Önder Özden wrote – Alternative politics: Overcoming conflict without avoiding confrontation

It's no longer an exaggeration to say that the current political order is failing to address the daily and deepening social, economic, and ecological crises. Worse, some responses to these crises—especially authoritarian or far-right policies—are exacerbating rather than solving the problems and blocking potential solutions.

One of the most visible examples of this in Turkey is the government's transformation of the judiciary into a tool of oppression. Legal reforms and judicial decisions are used to suppress political opposition , silence journalists , and intimidate society. In such an environment, direct confrontational politics can sometimes become ineffective and even deepen polarization.

Therefore, thinking of politics solely in terms of conflict and direct struggle is insufficient. Taking to the streets and holding mass rallies are certainly important, but they are not the only tools. It should not be overlooked that sometimes indirect, symbolic, or maneuver-based forms of action can also be effective.

In this context, the concept of interpassivity can offer another perspective. Political action need not always involve direct participation. Sometimes someone else performs a symbolic action on our behalf, or an object, a symbol, conveys our political position. For example, observing journalist Fatih Altaylı's empty seat—silently making his absence visible—is a form of resistance. Similarly, the refusal of large segments of society to believe stories of government corruption can also represent a form of silent rejection and defiance.

The politics of maneuvering, occasionally adopted by the opposition, opens new avenues in this regard. For example, the determination of Ekrem İmamoğlu's presidential candidacy through an internal referendum and the establishment of support funds were not merely a process of nominating candidates, but also a move that broadened social participation and established the legitimacy of politics from below. This process involved not only party members but also people from diverse backgrounds. Thus, a distinct political affiliation was created, transcending political affiliation with a specific party, and it became possible to find common ground.

This point underscores the need for the opposition to diversify its political strategy beyond rallies and beyond Ankara—without dismissing it as "street fetishism." Organizing unofficial referendums, particularly for certain social demands, could be an important alternative political tool.

These referendums do not require state approval or official validity. The crucial point is that they encourage direct public participation and raise political awareness. For example, posing the question "Do you want early elections?" to the public and then holding open forums based on the results can both put pressure on the government and broaden its legitimacy by reorganizing the opposition at the societal level. Such moves, like the process that cemented İmamoğlu's candidacy, can breathe new life into opposition movements extending beyond Ankara, hinder the government's ability to act more freely, and contribute to further questioning its legitimacy.

The "burn everything" approach we face today risks bringing not only political but also social destruction. This kind of anti-politics is, in a sense, a manifestation of impatience with politics, discontent with institutions, and intolerance of rules. Simultaneously, this destructiveness can ultimately lead to the destruction of common sense, social trust, and the very institutions of coexistence. As common bonds dissolve, individuals may become disconnected not only from one another but also from politics. Such a situation carries the potential to lead to a deeper cycle of polarization and intensify the authoritarian political climate.

The question of what we can do is no longer a question that can be answered with a single answer. Perhaps it's more appropriate to ask what paths we can consider together. We need a multilayered understanding of politics, extending from the streets to the ballot box, from symbolic actions to informal referendums, from cultural production to local solidarity networks. This understanding can open up new political spaces not only within the boundaries of the current system but also beyond it.

Because combating apocalyptic politics is possible not by imitating its methods, but by resisting in ways it cannot even imagine. This became even more crucial, especially after March 19th. Expectations that the opposition must burn all bridges could perpetuate the deadlock and further escalate the current government's level of violence. Before reaching this point—even if such a confrontation is inevitable—strengthening, diversifying, and continuing existing forms of political struggle without underestimating them could be at least as effective and strategic an option as conflict.