[HN Gopher] Turkey's Financial Crisis
___________________________________________________________________
Turkey's Financial Crisis
Author : jseliger
Score : 99 points
Date : 2021-12-24 16:56 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (adamtooze.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (adamtooze.substack.com)
| darkhorn wrote:
| In recent months it has appeared that some high ranking members
| of AKP is taking over private businesses by arresting,
| threatening or even killing the owners. Biggest media company in
| Turkey was bought by Erdogan without spending a penny. They still
| didn't pay. https://www.ft.com/content/3273aafc-4317-11e8-97ce-
| ea0c2bf34... Also watch this one
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvWOVToEmsA
| kw-maller wrote:
| Keep wondering if this is a panicking move or some weird long-
| term strategy. Are there any benefits to what they're doing,
| short- or long-term?
| selimthegrim wrote:
| Azerbaijan v. Georgia? To heal? Tooze is good but needs to hire
| an amanuensis.
| kingofpandora wrote:
| Indeed ... that's a sizeable error and it jumped out
| immediately. Hope the rest of the article is free of such
| mistakes!
| [deleted]
| mrtksn wrote:
| Erdogan pulled a huge pump and dump scheme a few days ago. He
| kept repeating everything that makes the Turkish Lira weaker and
| weaker, he and his government claimed that the plan is to lower
| the lira and compete on price and the lira is not weak because
| they failed but because that's the plan. We will be the next
| China, they said.
|
| Then on the night of Dec 20, he introduces a financial instrument
| where the government offers %14 interest and guarantees to pay
| the any difference if it happens that the lira devalues. With a
| coordinated effort, government banks start selling $USD the whole
| day and whole night when the markets are shallow and Turks are
| asleep, selling off at least 7B$ of the reserves of the central
| bank and who knows how much of other banks, lowering the $USD
| from 18 the night Turks went to bed to 11 at the morning.
|
| Look at that graph:
| https://twitter.com/tashecon/status/1473065067914702852
|
| Then they continued to sell off the national $USD reserves,
| conducting a full blown media propaganda operation including
| advertisement that is obviously produced at least days before the
| event. Looking back, just the day before the stock market crashed
| with %10 and there are rumours of certain businessman being
| informed that the government will change it's stance and
| intervene strongly.
|
| Then we had the Economy minister bragging how they screwed up the
| little guy who bought $USD at over 14 in an attempt to protect
| their savings, adding that no institutional investors were harmed
| in the process.
|
| It's just a crypto-bros level of shake off organised and executed
| by the government. They claim that the orthodox economists are to
| be blamed for the losses, how silly they are for not accounting
| for the government tricking the people. Imagine FED giving
| guidance for interest rates decrease then out of the blue
| dramatically increasing the rates at midnight once the pals of
| the president position themselves correctly and saying that the
| public shouldn't have listed to the economists.
|
| At this very moment, Erdogan is having an "interview" that is
| broadcasted by multiple TV channels and as expected they again
| started selling off $USD as he began speaking, pushing the dollar
| from about 12 to 10.
|
| Take a look at that chart: https://imgur.com/a/CxYYfyL
|
| That's %20 daily volatility.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| The plan is to get rid of $US reserves and replace them with a
| currency of some other country. Maybe China.
|
| Bold move, and a smart one, considering the outright hostile
| actions by the US towards the country. No dollar reserves,
| means no more economic bullying by the US.
| [deleted]
| SilasX wrote:
| Wow, that's bizarre. I don't recall governments ever
| aggressively propping up their currency, usually they devalue
| it as a silent tax or export subsidy.
| bsanr2 wrote:
| >Imagine FED giving guidance for interest rates decrease then
| out of the blue dramatically increasing the rates at midnight
| once the pals of the president position themselves correctly
| and saying that the public shouldn't have listed to the
| economists.
|
| The Fed has done worse, just on a longer timescale. Alan
| Greenspan may, in fact, be the devil.
| janmo wrote:
| I wonder how long their pump will last, their USD reserves are
| now exhausted, their new savings plan will also cost a fortune.
| darkhorn wrote:
| They are going to continue selling land and military
| companies to Qatar and other Arabs.
| lvl100 wrote:
| This is why you always hold real assets. And, no, crypto is not
| real.
| DSingularity wrote:
| > The one thing that the central bank is not doing is raising
| interest rates. This is at the heart of the entire crisis.
|
| Okay am I missing something here? Europe has negative rates. The
| US has negative rates. But when Turkey lowers rates from 19%
| (!!?!!) to 14% it creates a "crisis"?
| mghfreud wrote:
| Until last year, US and Europe was desperately trying to raise
| inflation. I do not remember any time in Turkish history when
| this was the case.
|
| Anyways, current Turkish PPI is >50% (and it will only increase
| in coming months.). The real interest rate in Turkey is in far
| negative territory compared to US and EU, where they are
| desperate for inflation.
| syshum wrote:
| >> US ... was desperately trying to raise inflation.
|
| Well good news, they succeeded beyond their wildest
| dreams....
| odonnellryan wrote:
| Well. 7% inflation is not insane. Look at it over the last
| 5 years. Average inflation is not crazy.
| mghfreud wrote:
| Right, but at least they said they know there is a problem
| and they will address it. It is not like how it is in
| Turkey where they said "inflation is high, let's decrease
| it by printing far far more money and decreasing interest
| rate further".
| slaw wrote:
| I am not aware that US government is going to address
| inflation issues. Interest rate should at least match
| inflation that is 6.8% and that is not going to happen.
| skybrian wrote:
| The Fed isn't doing that because it's an extreme change
| that would wreck the economy. Or at least, so many people
| believe. Why do you think you know better?
| slaw wrote:
| I only say FED doesn't address inflation. Not if it is
| good or bad.
| odonnellryan wrote:
| They obviously address inflation. Why do you think they
| do not?
| syshum wrote:
| Have they? because last I checked they (both the Tresury,
| and The Fed) still insist that this inflation is
| transitory, supply chain issue not their monentary
| policy... (they investigated themselves and found they
| did nothing wrong)
|
| And they are still claiming government spending trillions
| is not the cause, and will not create new inflation..
|
| So no, I dont believe they have acknowledged the problem
| at all, nor are they really going to address is. Sure the
| fed says they will wind down their buying, and signaled
| they might raise interest rates VERY VERY VERY minimally,
| they are acting as if demand caused by supply chain
| issues is the root cause
|
| It is not
| odonnellryan wrote:
| They have taken actions in response to inflation....
| skybrian wrote:
| High inflation and low interest rates in Turkey means that
| depositors there lose more money than they would if it were in
| Euros.
| mastax wrote:
| Therefore people are discouraged from holding deposits, and
| encouraged to spend Lira - exacerbating inflation.
| lumost wrote:
| there is a "natural" interest rate which is roughly what a
| lender would expect to earn when lending to a reputable
| borrower. The Federal Reserve/ECB may lend at a slightly
| lower/higher rate than this natural rate - but going far away
| from it leads to a crisis as the money supply becomes
| distorted.
|
| There is a big difference between lending at 0% when "natural"
| interest is .25% and lending at 14% when natural interest is
| 20%. If inflation is 18% you're effectively giving consumers 4%
| return on borrowed money, which means everyone will borrow as
| much money as they possibly can and use it to purchase goods.
| jbay808 wrote:
| > Lending at 14% when [...] inflation is 18%
|
| In the US, inflation is nearly at 7%, while savings accounts
| yield around 0.05%. Doesn't that mean Americans are
| discouraged from keeping money in savings accounts about the
| same amount as Turks are?
| lumost wrote:
| Quite possible that the US is going down the same route
| Turkey is. The US has an entrenched financial system that
| might take an extra 6 months to enter a crises.
|
| The current belief is that the fed will manage inflation
| appropriately, and that the 7% headline number will vanish
| in a few months. Housing increasing 20% last year is a sign
| that the same incentive is there, getting a mortgage at 2%
| and then earning a free 5% interest is too good a deal to
| pass up.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Doesn 't that mean Americans are discouraged from
| keeping money in savings accounts about the same amount as
| Turks are?_
|
| If you believe American inflation will remain there, yes.
| Few do. (Also, the Fed is tightening.)
| skybrian wrote:
| Yes, it is discouraging. This is a reason why fixed income
| investments are quite unattractive right now. But there is
| a lag. After many years of low inflation many people
| haven't changed habits yet. We still don't expect that much
| inflation.
| financetechbro wrote:
| US does not have negative rates. Every other central bank would
| raise interest rates with inflation at the levels we're seeing
| in turkey. They problem here is that Turkey is doing the
| opposite
| LatteLazy wrote:
| The US doesn't have negative interest rates, but with
| inflation over 6% and rates at 1.25% that's a pretty big
| negative _real_ rate...
| halpert wrote:
| They have negative real rates.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| I looked up the core values of Turkey. And their debt to gdp
| ratio is 40%. Neighboring Greece is 200%. The Turkish economy was
| the second fastest growing economy last year in the G20 and is on
| pace to be the one of the fastest growing economies this year.
| Turkey has had record exports and been one of the most successful
| in tourism both last year and this year helping the current
| account deficit. Yet bankrupt Greece can borrow at almost 1%
| interest rate with over 200% debt-to-GDP ratio. Meanwhile there
| is an unofficial blockade on international lending to Turkey from
| the US and its cluster of allies/subjects. That is the real story
| of the attack on the currency and the financial system. The US
| did the same to Chile by undermining its economy and killing its
| financial system before staging a coup (Obama attempt to kill
| Erdogan and stage a coup in Turkey failed in 2016):
|
| https://youtu.be/EYrznlDTE_M?t=7576
| howmayiannoyyou wrote:
| You're looking at the wrong metrics. Instead:
|
| - Change in foreign reserves.
|
| - Private debt to GDP, particularly denominated in EUR and USD.
|
| - Turkish private bank debt to FX reserves, particularly
| denominated in EUR and USD.
|
| Turkey's problem is having to pay for inputs in EUR or USD and
| interest payments in EUR or USD at the same time such reserves
| and the ability to acquire such reserves are in decline &
| increasing in cost.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| I don't really disagree but... Greece is backed by Germany so
| they're a bad comparison. Without that backing they'd be Turkey
| right now.
| hoffs wrote:
| Really quickly went from 0 to 100 at the end there
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| You are correct. What many here don't realize is that the
| current financial system is directly tied to the wimps and
| wants of the USA.
|
| Speculation abounds at Wall Street, London stock exchange and
| other western financial institutions. They are the ones
| dictating the price of money, the exchange rates and asset
| bubbles. They have the power to financialy attack any country
| in the world that does trade in US dollars and euros (almost
| all countries in the world). As we can see, even their "allies"
| are not spared.
| genousti wrote:
| You are 100% true. But erdogan did buy russian weapons after
| the us forbade him to buy american ones. Turkey disobeid the
| american golem and must pay the price
| jcfrei wrote:
| Any source on that claim that Obama was behind the coup attempt
| in 2016?
| ahelwer wrote:
| There are never any sources on these things until 20 years
| after the fact. So we really don't know. But if you'd gone
| ahead and assumed America had a hand in every coup in the
| Western world over the past century, you'd at least have a
| pretty good batting average.
| mghfreud wrote:
| Dept to gdp of Turkey is 40%, if you believe official numbers.
| But they are not publishing numbers for dollar denominated
| guarantees to PPPs.
|
| This is only one of the many unpublished "dept"s.
|
| The more the Turkish lira devaluates, the more the public has
| to pay for the PPPs. Hence, when considering for
| creditworthiness, you need to account for all, not a single
| number.
| forvelin wrote:
| is this unexpected ? erdogan literally buys weapons from russia
| as a nato member, allies with putin at every occassion and
| disregards any civilized values. he'd like to squeeze
| minorities as he wants, oppress the opposition as he wants and
| ally with whoever he wants. at that point, people might not
| want to cooperate with you, a bit of diplomacy eh ?
| fpoling wrote:
| Erdogan may use Putin when it suits him, but when the
| interests no longer allies, he has no problems acting very
| much against Russia wishes. Like it was in the recent war
| between Armenia and Azerbaijan or when Turkey sells weapons
| to Ukraine.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| In the case of Armenia, the country was becoming a hotbead
| of CIA activity. So Putin wanted to make an example of it.
|
| Russia allowed Azeris to win that war, just to show Armenia
| how vulnerable it is without Russian help. Plus, they now
| have troops patroling along the border with Nagorno-
| Karabah.
| baybal2 wrote:
| > erdogan literally buys weapons from russia as a nato member
|
| After US refused to sell PAC 3 despite Istanbul pleading for
| it since even before Erdogun
| forvelin wrote:
| istanbul does not plead for anything, ankara may though.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| So, he is acting like a leader who puts his country first?
| How is that bad?
|
| If US doesn't want to sell weapons to Turkey, its NATO ally,
| is Turkey supposed to give up and stay defenceless against
| terrorists that attack its borders?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _If US doesn 't want to sell weaoons to Turkey_
|
| America is happy to sell to Turkey. Turkey wants to dual
| source. The U.S., reasonably, doesn't want its latest
| stealth tech painted by Russian radars phoning home.
| Sometimes playing the middle ground helps. Sometimes it
| gets you a raw deal. In Turkey's case, the people are
| losing.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| US refused to sell Patriot missile system to Turkey. It
| also refused to sell it's F-35 fighter jets _before_
| Turkey formally requested to buy S-400 anti-air missile
| system.
|
| US knows that it cannot keep Turkey on a leash like it
| can, for example, France or Greece. So it does not want
| to sell it weapons, in case Turkey ever becomes a
| "problem" (read too powerful to control).
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _in case Turkey ever becomes a "problem" (read too
| powerful to control)_
|
| Is this honestly the line Turks are being fed? The
| concern is Turkey becoming a failed state and terrorist
| hotbed, for the U.S. and Russia, and a new migrant
| source, for the EU. If Turkey could reliably project
| force in the region, it would solve a lot of American
| strategic problems.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| "The concern is Turkey becoming a failed state..."
|
| Of course, there is a real danger of that happening.
| Turkey can indeed become a failed state...if USA attempts
| another coup or color revolution.
|
| Look, there are multitude of concurrent attacks, both
| military (inside Syria by using Kurds/SDF) and economic
| being made agains Turkey for it's failure to be a "good
| NATO ally". I don't like Erdogan, and I care not about
| what happens to him. Turks do, though.
|
| Many people will die if Turkey turns into another Iraq,
| Libya or Syria. And I don't want that to happen.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _if USA attempts another coup or color revolution_
|
| The article this thread attached to is about home-grown
| economic orbital bombardment. If the Anatolian elite can
| keep the populace distracted by phantom foreign threats,
| they'll succeed in extracting their wealth before the
| house falls.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| The US has always put arms embargoes and blockades on Turkey,
| even having formal ones in the 1960s and 1970s. The US also
| arms the terrorists in Turkeys south to attack and terrorize
| the country. According to CIA agent John Stockwell and others
| they have been arming those terrorists since the 1970s on
| Kissingers orders to attack Turkey. The US also refused to
| sell defensive systems to Turkey under the Obama blockade.
| The Turks bought it then instead from the Russians. Other
| NATO countries also have both Russian weaponry and the
| S-class defensive system like Greece, Bulgaria and Hungary.
| Turkey is clearly not competent enough to build it itself
| which is why it bought it.
| [deleted]
| baxtr wrote:
| Just a question: would it have been a good idea for a Turkish
| person, say, a year ago, to invest in stable coins to prevent
| suffering from Lira depreciation?
|
| PS: This is a sincere question...
|
| EDIT: some are asking why not real Euros or Dollars? I was
| thinking convenience and availability. I'm not sure if you could
| just easily get dollars in Turkey.
| TimVulcanus wrote:
| Well you could if you are talking about usd stablecoin, but you
| could have also simply buy another currency be it euro, US
| dollar... as long as its value compared to the turkish lira was
| greater.
| theNJR wrote:
| Turkey banned crypto https://fortune.com/2021/04/30/turkey-
| crypto-ban-erdogan-cry...
| 1cvmask wrote:
| Fake news. Turkey has some of the most active crypto
| exchanges in the world.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/exclusive-turkeys-
| cryptoc...
| mertd wrote:
| What extra advantages do they get from stable coins over simply
| walking to an exchange kiosk and buying Euro or USD?
| dehrmann wrote:
| Bonus: local merchants are going to get really used to seeing
| those currencies soon.
| latchkey wrote:
| In $100 bills, the weight of $1 million is about 22 pounds.
| halpert wrote:
| Not just stable coins, holding many types of assets would help.
| It's very common in many countries to hold savings in US
| dollars to avoid domestic currency fluctuations. Stable coins
| may be a convenient way to do achieve this goal, but also has
| counter party risk with the coin issuer.
| dehrmann wrote:
| Why not dollars, pounds, or euros?
| deeviant wrote:
| > Yust a question: would it have been a good idea for a Turkish
| person, say, a year ago, to invest in stable coins to prevent
| suffering from Lira depreciation?
|
| > PS: This is a sincere question...
|
| No.
|
| PS: This is a sincere answer.
| dehrmann wrote:
| Nit: buying currencies shouldn't be an investment, but it can
| be speculation or a hedge.
| AlexCoventry wrote:
| Why not straight-up crypto? Ethereum is up 647% from a year
| ago.
| sdasdasczxcxzc wrote:
| Crypto is especially known for stability.
| trophycase wrote:
| More stable than the lira at this point
| kingofpandora wrote:
| Define stable.
|
| The poster above you stated that his/her $100 investments
| are now worth after 1 year:
|
| > ETH: $899.22 (+799.22%), BTC: $320.77 (+220.77%)
|
| The Turkish lira hasn't changed nearly that much in
| value.
| latchkey wrote:
| I did a "dumb" crypto experiment to prove your question.
|
| Just over a year ago (Nov 2020), I bought $100 of BTC and
| $100 of ETH... on Paypal of all places. Didn't touch it at
| all.
|
| Today, it is worth $1221.37 (+510.32%).
|
| ETH: $899.22 (+799.22%), BTC: $320.77 (+220.77%)
|
| You're right mentioning ETH over BTC. =)
|
| My plan is to donate this to charity.
| [deleted]
| aaron695 wrote:
| marsven_422 wrote:
| grouphugs wrote:
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| The worse crisis Turkey has now, the better it is for its future.
| The policies of a charismatic autocrat must publicly and
| catastrophically fail, vaccinating the country against such types
| and returning the county on the secular track.
|
| In democratic countries, people can rebuild from any crisis, so
| any dark period is temporary. In theological autocracies darkness
| has no end, and future gives no hope.
| markvdb wrote:
| Large movements, high volume, in currency not stock. The powers
| that be know the direction. How difficult could it be for them to
| make piles of money out of this? How difficult would this be to
| cover up?
|
| I'm not very familiar with the mechanics of forex markets, but
| I'm fairly certain that a small circle of well-connected people
| has made a killing out of this. Which raises a question...
|
| To what extent was plain and simple greed part of the motive for
| setting up this unorthodox policy? Insider trading.
| hereforphone wrote:
| Erdogan claims that lowering interest rates to zero or near zero
| is more in line with Islamic principles, which may be true
| (according to interpretation of Islamic principles, I assume).
| This is a bold move that reinforces what was already suspected:
| he is continuing to solidify his power by appealing to Islamic
| sympathies.
|
| During the recent coup calls to resist the belligerents were
| broadcast over mosque loudspeakers and throats were being slit in
| the street. Praises to Allah could be heard.
|
| Ataturk strengthened Turkey by moving it away from the regional
| Islamic influences. He changed the alphabet and implemented laws
| to guide Turkey toward a secular culture. Islam was acceptable
| (as Turkey was attempting to be a "free" republic), but not
| compulsory.
|
| If Erdogan continues to mold Turkey's future Turkey will soon
| look more like Syria in terms of culture, and less like Western
| Europe, which it recently did.
| midasuni wrote:
| Paradox of tolerance.
| smnrchrds wrote:
| > _Islam was acceptable (as Turkey was attempting to be a
| "free" republic), but not compulsory._
|
| Until Erdogan overturned it, there was a ban on women wearing
| hijab (the head covering , that the vast majority of Muslims
| consider a basic tenet of their religion) in universities in
| Turkey. I leave the judgment to you, but personally I wouldn't
| consider asking millions of people to choose between adhering
| to their religion and getting a higher education to be treating
| their religion as "acceptable, just not compulsary".
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11880622
| hereforphone wrote:
| I don't disagree with you but I'd like to provide some
| context for how things have shifted, for others reading this
| thread. The current headscarf culture in Turkey, as I see it.
|
| The head coverings (various kinds) are associated with
| modesty. They are often fashionable modesty (?!) in Turkey
| now, as Armani and others advertise cutting-edge, expensive
| headscarfs. Some women are using them as a status symbol.
| They can also be used to signal pro-Erdogan, pro-Islamist (in
| a government sense) sentiments.
|
| Now, a woman not wearing a head covering (very many do not)
| may be called a slut by women wearing them. Rare perahps, but
| these things happen. There is often a palpable tension
| between the groups of women who wear them, and the groups of
| women who do not. It is as I said often a political symbol.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Cyph0n wrote:
| And the solution to that imaginary problem is.. to ban all
| women from wearing hijab? Excellent logic.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Of course, male from Saudi Arabia claims that this
| problem is imaginary. What a surprise. /s
|
| Just because you decided to consider this problem
| imaginary, it does not mean that this problem does not
| exist in the real world, bringing suffering to millions
| of disenfranchised women.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Wow, you're completely off the mark, buddy! But nice try
| with the amateur OSINT haha.
| istinetz wrote:
| Well, yes. What solution do _you_ propose? Mass
| propaganda? Perhaps possible in 2021, but it wouldn 't
| have been as effective in the 1930s.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Why did you use the word "propaganda"? Why not
| "education"?
|
| Regardless of the time period, I would simply propose
| focusing on _educating_ current and future generations
| that men and women have equal rights.
|
| If you dig into history a bit, you'll find that state-
| sponsored persecution - ethnic, religious, or otherwise -
| is almost always guaranteed to backfire in the long run.
| worik wrote:
| But what is the problem?
|
| It may have a religious origin but a headscarf is a
| fashion accessory. Like trousers or shirt buttons. We
| could ban them too, just for fun!
|
| Up with skirts! Down with trousers!
|
| See? What fun!
| throwaway123x2 wrote:
| lol this is so patently false. in a family very close to
| me, the husband would very much like his wife to wear not
| hijab and his wife tells him to mind his own business. both
| are muslim.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Tell it to this girl [1], or this [2] girl. You won't be
| able to tell it to this [3] girl, because she killed
| herself, rather than submitting to this barbarity.
|
| If you have some anecdotal example of a person who does
| this willingly (likely because of systemic
| multigenerational indoctrination), it does not prove that
| many other women are not willing to submit to this
| requirement, yet, are powerless to resist it without
| having to face severe consequences.
|
| [1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56085734
| [2]:
| https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348389/Muslim-
| woma... [3]: https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-
| east/2013/07/17/Eg...
| worik wrote:
| Because you can come up with people being psychotic
| monsters, it does not mean people are psychotic monsters.
|
| There are a lot of barbaric things that go on in families
| all over the world in all sorts of families. What exactly
| is your point?
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Yep. A lot of people seem to - willingly or unwillingly -
| ignore the dark side of Ataturk's revolution. The fact of the
| matter is that nothing in the real world is ever as rosy as
| you would like it to be.
| Bayart wrote:
| I would feel extremely comfortable banning those head
| coverings from all universities, if not all public venues.
| Religious vestment simply has no place outside of ritual
| occasions. But then again, I'm from the country Ataturk took
| after. From our point of view, allowing religion to _exist_
| is treating it with tolerance. Acknowledging religion as
| something that deserves any sort of deference by the State
| isn 't acceptable. And I say that as an otherwise religious
| person myself (don't take it as the stance of some rabid
| atheist).
| smnrchrds wrote:
| > _I would feel extremely comfortable banning those head
| coverings from all universities, if not all public
| venues...From our point of view, allowing religion to exist
| is treating it with tolerance._
|
| If saying "either stop adhering to your religion or you
| cannot go to university/exist in public" is tolerance, what
| is intolerance? Is everything short of prison, internment
| camps, torture, and execution tolerance in your point of
| view?
|
| Also, if a government tells religious people "we are going
| to make your life very difficult, but you should really be
| thankful to us that we are not outright destroying you",
| they should not be surprised when they don't end up being
| thankful and instead vote for the other guy. That's one of
| the reasons Erdogan is now in power.
| Bayart wrote:
| The assumption that asking for the removal of what is
| essentially discriminatory somptuary laws amounts to
| asking for apostasy is your own. Internal religious
| regulations have no bearing on the law and whether or not
| they're essential to religious practice is of no
| consequence to civil society. Keep in mind I'm referring
| to a system where universities are public institutions,
| emanations of the State, rather than private foundations
| as is usually the case in the US.
| worik wrote:
| Why would your secularism turn you into fashion police?
|
| Why cannot a person wear a headscarf (it does not obscure
| their mouth or eyes so does not inhibit communication) if
| they want to? For what ever private reason they feel they
| want to?
|
| I know people who wear them for non-religious reasons.
| Will they be exempt from your rules about fashion?
|
| People get told all the time that what they wear is
| unacceptable by others in power, and it is an abuse of
| power. This is particularly true for women and a
| "headscarf" ban another example of blatant misogyny.
|
| What is particularly offensive is it is said it is one
| for "liberating" those women. Often (usually not always)
| it is non Islamic people lecturing Islamists.
|
| The fight against misogyny in Islam is a fight for
| Islamic women. When there is a cry from Islamic women for
| non-Islamists to set fashion laws for Islamic women to
| obey (and not just the odd lone voice) then maybe,
| possible you might have a point. Is that ever going to
| happen?
|
| I do not think that Islamic women need misogynist,
| sexist, Islamophobic, theophobic, bigoted, and
| patronising rules and punishment. To liberate them, no
| less! Perhaps they need the opposite
| radycov wrote:
| >> Acknowledging religion as something that deserves any
| sort of deference by the State isn't acceptable.
|
| What next, enforce a communist uniform on everyone and
| strictly control their freedom to express their thoughts?
| Do you realise how ludicrous you sound? I note you're
| French and your religious expressions laws are not made in
| the name of secularism, rather specifically intended to
| discriminate against a sizeable minority.
|
| Presumably your also include a Christian Cross necklace?
| What about a symmetric cross that's visibly a cross but not
| a traditional cross? A cross at an angle?
|
| You're entitled to express your point of view, of course,
| but please be more convincing and informed than a
| nationalistically ideological charlatan (how ironic).
| Bayart wrote:
| >What next, enforce a communist uniform on everyone and
| strictly control their freedom to express their thoughts?
| Do you realise how ludicrous you sound?
|
| You're making leaps in logic that don't make sense to me.
| You're the one being ludicrous, as far as I can tell.
|
| >I note you're French and your religious expressions laws
| are not made in the name of secularism, rather
| specifically intended to discriminate against a sizeable
| minority.
|
| At the time those laws were made, the absolute majority
| of the country was made of church-going Catholics. That
| _at the present day_ they 're mostly invoked in relation
| to a religious minority doesn't make any difference.
|
| > Presumably your also include a Christian Cross
| necklace?
|
| Sure.
|
| > What about a symmetric cross that's visibly a cross but
| not a traditional cross? A cross at an angle?
|
| Is it a token of belonging to a religious organization ?
| If so, keep it private. I don't see what's complex about
| that.
|
| > You're entitled to express your point of view, of
| course, but please be more convincing and informed than a
| nationalistically ideological charlatan (how ironic).
|
| I'm informed about the political and religious history of
| my own country, and as such transversely familiar with
| the framework Ataturk tried to put in place in Turkey.
| I'm less familiar with the ways it started breaking down.
| And frankly, you're not in any position to demand better
| argumentation on my part if you're not doing as much
| yourself.
| femiagbabiaka wrote:
| Allowing people to dress how they please is hardly
| deference.
| beebeepka wrote:
| Heh. I wasn't aware religious beliefs include monetary
| policies. I just hope they don't start another war out of
| desperation.
| hereforphone wrote:
| One big concern is that Erdogan will likely hold on to power
| however he can. He's already circumvented the constitution
| (and changed electoral law). I believe he will fight to
| maintain his reign if necessary. He has about 50% of the
| country behind him, and as far as I can tell the allegiance
| is based on religious principles, which makes it a strong
| allegiance indeed.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| Donald Trump only won 46.1% of the vote in 2016 and that
| was enough. In fact no one got over 50%. Hillary Clinton
| had a plurality with 48.2%
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidenti
| a...
|
| In England David Cameron had a parliamentary majority with
| only 38% of the vote.
| adventured wrote:
| That's actual voters of course, a subset of how many
| people support a candidate or President in the US. The
| parent has no idea how many people support Erdogan (the
| claimed 50%), nobody does. It's just a guess in the wind
| (if it's 42% that's a massive difference from 54%, as to
| whether Erdogan remains standing). Like trying to guess
| how many Russians really support Putin's dictatorship.
| Getting honest answers on such questions is quite
| difficult, as is accurately polling in nations the size
| and complexity of eg the US, Russia or Turkey.
| eynsham wrote:
| In England in 2015, Cameron had 40.9% apparently
| (https://www.statista.com/statistics/717022/general-
| elections...). The point still stands--he had far more
| than 40.9% of English seats!
|
| On the other hand, the Turkish electoral system can fail
| even more bizarrely than a simple single-member
| constituency FPTP system--in 2002, only the CHP and AKP
| cleared the 10% threshold, so the AKP had 2/3 of the
| votes.
|
| However, at the moment, the president is directly
| elected, so anything <50% wouldn't suffice. (How those
| votes are obtained, of course, is another matter.)
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| Many religions have laws about interest and usury. Catholics
| were unable to lend with interest between each other for a
| very long time. I suppose it's not a stretch to say if a
| person can't charge interest the government shouldn't be
| doing it either.
| beebeepka wrote:
| Your last sentence makes sense
| DSingularity wrote:
| Throats were slit? I never read that.
|
| If you believe in democracy you would celebrate the failure of
| a coup. Even if you hate the surviving leader, you ought to
| prefer defeating him within the frameworks of democracy.
|
| You seem to really dislike Muslim culture. If the people of
| Turkey want their culture to closer to that of Syria instead of
| Germany, what's the problem?
| luckylion wrote:
| > If you believe in democracy you would celebrate the failure
| of a coup.
|
| That depends, I suppose. Hitler was democratically elected.
| Hard to say what might have happened, had one of the many
| plans to assassinate him had worked, but I'm not sure we'd
| look at it retrospectively as an attack on democracy.
| nickff wrote:
| > _" If you believe in democracy you would celebrate the
| failure of a coup. Even if you hate the surviving leader, you
| ought to prefer defeating him within the frameworks of
| democracy."_
|
| You are supposing that the once freely-elected leader will
| permit a reversion to 'free' democracy. In fact, rigged
| elections form the basis of stable autocracies. Outright
| juntas and dictatorships are actually more likely to
| transition to 'free' democracies.[1]
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Logic_of_Political_Surv
| iva...
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| Westerners think that their culture is the greatest of all
| time, how could you not accept it? They are even exporting it
| together with their bombs and missiles in case you don't
| comply /s
|
| But seriously, if their "culture" consists of gender
| theories, Holywood movies, superhero novels and the like,
| they can keep their culture.
| lostlogin wrote:
| You've picked a subset of a subset of a subset.
|
| There is a little more to it than that, and a similar style
| summary of your preferred culture would be pretty dark.
| ardacinar wrote:
| I remember there was an instance of a soldier being beheaded
| on the Bosphorus bridge. Not sure about the plural though
| grenoire wrote:
| The problem is that people suffer the transition's
| consequences.
|
| The current state of affairs has driven a _rather large_ part
| of the country 's population, who share Western ideals and
| want to pursue them for their nation, prefer a coup over
| whatever this ongoing messy loss of wealth and human capital
| is (certainly not 'democracy,' though). That should be
| telling, but it's hard to have Westerners empathise, I guess?
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| Syria was a prosperous and deeply secular country, with many
| cultural sites dating back to the ancient world. At least it
| was until imported wahabbi terrorists from you know where
| started to split the country up, turning parts of it into a
| Islamic State caliphate.
|
| Today, Syria is being plundered by the same countries that
| helped the terrorists sell the stolen oil. We all know which
| country smuggled truckloads worth of oil then, and which
| country does the same now.
|
| Comparing Turkey's and Syria's cultures is like comparing an
| ugly frog to a beautiful marmaid.
| hereforphone wrote:
| They fall like dominoes. Where does the chain lead?
| justicezyx wrote:
| That country is Russian, right? Or Saudi Arabia?
|
| I am not very familiar with Syria situation. Purely a honest
| question.
| lucian1900 wrote:
| Saudi Arabia as the direct source of Wahhabis, with the US
| funding and arming them.
|
| Russia has been supporting the secular Syrian government.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| I fail to see how the US is funding the Saudis. Arming,
| maybe. Funding? Not so much.
| lucian1900 wrote:
| The US funds Wahhabis all over the world, from Syria to
| Kosovo to Iraq to Xinjiang.
| objektif wrote:
| Not necessarily Saudis but the so called "rebels". Turkey
| openly aided ISIS and other violent rebels in the region.
| I can tell you Turkey did not do this alone as a Nato
| member.
| finikytou wrote:
| and turkey host more than 3 millions syrians. how many
| the US do after starting the war?
| finikytou wrote:
| ask the clinton fundation
| HideousKojima wrote:
| Saudi Arabia. Russia supports Assad and has no interest in
| destabilizing the country because they want to maintain
| their naval base at Latakia etc.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Turkey is at least as much at fault as Saudi Arabia. They
| literally straight up pay salaries to wahabbi terrorists.
| The US also financed a lot of them.
| worik wrote:
| > They literally straight up pay salaries to wahabbi
| terrorists
|
| Really? I did not know that. Have you a source?
| SuoDuanDao wrote:
| The Syrian conflict, though deliberately obfuscated, was
| probably primarily a conflict between Russia-backed Iran
| and US-backed Saudi Arabia. Wahabism is an arm of the
| latter.
| objektif wrote:
| Well you conveniently skipped another very important
| country in the region.
| lostlogin wrote:
| For those of us interested but less informed - could you
| name the country directly?
| throwaway123x2 wrote:
| It's a different axis. The Turks are fighting the Sauds
| for influence in the Islamic world, while the Sauds are
| fighting the Iranians in their imagined Shia vs Sunni
| conflict.
| melony wrote:
| The one in the title post.
| pphysch wrote:
| Northeastern Syria (major agriculture/oil region) has been
| actively occupied by USA for the better part of a decade.
| Turkey occupies Northwestern Syria (Idlib) along with US-
| backed HTS.
|
| Arguably the only reason Syria didn't collapse like
| Libya/Iraq is because Russia was there to balance against
| US interests.
| wheelerof4te wrote:
| Russia is invited by the government to help in the fight
| against wahabbi terrorists imported from Saudi Arabia and
| Turkey.
|
| Turkey used to smuggle Syrian oil, but today that "job"
| belongs to the USA.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
| forvelin wrote:
| It has nothing to do with religious beliefs, its all about
| gathering capital on his side. He is just abusing peoples'
| religious beliefs. Everybody knows the new savings scheme he
| introduced is essentially increasing interest rates.
|
| Contrary to popular belief, I do not think that Erdogan will
| continue to mold Turkey's future. So far Turkey always had
| 40-50% opposition which could not unit, but now they are all
| united and next time it is certainly going to tip the scale in
| the right way. He will do everything to delay the elections or
| call them at the right time -like now ?- but his plans don't
| always work out -not far, look to recent Istanbul elections he
| lost.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| He lost all three of the biggest cities of Istanbul, Ankara
| and Izmir. Yet his coalition actually increased their total
| votes in the municipal elections by getting more votes in
| other cities.
| [deleted]
| costac wrote:
| > Everybody knows the new savings scheme he introduced is
| essentially increasing interest rates.
|
| This is not true. Raising interest rates would mean raising
| the cost of funding for the banking system. Under the new
| saving scheme, since the Treasury pays depositors the extra
| yield, the cost for banks remains unchanged. As does the
| marginal cost of borrowing from the central bank.
|
| The new saving scheme is a free dollar call sold by the
| country's Treasury to depositors. And it will pay it out by
| printing money.
| mghfreud wrote:
| Borrowing cost for both companies and individuals increased
| substantially this week. Yes, it is true.
| costac wrote:
| Borrowing costs increased independently of the new
| savings product. They were rising well before it was
| announced and increased further because the market priced
| in a higher level of inflation following the sharp
| depreciation.
|
| The higher rate on deposits that the new saving scheme
| offers doesn't increase funding costs for banks in
| anyway. The Treasury literally pays the depositors the
| extra yield, not the banks.
| mghfreud wrote:
| Does it matter if it is direct result or second order?
|
| BTW, this week, the interest on private loans increased
| substantially, not gradually.
| costac wrote:
| Independent is very different from second order.
|
| And, yes I know interest on loans increased substantially
| but that has nothing to do with the new saving product
| and everything to do with the meltdown in the lira that
| preceded.
|
| Edit: And in any case why would banks raise loan rates if
| they don't have to bear the cost of the new product?
| mghfreud wrote:
| You are asking the correct question, it does not matter
| if the cost is financed by banks or public. The cost of
| borrowing increased substantially, even though exchange
| rate decreased in the last one week.
|
| Access to TL got harder by the actions of the government.
| This is why interest rates increased.
| costac wrote:
| Of course it matters. If banks bare the cost, they have
| to pass it on to their customers by raising rates. If the
| public pays for it, the government and central bank will
| end up printing money --one way or another -- to pay
| depositors.
|
| And all this mind you only IF people move a substantial
| amount of their lira deposits to the new product AND the
| lira depreciates more than the rate on the underlying
| lira deposit account (only then are savers eligible for
| the kicker rate).
|
| So far, savers have moved around 10b liras into this
| product, out of a total 4.3 trillion lira of deposits.
|
| You're telling me banks raised rates because of that
| marginal shift? And even though, I repeat, they don't
| have to pay for it?
| mghfreud wrote:
| I am saying that the government raised interest rates
| substantially, one way or the other. It used couple of
| tools to do it, one of them is promising expected dollar
| appreciation as interest. (Tl is expected to depreciate
| at least at the rate of inflation, which substantially
| higher then central banks overnight rate, hence they have
| increased interest)
| howmayiannoyyou wrote:
| > printing money
|
| Something it cannot do without increasing its own borrowing
| costs, and reducing the import purchasing power of its
| currency. This has been tried and doesn't work:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday
| selectodude wrote:
| Anybody with even a cursory knowledge of macroeconomics
| knows it won't work. Erdogan just doesn't happen to be
| one of those people. It's tragic.
| csomar wrote:
| Erdogan is a Ottoman and not an Islamic leader. He is using
| Islam to reach his goals but he is not married to it. He'll
| move away from Islam as soon as it no longer serves his
| purposes.
| justicezyx wrote:
| Even a fictional character, Paul Atriades, knows that
| religious zeal is a beast that cannot be contained. I am more
| inclined to believe that as a skilled politician erdogan
| should be well versed in history and politics to see that
| danger. And I believe that he indeed is a believer of Islamic
| religion.
| midasuni wrote:
| But will the country. Like other populists found out, once
| you unleash the beast you have a job on taming it again
| csomar wrote:
| Islam is flexible. He'll bullshit his way out of it. Seen
| it first hand. Also most of his target countries for
| influence are already Muslim Sunni. So that should work
| out.
| hereforphone wrote:
| What is an "Ottoman leader"?
| csomar wrote:
| Basically he still believes in the Ottoman empire and that
| his country should turn into a super-power that controls
| the Mediterranean. Many Turks share this idea, too.
| throwaway123x2 wrote:
| Essentially a Turk first and then a Muslim. Ottoman because
| it allows him to project hegemony because the Ottomans were
| the last Islamic "Caliphs".
| throwaway123x2 wrote:
| Can anyone cite Muslim economists or theorista who endorse
| Erdogan's scheme? A vague "we don't do interest because Islam
| bans usury" hardly sounds like good policy. What is the Islamic
| alternative to the current macroeconomic framework?
| pmayrgundter wrote:
| Nice up-to-date overview of Turkey/US relations:
|
| https://sgp.fas.org/crs/mideast/R44000.pdf
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-24 23:01 UTC)