East and West, No matter what you call this platform or forum, the vast majority of users are from America and Europe. The East is often viewed from an Orientalist perspective in the eyes of the West. However, when it comes to Turkey, it resembles neither the East nor the West. Our electoral system is not like that of the East. There is no fraud or any other kind of manipulation. However, on the road to elections, anything goes. Laws are enacted, changed, or amended as needed. This is the electoral process. But while the elected officials are chosen by the people, the candidates who make it to the election stage undergo intense training and a series of specific events behind the scenes.
Now, if you look at this matter with straightforward logic, you see that Erdoğan unfairly invalidated İmamoğlu’s diploma and that this is against the law. However, I can only explain the reality of the situation as follows: For nearly 20 years, newspapers, the media, news channels, and even certain famous figures have speculated about Erdoğan’s missing diploma. Whether Erdoğan has a university diploma or not remains uncertain. This is something the left in Turkey has always known but often mocked.
I want to emphasize this: The left in Turkey is ineffective because you cannot change the paradigms inherited from the past. Now, the discussion revolves around İmamoğlu’s diploma. But why? Because, quite simply, those who once criticized Erdoğan for allegedly not having a diploma have now been given a president without a diploma in return.
Was this action illegal? Absolutely not. But is justice in the country applied equally to everyone? Of course not. Do not perceive me as right-wing, left-wing, or an Erdoğan supporter. I am analyzing the situation from a historical perspective.
As for the invalidation of the diploma, if there is an absolutely void and legally null action, how can “acquired rights” (müktesep hak) be established? In the case of an “obvious mistake” the decision can always be reversed. Therefore, the diploma is invalid. Even if most Turks here do not accept this, states operate collectively, and only those chosen by the game masters(USA) remain in play. İmamoğlu is neither one of those people nor even on the bench. That is why, even if he won admission to the university, unfortunately, he has no real chance of being elected.
Now, if you look at this matter with straightforward logic, you see that Erdoğan unfairly invalidated İmamoğlu’s diploma and that this is against the law. However, I can only explain the reality of the situation as follows: For nearly 20 years, newspapers, the media, news channels, and even certain famous figures have speculated about Erdoğan’s missing diploma. Whether Erdoğan has a university diploma or not remains uncertain. This is something the left in Turkey has always known but often mocked.
I want to emphasize this: The left in Turkey is ineffective because you cannot change the paradigms inherited from the past. Now, the discussion revolves around İmamoğlu’s diploma. But why? Because, quite simply, those who once criticized Erdoğan for allegedly not having a diploma have now been given a president without a diploma in return.
Was this action illegal? Absolutely not. But is justice in the country applied equally to everyone? Of course not. Do not perceive me as right-wing, left-wing, or an Erdoğan supporter. I am analyzing the situation from a historical perspective.
As for the invalidation of the diploma, if there is an absolutely void and legally null action, how can “acquired rights” (müktesep hak) be established? In the case of an “obvious mistake” the decision can always be reversed. Therefore, the diploma is invalid. Even if most Turks here do not accept this, states operate collectively, and only those chosen by the game masters(USA) remain in play. İmamoğlu is neither one of those people nor even on the bench. That is why, even if he won admission to the university, unfortunately, he has no real chance of being elected.