how defaults on subprime mortgages, spurred by the bust of a bubble in the housing market, could spread to the entire financial system. The answer lies in the structure of financial markets. Using the opportunities provided by technology, banks created complicated products to pass on loans to other investors, rather than keeping them on their books (securitisation). This way, a very small amount of capital can be lent and re-lent multiple times. The extensive trading of these products, such as the infamous credit-default swaps, spread the risk across the financial system. In the end, nobody knew whether their counterparty held these toxic products or how each product was valued, and this led to widespread panic. Banks stopped lending to each other, and the leveraging trend of the past few years was reversed: Now everybody wanted to de-leverage, not only refraining from extending new credit, but also trying to get their cash back as soon as possible. That’s what spurred governments to bail-out their troubled financial institutions with public money, as these institutions were not able to obtain funding from markets. The argument for government intervention goes that these institutions were systematically too important (too inter-linked to every other institution in the system) to fail.

With hindsight, critics claim that financial engineering and innovation got out of hand, leading banks to take on risks they could not manage, with dire consequences for the whole system. The ideological underpinning for a free market economy is de-regulation, which supposes that market forces will allocate resources most efficiently if left on their own. However, economic theory calls for regulation when part of the costs of an economic activity are not internalized by the company or country undertaking it. As the crisis has demonstrated, more effective regulation and oversight are needed in financial markets. What shape the new regulations will take, and which new national and international institutions will be responsible for implementing them, is unclear at the moment. To fight with over-leveraging, the Economist calls for an overhaul of regulatory and oversight institutions (especially in the US), increasing the banks’ capital ratios, and changing tax codes that favour debt over equity for companies and households.

But bankers and regulators are not the only ones to blame. The monetary policy of central banks, most notably the Federal Reserve, exacerbated the bubbles in the economy. Low short-term rates, for example, inflated the housing bubble by making adjustable-rate mortgages cheaper. Moreover, high savings of emerging markets like China and Russia, as well as the Gulf states (due to export revenues, thanks to currency management in the Chinese case and the surge of oil prices in Russia and the Gulf) flooded into the US and Europe, driving long-term interest rates down. Meanwhile, emerging markets, which pegged their currencies to the dollar, suffered from the Fed’s loose monetary policy, leading to overheating in their economies. Even countries with a floating exchange rate, such as Turkey, enjoyed significant capital inflows.

How will the crisis affect an emerging market like Turkey? Very shortly, the reversal of capital inflows will expose the structural weaknesses of our economy. We enjoyed tail winds until 2007, but now we are faced with strong head winds. The difficulty, however, does not stem from the banking sector. Our banking sector is relatively shielded thanks to regulatory reforms introduced following the 2000/2001 banking crisis, which established the independent Banking Regulatory and Supervision Agency (BDDK) and brought more stringent capital requirements and internal auditing standards for banks. However, foreigners hold a large share of the Turkish banking sector (around 40%), a channel through which the crisis could spread into Turkey.

The main problem for us is the large external financing needs emanating from the current account deficit and large external debt. Rollover of foreign debt will be more costly, and finding FDI and portfolio investments will be more difficult from now on. The Istanbul stock market (IMKB) was down by 10% last week, and 21 % last month alone. The lira is also depreciating rapidly against the dollar and the euro, and this coupled with global credit crunch leaves the corporate sector, which holds a lot of FX-denominated debt, and local banks, vulnerable.

The slowdown in the world economy will influence the size of our trade deficit. Our exports to the European Union, our main trading partner, have already slowed down considerably. This effect, however, will be offset by several factors. Domestic demand for consumption and industrial inputs will decline. Significantly, our imports will also cost less, thanks to the diminishing price of oil and other commodities. (By the way, the Economist thinks earlier surge in oil prices was more due to rising demand and government subsidies than speculation on commodity futures. Food prices rose due to biofuel production and export bans.)

The crisis will force everyone to take a good look at themselves, reflect on what went wrong and clean up their act. For Turkey, this will mean addressing the structural problems in the economy. If it leads to meaningful reforms geared towards reducing the administrative and tax burden on the private sector, increasing the domestic saving and investment ratios, and improving the efficiency and value-added in the economy, then we can really look back and remember the crisis as an opportunity. This would also mean sustainable growth and less unemployment, which lingered around 10% even as our economy was growing by 9.4%, 8.4% and 6.9% in 2004, 2005 and 2006 respectively.

The same goes for every country in the world. A crisis situation presents the opportunity to build a system that is more consistent and coherent, and hence more stable. We learn more about human nature and economics as time goes by, we are not nearly there yet. We have to do our best and go forward.

A new equilibrium

Have you ever wondered how your life would look like if a camera followed you around? All day? Showed all your facial expressions? (Even those you make looking at yourself in the bathroom mirror?) What you said and what you didn't? And you would have to watch it at the end of the day? I would like to add the absence of such an arrangement to the things that save us.

That said, without the social interaction I've been addicted to, I feel like a fish out of water. Unspoken words fill my mouth like fresh air. I can see that most of my so-called friends were in my life out of circumstance, and I just don't have the energy to keep them there (or compete with other priorities in their lives).

But, as all changes take some time to adjust to, I will adjust to this new lifestyle, too. Change my expectations, find a new equilibrium...

Random thoughts

What is a blog for, anyway? To be able to write stuff without thinking about it that much! I will use this opportunity, to end this wonderful week in a high note, to write in my blog as I please.
And talk about myself.

On the tube from Charing Cross to my place, I was thinking about the events of this uneventful week. And these little random abstract thoughts began shaping up in my head (clearing all the fog that seemed to block the tiny channels in my brain.) Now - as we all know, anger (resulting from disappointment) is a sharp, clear feeling. Like a crisp blue winter day. One thing it is not - it leaves no room for confusion and mushy clouds. We get angry usually when we are FINALLY faced with reality. What is important, is to keep your cool for a few minutes, and you will see that giving an angry response (to what you just found out) is nothing but hoping that what you just found out isn't actually true. Because we are afraid of reality (namely - that we are not as important as we wished/wanted to be), we cry like a baby until they hear us - and hopefully tell us that we are actually important and ask for forgiveness.

And the second point - sometimes we don't ask questions because we are afraid of learning the truth, only to be able to continue assuming. If you are curious about the answer of a question, go ahead and ask it.

And people must have a way to sense when you need them and disappear right at that moment!

And fuck it - maybe I'm not that important, after all.

I started to sound like Oprah (except for the sentence before this), and sorry if you already knew all these things (including the sentence before this). They should teach this kind of thing in school. I promise, this is my last loserish post. You know, I have waves of these. They come and go. What comes around goes around. Etcetera.

In the middle

Have you ever felt like you have departed from somewhere, but haven't arrived at your destination? And you don't even know where your destination will be? And anything you can imagine seems either dull or unlikely?

I'm reading Orhan Pamuk's Masumiyet Müzesi and watching Gossip Girl all the time, any time I'm not working, that is. I can focus on those better than I can focus on work, that's for sure. When I'm reading the book, when it describes the weather or children playing in the backyard of a building I can feel it. My parents were here last week, and I felt somehow departed from them. I felt the obligation to be ok on my own. And I haven't seen most of my extended family in six months or more. I miss the old days. I miss going to lunapark in Akçay and buying tulumba halkası or lokma. I miss the old apartment building in Göztepe. I miss even Halilrıfatpaşa. I miss going to Bandırma. I considered going back, soon, for sure, but if I went back, I would be scared that it's the last time. I would feel like a tourist. I changed, everything changed, I grew up.

I don't know, I just feel like a letter en route, and it feels a bit lonely among all these other strange letters in a pile. I hope I'll arrive at my destination soon.

The following piece was Perihan Mağden's column in yesterday's Radikal. I loved it so much it actually brought tears to my eyes.

Zaman izafi midir?

Fizik dersinde berbattım. En arkada oturup başka şeylerle vakti ‘öldürmeye’ çalışırdım. Öyle zor geçerdi ki fizik dersinde zaman. Açıp açık açık kitabını da okuyamazsın. Yani dersi dinler havasını yaratarak, ne yapılabilirse, öyle geçirmeye çabalamak zamanı... Şimdi bile aşırı sıkıntıyla geçirdiğim zamanları ‘fizik dersi gibi’ diye tasvir ederim.

Oysa gerçekten, samimi olarak, fizikten anlayabilen bir kafam olsun isterdim. O formüller, akselerasyon mesela: Hem gerçekte olagelen şeyler, hem de onca soyutlanarak bir formül halinde -yani bir hap gibi- sana sunuluyorlar. Taş düşüyor işte, işte eğim var, taşın hızı var, hepsini simgeleyen bir işaret var. Sen de yapacaksın hesabını, ama ne önemi var? Gerçi böyle felsefi nedenlerle direnmiyordum fiziğe. İşin içinden çıkamıyordum. Gerçek anlamda kafam basmıyordu işte. Einstein’ın o muhteşem, enerji eşittir formülü. Sonra nasıl Freud sayesinde bilinçaltı ve bilinçdışı olduğunu biliyorsak, Einstein sayesinde zamanın izafi olduğunu biliyoruz.

Zamanın izafi olduğu zamanlar vardı. Kapı çalınırdı. Bir arkadaş sana gelirdi. Sonra bir 24, 36 saat kayıp giderdi. Muhtelif yerlerde yenilir, sokaklarda yürünür, videoda filmler izlenir ve kimseye hiçbir şeyin hesabı verilmezdi. Öle bir durum yoktu. Hesap vermeyi gerektiren bir durum yani. Bir arkadaşın arka odasına kapanılıp üç gün hiç çıkmadan -tabii yemek, içmek ve tuvalet dışında- Shibumi okunabilirdi, diyelim. O zamanlar, yani gençken, zaman izafiydi.

Zaman, içine girilip gönlünce yüzülen bir okyanustu. Rüya görmeye vakit vardı örneğin. Bol bol rüya görülür, onlar hatırlanır, anlatılırdı. Oysa dilediğinizce uyuma hakkı elinizden alındığında rüya da göremez, daha doğrusu gördüğünüz rüyaları hatırlayamazsınız. Zaman, bir hapishane çizelgesine dönüşür. Her saat halletmeniz gereken kalemler, bunlardan kaytarmaya cüret edecekseniz, kendi kendinize vermeniz gereken hesaplar vardır: Dolusunuzdur. Da neyle? Bir sürü hamaliye saçmalıkla. Her gün, listelerle sona erer. Her gün, atlamanız gereken bir sürü engelle donanmış bir koşudur. Siz de iyi eğitilmiş ve yarışmak dışında hiçbir şeye hakkı olmadığını iliklerine kadar hisseden bir yarış atı.

Mekanik bir at üstelik. Her türlü haz duygusundan tasarlanırken muaf tutulmuş. Bazen yangından mal kaçırır gibi, biraz zaman araklamaya kalkarsınız işten güçten. Ne acıklı bir çaba! Bunu faiziyle ödemeniz gerektiğini bilmek, o soluk soluğalık ‘araklanan’ zamanı baştan lekeler. Mükemmel ve el değmemiş bir zaman dilimi, sizin için artık mümkün değildir.

Penang’ta yine üç gün bir ‘otelin’ yatakhanesinde yalnızca aşağıdaki lokantaya inmelerinizle bölünen Dostoyevski okuduğunuz günleri hatırlarsınız. Nerdeyse bir sıla hasretiyle. Bir sürgün duygusuyla. Bir daha böyle günlerin, kapınıza umulmadık bir hediye gibi bırakılmayacağını eşekler gibi bilerek. Eşekler gibi mahzun ve derisi kalın. Gerçek ve derin, ipin ucu koyverilmiş, bedbahtlıklara bile artık zamanınız yoktur. Hiç yoktur.

Karı hissedemezsiniz. Yağmuru. Rüzgârı. Bir nevi izolasyon malzemesiyle tecrit edilmiştir ruhunuz ve bedeniniz. Doğayla ilişkiniz, hayatın doğallığıyla ilişkiniz kopmuş gitmiştir. Zavallı bir memursunuzdur. Artık herkes, bu hayatların her sabah kartını deldirmesi gereken, bitap memurlarıdır. Tüm arkadaşlarınız da sizin gibi enselenmişlerdir. Tesisat işleri, elektrik makbuzu, perdelerin yıkanması, yapılması gereken telefon konuşmaları, ödenmesi gereken borçlardan ibaretsinizdir.

Bazen arkadaşınızla karşılıklı şikâyet ve ağlaşmayla bir yarım saat geçirirsiniz. Yan yana oturup ‘Yüzbaşı Volkan’, ‘Dr. No’ okuduğunuz günlerin zavallı siluetleri olarak. Kavga bile edemezsiniz artık. Şiddetli kavgalar ve ağlamalar çoook gerilerdedir. Vızırdarsınız, cızırdarsınız, laf sokuşturursunuz. Siz artık siz değilsinizdir. Yeni bir insan da değilsinizdir. Zaruretleri yerine getirmekle mükellef bir kılıf. İçiniz boştur. Eskiden kalbin durduğu yerde kırık, imitasyon bir şeyler durur. ‘Şeyler’dir onlar. Gerçek hiçbir şey yoktur artık zira. Olamaz da.

Since the financial markets started recovering already (not by themselves, of course, only when provided by the right incentives), I decided to go back to what I wanted to write about in the first place.

My perfectly flawed country

The story between our prime minister Erdoğan and media tycoon Aydın Doğan has several veins.

Chapter 1 - Government tainted by corruption scandal
A Germany-based Turkish charity (Deniz Feneri) collects money from devout Muslim Turks in Germany, only to send it to affiliated Turkish businesses, such as Kanal 7, a pro-government TV channel. German investigators claim that Turkish authorities applied political pressure for the release of those detained in Germany, and the prime minister's office received some funds from the charity to help tsunami victims. Meanwhile, one of the guys who worked as a "courier" between Germany and Turkey is appointed as the chairman of the Radio Television Supreme Council (RTUK).

Chapter 2 - Freedom of media?
The coverage of the scandal features prominently in Doğan newspapers, which have been critical of the government for a while. In a furious (and public) address at a party meeting, Erdoğan claims that Doğan is seeking revenge because the government didn't agree to the favours he requested for his other businesses. These include the changing of a development license for the land where the Hilton Hotel stands in Istanbul, and an overland broadcasting license for CNN Turk from RTUK. More allegations appear on pro-government newspapers about allegedly illegal practices of Doğan Group. Doğan Group shares fall in the stock market.

Chapter 3 - Political risk: Independence and impartiality of regulatory agencies
Doğan responds that he has not requested anything illegal, he is just seeking his legal rights as a citizen and business man (which is a fair point, I must say.) He goes on to claim that the Energy Markets Regulatory Agency (EPDK) has been denying his oil distribution business Petrol Ofisi a license for the construction of an oil refinery in Ceyhan. He says that Erdoğan told him Çalık Holding would remain the sole license-holder in the port city. Çalık is also building the oil pipeline from Ünye to Ceyhan in a consortium with Italian Eni.

EPDK claims the site proposed by Petrol Ofisi for the refinery belongs to another company, which wants to build a power utility on the same site.

Chapter 4 - Freedom of media?
Çalık Holding, run by Erdoğan's son-in-law, was the sole bidder for our second largest media group, Sabah-ATV. State banks provided financing for the acquisition, and a Qatari investment fund chipped in by buying a 25% stake (the largest interest a foreign entity can hold in a Turkish media company). There were rumors that this limitation (if nothing else!) deterred other bidders, including foreign private equity groups and media companies, from bidding for Sabah-ATV. The government is now planning to lift this rule to comply with EU legislation. Then Çalık could sell Sabah-ATV to one of the foreign suitors for a decent profit.

***
I admire the intricacy of the story, and I think we can recognize several themes here. First of all, the story casts doubt over the independence and impartiality of regulatory agencies, municipalities and state banks. These institutions are clearly open to political influence. The destiny of a business is determined by its relationship to power circles, not its economic efficiency or integrity.

Once we identify this structural flaw as the root problem, it is easy to see why media groups might want to leverage their influence over public opinion to receive favours from the government, or how the government might be able to use these licenses as a stick to punish a media group for its unfavourable coverage. People do things when they are able to.

This is a high price to pay. Journalists play a very important role in the healthy functioning of a democracy. Their job is to raise awareness by providing correct, comprehensive and balanced information and analysis. People can make sound choices and hold decision makers accountable only when they have sufficient information. The independence and freedom of media groups is therefore very important, and media is not just an ordinary economic sector. However, in practical terms, I don't know how we could oblige media tycoons to shed their other business interests in countries where we cannot disentangle politics from business. This would be a second-best solution aimed at curing the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

Finally - a word on journalism ethics. Some of the journalists and columnists in Turkey suck. My question is, do these journalists genuinely believe in what they write, or have they lost all respect for themselves, their audience and their job - so that they don't care anymore? Are they aware that they suck?

A costly experiment

I am fascinated by what's happening to Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch and AIG. It's like the Titanic sinking. It's like a beautiful facade collapsing because its basis is rotten. It's people taking risks without understanding the fundamentals of the products they were buying into. A machine that should be working smoothly because it is all based on logic and maths - but then, maybe not, because at the end of the day, it was people calling the shots, people looking over important details. Now it is technocrats who have to make really tough choices to minimize the costs. This is like an experiment with real people and real consequances.

I will write more about it soon.

Painting book

I've been thinking about how we give people and events meaning - and professionalism. Yesterday this image came to me - the image of a painting book. I figured we turn a new page every single day. People, events, information appear before us. Then we start painting them according to their importance to us, and some of them don't even catch our eye.

Some people or events make consecutive appearances, they happen or we let them (or make them) happen, and then we can't look over them anymore, even if we did once.

What we considered important once and painted bright red, sometimes turns out inconsequential and disappears completely from our book. We don't even know what color we'd paint them if they were to make an appearance again.

Sometimes, at work, I have to judge something's importance by my colleagues' reactions to it. Sometimes they react very strongly to something I wouldn't consider important, and sometimes they don't seem to care enough about a seemingly important thing. Because they are more experienced and I assume they know better, their reactions affect my views, as well. I find myself talking passionately about small things, and become indifferent to events I would find important in another setting. Market's priorities started to become my own.

Professionalism, then, is to become devoid of emotion? Reactions are censored and over time, feelings are just not so strong anymore. This may be good when it comes to anger, envy, greed, desire or dislike, it sets minimum standards for the quality of your work and conduct.

But it may not be so good when you take that minimum standard literally and just don't feel so passionately about the subject matter of your work, your audience, or your ability to make a difference. Then you become a boring civil servant who treats everyone equally poorly, and start painting everything the same color - gray.

Fear is irrational

I looked at a blue blouse at an Indian (Pakistani? - let's say South Asian to be safe) shop on Wisconsin Avenue once. I told the shopowner I would think about it and come back. He said, "nobody comes back." I went back just to prove him wrong, restore his faith in humanity. The blouse turned out really bad, dying my underarms dark blue.

To be able to buy this reading lamp, I had to go to the Barclays ATM by Spitalfields. We negotiated the price and everything with the young guy selling the lamp, then I took off. On my way to the ATM, I wondered whether he was worried that I wouldn't go back. But then I decided he shouldn't be, because I liked the lamp enough to go back. (The energy-saving bulb he gave me doesn't work, I'd like to add with deep annoyance.)

I went all the way to Stoke Newington for this artist's work.

People go, come back. If they like you enough... Fear is irrational, unnecessary.

How to become a Bobo

I moved into a studio in Marylebone "village". I went to the Farmer's Market on Sunday, and all you could hear was a hushed hum, you could almost see the blue blood running behind serious, charismatic faces picking vegetables and fruits. My mom says the people in this area "don't have battered faces." Their every action, every expression seems measured yet smooth - just right, how it should be. I felt nervous and clumsy. All new reference points - the bar is higher now. My parents hope I'll come out of this more sophisticated.

I passed by the Ginger Pig and La Fromagarie, all anxious as I am when I go to Bebek or Nişantaşı -a little out of place. I will stop by later when I'm not by myself.

Knowing myself for this long, I don't think I have a sophisticated bone in me. I will sound fatalistic, but some people are just born with it. Their faces, hair, clothes, they are intelligent, smooth, serious. They are not flashy or overly confident or annoying. They are respectable. They carry everything they own and are with subdued entitlement, and live up to the life they are born into. I, on the other hand, am clumsy, anxious, worried and late. My face shines and I sweat. I'm not smooth, because I think too much and I worry.

After a trip to Waitrose, I decided to venture into the East End. When I lived there I hardly valued or appreciated it enough, but I missed it and fell in love with it when I moved away. First the stalls of Spitalfields, then onto Commercial Street, the Smudge Gallery with commercial graffiti, vintage shops, and finally Brick Lane. I walked into the Up Market in the old Truman Brewery, people sitting on the threshold with greasy Asian food. First food stalls, then I bought a necklace made from "recycled materials", then a silver ring, then I ran into this artist's stall. I liked his delicate work. I got his card, and moved on to get a reading lamp (more on that in the next post.)

I walked around some more with my reading lamp, stopped by and listened to a dirty but cheerful street band right around Vibe, ran into Gokhan from Athena (a Turkish ska band who performed at Bazaar Day once, back in the day), walked on this side street with expensive little Bobo shops, walked into a small art gallery and got a crispy bacon beigel (I think this was the high (low?) point of the day, depending how you look at it). I walked to the end of Brick Lane up to Bethnal Green. Then walked back to Liverpool Street from Shoreditch High Street. For my next move, I want a wooden-floored loft around there. It will be expensive despite the sketchy (not really), dirty (really), but spirited area. Just like a Bobo likes it.

I felt carefree and happy and myself. Excited about what could be lying ahead. Like I do when I walk from Galatasaray to Tunel and then to Galata.

On Monday, I considered getting Banksy's "feisty maid" for my vast empty wall, something I thought would remind me of the things I sweep under the rug. But on Tuesday, I decided to go find the artist in the Up Market. I e-mailed him and he responded promptly: He lived and worked in Stoke Newington. The Turkish area I've never been to.

I took Bus 73 from King's Cross, and passed through Islington. Islington seemed uglier and more run down then I thought, Stokey more cheerful and pretty - especially around Church Street. (High Street is more "rough" around the edges, as Pierre's London for Londoners book observes.) I found his flat/studio on a residential street, his flatmate (looked like he jumped out of Notting Hill with his white undershirt) got the door. The building was like a communal tower with rooms lined along a staircase. One room - storage for all his work, prints on canvases stretched over rectangular wooden blocks, the other an airy bedroom with the blue paintings he's working on. One piece of the three-piece print I got is cracked, apparently he dropped it off the window. Like the stats book that fell off the Healy Building once. He will replace it when I visit him in the Up Market not this Sunday - but next Sunday.

I got my prints, took the bus passing through Kingsland and Dalston and Shoreditch High and Liverpool Street. I saw what's beyond Shoreditch High for the first time.

I find it ironic how my tidy and clean flat has these prints from this artist's studio in Stoke Newington, how it has this reading lamp from the Up Market.

Does this little deliberate civilized adventure qualify me as a Bobo?

Under rug swept

Yesterday I was thinking about the things I don't like talking about, writing about, thinking about. Things I pretend do not exist, things I pretend are of no consequance (as long as nobody notices them). Things that make me feel uncomfortable or guilty or awkward or worthless. Things that would make the blood and meat of any good piece of writing - any good depiction of reality - I avoid. Money, sex, injustice, sickness, senselessness, envy, greed, fear, unfulfilled dreams, failure, deterioration, death. Justification and entitlement.

Then in the Smudge Gallery at Spitalfields, I ran into a reproduction of graffiti artist Banksy's "Sweeping it Under the Carpet."

Then I realized, not talking about something doesn't make it go away, disappear. Things you don't talk about make what you talk about less real, what you write about less deep. What is hidden robs what is displayed of part of its truth. Sterile and shallow. In the end, nobody gives you a prize for being that spotless.

People discount blogging as "public confession." There are things in our lives, however, that we can't even confess to ourselves. We just overlook them completely, we don't talk about them even in our heads. Self-censorship prevents one from capturing and depicting reality, one is then left with abstraction -bare bones- and other people's stories.

However disconcerting it is, facing reality with all its details and facets, inquiring beyond what I think I already know is the only way to something real.

A room of my own

I'm learning recently (from my parents) that the most practical thing might not be the best thing, the right thing to do. (In fact, the best things are seldom practical.) Living on my own might be the best thing to do for me now, although it is a bit scary and a more practical solution could be found. But maybe that would just make me put off what I should be doing. Spare time, as scary as it is, might give birth to something valuable.

I'm sitting in my temporary flat next to the railways. Trains pass by in all directions, making electric blue arcs, shaking the building from its foundations. Railways stand on archs, archs made of dirty gray tiles. These tiles cover the buildings, black frames hold windows. This place is like a fishermen's town. I am close to water. And I hope to be anchored soon.

Or maybe I am already anchored. As long as I write.

People change?

The purpose of this post is not to make a judgement on whether Turkey's Constitutional Court should have shut down Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) on July 30. I still don't have an opinion on that. I would just hope Turkish people could produce a political movement which does not derive its power from religion (or the lack of, for that matter), but simply its competence in policy making and commitment to pluralism. And if I don't like any of the two sides, I don't have to take sides. Taking sides when both sides are wrong does injustice to the truth, to something better. I don't want to take sides in this struggle. I want out, I want a better, third option.

The purpose of this article is simply to understand why the staunch secularist judges let the AKP survive this. A favorable decision for the AKP was not expected given the judges' track record and the balance of power within the court.

A constructivist would claim that the judges changed their minds about the pay-offs associated with each option. So the calls for a "compromise solution" worked. The judges either perceived the potential costs of shutting down the AKP as higher than they did before, or the costs of letting it off the hook lower. In other words, the judges were either afraid of the consequences of banning a ruling party, i.e. political instability and associated economic costs. Or they realized that AKP is not as dangerous to the secular system as its predecessors, Welfare Party and Virtue Party.

A rationalist, on the other hand, would not expect this outcome, unless something deterred the judges from banning the party by altering their pay-offs. A rationalist would argue that our judges, as far as we know them, would have viewed AKP's long-term threat to the secular state as outweighing any short-term turbulance their verdict could create. Besides, their priority would have been to protect the Turkish constitution, (rather than suggesting that political parties would do well amending it!) Secondly, our judges would have perceived AKP as a credible threat, since it holds the power unprecedented by its predecessors. In short, a rationalist would dismiss the constructivist argument as wishful thinking.

Unless something changed the equation. Something that dawned on the analysts of international banks days before the actual ruling was out.

Whatever the reason of the judges' decision was, this decision signals a shift in conventional sense and expectations. Now we need to make our predictions based on a new formula, since what we took as given turned out to be variable. Maybe this is an all-out power struggle, and we cannot count on precedents anymore.

License to live

I need one. To understand the real consequances of the things I do, how everything I do and say will have consequences for people, how people won't bare with me like my family. Because they don't have to, if they see no point. And maybe I'm the one who's losing out because of that.

People shouldn't have to suffer for taking my word, they shouldn't suffer for counting on me.

I need to grow up.

Standards

sometimes it becomes so hard to live by the standards we set for ourselves. to live up to, to live by that moral code. to be that consistent all the time, to fit in that straitjacket we ourselves have created. trying to be perfect, looking for perfection in others. and staying lonely.

because they are not perfect. and we are not perfect. so we can't even stand our own company. we can't even stand behind ourselves.

don't try to fit me in your straitjacket. and I won't try to fit you in mine. and don't try to fit yourself in your straitjacket.

because it clearly doesn't fit.

we need larger space, where more is acceptable.

Procrastination

I was sitting in a tube station the other day, and looking around me, I got the feeling that everybody was putting off something. They were procrastinating, maybe knowing what they should be doing, but not doing it. Everything they were doing, was not to think about, to forget about what they should be doing.

London seemed like a huge entertainment park (not even that entertaining), but moving so fast, so that nobody has a chance to stop and think what it is they are really doing, and what they should be doing. Just trying to catch up with everything else happening around them. Barely catching up, keeping themselves occupied. An occupation in itself.

"Some people feel like they don't deserve love. They walk away quietly into empty spaces, trying to close the gaps in the past." Into the Wild, 2007

Being an only child

After years of having all the love and pampering all to yourself, one day, quite suddenly, you wake up and realise that you have some responsibilities that all those years were supposed to prepare you for. Although nobody told you, you were fed and loved and looked after for this moment. It's like taking a huge loan without knowing it was a loan, and then having to pay it back.

You have to keep your act together. You have to be strong. You have to be happy, because you have no reason not to be. Which in itself, I'm telling you, is a big responsibility. Having to be happy, having to end up happy.

I know how spoilt I sound, I'm sorry. I'm just a little overwhelmed with noone to help.

In my quest to build my self-standing, sustainable life. And be happy.

Somebody else's problem

My boss, apparently, had a library at the back of the office. I caught a glimpse of the books before, it was all cute and respectable, but today I got to carry them. Books, many of them, and folders - folders fulfilling their duty to their utmost limit. (I think the work of his last eighteen years or so. So years have weight.) Since my boss is on vacation, the lady who is responsible for our office expansion designated me as his next-of-kin. And the books, apparently, had to be carried now as the space downstairs would better be used now as they were paying for it now. (Although the workstations that will take the place of my boss's library won't arrive until August.)

And as I made probably 20 trips up and down the staircase (which is literally in the middle of the office) with my arms full of books and folders, my colleagues (most of them men) just carried on with their work. They were wearing their "somebody else's problem" shield. The only people who were sympathetic were the movers.

This happens on the train. People don't move their shit from the empty seats unless and until you ask them.

Now, the stupid thing about me is that I will move my shit away when I see someone walking up and down the aisle. I will propose to help if I see a coworker carrying stuff. Maybe I wear my somebody else's problem shield sometimes, too, in which case I wouldn't even realise that I'm doing so, but most of the time I see the problem and take it upon myself. And I don't ask people to do stuff for me unless I really have to. I just don't.

Then I get angry.

Out of nowhere

I finally saw Sex and the City. It was fun, very shallow, with a few slightly "deeper" moments. At times I felt like I was watching a TV movie, a soap opera. Mr. Big's plastic face, his very childish freak-out when Miranda tells him he and Carrie are crazy to get married, Samantha's stalking of the man-next-door, prompting her to leave her first 'love,' Carrie deciding to make her wedding bigger when she decides to wear a bigger dress, the assistant girl going crazy when Carrie gives her a real Louis Vuitton... It's OK when it's on TV, it's not OK on the movie screen. All of it seemed like a lot of hot air, a colorful inflated balloon. The only character I could relate to was Charlotte, who was afraid of losing the blessings she had when her friends, who were all good people, were unhappy.

Then my friend pointed out something, which I think explained all this shallowness. None of these people in the movie had families. We saw no declining parents, no less glamourous siblings, cousins, aunts or uncles. Even in the TV series, the only parent we saw was Steve's mother. (Steve, by the way, is the only normal, real person in the whole show.) These people seem like they have nothing to worry about but their relationships! Nothing holds them back, makes them question their way of life, lose their balance. They have a light and two-dimensional existence. There is no past, only now, only future. Only going forward. Without thinking about, feeling for much else but themselves. This makes me a little motion-sick.

Irreconcilable differences..?

As I'm completely uninspired to do anything else, I might as well write a few words...

I'm reading Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie, partly because of the Indian people I know... There's an air of humility and depth around (most) Indian people, even the most intelligent (maybe because they are so intelligent), something I find endearing and easy to relate to.

But the book itself is not our topic now, I'm sure I'll write about it later. An Indian friend of mine opened a random page the other day, and started picking out random names and explaining them: "Filmfare is the equivalent of People magazine, Polly Umrigar is a very attractive actress and so and so many people live in Kerala of which so and so many live under $2 a day..."

My other friend, who has read the book himself, said that we foreigners can make out things as we read along. I wasn't that optimistic, remembering the times I wondered how a foreigner could appreciate an Orhan Pamuk book fully.

At least we don't know what we are missing.

The next day, we went to a karaoke place with my Indian friend and his friends. Karaoke (an experience like no other - hearing your own horrible trembling singing voice, it's like seeing yourself naked from outside) deserves its own post, which will come soon. At one point they started talking about social networking events that are exclusive to South Asians. I asked whether they would date non-Indians. One of them said issues arise when they do. The other one questioned the rationale behind that, pointing out that Sikh men can be annoying, and everyone else can be quite nice.

There are some truths that are common to everyone. That's what makes a good book a good book - universally. That's what will make me like Midnight's Children, and an Indian like Orhan Pamuk. Because deep down, we are similar.

But we are also different, and the importance of this difference is hard to rationalise. That feeling of recognition when you hear music, when you see a gesture, when you go to a place, the landscape, when someone talks about something you both know, even a TV show, a celebrity, a politician. An inside joke. Those names. Specifics.

These differences enrich our lives, and we try to hang on to them. Smells, sounds, tastes, the sunlight and the colors, there is only one home. It's irrational. Like love. Belonging can only be justified by differences.

But then, I have lived in a few places, and I miss them, too. With time and knowledge one can make a new home...

Would we be missing anything?

The real deal on Turkish economy


At times like these, it seems redicilous to talk about economics. The latest detentions under the Ergenekon investigation are perceived as the government's response to the closure case brought against it in the Constitutional Court. The investigation has completely lost the credibility it once had in the eyes of the public, and the detainees are viewed as victims, not suspects. How can anyone feel safe and secure in a country when one cannot trust the police, the justice system? These detentions are just the tip of the iceberg. People who are anonymous to all but their loved ones are detained all the time, we just don't know about them. Our government has demonstrated that they are no different from all those who held power in the past. God help the powerless, the weak in this country.


The feeling of justice, safety and security is the fundamental condition of a thriving economy. People find ways to survive in any country, but they can go beyond survival only when they feel safe, only when they know that their lives and efforts are not left to the whims of those who hold power. Let alone attracting investment and technology from abroad, the best and the brightest people in our country will leave at the first chance they get, because they rightly feel that they are not getting what they work for, what they deserve.

Our economy has been performing well from 2002 to 2006 simply because macroeconomic conditions improved. Better fiscal discipline allowed inflation figures and interest rates to drop to more acceptable levels, banks were better regulated. Favourable global economic conditions helped us attract FDI and borrow cheaply, enabling us to finance the growing current account deficit. Now that the actual performance of the economy has caught up with its potential, growth rates have been slowing down. Now the question is how to increase the potential of the economy and achieve real growth, which is desperately needed to create jobs for millions of unemployed. And we have to achieve that in a more difficult global environment, when portfolio investments will be more easily reversed and foreign borrowing will be more expensive.

The real issue is the real economy. It is about how to increase savings and investment. People will save and invest only when they feel they are not striving in vain. They will build something only when they know that it has a potential to grow, that it stands on solid ground. Potential investors will consider the quality and credibility of institutions and laws, the quality of the workforce. If potential risks outweigh potential returns, undesirable decisions will be made all the time. Money will flow to high-return financial instruments and bank accounts instead of the real economy. Banks will lend to the government to get high interest instead of lending to entrepreneurs. As the current account deficit grows, macroeconomic policy will fall hostage to the whims of foreign investors and lenders instead of responding to the needs of the real economy.

Unfortunately, more sound macroeconomic management, supported by foreigners' strong appetite for our assets, was not enough to achieve sustainable growth. Economics is not enough to achieve a strong economy. Cheatsheets and equations will not give us the solution. What we need is decency and competence.

Balance of Payments cheat sheet

It's been a long time since my last post about the Turkish economy, so an update is long overdue.

First of all, a cheat sheet to guide me through a qualitative analysis. The equations below are taken from the Balance of Payments Manual published by the IMF. Most of it is quite intuitive, but I like to keep the formulas in sight. Please refer to page 21 of the report.

C = private consumption expenditure

G = government consumption expenditure
I = gross domestic investment

S = gross saving

X = exports of goods and services

M = imports of goods and services

NY = net income from abroad

GDP = gross domestic product

GNDY = gross national disposable income

CAB = current account balance in the balance of payments

NCT = net current transfers

NKT = net capital transfers

NPNNA = net purchasses of nonproduced, nonfinancial assets

NFI = net foreign investment or net lending/net borrowing vis-á-vis the rest of the world

GDP = C + G + I + X - M

CAB = X - M + NY + NCT

GNDY = C + G + I + CAB

GNDY - C - G = S

S = I + CAB

S - I = CAB

S - I + NKT - NPNNA = CAB + NKT - NPNAA = NFI

And the rest of our cheat sheet comes from Wikipedia (I know this is lazy but I'm still officially on vacation and here it's 35 Celsius.)

Current Account = Balance of trade + Net factor income from abroad + Net unilateral transfers from abroad

Financial Account = Increase in foreign ownership of domestic assets - Increase in domestic ownership of foreign assets

= Foreign direct investment + Portfolio investment (equity and debt) + Other investment

Capital Account is the transfer of nonproduced, nonfinancial goods (capital goods.)

Balance of payments identity

Current Account = Capital Account + Financial Account + Net errors and emissions

X - M = Capital outflows - Capital inflows

And the following equations come from a Deloitte report on Turkish economy:

Financing Needs = Current account deficit + Debt servicing (public and private debt)

Resources for Financing Needs = FDI + Portfolio Investments (Equity) + Debt (private and public loans) + Banks' assets in hard currency + Net errors and emissions + Reserves

Özgürlük

Önce lütfen şu yazıyı okuyun. Okuduğumda özgürlüğün ne demek olduğu, kadınların ne kadar özgür olduğu konusunda düşünmemi sağladı.

Özgürlük kavramı, yazıda da çok güzel anlatıldığı gibi, seçimlerin nasıl yapıldığını, yapılan seçimin doğru olup olmadığını sorgulama gerekliliğini ortadan kaldıran, düşünce tembelliğine yol açan bir paravan haline geldi. Herkes özgür, herkes istediğini yapar, saygı duymak lazım! Demokratik yaşam budur, karşılıklı hoşgörü budur.

Ancak kadınlar niye bu seçimleri yapıyorlar? Çünkü çevrelerinde onlara "başarı modeli" olarak sunulan, "olması gereken" diye gördükleri referans noktaları var, onlar da rekabet içine giriyorlar. Bu muhafazakar kesim için iyi bir koca bulmak, iyi bir ev hanımı olmak olabilir. Bu liberal, şehirli kesim için kariyerinde başarılı olmak, bir yandan da heyecanlı bir özel hayata sahip olmaktır. Gerçekten istediklerinin, kendileri için en anlamlı seçeneğin ne olduğunu düşünmeden, içinde bulundukları gruba ayak uydurmaya, herkes kadar iyi olmaya çalışıyorlar. Üstelik "olması gereken" gibi olmadıklarında, parkurun dışına çıktıklarında en büyük eleştirmenleri kendi hemcinsleri oluyor.

Peki kadınların yaptıkları seçimler her zaman doğru mu, iyi mi? Türban takmak iyi bir şey mi? Ya da öbür uçta, porno filminde oynamak, hadi onu da bırakın plajlarda göbek atmak iyi bir şey mi? Bunlar kadınları gerçekten mutlu ediyor mu? Aslında iyi kızlar da, kötü kızlar da erkeklerin taleplerini karşılıyor. Ama içinde bulundukları parkurdan çıkmak gibi bir seçenekleri olduğunu düşünemiyorlar, düşünseler bile buna cesaret edemiyorlar, çünkü o zaman o çok ihtiyaçları olan onaylanma, kabul edilme duygusundan vazgeçmeleri gerekecek. Ama ne de olsa özgürler, kendi seçimlerini yapıyorlar!

Ancak şu da var: Gerçekten özgür olmaya her kadın kendisi karar verebilir, cesaret edebilir... Tabii ki kadınların önündeki fırsatların, seçeneklerin artırılmasına çalışılabilir, ama yine kadınlara kalıyor bunları değerlendirip değerlendirmemek...

Light... or heavy?

My friend's mom brought the NY Times Magazine from the US with her, and in the letters section, I saw some letters to this article from the previous week. The letters were not very sympathetic, but I was when I read about her addiction to blogging, her urge to put down her discoveries, keep a "record of existence".

Then I read this post from John Mayer's blog. I liked his decision to stop acting careless - and in fact - care more.

Then I went to the Street & Studio exhibition at Tate Modern. I saw countless faces that are similar to mine, countless lives. All requiring similar things to be happy. I was also faced with faces similar to those I turn a blind eye to each and every day, because the guilt would be too much to live by.

Then I went to a Refugee Week event on the waterfront. The food and the music was amazing. Especially kanun in the Uzbek tent. The Palestinian musician made us sing "ah," "ah" for longing.


I don't know what to make of all this. We are trying to make sense of a very diverse, colorful, complicated, very unjust world with our limited understanding, and it's hard, even for us privileged, spoilt blogger kids. Maybe because we can afford to ponder.

"Got an earful from the aunt. But it was Quoyle who smoothed things out, explained in a reasonable voice, coaxed the principal and Bunny into mutual apologies and promises. Easy enough for the principal who knew that Mrs. Lumbull was moving to Grand Falls to open a Christian bookstore. Hard for Bunny who still measured events on a child's scale of fair and unfair." The Shipping News, pg. 317

Gray

When we were in Edinburgh, we watched a college movie on the hotel TV, funny enough. There was a big sister and her freshman brother who tried to go into the most popular frat. She was dating this really popular guy, and when he cheated on her, she cheated on him and stayed together with him. When her amazed brother asked why she acted like that, she said: "Black and white - that was in high school. Now we are in the gray zone in between. I can't give up what I've worked so hard for!"

As I'm faced with real life situations, I observe people acting in unprincipled, inconsistent ways that often don't make sense to me. But then I realize, they act like that because they see the big picture, they see what's beyond that situation, rightly so since that situation is not isolated. Sometimes acting "right" in every instance does not yield the right result. People give up something small, some small piece of principle, a sense of what's "right", what's just, what's consistent, to save, to achieve something bigger. They apologize for something they shouldn't apologize for to save someone's face. They don't apologize for what they should apologize for to avoid taking responsibility. We all become diplomats, we all mind balances and act strategically.

This is something new to me. I think it'll help me understand people and the world, and navigate through, though, so that I don't get so stupidly surprised every time someone deviates from best practice!

Input and output legitimacy: Sometimes we have to do the more counter-intuitive, less than ideal thing to achieve the desired outcome.

It's important to set the goals and priorities right, though. You don't want to give up something valuable for something petty. And I still think some things (should) have more value than others. That is (should be) black and white.


...
By the way, it's been a year since I did those LSE exams! I still remember the barbecue on that grassy courtyard with keys, and how the sun came out...

yolun başı

bir arkadaşım var, sürekli kavga ediyoruz. insana ilk bakışta ufak gelecek ama benim daha büyük bir düşüncesizlik, bencillik halinin göstergesi saydığım şeyler yüzünden. ama onunla konuşmalarımız genelde benim kafası karışmış ya da aydınlanmış bir halde bir şeyler yazmamla sonuçlanıyor. neyse bu arkadaşla gene aramız limoniydi, mutfakta karşılaştık, ben nafile kahve arıyorum, elim ayağım titriyor. biriyle konuşmak, ondan ufacık bir ilgi görmek böyle zamanlarda bardağı taşırır ya, ben de oturdum mutfak masasına ağlamaya başladım. kahve yaptı, sonra biraz konuştuk, benim şimdiye dek korunaklı, güvenli, her şeyin kesin olduğu bir yaşamım varmış, oysa şimdi hiç bir şey kesin değilmiş, o yüzden zorlanıyormuşum. tabii konuşmayı kavgalarımıza yontmayı da ihmal etmedi: benim kötü sayıp kafaya taktığım şeyleri o önemsiz görüyormuş, hayatın ne kadar zor olduğunu benden çok daha önce anlamışmış. hayatta önemli olan bir şeyleri sevgiyle yapabilmekmiş, "giving and taking acts of love..."

pek tutarlı, güvenilir değildir bu kız, ama daha önce söylediği bazı şeyler doğru çıktı, o yüzden artık öyle hemen savunmaya geçmiyorum bana böyle şeyler söylediğinde, ya da "gene boş konuşuyor" demiyorum. bunlar ilk duyulduğunda boş, ama insanın yaşadıkça içini doldurabileceği sözler. insanın ancak kendisinin içini doldurabileceği sözler.

diyeceğim o ki, bazı şeyler o kadar önemli, onun yanında bazı şeyler o kadar önemsiz ki... önemsiz şeyler yüzünden önemli olanlardan vazgeçmeyecek kadar büyüdüm artık. aslında birinin ne kadar değerli olduğunu hoşgörülen kusurlarından çıkarmak da mümkün. böyleleri beni bırakmadıkça, benim de onları bırakmaya niyetim yok.

Train

This morning I dreamt that I was on the wrong train, it wouldn't take me where I wanted to go. (In the dream I knew where I wanted to go :) What a pain, taking another train and going all the way again.

Bubble


there are -in fact- three things that save us: 1. we don't know what people say behind our back. 2. we can never know exactly what we are giving up, missing out on by choosing one thing over another 3. we get to hang out with people who are similar to us. who have similar interests, who care about similar things, who have similar abilities. usually we don't have to deal with those who are far smarter or stupider than us, or much cooler than us, or don't care about what we care about. the only way to feel important, special, non-anonymous.

"Neoliberal Populism"

the depoliticization of economics

I went to two intellectually stimulating lectures in a row: Yesterday Professor Mine Eder's talk on the political economic features of the AKP government in Turkey, and today a panel discussion on why economics matters. I thought they had a common point: That economic policy-making is increasingly escaping the political realm, and neoliberal economics is being elevated to an undebatable law of nature. Technocrats, who usually have an academic background, understand this law and devise policies that are compatible with it. Maybe the Economist is its holy book.

Is it because the alternatives to neoliberalism have failed? Is it because there really is one way to manage the economy well, and economics is actually a positive science? The alternatives that have been tried so far were actually lapses in thinking, mistakes that were necessary to find the right way in the end? And now we have learned from our mistakes and discovered the truth?

While I was studying economics, I thought politics was so frustrating, each group pushed for their interests and wanted to gain undeserved rents, hurting the whole economy and leading to suboptimal outcomes. So it is better to leave economic policy making to technocrats who can see the big picture and who are aware of the constraints. Who wants to think about these things, anyway, they are too complicated. We trust economists just like we trust doctors, engineers. After all, we are quite happy to devolve our decision-making powers when we visit a doctor.

Eder pointed out that in Turkey economic considerations come after religiosity and ethnicity in voting behaviour.

Hence the "neoliberal populism", a new breed in political economy. Governments cannot be true populists anymore, because their dependence on international capital markets sets boundaries on how much they can spend. So the elected governments and the people alike submit to the "rule of economics" as prescribed and defended by the technocrats. Ruling and opposition parties alike accept it as a fact of life, and if not already there, set it as a common goal to be reached. Political debates remain confined to cultural and religious issues, lifestyle choices - because everybody more or less agrees on the general direction economic policy making should take. Nobody dares (or cares to) offer an alternative.

In the Turkish case, the AKP government wants to defeat the secular elites and return the power to the people. But when workers want to take to streets to protest the Social Security Reform, the prime minister declares all of a sudden that workers should leave policy making to those who know better than them. Isn't this a new kind of elitism? While the government argues that the powers of the military and the judiciary should be curbed in the name of democracy, a group of economic institutions mushroom largely free from political influence (of course clientelistic relationships exist between the governments and the officials in these institutions, but the goal is personal benefit rather than a re-orientation of economic policy): Central Bank, Privatisation Agency, Capital Markets Agency, Energy Markets Regulatory Agency, Competition Authority... They know better than us, so we let them decide.

Aren't the cycles of IMF intervention akin to military coups? They come in when elected governments mess up. Is output legitimacy enough to justify the lack of input legitimacy?

The economics student in me knows that this is probably the best way. But I also realize that it is not that simple: the grievences in some segments of the society should not be overlooked. In fact, Martin Wolf pointed out today that usually distributive concerns, perceptions of injustice in allocation of resources and income lie behind ethnic and religious divides, civil unrest.

So maybe economic considerations do in fact affect voting behaviour. Religious and ethnic identities are magnified and become a source of division and hatred when people are not satisfied with their standards of living, when they are not well-educated, when they think they don't receive their due share of resources and power.

a new concept

"it will be fun." the word sounded stupid in his mouth. When had he ever had "fun"? Or Wavey, chapped face already set in the lines of middle age, the encroaching dryness about her beyond stove heat and wind? What was it, anyway? Both of them the kind who stood with forced smiles watching other people dance, spin on barstools, throw bowling balls. Having fun. But Quoyle did like movies, the darkness, the outlines of strangers' hair against the screen, the smell of peanuts and shampoo, popcorn squeking in teeth. He could fly away from his chin and hulking shape into the white clothes and slender bodies on the screen. 309

"how to say it? that he loved Petal, not Wavey, that all the capacity for love in him had burned up in one fast go. The moment had come and the spark ignited, and for some it never went out. For Quoyle, who equated misery with love. All he felt with Wavey was comfort and a modest joy." 320

"Quoyle thought of Partridge. He'd call him up that night. Tell him. What? That he could gut a cod while he talked about advertising space and printing costs? That he was wondering if love came in other colors than the basic black of none and the red heat of obsession?"325

"Quoyle let himself be dragged through the company, eyes catching Wavey's eyes, catching Wavey's smile, oh, aimed only at him, and upstairs to Bunny's room. On the stairs an image came to him. Was love then like a bag of assorted sweets passed around from which one might choose more than once? Some might sting the tongue, some invoke night perfume. Some had centers as bitter as gall, some blended honey and poison, some were quickly swallowed. And among the common bull's-eyes and peppermints a few rare ones; one or two with deadly needles at the heart, another that brought calm and gentle pleasure. Were his fingers closing on that one?" 332

Shipping News, Annie Proulx

Fishermen

In Siyah Süt, Elif Şafak talks about fishermen. How they wait. How they don't look for or force or chase things. Success, people, ideas. They wait patiently until they come. There's a time for everything.

I'm not feeling or thinking anything strongly. I'm not making any exciting discoveries. That's why I'm not writing, because I don't want to write anything that doesn't come from my heart. I don't want to revisit old thoughts and discoveries and feelings, it would be like shuffling the variables in an equation only to discover you are back where you started, it would be like tying a knot that doesn't hold. I'm not forgetful enough to think they are new.

So there isn't anything new. It's just that every time I walk through Maida Vale the lights, the shapes are sharper. The silence is sharper. Maybe what I've learned in the past year and a half will do for a while. Maybe I have reached peaceful grounds with sharp lights and soft shadows.

I promise I'll write when something exciting occurs to me.

!!!Cheesy Post Alert!!!

Düzlük

Things I learned in the past month (or rather eight months).

You can't learn from anybody's experience. They tell you and you think it's obvious and you won't make the same mistakes everybody does, and you still have to make your own mistakes to get to know yourself and learn. (Thanks to all those people who told me the following in the past eight months, though:)

Work, love, friendships... They all take a lot of hard work.

[If you like what you're doing], hang on to it!

You'll write hundreds of reports like this one!

But you haven't gone deep in anything yet.

You just need to pick a channel and flow through it.

The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.

Nothing works unless you work.

Work is not enough to be happy.

While I was cooking an omlette today - I realised high heat makes things burn, I want cooked.

And something I found out while watching Funny Ha Ha, an independent American movie about a girl who just graduated, who has "broad interests" and looking for a 'temporary job but a permanent boyfriend', I realized my ordinariness (similar to the feeling I got when our office director made a presentation and it became obvious (to me) that I make up a miniscule part of the business, naturally down in the managers' list of things to do - 'people urgently to hire!') As I'm struggling to get a job, as I'm having an all-important very awkward conversation with a boy, millions of other girls (and boys) are doing the same out there. We all believe we are very unique, in our music tastes and the places we've traveled and the memories and the people in our lives. Looking for special meaning in all that happens, connecting dots. Even in that, we are all so similar to one another. Which is sad and humbling and relieving all at once.

Control

Once I read an interview of Mercan Dede, one of my favourite musicians. He likened life to ebru, and said that he throws the colours in water, and then lets the shape appear on paper.

We have no choice, anyway.
...

Today at work I was reading an article about the economic reforms in Ireland, and the article said that entrepreneurs develop an "internal locus of control" when the state plays only a small role in the economy. Property rights, free trade, less taxes, flexible labour markets, independent central banks. I wondered what "locus of control" was, and read about it on Wikipedia. Apparently, when you have "internal locus of control", you believe that you reach an outcome because of reasons that come from within you. The outcome you get depends on your ability (talent+effort), not factors external to you, the sum of which we call chance.

It was funny I saw this today, a couple of nights ago my father told me that what other people do or say should not affect me so much. I should stand solid and mind my business. Focus on what I can control, really. Because I won't be able to control other people, their characters, all the combinations they think, act and interact.

For I've been really desperate lately. People have told me it's the competition. It's the credit crunch. It's because I'm Turkish. Recruiters get piles of applications, they don't even look through them. Recruiters are so subjective. People say things, they change their minds. It's not me, really.

After all, it would be really sad if it was me after all this education! All this education should have increased my chances of getting somewhere, right? As I wait and get no response (some employers respond a month after you apply!) I started to think, what's the point in putting all those hours to prepare a good application when I don't even know they will read it! As I start to believe I'm not in control of the outcome, I just feel like not doing anything. Fatigue, powerless -ness.

Then I understood the point about economic freedoms and the feeling of being in control. If the outcome does not correspond to the talent and effort you put into the equation, if the government is taxing you or limiting your options (and hence rewards) with strict regulations or stupid policies, if your success depends on too many external factors that are not of your making, you don't feel like doing anything. And this reminded me of what I read about the agency of welfare recipients. If you continue to receive welfare however little effort you put into improving your life, you'll have no incentive to try harder. The goal of social policy should be to empower people by mitigating the risks they face.

The Wikipedia article suggests that there are cultural variations in whether people have "internal" or "external" locus of control, and compares the Japanese with Americans. Wrong comparison. One should compare the third world with the first world.

If you are from a developing country, (emerging market, as they say), you can easily die in an earthquake or hurricane or traffic accident. Tax inspectors will come and rob you. You will find yourself in an economic crisis because your government is stupid. You will find yourself in an economic crisis because some bankers from the first world are stupid. The party you voted for can be banned. People will hire their relatives, not you. You will have to get a visa to travel anywhere, although you are better qualified than half of the people in that first world country, including that embassy official. You can find yourself in a war because you had a dictator! More at risk simply because you were born there, you live there. Less incentives to try, to try to keep things in control, your life on track. More left to the forces of nature. Vicious circle.

In emerging markets, politics matter as much as the market forces, my big boss says.

By the way, will he hire me?

Kim kimdir? Hepsi birdir!

Bir arkadaşım zamanında sormuştu bana, türban serbest olmalı mı diye. Ben de evet demiştim. İnsanların kendilerini kısıtlayan, geriye götüren bir şeyi seçmeleri (ya da bunun kendilerine ailelerince dayatılması) serbest olmalı.

Geçen hafta AKP'ye kapatma davası açıldı. Tamam, demokrasilerde partiler kapatılmamalı. İnsanlar istedikleri gibi yönetilmeli. Genel prensiplerimiz olmalı, her durumda, her ülkede geçerli. Evrensel prensipler.

Ama iddianameyi okuyorum, içim acıyor. Hayal kırıklığına uğruyorum. Bu iddianamede anlatılanlara izin verilmemeli diyorum kendi kendime. Böyle düşünen adamlar yayılmamalı, kadrolaşmamalı, güç kazanmamalı.

Biz liberallerin savunduğu evrensel prensipler bazen gerçeği görmemize engel. Kolayımıza geliyor demokrasinin her şeyi tek başına çözeceğini sanmak. Demokrasiye bir din gibi bağlanınca ne farkımız kalıyor statükocu laiklerden, dincilerden? Demokratik bir şekilde daha da bayağılaşalım, geriye gidelim o zaman!

Önemli olan demokratik yollardan insanların aydınlanmasını sağlayabilmek. Demokrasi bir zorunluluk, ama yeterli değil. Sorunumuza çözüm değil. Sorunumuz eğitimsizlik. Bayağılık.

Bu sabah Ergenekon soruşturması kapsamında İlhan Selçuk gözaltına alındı. Selçuk'un gözaltına alınma biçimi mazlumların zalimliğe nasıl kolay alışabildiklerini gösteriyor. Kim kime diş geçirebilirse işte. Statükocu laik, sözde demokrat farketmiyor, aslında hepsinin kafası aynı, hepsi fırsatını bulduğu anda tahakkümcü.

Tamam, parti kapansın. Bu kapatılan kaçıncı parti, bu kaçıncı darbe söylentisi? Çözüm değil bütün bunlar. İnsanların eğitim alması, iş bulması gerek. AKP'ye alternatif çıkması gerek. Laiklerin hem laik hem demokrat olmayı, insanların günlük hayatlarını iyileştirecek çözümler üretmeyi bilmeleri gerek. Eğer gerçekten samimiyseler, tepeden inme çözümlerin bir işe yaramadığını görmeleri gerek.

İnsanlara zorla yaptırabileceğiniz şeyler sınırlıdır, sürelidir, gün gelir insanlar asıl istediklerini, alıştıklarını, doğru bildiklerini yaparlar. Onların kendiliklerinden ikna olmalarını sağlayacak ortamı (demokratik yollardan) hazırlamanız gerekir. Bu süreç uzun sürer, kafa ister, çok çalışmak gerekir. Bu kafa, bu sabır kimde var? Ne liberallerde, ne laiklerde, ne dincilerde var!

Last post about what this post is about

Because I have a feeling things will sort themselves out in a few days. I hope.

I know this will sound very spoiled. I am very spoiled. I'm 23 with a master's degree and I've been unemployed since Jan. 7.

But you are not in my shoes, so don't judge me. Maybe this will sound lazy. Let me explain: I explained here once how constructivism works. Let me quote myself:

Constructivists, on the other hand, argue that actors' understanding of the pay-offs may change, without an actual shift in material interests. Especially in crisis situations ("a policy window"), actors may be more open to new ideas - because they realize that what they always believed in doesn't work. A charismatic actor ("an institutional entrepreneur") comes up with a new idea, and uses such a policy window to persuade the other actors. As they interact and negotiate ("social learning" within the existing institutional framework,) actors change their minds about the pay-offs associated with each option.

Crisis situation: I'm unemployed. I have too much free time in my hands. There's not any progress in any department of my life. I'm desperate for getting busy with something to do, having security, certainty, learning things, meeting people, going forward. Everybody seems happy and settled in their lives.

So I decided I'd be happy taking ANY job. Any job that will keep me busy enough so I will forget myself, learn something, anything. Something that will keep me busy enough so soon I can forget all these questions and thoughts. Banks, consulting companies? Anyone who will hire me. I'm applying. I decide something is my dream job, the next day I change my mind about the job, the location. The British look through me, Turks don't know what to do with me. I don't know what to do with myself. My parents don't know what to do with me. I feel so clumsy and out of place when I walk the streets of this city. I can't imagine any other life than what I used to have in London. As Kiran Desai says:

"He knew what his father thought: that immigration, so often presented as a heroic act, could just easily be the opposite; that it was cowardice that led many to America; fear marked the journey, not bravery; a cockroachy desire to scuttle to where you never saw poverty, not really, never had to suffer a tug to your conscience; where you never heard the demands of servants, beggars, bankrupt relatives, and where your generosity would never be openly claimed; where by merely looking after your own wife-child-dog-yard you could feel virtuous. Experience the relief of being an unknown transplant to the locals and hide the perspective granted by journey. Ohio was the first place he loved, for there he had at last been able to acquire a poise-" The Inheritance of Loss, page 299.

So, tonight I decided:

• I will not let anyone influence or judge me. I will not let myself influence me or judge me.
• I'll stop thinking I should be hired by a big name, just so I will enjoy putting it on my Facebook profile and letting people know - as an indication of my worthiness and fitness in this world.
• I will not let my warm heart creep through and hold me back. I will not try to plan ahead and cross bridges before I even come to them. When my family needs me, I will be there for them, if they don't need me yet, then I should do what will make me happy now.
• Nobody at this point knows that better than me. (Well, I don't know it myself yet, but soon I'll find out.) Because not a SINGLE PERSON WAS WITH ME THE WHOLE TIME IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS; BUT MYSELF!
• It's unfair that I had an education that made me think I could become anything, and now I am trying to limit my own choices, just out of laziness, fear of the unknown! I WILL NOT DRAW BOUNDARIES, HOLD MYSELF BACK!
• I am the one who needs to make the decision and take responsibility in the end.
• If you care for me, be patient with me. (Note to myself: If you care for me, be patient with me.)