Mustafa Şekip Tunç, Bergsonian Conservatism, and Passive Revolution
The 1930s in Turkey is a highly controversial socio-political topic with two main competing interpretations: the liberal-positivists consider the 1930’s transformation as a progressive move whereas conservative-idealists regard it as a top-down break from tradition and history. However, there are other readings that bridge these two positions. To analyze one of these, this study establishes links between Mustafa Şekib Tunç (1886-1958), a Turkish psychologist and philosopher, the French philosopher Henri Bergson (1859-1941), the French sociologist Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), and the Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937). It does this through the latter’s concept of “passive revolution” to contribute to the understanding of Turkey’s socio-political transformation during the 1930s. The main argument is that Tunç’s anti-empiricist and anti-positivist philosophy, based on Bergson’s spiritualist and biologist-holisticism, meets with Durkheim’s positivist collectivism. This enables Tunç to interpret the 1930s’ passive revolution as a “conservative revolution” that found its expression in the formulation of the “unprivileged-classless-fused-mass” and an “organic society”. Tunç, following Bergson, conceives history and society biologically, as a socio-functional whole that helps mask socio-political divisions and struggles within the society.
- Bayraktar, L. (1998). Bergsonculuğun Türkiye’ye Girişi ve İlk Temsilcileri. Felsefe Dünyası, 28, 62-72.
- Benton, T. & Craib, I. (2011). Philosophy of Science: The Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Bergson, H. (1944). Creative Evolution. New York: The Modern Library.
- Berkes, N. (1936). Sociology in Turkey. American Journal of Sociology, 42 (2), 238-46.
- Berkes, N. (1998). The Development of Secularism in Turkey. London: Hurst & Company.
- Bhaskar, R. (1998). The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences (Critical Realism–Interventions). New York: Routledge.
- Bozkurt, N. (1995). 20. Yüzyıl Düşünce Akımları: Yorumlar ve Eleştiriler. İstanbul: Sarmal Yayınevi.
- Demirel, T. (2002). 1946 Sonrası Muhafazakâr Modernleşmeci Eğilimler Üzerine Bazı Değinmeler. (Ed. U. Kocabaşoğlu). Modern Türkiye’de Siyasî Düşünce 3: Modernleşme ve Batıcılık. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 218-239.
- Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. (Eds. & Trans. Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
- İrem, N. (2002b). Turkish Conservative Modernism: Birth of a Nationalist Quest for Cultural Renewal. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 34 (1), 87-112.
- İrem, N. (1999). Muhafazakar Modernlik; Diğer Batı ve Türkiye’de Bergsonculuk. Toplum ve Bilim, 82, 141-179.
- İrem, N. (2002a). Cumhuriyetçi Muhafazakarlık, Seferber Edici Modernlik ve Diğer Batı Düşüncesi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 57(2), 41-60.
- İrem, N. (2003). Bir Değişim Siyaseti Olarak Türkiye’de Cumhuriyetçi Muhafazakârlık. Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce, 5, 105-117.
- Oğuz, M. C. (2015). Mustafa Şekip Tunç ve Türkiye’de Bergsonculuk. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1 (1), 90-109.
- Parla, T. (1985). The Social and Political Thought of Ziya Gökalp. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
- Tunç, M. Ş. (2005). Terakki Fikri. (Haz. O. Bahadır). İstanbul: Anahtar Kitaplar Yayınevi.
- Tunç, M. Ş. (1954). Muhafazakarlık ve Liberallik. Türk Düşüncesi, 1 (2), 89.
- Tunç, M. Ş. (2010). Liberallik ve Şuurlu Muhafazakarlık. Muhafazakar Düşünce 25–26, 99-103.
- Ülken, H. Z. (1992). Türkiye’de Çağdaş Düşünce Tarihi. İstanbul: Ülken Yayınları.
- Yalman, G. (2002). The Turkish State and the Bourgeoisie in a Historical Perspective: A Relativist Paradigm or A Panoply of Hegemonic Strategies? The Politics of Permanent Crisis: Class, Ideology and State in Turkey. (Eds. N. Balkan & S. Savran). New York: Nova Science Publishers, 21-54.
