The commentary argues that segments of the Turkish left maintain ideological contradictions, particularly between their stated opposition to imperialism and their alleged cooperation with Western governments, institutions, and funding networks. The author claims that left-wing groups have accepted support from foreign actors while continuing to frame themselves as anti-imperialist.
The text also raises accusations regarding historical interpretation, alleging that leftist discourse selectively addresses past political repression and violence. According to the commentary, figures such as poet Nazım Hikmet and writer Sabahattin Ali are frequently used as symbolic references, while political systems and parties associated with their persecution are treated with tolerance or defended.
Labour policies during Türkiye’s early Republican era are also mentioned. The author claims that despite frequent emphasis on workers’ rights, left-wing narratives overlook or justify harsh labour practices implemented under past governments, including compulsory labour laws in the mining sector.
On foreign policy and international history, the commentary criticises what it describes as admiration within leftist circles for Western European countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and Sweden, despite their colonial records in Africa and the Caribbean. It argues that these countries are often portrayed as models of democracy, civilisation and human rights, while the Ottoman legacy is framed negatively.
The article further claims that left-wing discourse in Türkiye has, at times, adopted positions supportive of Israel during the war in Gaza, a stance the author describes as inconsistent with broader humanitarian sentiment.
In addition, the commentary accuses leftist organisations of maintaining close ties with major business groups and foreign-funded civil society networks, arguing that such relationships undermine claims of representing workers and marginalised communities.
The author concludes by asserting that Turkish left-wing politics remain culturally disconnected from large segments of society and overly oriented toward Western political and intellectual models. The claims have drawn mixed reactions online, with supporters describing the commentary as a critique of ideological inconsistency, while critics argue it presents a one-sided reading of complex historical and political issues.
The commentary was shared via a social media account identified as x.com/surgunsuregi
