Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 67 - Sayı: 01

Hemşehrilik and Favouritism in the Context of Political and Civil Society Organizations

Siyasal Örgütler ve Sivil Toplum Örgütleri Bağlamında Hemşehrilik ve Kollamacılık

Pages
141–169
Publication Date
2012-01-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In each section and the conclusion, it is stressed that the presence of hemşehrilik and clientelism in civil and political societies should be linked with macro processes and the meanings of them in people's everyday practices, instead of treating them as something peculiar to a specific period or a group of people.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study focuses on the intersection of the two phenomena "hemşehrilik" and "favouritism" each of which separately has a significant place in social and political lives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It analyses the hemşehrilikfavouritism relationship by focusing on hemşehrilik organisations, political parties and bureaucratic organisations separately due to the fact that each of these organisations are situated differently in the political-civil society distinction.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In each section and the conclusion, it is stressed that the presence of hemşehrilik and clientelism in civil and political societies should be linked with macro processes and the meanings of them in people's everyday practices, instead of treating them as something peculiar to a specific period or a group of people.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Patronaj · kliyentalizm · hemşehrilik örgütleri

Abstract

This study focuses on the intersection of the two phenomena "hemşehrilik" and "favouritism" each of which separately has a significant place in social and political lives. It analyses the hemşehrilikfavouritism relationship by focusing on hemşehrilik organisations, political parties and bureaucratic organisations separately due to the fact that each of these organisations are situated differently in the political-civil society distinction. While hemşehrilik organisations are analysed in relation to charity, political parties and bureaucratic organisations are discussed in relation to patronage and clientelism, alienation and patrimonialism respectively. Besides, the following questions are discussed: Whether or not favouritism and/or clientelism, which are frequently associated with discrimination, are in-themselves and universally negative; what may be the conditions under which clientelism can be pushed out of both political and civil societies and what may be the impacts of the presence of clientelism on both civil and political societies. In each section and the conclusion, it is stressed that the presence of hemşehrilik and clientelism in civil and political societies should be linked with macro processes and the meanings of them in people's everyday practices, instead of treating them as something peculiar to a specific period or a group of people.

Özet

Bu çalışma, toplumsal ve siyasal hayatta ayrı ayrı önemli bir yer tutan hemşehrilik ve "kollamacılık" olgularının kesişimine odaklanmakta ve hemşehrilik-kollamacılık ilişkisi hemşehrilik örgütleri, siyasal partiler ve bürokratik örgütler, sivil toplum-siyasal toplum ayrımında farklı yerlerde durmaları nedeniyle bir birinden ayırarak analiz edilmektedir. Hemşehrilik örgütlenmeleri analiz edilirken, hemşehrilerarası dayanışma hayırseverlik bağlamında; siyasal partiler tartışılırken patronaj ve kliyentalizmin siyaset işçindeki işlevleri ve bürokratik örgütler analiz edilirken yabancılaşma ve patrimonyalizmle ilişkisi bağlamında elealınmaktadır. Analizde ayrıca, sıklıkla ayrımcılıkla özdeşleştirilen kollamacılık ve/veya kliyentalizmin kendiliğinden ve evrensel olarak olumsuz olup olmadığı; kliyentalizmin siyasal toplumun dışına atılmasının koşullarının ne olabileceği ve kliyenatlizmin siyasal ve sivil toplum üzerindeki sonuçları tartışılmakadır. Her bir bölümde ve sonuçta hemşehrilik ve kliyentalizmin siyasal toplum ve sivil toplumdaki varlıklarının, bir döneme veya belirli gruplara özgü görülmek yerine, makro süreçlerle ve kişilerin gündelik hayatlarındaki anlamlarıyla ilişkilendirilmesi gereği vurgulanmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KURTOĞLU, A. (2012). Hemşehrilik and Favouritism in the Context of Political and Civil Society Organizations. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, Cilt: 67 - Sayı: 01, 141–169. https://ajindex.com/articles/380739

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. gnew, John. A. (1987), Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of State and Society, (Boston: Allen & Unwin). Anderson, Benedict (1991), Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism and Ethnicity, (London: Verso). Ayata, Sencer (1996), "Patronage, party and the state: the politization of Islam in Turkey", The Midde East Journal, 50 (1): 40-56.
  2. Bayraktar, Ulaş ve Hacı Kurt (2010), "Reform Sonrası Bir İl Genel Meclisi: Arzuhalci ile Noter Arası Siyasal Bir Organın Doğuşu", Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 65(1): 31-56.
  3. Brinkerhoff, Derick. W. ve Arthur A. Goldsmith (2002),
  4. Clientelism, Patrimonialism and Democratic governance: an overview and framework for assessment and programming. U.S. Agency for International Development Office of Democracy and Government (http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACR426.pdf)
  5. Bourdieu, Pierre (1986), "The Forms of Capital", Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, (New York: Greenwood Press): 241-257.
  6. Demirbağ, Hande (1997), Refah Partisi Hemşehrilik Cemaatleri İlişkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Uludağ Üniversitesi,
  7. Bursa. Dubetsky, Alan (1976), "Kinship, primordial ties, and factory organisation in Turkey: an anthropological approach", International Journal of Middle East Studies, 7(3): 433-451.
  8. Eisenstadt, S. N. ve Roniger, L. (1981), "The study of patron-client relations and recent developments in sociological theory", S. N. Eisenstadt ve R. Lemarchand (der.) Political Clientelism, Patronage and Development – Contemporary Political Sociology C.3, (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications): 271-96.
  9. Emiroğlu, Kudret (1999), Anadolu’da Devrim Günleri: II. Meşrutiyet’in İlanı, (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi). Erder, Sema (1996), İstanbul’a Bir Kent Kondu, (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları). Flora, Jan L. (1998), "Social Capital and Communities of Place", Rural Sociology, 63(4): 481-506.
  10. Güneş-Ayata, Ayşe (1990), "Kasabada Politika ve Politikacı", Toplum ve Bilim, 50 (Yaz): 97-110.
  11. Güneş-Ayata, Ayşe (1994), "Roots and trends of clientelism in Turkey", Luis Roniger ve Ayşe Güneş-Ayata (der.) Democracy, Clientelism and Civil Society, (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers): 49-64.
  12. Heper, Metin ve Fuat E. Keyman (1998), "Double-faced state: Political patronage and the consolidation of democracy in Turkey", Middle Eastern Studies, 34 (4): 259-277.
  13. Heper, Metin (1983), Türkiye’de Kent Göçmenleri ve Bürokratik Örgütler, (İstanbul: Üçdal Neşriyat). Horkheimer, Max (1986), Akıl Tutulması, (İstanbul: Metis Yay